urbanSTL

This is still a rural-dominated legislature, why would they focus cuts on rural infrastructure? They'll cut funding for education, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc. Rural infrastructure will be the last thing standing.

I'll have a lot on this in a few weeks. Busy with something right now.

ajwillikers wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote:This is still a rural-dominated legislature, why would they focus cuts on rural infrastructure? They'll cut funding for education, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc. Rural infrastructure will be the last thing standing.

FULL KANSAS FULL KANSAS! Although I think it's actually Vermont with no Income or Sales Tax. Take the Missouri Four-Point-Whatever% Sales Tax and $315+(6% Taxable Income above $18,000) and keep that local instead of sending it Jefferson City.

St. Louis City, County, and Jackson County population is about 36% of the total. By my estimates State Sales and Income Tax paid by those counties represent about 55% of the total.

We should be trying to keep our tax monies local in productive areas, not sending it away and begging for scraps and credits back. #StateOfStLouis

Good luck getting that through the legislature.

ajwillikers wrote:

MarkHaversham wrote:Good luck getting that through the legislature.

The anti-tax GOP wouldn't pass a bill that does away with the State sales and income taxes?

I mean, if you're standing in front of an angry crowd that wants to burn down your house, why not just burn it down yourself and deny them satisfaction?

Because then you don't have a house?

I think you're both underestimating how much accelerationism would worsen life for people in the cities, and overestimating how much it would boost a return to normalcy after rural folks were taught their lesson.

ajwillikers wrote: Second, 'Missouri' loves company. Amirite? Rural Missouri doesn't need to be "Taught a lesson" they need to be crushed by their own small government policies. As it stands right now, they're saying "Small Government Free market policies forced upon the Urban areas, but State Subsidies for the Rural areas." If there's one thing I can't stand, it's hypocrisy.

They'll still say that after you burn everything to the ground.

If you want some light reading on the new transportation bill

http://fast.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx


Transit New Starts is funded for next 5 years at $2.3B a 20% hike from the last bill

A big improvement with the new lighting under the I-70 underpasses. Pretty cool.

Not exactly an Apple spaceship, but yeah, pretty cool.

Nicotine dependence to fund the encouragement of auto-dependence?

Stl Public Radio - Signature gathering underway for plan to hike Missouri's tobacco tax by 23 cents a pack

After months of mulling over the details, an unlikely coalition of convenience stores, gas stations and low-cost cigarette companies has hit the streets to collect signatures for a proposed 23-cent-a-pack hike in Missouri's tobacco tax – now the nation's lowest.

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/sig ... cents-pack

^^ You're right, chaifetz, and I suspect that forcing out those camps is a major reason for the design of the lightin. Perhaps, the primary purpose of the entire installation!

Regarding the proposed cigarette tax, that's been something I've been proposing on the local level for several years now. but not for the state's definition of transportation -- i.e. highway expansion and maintenance -- but for St. Louis City transit (cough, N-S Metrolink, cough).

In Twitter communication with Shane Cohn earlier this year, I learned any local special tobacco tax requires enabling legislation from the state, an action they've traditionally balked at. Maybe if the proposed 23-cent hike goes through, they'd be more open to enabling a local special? Or at least have less solid footing from which to argue against it. Hell, I'd recommend increasing the total tax by $2.23!

One other point on the local option (which I went into some detail in here on urbanstl: http://urbanstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 85#p240885) is the state language currently allowing cities and counties to each establish a local tax of $0.04 to $0.07 per pack. St. Louis City currently maxes out at $0.07, but I wonder if there's a loophole here -- by virtue of the City's existence as a County of its own -- which allows them to double up that tax to total $0.14. If legal, that'd be some fun economic jujutsu to use against the state!!!

(For the record I do smoke, and live in Chicago, where the per pack price is the highest in the country -- about $12 a pack)

MoDOT Commission meets on 1/06 to approve the budget for the SFY 2017 (july1,2016) to 2021 Construction Plan....it wont be $325M...probably at least doubled that...

ajwillikers wrote:Tough choices now?

on the toughness scale i would put the next 5 years as a 3
10 being very tough choices.

some valid and good points by him....one issue is liability...while MoDOT (state) can vacate state roads all day, but they keep the liability until someone (city/county/private citizen) takes the road. So lets say MoDOT vacates a road and someone dies in a car crash because the road wasn't maintained...thats $10M-20M lawsuit lose easily.

the pool of money is the same..so not sure if that would solve much.
MoDOT gives Cities/Counties about $250,000,000 a year in state funds right now for those cites/counties to maintain their own roads...maybe end that practice and keep the $250M to maintain the state roads
St.Louis County gets $11M a year, City gets about $12M

Here is how the County $102,000,000 is split up
http://www.mocounties.com/images/1254/d ... cr_745.pdf