THE TACOMIC


Yes on Prop 1: Fix Goddess of Destiny's Streets!

Make the Freeloading, Big Box Power Vampires PAY
posted Sep 24, 2013
tacoma, tacomic, prop one, fix tacoma streets, utility tax
Sizes:   web  |  email  |  print

<< >>
ALL HAIL the RETURN OF THE GODDESS! She's back and ready to roll over any lumpy-space farkwad in her way. Not only can we fix the streets by voting yes on prop 1, you also get the happy side benefit of eventual raised rates on city tax freeloading power vampires like JBLM, University Place, Fircrest, Simpson Kraft, Walmart, Pothole Pig, Big Medical and maybe even flip-flop/T-shirt clad slobs at City Hall as well! 

Previously on The Tacomic...


BUY Cartoons! Contact Cartoonist! ANONYMOUS Toon Topic Tip Line!
Original Surplus Tacomic Pencil Art | Book EMAIL RR (253) 778-6786

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 5:43am
Won't generate enough money to "fix the streets." Furthermore, as I understand the proposal,the funds won't be earmarked for street repairs whatsoever. Doubt that anyone will ever notice any measurable improvement in the streets. Council's objective isn't street repair but rather another incremental assault on the taxpayers and employers in the area.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 8:28am
Simpson Kraft is against it, so it must be good.


by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 8:29am
Ultimately a tax that only charges Tacomans 1/8 of what it costs to do the needed work.  The way the proposition is constructed is genius in the sense that it dings places like UP, Fircrest, and the stink factory while leaving residents who own the utility with the least of the bills.

It expands street repair revenues from $11m to $22m and adds another $6m from the tab tax to a dedicated fund for streets.  I'm not sure how this could be a better situation for those wanting the roads fixed...

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 8:31am
^ amen! ^


by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 9:06am
It makes our utilities LESS affordable. I don't see why anyone would find that beneficial.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 9:09am
Bill Baarsma says we never should have sold the xburbs our utility services in the first place!

by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 9:14am
"Bill Baarsma says we never should have sold the xburbs our utility services in the first place!" - RR

Is it because they were then able to incorporate themselves into their own cities instead of being part of Tacoma, therefore costing extra millions in redundant municipal services?

"It makes our utilities LESS affordable. I don't see why anyone would find that beneficial" - Fredo

I understand Tacoma utilities are 30% less than the surrounding utilities already.

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 9:24am
If our rates are 30% less than other areas I say let's keep them that way. If it ain't broke Jesse don't fix it.

by Erik on 9/24/2013 @ 11:23am
Time to stop complaining about how blighted Tacoma is and start cleaning it up.  A large component of the blight factor in the city is the streets both visually and the impact it has on drivers and the perception of the city.

It is pretty hard to argue how great a city Tacoma is with it's streets in their current condition.

One of the beauties of Proposition 1 is that it spreads the cost out to other jurisdictions that benefit greatly from being hooked to Tacoma Public Utilities but pay no B&O tax.

The problem with the sale tax is that it is regressive and effects only consumers. Large retail outlets collect sales tax for the state but do not pay any.

Having large corporation including big box stores share in the cost is a great policy. (Yes, including Walmart)

Also, federal, state and "non-profit" hospitals can now share in the cost of street repair.





by JesseHillFan on 9/24/2013 @ 11:42am
I disagree with Prop 1 because I feel that it should be funded by another motor vehicle tax instead to pay for the road wear as motor vehicles (especially large trucks,construction vehicles etc) are the main offenders.
Why should I pay more to subsidize motor vehicle infrastructure.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 12:34pm
Interesting point jhf

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 1:32pm
I'm the only one who thinks affordable utility rates are a GOOD thing and something worth PROTECTING.

If the city REALLY needs an extra $10M per year they can get that by reducing their investment in cockamamie pet projects and premium pay levels for all the city workers..

It's pretty hard to argue how great a city Tacoma is with it's city council decision making in it's current condition.

by Chris.Tacoma on 9/24/2013 @ 2:36pm
Maybe someday my street will be repaved.  It's more likely to be after this passes, rather than if it fails.

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 2:38pm


even if your street doesn't get repaired at least you'll be guaranteed one thing Chris....YOUR UTILITY BILLS WILL BE GOING UP. 

