To the editor:
As previous letters I have written to the editor will attest, I derive all of my personal income from the retail used car sales industry in Lawrence. Knowing this, some people might think it unusual that I, as well as the owners and other employees of the dealership where I am, support the tax bill to keep and improve Lawrence public transportation, the T.
Our sales staff meet people every day who are not able to qualify for an automobile loan due to factors that are often beyond their control. However, situations do change for the better. To take their optimism for a more mobile life away and make things more difficult for those who need our help the most is not just showing a bad civic conscience, it's also bad for business. Substantial companies considering a move to our city have a short list of "must-haves'" and public transportation is usually on that list. A sure way to ensure stagnant growth for any city is to go backwards in its city services.
I spent many years living in Arlington, Texas. It is known as the largest city in America with no public transportation. Every street there is a nightmare. As the city grew, so did the bumper-to-bumper congestion, not to mention the smog.
Let's not be so cheap and shortsighted that we cost ourselves jobs and tax revenues in the years to come. Vote "yes" in support of the T.
Thomas Langas and the staff at Academy Cars,
Lawrence
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
lawrenceguy40 (anonymous) says…
I think Mr. Langas is a bit confused. He sells cars for a living. Those cars will cost more under if this sales tax is passed. The poor people who arrive on the bus will be less likely to afford them. Mr. Langas will have fewer customers, costing his loyal, supportive employees their jobs. I hope they remember this LTE (that I somehow doubt they had any knowledge that they were signing) when he has to hand them their pink slip.Vote No!
merrill (anonymous) says…
A more sensible decision would have been to reinstate the 3 mils originally dedicated to The T as the city commission was asked to do. It could still be done if only the City Commission would see fit. Just include the T in the general budget.Campaign to Save the Thttp://www.lawrence.com/events/2008/sep/22/31953/The League of Women Voters of Lawrence-Douglas County is urging everyone to vote 'Yes' for the Lawrence Transit System (the "T"), and will hold a forum on public transit in LawrenceForum on Public Transit the "T"7:00 9:00 PMWednesday, October 8thPlymouth Congregational Church
Informed (anonymous) says…
Vote 'NO'Vote early.Vote often.
monkeyhawk (anonymous) says…
"Every street there is a nightmare. As the city grew, so did the bumper-to-bumper congestion, not to mention the smog.".... and this is SO different from Lawrence WITH the smoggy MT City in Motion? Has anyone ever seen merrill on the T?
none2 (anonymous) says…
The T has been a miracle. It is everything all have ever dreamed for for Lawrence. It is everything that this country stands for: entitlements. People will die without it including children, puppies, kittens, and bunny rabbits...Not like the brazen giant of Greek chariotsWith conquering wheels astride from street to street;Here at our kaw-washed, sunset bridge shall rollA mighty Em-T vehicle with a lamps, and her name:EM-T. "Keep people needy!" cries sheWith silent lips. "Design me for just 1% of people, Give me your sales tax yearning to increase,Those wadded dollars in your wallet yearning to breath free.Send all your coins, tempted-tost to me,I lift my headlights beside the golden entitlement!
Warren6032 (anonymous) says…
Vote 'YES'Vote early.Vote often.
canyon_wren (anonymous) says…
What a sensible letter! I would guess that you regular protestors--like [un]Informed--regularly spend 'WAY more than this tax would impose on some pretty stupid stuff. The people of Lawrence consider themselves so enlightened, but those who want to eliminate public transportation entirely are back in the Dark Ages. It seems like the City could figure out good ways to improve it and that should be required, but, as others have mentioned, to start over will be even more expensive, and you ultimately will HAVE to have something like this that works.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
I wonder if his income would change if he changed from selling cars (those nasty things) to bus rides. My guess is he would go broke selling rides on the T. My vote is no.
sustainabilitysister (anonymous) says…
Vote YES to the T. Several Lawrencians' lives depend on it for their livelihood, groceries, doctor's appointments, social engagements, etc.... Think about all of the times most people rely on some type of transportation to get from A to B in this busy life we all live in. If we take away the T, we're taking away opportunities and the quality of life for a large amount of our community. Taking away the T is moving away from progress as a whole for our wonderful community.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
Were you opposed to the Wall Street "bailout"? Then vote NO to the T bailout.
dandelion (anonymous) says…
monkeyhawk (Anonymous) says:"Every street there is a nightmare. As the city grew, so did the bumper-to-bumper congestion, not to mention the smog.":. and this is SO different from Lawrence WITH the smoggy MT City in Motion?monkehawk, why don't you try and go to a big city, especially one that has let developers to run rampant? Lawrence is 10 times easier to get around in than even Kansas City. Topeka is a zoo for traffic, and their town has no center. Obviously you come from some podunk small town with no stop signs, and have no clue that, except for the bad repairs, Lawrence traffic isn't that bad. Try going up to Olathe sometime. There's a nightmare.
monkeyhawk (anonymous) says…
"Obviously you come from some podunk small town with no stop signs ...blah, blah, blah..."I come from the podunk town of Chicago, actually. Was just there last weekend and despite all their public transportation, the traffic is significant. I think your argument that there are worse places is very logical. Great comeback.Has anyone ever seen merrill on the bus??
Informed (anonymous) says…
Well, canyon_wren, what I spend my money on is my business, whether you might judge it pretty stupid or not. That's not the point; it never has been. My opposition to these tax proposals -- which is not the same as opposition to public transit, despite those who seem to be comprehension challenged -- is that the city is trying to pass this tax as the only way to save transit. Whatever happened to budgeting? When your income stays the same, but your expenses go up, you reprioritize your budget. It's very simple, basic economics. Yet, the whole concept seems to have bypassed the City Commission.Additionally, while the city acknowledges that 'something' needs to change within the T, they haven't really given us the foggiest idea of what it might look like. They are asking us to vote for a pig in a poke. Not gonna happen.Vote 'NO'Vote early.Vote often.
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
"It seems like the City could figure out good ways to improve it and that should be required..."Absolutely. And right now it isn't. They are asking for our money and saying they'll think about change, but if you give them the money they have no more incentive to think about, let alone implement, change. Change *first*, or at least define what change means, then ask for our support. (Hmm - seems like good advice for Obama supporters, too.)
PapaB (anonymous) says…
Simple answer to all of this: Make people pay for how far they ride. $1.50 may be enough for a short ride, but it's too cheap for going across town. They're already saving more than that in gas and expenses of owning a car.
Newell_Post (anonymous) says…
Lawrence grew and prospered just fine before the existence of the "T." It is therefore a logical fallacy to claim it is a "must have." If the sales taxes pass, the T will sail blithely along on 91% tax money and 9% farebox revenue. Nothing will change. The only way to fix this problem is to kill it and start over with a blank slate. Any new system should cover at least 66% of its opex from farebox revenue, except for paratransit. And smaller, cleaner buses would be a very welcome improvement.
Godot (anonymous) says…
The T in its current form is a "must not."