DaninDC

I wonder if the County even looked at other sources of funding the arts before deciding to sock it to smokers again. How do other cities fund their arts institutions?

Man, right now, all I can do is dream about KJP's proposed high-speed rail plan. I'd love to be able to get on a train and go back to Cleveland for a weekend. But there's only one train a day. And it takes 12 hours. Yuck.

Bryan, Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria, Alliance, Cincinnati

Okay, then. Let's make a comparison of Ohio to Illinois. Would that be better for you? The reality is, no state needs to subsidize Amtrak service. Some choose to do so, though, because they know it's a better investment than say, widening I-71 for it's full length.

If I had a senator, I'd be writing right now. Thanks for bringing this to the forefront.

Actually, Michigan's gas tax is fixed at $0.19875/gallon. Constitutionally, Michigan is prevented from spending more than 10% of its transportation budget on transit (This provision dates to the 1950s). There was an increase passed around 1997, I believe, which was written such that all of the gas tax increase had to be spent on roads. Therefore, the actual percentage of Michigan's transportation dollars spent on transit is about 8%.

I think Garfield Mall up the road largely has. Hooray for progress!

My chip is that the way things are done now is horribly inefficient--both spatially and economically. Our nation wastes so much money every year just to keep the so-called American Dream alive. This deprives our society of resources that could otherwise be reallocated in a more responsible manner. Think about it--why is it that we are far wealthier as a nation than we ever have been, but our public domain gets crappier and more generic over time? For example, the only difference between a modern high school and a prison (from the exterior anyway) is the barbed wire. That's exactly correct. There was no meeting of the minds in 1945 to determine which direction post-war America would go. It was all a big advertising campaign and diversion of resources, and most people still buy into it. To acknowledge the American Dream for the farce it is would mean recognizing that our own lives, hopes and dreams are all predicated on lies, and I don't know too many people willing to do that.

If this is worth noting, please attach some meaning to it. Otherwise, you're just stating a fact.

I disagree. You just have to cut out the subsidies to the suburbs--it would actually be cheaper than doing things the way we are now. Let the free market work. (Aside: if a house can stand on a particular foundation and not have a problem for over 100 years, how is that inferior to new construction where settlement hasn't completed yet?) I don't think lot size is as much of an issue as people want to make it to be. Not everyone wants or needs an acre of lawn to maintain. At least give people the option, instead of mandating one type of construction, which from a legal standpoint, is what suburban zoning regs and neighborhood associations do. It seems like some of the posters on this thread have bought in, at least in part, to the American Dream fallacy, where "new = good" and "bigger = better". I can't say I blame them, though. Ohio hasn't had healthy large cities for decades, so I dare say that most of the people on this board don't have the experience of living in an urban environment where it's normal to want an old house on a small lot. Certain things are not mutually exclusive--don't make it more difficult than it needs to be.

^That seems a bit short-sighted and well, naive. In metropolitan areas with healthy central cities, the "older" housing in-town commands an enormous premium over the vinyl-sided crap in the suburbs. The problem isn't one of age or marketing or anything else superficial. It's a problem of subsidizing new suburban construction while neglecting the inner cities.

Thanks for the clarification. That downtown in that photo looks SO contemporary, it's hard to tell it apart from all the other "contemporary" downtowns in America.

Uncle Rando, pardon my ignorance, but where is "The Most Modern Downtown in America"?

Using an average figure of $50 million/mi (I imagine a few of the routes would be crossing mountains.), that equates to SIX THOUSAND miles of TGV. All this talk about rebuilding Iraq...hell we need a Marshall Plan for US.

Well, we *do* have our own DMV, you know. :-) Actually, DC is an odd duck because it functions as a city, county, and a state. I'm sure if you took the numbers for DC's transit funding, and compared them to the combined city/county/state funding for Cleveland, Columbus, or Cincinnati, we're still spending a buttload more money per-capita. Mind you, since we don't have a dedicated source of revenue (like Cuyahoga County's 1% sales tax levy for RTA) the District transit spending comes directly from the General Fund. In that regard, it really isn't all that different from how the State of Ohio funds transit. Let's not lose the important point, though: for a heavily populated and urbanized state, Ohio invests very little money in transit--even compared to Michigan, which aside from Lansing and Ann Arbor, has third-world public transportation. The transit advocacy group in Detroit (TRU) loves to complain that the state constitution puts a cap on transit funding of 10% of all transportation funding. That's still 10% more than Ohio allows. With combined with the excessive highway spending, is it any wonder that Ohio's cities have lost so much urban character? I know I'm preaching to the choir. I just hate it when numbers confirm how backward Ohio's priorities are.

Are you perchance discussing the 30 fighter jets and the rights to manufacture Kalashinikov rifles that Chavez is purchasing on his current worldwide swing?

If we can spend $300 billion in Iraq....

Ah, now we're getting into semantics, aren't we KJP?

There are plenty of urban areas where transit is expensive to provide, namely dial-a-ride services for the handicapped (essentially equivalent to rural transit), which is often supplemental to fixed-route service. How do you justify a city of 565,000 spending 10 times more than a state of 11 million? New Jersey, a smaller state in area with 8.6 million people, spent more than 40 times as much as Ohio, or 52 times more per person. No matter how you slice it, Ohio has terrible transportation policy for a heavily urbanized state, and the funding to match it.

UCplanner, image is one thing, but if there's no substance to back it up, image doesn't mean shit. Not to say Cincy doesn't have substance, but you can't rebuild a neighborhood (let alone a city) on image alone. To answer your question more succinctly, you certainly won't see me second-guessing my move to DC in favor of a relocation to Phoenix.

Okay, Providence ranked just ahead of New York in nightlife. Can we all agree to disagree with these "rankings"?

By comparison, when Ohio spent $20 million on public transit in FY 2003 (about $1.81 per capita), the District of Columbia spent $198 million, or $352 per capita (DC gov't spending per DC resident, not Metro spending). Granted, we don't have a dedicated local funding source, like RTA does, but we certainly pay a much larger share in fares. Ohio spent less on public transportation per capita than such urban powerhouses as Delaware, North Carolina, Vermont, Indiana, Iowa, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Kansas. More good stuff here: http://downloads.transportation.org/scopt-funding_survey.pdf

Well, the thing about plentiful parking is that eventually, there will be enough parking spots for everyone, but no reason for anyone to park there.

No, people would come downtown for such large events without all the parking, but Columbus has some of the suckiest public transit this side of Detroit.

Metro Puts Ads at Gas Stations Mike Rupert, The Examiner Jul 22, 2006 5:00 AM WASHINGTON - Not satisfied with record-level ridership, Metro is going after SUV-driving commuters in a new ad campaign rolling out this week. Drivers pulling up to gas pumps at 75 stations around the region will receive a “reminder” that Metro is an environmentally friendly alternative to filling their tanks and emptying their wallets, said Metro spokesman Steven Taubenkibel. “The system is crowded during rush hours and everybody knows that,” Taubenkibel said. “But you don’t necessarily need to ride every morning and every evening to save some money. If you just want to go shopping on the weekend or grab dinner, Metro is ready.” Metro has been swarmed with new customers as gas prices continue to hoverat more than $3 a gallon. The rail system has set seven of its top 10 ridership days this year — many on days without any special events in the region. The new “Go Green on Metro” advertisements were installed on top of gas pumps in the District, Virginia and Maryland this week. This is the first time Metro is advertising at gas stations. [email protected]