Advertisement

Previous poll Next poll

Would you support spending more money for the T, Lawrence’s public transportation system, in 2009?

Response Percent Votes
No.
 
56% 229
Yes.
 
39% 160
I don’t know.
 
4% 19
Total 408

Comments

jonas 6 years, 9 months ago

I would really, Really, like to see them make some badly needed route changes or scale downs in their operation before we considered upping their budget. The system could be made much more efficient and ordered than it is now. If course, it couldn't be much worse, currently, in terms of efficiency and convenience to riders, and that's coming from someone who's been both a rider and a driver within the past few years.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 9 months ago

Face it folks it likely cost $6-$9 per vehicle trip(2-3 gallons of gas) Inner city travel really sucks the gas. Optimum city mileage is attained by strict disciplined driving soooo forget what the manufacturer said on the window sticker. It ain't happening. Not even with a Toyota Prius(although still the best).

Public Transportation is necessary and open to all taxpayers everyday use. New neighborhoods are not. Taxpayers cannot walk into any house, sit down and make themselves at home or just stop by to use the bathroom. Yet taxpayers contribute millions upon millions upon millions to new neighborhoods:. far more than it would cost to keep the T running.

The North Lawrence for profit light industrial project is looking at: $477,000 tax dollars for a bridge on E 1600 rd $326,000 tax dollars for a culvert @ 24/40 $16.2 million tax dollars in reconstruction projects $24.8 million tax dollars for flood control $ 8 million tax dollars for water and sewer lines - $50 million tax dollars( corporate welfare) Keep in mind there are THREE industrial sites on the table as we speak none of which have tenants waiting and may never pay back. 31st street expansion project - many millions $200 million bypass still on the table All of which will demand more : water and sewer lines streets and repairs houses public schools fire stations law enforcement manpower sidewalks snow removal bike trails and cross walks Traffic signals Traffic calming developers requesting more tax dollar assistance(new infrastructure) for their retail projects THEN 75 years maintenance costs for all of the above = millions

Considering the above the T or our public transportation system could be funded for approximately 45 years. Public transportation is the better bang for the buck. If funded properly service would DEFINITELY improve.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 9 months ago

Keep in mind I do not use pesticides nor chemical fertilizers. I do quietly pull weeds and my equipment meets the California environmental codes. Keep my equipment in tune.

I can do 3- 5 yards per 60 minutes.

BTW were you not bragging about your 10 mpg old beat up Rolls Royce yesterday?

What do your posts have to do with my comment?

quapawndn 6 years, 9 months ago

I might consider riding the T if it would get me anywhere I needed to go in a decent amount of time. The way the routes are it would take me 1 hour to get to work and I would be late. Saving the money of gas and preserving the enviroment is rather voided out if one gets fired.

tennismatch 6 years, 9 months ago

Lawn care? Could you be MORE off point. Also, why would anyone NOT want to adequately fund public transportation? Merrill is right. It is a great deal AND it helps the planet. So what if it takes you an hour to get to work! I think the earth is worth saving. Furthermore, as a citizen of Chicago, I am surprised at all these really bad arguments against public transportation. What next? Are you guys going to vote against school busses for kids?

Richard Heckler 6 years, 9 months ago

Funding public transportation for 45 years make more dollars and sense than building more neighborhoods. Building more neighborhoods in Lawrence,Kansas supports massive corruption and cost waaaaay more tax dollars.

Not only that public bus service gets taxpayers to work,schools,medical clinics and shopping.

Public Transportation is necessary and open to all taxpayers everyday use. New neighborhoods are not. Taxpayers cannot walk into any house, sit down and make themselves at home or just stop by to use the bathroom. Yet taxpayers contribute millions upon millions upon millions to new neighborhoods:. far more than it would cost to keep the T running.

Bill Lee 6 years, 9 months ago

The city's recent survey on the T went out with utility bills. This means that most renters did not get a chance to reply, and they are one of the main sources of potential T riders. If we can't provide public transportation in Lawrence for those who can't drive or prefer not to every time they go out, then let's not fix the potholes in the streets either. That just encourages more driving and more carbon emissions in the air from more vehicles on the streets. We could also save money for ourselves and the city if Lawrence becomes an all-pedestrian city. Let's replace the streets with more, better sidewalks.

Drew_Carey 6 years, 9 months ago

Only if the expansion includes downtown to door services for the drinking establishments downtown after 9 pm. I guarantee 98% of those people walking out of the bar and getting into their cars to drive home are above the limit. Just watch them trying to walk to the parking lots. Officers do the bar checks, see the drinkers downing shot after shot, but I see few arrests.

aginglady 6 years, 9 months ago

jumpin_catfish (Anonymous) says:

no no no no no no no:.no


I keep seeing this comment. It' so catching I may have to make a sign for my front porch. I have fishing paraphenalia about. People look at me funny. Yeah, I'm funny. Those wide repetitive mouths saying, no no no no. They just don't seem to be saying, Put me back, put me back! Do I have catfish guilt? NO. But those pictures in many places in the Ozarks during my childhood of 300-500 lb catfish are deeply ingrained in the fear sector of my brain. LOL. NOT! Jaws made my deep swimming turn into cold water vague fear. Effective.

lawrencejna 6 years, 9 months ago

Most of the bus riders that I know aren't riding it in an attempt to save the planet, but as a much needed means to get to employment. Many of these people may not be able to get to their jobs otherwise. Think about all of the money we, as a city, are very likely saving on social services by providing adequate transportation to work.

Bladerunner 6 years, 9 months ago

I think Merrill and Marion should just IM each other.

dipweed 6 years, 9 months ago

Ride a bike or walk...end of argument.

notajayhawk 6 years, 9 months ago

I'd like to point out that most (if not all) the arguments posted here in favor of the T are only valid if people ride the darned things.

And the fact that the LJW felt they couldn't ask a question about the T without telling us what the T is in the headline does not speak well of ridership.

Bill Lee 6 years, 9 months ago

The city's stock answer is to cut back T service. I think its hours and routes need to be expanded. No one working a third shift job, for example, is served by the T. For others the routes don't serve enough areas. Cutting back will not increase ridership...quite the opposite!

sjschlag 6 years, 9 months ago

If only our city government and the University had a closer relationship, like in other big 12 cities. The Merging of the KU on Wheels and T bus systems would save the city and the university countless dollars, and also improve service for all riders. The routes on the T need to be shortened to denser neighborhoods, and the buses need to be more frequent on these shorter routes. Do this, see ridership go up and costs go down. Then we can expand the service. Also, entice developers to build housing and commercial areas close to these routes. Lawrence has all of the tools and people it needs to make this happen.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.