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 3:08pm
if people want to buy cheaper power nothing is stopping you from forming a power company and supplying power at a cheaper rate.


by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 3:16pm
Fix Tacoma Streets 23 hours ago via mobile

It's
a fact: Prop 1 will raise $10 - $11 million a year for the sole,
dedicated purpose of street maintenance improvements and road safety
upgrades. Real improvements in every Tacoma neighborhood.





by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 3:46pm
Even if I set up an independent electric utility here in Tacoma the power supplied will STILL be subject to the proposed tax. How would that help anyone? 

And the utility tax isn't just on electricity, it's on ALL utilities. I don't think you are allowed to establish an independent trash collection company or an independent waste water or surface water collection company RR, but maybe you just haven't had time to reflect on the proposition.

 You're going to be taking money that you could use to help fund Max's college education and blowing it on your selfish desire to ride on smooth streets. Sort of a greedy bloke aren't you?

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 4:04pm
 If we don't invest in infrastructure, our sons and daughters might not make it to college. potholes kill.   


by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 4:15pm
 " If we don't invest in infrastructure, our sons and daughters might not make it to college. potholes kill." 

So you're going to explain to max that he can't go to college because.... you were afraid he might be killed by a pothole? Good luck with that.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 4:32pm
by that time college degrees will just be downloaded into your mind from the media net web.


by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 4:52pm


They're going to download a college degree to him and you won't have to pay for it? 

by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 5:25pm
If a 2% utility tax equals $11m, than for each percentage point the utility rates are raised, that's $5.5m.  So, if Tacoma's rates were up 2% for this tax and another, say 15%, than our utility rates would still be 13% lower than anybody else's.  I say raise the rate 15% more and use 2% to help the needy pay their rates, 1% to start burying power lines and the other 12% toward transitioning Tacoma to solar on the roofs of citizens homes and businesses.  That would be $66m a year toward conversion toward renewable power and in 20 years, Tacoma may be the only city in the northwest to be completely energy independent.

How would that effect Tacoma's future? Our sons and daughters future?

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 5:43pm
How would that effect Tacoma's future?

The immediate impact would be less disposable income for nearly everybody. This would result in diminished local spending and diminished local sales tax collections. Utility tax collections would go up, sales tax collections would go down.

Later, as the solar panels are installed and the demand for power drops then power rates will have to be increased to make up the difference. This will create even more difficulty for folks living on the margins. But we'll have a socialist utopia where people can work all day to pay their power bills.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 5:47pm
poor people get reduced rate on their power bill. 

www.mytpu.org/customer-service/rates/pow...

Fat Cats however.. MAKE 'EM PAY!

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 6:17pm


Maybe some poor people have something called pride and don't want to ask for handouts all the time. I realize that's probably hard for you to understand.

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 6:29pm
YOU ARE INSANE! 

meanwhile...

twitter.com/KateReports/status/382669998...



by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 7:18pm
Germany is making solar happen with less sunshine than us.  They'll be energy independent soon while we continue to frack, fight wars for oil, and eff-up our environment.  

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 7:32pm


jesse, solar energy has been available for a long time. how many solar panels do you personally have on your roof? 

by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 8:19pm
Solar is just now becoming economically feasible and more so everyday.  If I were offered a program through the power company for 50% off, I'd put them on my roof... And my next car would be all electric instead of half electric. 

 Since I'm only likely to live here ten years or so (most people move every few years) it'd have to be paid for in under 10 years with a similar payment to my current power bill.  But, that electricity benefit would be on that house for decades (even after I moved) and therefore benefit the community, power company, and next owner.

by fredo on 9/24/2013 @ 8:44pm
Jesse, I think I see what you are driving at.

 Unless the other taxpayers pay for half of your solar panels then you aren't going to do anything more than just use that oil that's caused fracking, oil wars and a messed up environment.

Is that pretty much it?

Do you expect the taxpayers to buy you an electric car too?

by Jesse on 9/24/2013 @ 8:52pm
Taking houses and cars off the power grid won't supply a long range positive economic impact for the community?  I'm not willing to pay for it for over 10 years because most people don't live someplace for over that amount of time - but the house will be there for decades more Producing energy long after I'm gone.  It's called an investment.  I just personally wouldn't be around to collect all the dividends.

Besides, you do realize that the current system is socialist in nature, don't you?

by NineInchNachos on 9/24/2013 @ 9:18pm
why should the people of Tacoma suffer horrible infrastructure just so those university place farkwads can suck our cheap ass power?


