Rep Robert Brawley's statement and his switching positions from support to opposition to I77 HOT lanes makes him the most senior elected official and the only member of the General Assembly to publicly oppose the project. This is significant - so significant that a reporter present asked if Rep Brawley was concerned about any consequences from Raleigh for speaking out. This reporter relayed being told by other area politicians that "the moment you step out and start saying you are against the toll road, you get a phone call from Raleigh and they either tell you 'get behind the toll road or you lose other projects'. The folks in Davidson were told, 'get behind us and we'll do the Red Line.'"
Rep Brawley's response?
"Threats do not bother me."
He also went on to clarify that he did not expect to be threatened over changing his position - something we should all be glad to hear.
However, if one Representative in the General Assembly breaks what has effectively been a "code of silence" in opposing toll roads, might others not be far behind?
Maybe more importantly though is the horse trading that is possibly going on to garner support for the HOT lanes project. The reference to Davidson being bought off by ensuring the Red Line goes forward is disturbing to say the least. This question was asked on camera by a reporter with multiple competitors in the room. It was asked seemingly without concern of being called on it. If there is any truth to that, it needs to be cleared up exactly what that means.
And as a backdrop to all this drama in Mooresville? There was a wall of petitions on display representing the thousands of signatures WidenI77.org has collected. One member claimed 15 full sheets were collected on Saturday at the Cornelius Dragon Boat festival.
Those petitions contain the email addresses of the signers. Email addresses are the lifeblood of any political campaign. With WidenI77.org planning to put out a voter guide this election season, those politicians - unlike Rep Robert Brawley - who end up on the "wrong" side of this issue will likely face an email list of several thousand telling voters who wants to toll them and who doesn't.
I do not understand? The choices are 1. $100 million of taxpayer money to add an additional lane in each direction or 2) $100 million of taxpayer money to add 2 lanes in each direction and have a foreign company finance the other $450 million (with an influx of $450 million of European money into our local economy over the next 4 years) and that same European company recoups their investment over the next 50 years through tolls? Are those the choices or is it more complicated? Are the tolls the problem or should the HOV lanes the problem?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment Anon.
DeleteAnd the remaining $350 million in tolls is somehow not "taxpayer money"?
The more accurate comparison is $100 million in taxpayer money for a lane that provides an increase in capacity for all users in the most congested areas versus $450 million in taxpayer dollars to provide a benefit for a relatively small number of users while ensuring the vast majority receive very, very little benefit.
Your assumptions that opposition to the HOT project is strictly about tolls and/or HOV lanes is also incorrect.
While some people may be strictly against both of those things for philosophical reasons, I'm not one of them. I'll tell you what I told Jeff Tarte back when he was running for State Senate.
Taking an HOV-2 lane, making it HOT-3 and then claiming it can still be ridden for "free" is fundamentally dishonest when one knows going in that the number of 3 person vehicles that will be "free" drops dramatically from the 2-person vehicles currently eligible for HOV-2. Pretending that is not the case is not honest.
Also, I have no real issue with HOV lanes. I ride the bus daily and will benefit from this project if it's built. For me, this is about overall cost effectiveness when government is spending taxpayer dollars.
The chosen option is the most expensive option of all the options originally on the table, and it benefits a very small group of the citizens living in the region - rather than a majority of citizens who also pay gas taxes and who also vote.
There is a bit of an implication that general purpose lanes are somehow free. They're not. Whether you go with the $100 million 'I-77 lite' approach now favored by Rep. Brawley, or the long-term approach which would cost $500 million using general purpose lanes, it's still a lot of money, and it's not free. Money is money regardless of where it comes from.
ReplyDeleteThis discussion should really only be about how infrastructure projects are financed. Are they financed through general taxation paid for by everyone regardless of whether they use the infrastructure, or should roads be financed with a user-fee approach? Typically Republicans favor the latter approach (even the very conservative John Locke foundation favors toll roads), but in the discussion over widening I-77 our local Republicans are falling over themselves to see who can out socialist the other (let the government pay for it all, and it's all free). Why just the other day I saw Vince Winegardner out scraping the 'Mitt' sticker off his bumper and replacing it with the familiar Obama sunrise. Now that's change we can believe in.
After checking with Mr Winegardner he expressed no concern with this anonymous post mentioning him directly. One of the benefits of small town living is everyone knows everyone, so this was easily validated. However, that is probably also the reason for this poster wanting to remain anonymous.
DeleteI feel obliged to respond to the “flip-flop” comment made by anon. I am an Independent who supports small, efficient, and socially responsible government. I would put myself as pragmatic and slightly right of center. Since there are so few moderates from which to choose, I support the candidates that align with my personal vision of government. Those candidates have mostly been Republican though a few moderate Democrats have crept into the mix over the years. Efficient government can still be a government that requires its citizens to pay for their infrastructure in a fair way. Based on what I have been seeing in Raleigh and in North Mecklenburg, I think our Republican leaders view this differently. I suspect moderates like me see it the same way and will be looking for other options this year and next. Sorry that my view of what our local Republican’s are doing on major issues is wrong. I will try to be polite in my disagreement but since I am an Independent, I do not have to abide by Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment. I also think you can do great things 80% of the time but if you make a major blunder like the HOT lanes or cable TV, the leader(s) need to leave public service (and not go to work for the tolling company or cable).
DeleteAnon
ReplyDeleteUser fees and our roads. Gas and various vehicle taxes are "user fees" that are not covering the costs of our roads. We are becoming more successful at increasing fuel efficiency which is resulting in lower gas tax revenue. The cost of maintaining and building our roads continues and our politicians have not had the political will to generate additional revenue through more wide spread and fairer user fees(i.e.increased fuel and vehicle taxes). The implication of higer fuel and vehicle taxes can be spun by the anti-tax crowd as a step in the wrong direction but it is not. It is a fairer way to fund roads than the HOT lane approach to be imposed on Lake Norman. The HOT lanes approach frees up about $400 million for the NC DOT to be spend on non-tollable projects elswhere in the region. That is a motivator for many people but clearly will have an adverse and unfair impact on the citizens of Lake Norman. It is "tax" focused on a specific poplution in order to benefit neighboring populations. It is also short sited.
The secondary roads in Lake Norman will require hundreds of millions of dollars to widen due to growth and the divergence of traffic from I-77 due to the tolls. These widening expenses will be needed in as few as 20 years. If we widened I-77 in a traditional way, these secondary roads could wait much longer and have less expensive modifications.
The logic of this issue is pretty straight forward but there are regional powers that our local politicians have gotten into bed with at Lake Norman's expense. Visit www.DavidsonWatchdogs.org and go to the home page and select the hyper link on the MUMPO Meetings article to view the presentations we have been trying to share with our elected leaders. Not all of them are being influenced by special interests and political ambition. They don't have much time left to stand up for their constituents. The special interests are fighting hard to promote themselves over the public good.