Comments on: Atlanta Roundtable Project List Currently Allocating 58% of Funds to Transit

By: smith

smith — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 16:10:11 +0000

It is interesting that we don’t hear much about the relative affects of the transit vs roads alternatives on our air quality. Based on this snippet from the Baltimore Sun website, maybe we should.
On a list of 252 locations in 40 states, ranked nationally by the number of Code Orange Air Quality days so far this year, the Baltimore Metropolitan area comes in with a dismal rank of 17. Only Atlanta, Ga. and 15 places in California did worse. Code Orange means that air pollution levels are considered dangerous for children and other sensitive groups.

The list, compiled by the Natural Resources Defense Council from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data, has East San Bernardino, Calif., as the worst, with 54 Code Orange days between Jan. 1 and Aug. 8 this year.

Atlanta has tallied 28 Code Orange days so far, placing the city in 12th place. Metro Baltimore posted 24 Code Orange days, earning a rank of 17. Houston-Galveston, Texas, with all their petroleum emissions, did a little better, finishing 18th, with 22 Code Orange days. Metro Washington had 20 Code Orange days, and ranked 24th.

By: brianc

brianc — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:38:43 +0000

I’d like to see inclusion too, but the reality in the current political environment, I’m afraid, is that in certain places hordes are going to turn out to vote against this–even if it had 100% roads. Then there is the other group that will vote against it if it has anything for MARTA. They are going to use strategies designed to divide people and to inspire fear, using the same old race and class code words. I have no doubt about that. Sometimes it’s possible to be magnanimous. Sometimes you have to be the bigger #!*hole.

By: TOK

TOK — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:22:05 +0000

I agree with that as a general principle–everybody pays, so everybody should get some benefits–but since the pool of money is limited, inevitably there will be tradeoffs that make the package more attractive some some people and less to others. And then the electoral considerations brianc mentions kick it.

By: Bobby

Bobby — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:11:29 +0000

Yes, but I believe any regional approach should attempt to include, however indirectly, rather than exclude.

I made a related remark Wednesday evening….

http://www.decaturmetro.com/2011/08/09/transportation-sales-tax-south-dekalb-wants-rail-too/#comment-131189

By: Bobby

Bobby — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:57:46 +0000

Maybe. I see that as a risky strategy for a regional collaboration. The smaller counties could align with each other. The big four aren’t very cohesive. Clayton would be in a powerful position. Fulton and DeKalb could lose out in a major way.

If you can consider that, you might consider dropping the TIA. Clayton could move forward with its referendum to join MARTA. Clayton joins. MARTA is restructured. Fulton and DeKalb throw in a second penny for a new capital expansion program (10 years possibly), in concert with relaxing the split on the first penny. Perhaps Rockdale joins, in concert with a decent plan for south DeKalb service extension. Gwinnett may be eager to join after this point; Cobb may still be conflicted.