I say we jack the price for them so high it makes more financial sense for them to install wind turbines in their butt cracks

by fredo on 9/25/2013 @ 8:04am
German solar energy is only 3%. One reason Germany has money to devote to alternative energy is that they are one of many countries which are dependent on our armed forces to maintain existing oil supplies. If we didn't need to spend hundreds of billions every year keeping the world safe we could probably invest in more in solar too.

by NineInchNachos on 9/25/2013 @ 8:16am
disarm now!  Save the planet!


by Jesse on 9/25/2013 @ 8:23am
As the cost of solar drops, Germany is doubling it's output capacity every 1.5 years.

Fredo is right about the fact that we shouldn't police the world.  We can't afford it and it's entirely arrogant of us to take that role.  We should be using some of that money here... or not at all considering our debt.

by NineInchNachos on 9/25/2013 @ 8:48am
let it be written that through civil discourse on the internets Fredo and Jesse have come together under an umbrella of peace.  Disarm Now!  Solar Bombs for All! 


by NineInchNachos on 9/25/2013 @ 9:52am
still no mention of flipflops...

www.thenewstribune.com/2013/09/25/280379...



by Mofo from the Hood on 9/25/2013 @ 10:15pm
According to today's Tribune article, city manager Broadnax revealed that City of Tacoma is aware of at least 18,000 potholes and 510 city blocks due for a repave or resurface. The timeline to finish the work: up to five years.

According to Wikipedia, a much more complex project, construction of the Empire State Building, was finished in less than eighteen months.

Why doesn't the City of Tacoma just borrow money now, and finish the roadwork in a timeline of one year? Or six months?

by fredo on 10/3/2013 @ 9:39pm
Tacoma's priorities revisited:

No money for potholes but plenty of money for state of the art community center.

by fredo on 10/3/2013 @ 9:43pm
Tacoma's priorities revisited:


No money for potholes but plenty of money to make S. 56th st. look more appealing to the golfers.

by low bar on 10/4/2013 @ 12:04am
www.autoblog.com/2010/11/16/video-crazy-...


by NineInchNachos on 10/8/2013 @ 12:28pm
TACOMA DRINKS YOUR MILKSHAKE, UNIVERSITY PLACE!

www.thenewstribune.com/2013/10/08/282769...

TACOMA DRINKS IT UP!!

*SSSHHHHURP*

by tacoma_1 on 10/8/2013 @ 4:01pm
Absolutely one of the best reasons for Tacoma residents to vote for prop 1 is because UP folks are against it. They don't mind using our roads as long as they dont have to pay for it. 

by NineInchNachos on 10/8/2013 @ 4:08pm
^ amen ^


by Jesse on 10/8/2013 @ 5:06pm
Liberate the U.P. tax shelter scheme!!! Liberate!!!

Make Ken Grassi pay twice.

by fredo on 10/8/2013 @ 5:23pm
 " They don't mind using our roads as long as they dont have to pay for it. " tacoma1

So your POV is that UP drivers use Tacoma roads without paying. But Tacoma drivers use UP roads without paying in the same way.

What's the difference?

by NineInchNachos on 10/8/2013 @ 6:55pm
DEATH TO UNIVERSITY PLACE!   LIBERATE!!!


by fredo on 10/9/2013 @ 7:24am
When people shop at tinkertopia and they say they're from university place I hope you tell them what you think of their city.

by NineInchNachos on 10/9/2013 @ 7:28am
No self respecting citizen would admit that

by low bar on 10/9/2013 @ 11:48am
Chrissakes take pride in where you live a fix your roads. LOL. No, I don't care that America is crumbling. If my white ass can't be the boss, then lets just let the whole fucking thing fall apart. You can thank right wing fascists for the holes in your roads. 

by tacoma_1 on 10/9/2013 @ 1:20pm
Another good reason to vote for prop 1 is that fredo will hafta pay higher utility bills at both his house and business. Since (successful) shop owners create traffic via their customers, and hence, wear and tear on our roadways, it only makes sense that the business community reinvest in the infrastructure of the very community that supports them. 

by fredo on 10/9/2013 @ 2:13pm


My prices are a function of my overhead. If costs go up, then prices go up.. Other local businesses will probably do the same.Most intelligent consumers are aware of this relationship. If they are OK with higher utility bills and higher prices in the marketplace just so they can get a few potholes filled then they should vote YES.

by tacoma_1 on 10/9/2013 @ 2:21pm
Supply/demand or competition doesn't affect price, just overhead costs? You should write a book on economics. 

by low bar on 10/9/2013 @ 2:29pm
Prices don't go up when Pierce county is over supplied. Supply drives down prices like nothing else. Jack up your prices and someone else will take over your comparative advantage. 

