Home

Should Madison Be Focusing on Roads?

Submitted by michael donnelly on Mon, 2008-11-10 12:01. Current | City Budget

gammon_construction.jpgMichael Barrett wrote an op ed piece for Isthmus about the focus on roads in the mayor's proposed budget for next year. In a budget that includes a 25% fare hike for Madison Metro riders there is close to $25 million more budgeted for roads than in 2008, a 60% increase. Barrett argues that we should hold the road budget where it is and use the leftover money, in part, to keep from raising bus fares.

While I don't know whether freezing the road budget is feasible, I agree in principle with Barrett's idea. Making public transit more accessible is a societal good. Making it more expensive to take the bus while massively increasing spending on roads sends a clear message: Drive.

What do you think? Should we be building lots of new roads? Is it worth cutting some road spending to avoid increasing the cost to ride the bus?

» email this page | quote | delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | google | yahoo | technorati | icerocket

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Public Hearing on Bus Fares - Nov. 24

Submitted by Jesse Russell on Mon, 2008-11-10 13:27.

There is a public hearing on bus fares Nov. 24.

http://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/PublicHearing-Fares08/publichearing-fares08.html

Quote:

Monday, November 24; 6:00 PM
Monona Terrace; Rooms KLMOPQ

On Monday, November 24, Metro Transit and the City of Madison Transit and Parking Commission will hold a public hearing on proposed fare increases to tentatively go into effect in March 2009.

Citizens are encouraged to come publicly comment on:

• current budget proposal of raising Metro’s fixed-route fare to $2.00

• an alternate proposal of $1.75 fare.

• pass, 10-ride card, and other fixed-route fare options increases

• potential impact on services if there is no fare increase

• future service enhancements resulting from fare increase

Proposed fare increases are listed below.

Information on possible future service enhancements and service impacts resulting from not implementing a fare increase will be available at the public hearing.

» reply | email this page | quote

Not tonight.

Submitted by Charlie B. (not verified) on Mon, 2008-11-10 15:40.

The date says Nov. 24th. That's in two weeks from tonight.

» reply | email this page | quote

Doh!

Submitted by Jesse Russell on Mon, 2008-11-10 16:01.

Good eye.

» reply | email this page | quote

Property taxpayers don't ride the bus?

Submitted by Jesse Russell on Mon, 2008-11-10 23:35.

Hey Michael,

I know you take the bus for work nearly everyday, but apparently you didn't receive the most recent memo regarding your citizen class. According to this Wisconsin State Journal editorial property owners don't ride the bus. Get with the program, man. If you are going to be a Bourgeois property owner, you don't need to be sardined with all of us filthy proletariat non-property owners.

Quote:
It's time for those who actually ride the buses to contribute a bit more to maintain routes and improve service.
...and...
Quote:
Unlike property taxpayers who don't ride the bus, bus users also will get more bang for their buck.

On that note, does anyone know how Austin keeps bus fares as low as $0.75 for a ride and $1.75 for a day pass?

» reply | email this page | quote

I own a house and ride the

Submitted by eric (not verified) on Tue, 2008-11-11 07:32.

I own a house and ride the bus too - so there Wisconsin State Journal!
And I think fares should stay the same.

» reply | email this page | quote

The comma matters.

Submitted by Victoria on Tue, 2008-11-11 10:06.

I don't think the WSJ is trying to say that property tax payers don't ride the bus, otherwise it would read:

"Unlike property taxpayers, who don't ride the bus, bus users also will get more bang for their buck."

I think they are referring to a specific group: "property taxpayers who don't ride the bus" as opposed to taxpayers who DO ride the bus.

And the "actually" emphasis is all yours. For any program that is subsidized by taxes, it will always be the case that there are some taxpayers who do not utilize the service and are annoyed that they help pay for it. Some of the burden has to fall on the shoulders of those who are actually using the service. How much? I don't know how that math is done. What is it worth to the non-service-utilizing taxpayer to have that service available? I drive more often than bus, and I like fewer cars on the road, because there are fewer emissions, and less traffic. You can sell it that way.

Yeah, how DOES Austin do it?

» reply | email this page | quote

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

*
*
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


*

  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dd><a> <b> <dl> <dt> <i> <u> <ul><br><p> <div> <u> <object> <strike> <img> <embed> <param>
  • You can use BBCode tags in the text, URLs will be automatically converted to links
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use [inline:xx] tags to display uploaded files or images inline.
More information about formatting options