Markets determine prices...not shop owners.

by NineInchNachos on 10/9/2013 @ 3:07pm
"The Economics of Street Trees, Minimum Wage and Potholes"  #fredobooktitle  (welcome back FREDO, TACOMA1 and LOWBAR !) 

by low bar on 10/9/2013 @ 3:17pm
"The best way to prevent potholes from forming is to build the entire substucture of the road out of free draining material and keep the pavement surface sealed."

Like bricks and sand? For fucksake this isn't fucking rocket science. I wouldn't pay any fucking tax policy that doesn't fund a sound scientific solution to a problem. Fuck the city councils of Tacoma and University Place. 


researchfrontiers.uark.edu/6354.php


by NineInchNachos on 10/10/2013 @ 4:03pm


TACOMA: Support Prop. 1 and fix city’s streets



Letter by Erik Bjornson, Tacoma


on Oct. 10, 2013 at 1:33 pm

|








Tacoma’s blighted, pothole-ladened streets are painfully
evident to both residents of Tacoma and visitors alike and pose a risk
to any car attempting to travel on them.
The reality is that Tacoma’s streets will never be improved without a
focused funding effort, which Proposition 1 offers Nov. 5. One of the
beauties of Proposition 1 is that, unlike proposals to raise the sales
tax, it allows multimillion-dollar hospitals, large corporations,
entities in the Port of Tacoma, Walmart, and state and federal entities
to participate in paying to repair the streets.
Outlying suburban areas, such as Fife and University Place – which
benefit greatly from bargain rates from Tacoma Public Utilities and use
of the roads in Tacoma while avoiding paying any B&O tax – would be
able to participate in the repair as well.
With the cost of repairing the roads spread to such a wide group, the
cost per person is negligible, making it an easy choice to vote yes on
Proposition 1 this November.


Read more here: blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2013/10/...



by low bar on 10/10/2013 @ 7:34pm
What are we STUPID? WTF is the tax funding? Lets see a fucking window sticker. I DON'T VALUE a road design that is made the same as the others and breaks the fuck down all the time. FORGET THAT. All that shit about multi million hospitals and corps is just rhetoric and telling me NOTHING about what I'm getting. Yes, I'm getting a road...but WHAT KIND OF ROAD?????

by NineInchNachos on 10/10/2013 @ 7:44pm
unholy road.   ha!


by low bar on 10/10/2013 @ 8:32pm
Someone over at Bjornson's office needs to get fired. I mean, thats what you get when you hire a communications major to sell your fucking policy to the public instead of a true political scientist. You get a message that doesn't sell worth dick.  

by tacoma_1 on 10/10/2013 @ 10:14pm
Actually, I rarely agree with Eric Bjornson, but his letter is right on the money this time. 

by low bar on 10/10/2013 @ 10:21pm
Really tacoma1? Four small paragraphs of complete rhetoric is all it took to persuade you to agree to this MONEY PIT PLAN to fill some holes THAT WILL COME BACK AND COST YOU AGAIN BECAUSE THE SHIT AIN'T ENGINEERED RIGHT?

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 6:50am
Eric, your letter is passionate and well written as usual. The problem is you're on the wrong side. Just a year ago you were attacking an increase to the sales tax rate because it would lessen the spending by local consumers. This proposed tax increase will also lessen spending. People affected by increased utilities will have less money to spend. Therefore, your position on Prop.1 is inconsistent with your previous position.

by Mofo from the Hood on 10/11/2013 @ 8:49am
This is a serious quality of life issue.

It's about seriously increasing the quality of life of those who work in the public service sector.

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 9:26am
Agree with mofo. His observation is spot on.

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 10:10am
why do  you insist on holding hostage the quality of our streets?   Also brick streets are a bad idea.  Look at Egypt... first thing they do is rip up the bricks and throw em at pro-western security peace keepers.  Brick roads are a slippery slope to sharia law.  

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 10:22am
Why do you insist on holding hostage the affordability of our basic utilities?

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 12:20pm
NIN you have to SEAL the goddamn bricks as a part of the construction. You can't rip up a brick that is SEALED to the fucking top layer of ASPHALT. 

WHY IS FUCKING N. STEELE STREET MADE OUT OF FUCKING BRICKS??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

JESUS H CHRIST PEOPLE

I'll tell you why N. Steele St. is made out of bricks...BECAUSE YOUR GRANDPAPPIES ACTUALLY HAD TWO BRAIN HALVES.

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 12:47pm
why are brick roads so lumpy?  LUMPY!!!

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 1:01pm
Because all you have to do is SEAL THE FUCKING LUMPS WITH A TOP LAYER OF ASPHALT. DUH!!!!!!!!!



by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 1:14pm
 then you have a lumpy road and asphalt.

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 1:26pm
Lol you have a lumpy grasp on civil engineering. 

"permeable interlocking concrete pavement saved thousands of dollars by eliminating conventional storm water drainage, making PICP cost-competitive with conventional asphalt."


www.cement.org/homes/ch_newsletter2009-1...








by JesseHillFan on 10/11/2013 @ 2:35pm
City of Tacoma ordered to pay injured bicyclist $242,000www.thenewstribune.com/2013/10/11/283289...

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 3:00pm
"It ignored design advice"


It being the City of Tacoma. This isn't a funding problem....this is A FUCKING DESIGN PROBLEM.

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 3:02pm
How many gentle cyclists must have their faces smashed in?  Just so Simpson Kraft can have cheap electricity to stink up our air?     sad day. sad indeed. 

by Jesse on 10/11/2013 @ 3:09pm
You can't just pave over bricks and expect it to be a long term solution.  Although brick somewhat qualifies as a permeable substrate, it has enough surface area to cause a sheering problem with asphalt when the asphalt gets older and loses its flexibility.  A basic rule of construction is that you cannot stick two substances together that expand and contract at different rates, and expect it to stay stuck together long term.

by Jesse on 10/11/2013 @ 3:23pm
Also, to answer your question about lumpy streets from bricks...

Take note that all hills in Tacoma that are old enough to have bricks or cobblestones under them have sandstone cobbles.  Flat areas are brick.  Why?  The sandstone cobblestones are purposely rounded on their tops so horse hoofs can set on them and allow them to get up hill.  Think of it as stairs for horse hoofs.  Flat areas in town are red brick because their flat.  Most exposed cobble streets are now fairly flat because sandstone is soft and can be deteriorated over 100 years by weather and wear.  I suspect that under streets that were overlaid with asphalt decades ago, the cobbles may be a bit rounder.

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 3:31pm
 " How many gentle cyclists must have their faces smashed in? "

 If cyclists are concerned about the conditions of the roads perhaps they could start a petition to put a bicycle registration tax on the bicyclists for the purpose of making an investment. Pretty hard to feel sympathetic for a group of people who won't invest a dime.  

by JesseHillFan on 10/11/2013 @ 3:43pm
I agree cyclists should pay their fair share of damage to the roads caused by usage.All ten cents per year.




by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 3:50pm
Whatever the streets are made of now is not a sound solution in a fucking rain forest. Get it the fuck together Tacoma and STOP IGNORING DESIGN PROPOSALS. Shit birds. If Norway can build roads and sound like hurdy burdy when they open their mouths, I'm pretty sure we can look at how they are building their shit in their rain forests based on drawings without knowing WTF hurdy burdy burdy means. 

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 4:33pm
OH lowbar. dude! things wear out.  new mattress.  New shoes...  new roads! 

by tacoma_1 on 10/11/2013 @ 4:33pm
The first step of this process should be for Tacoman's to collectively agree to actually fund and fix our roads. Step 2 would be to agree on how to fix 'em.  

All this nonsense about the best pavement method is just nonsense unless we actually have a way to fund it. 

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 5:04pm
If the first step in the process is to get a collective agreement, then how do you get that agreement when there are voters who are tired of seeing roads in a rainforest being managed BY A BUNCH OF IDIOTS??

I'm not saying spend a little money to fix the problem. I am saying you have to spend a goddamn shitload. But make sure that shit is build like a goddamn English channel tunnel THAT IS THE FUCK UNDERWATER. 


All you have to do is build this shit ABOVE WATER. Jesus, make a dead Roman say GODDAMN thats a smart road for once in your life.  

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 5:11pm
I've got it you RETARDS. The solution is probably chemical. MREs have these heating things in them that heat up when the shit gets wet. 

Well if the goddamn problem is freezing in winter, then inject the asphalt with shit that heats up when it gets wet. Snap to MORONS. 

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 5:14pm
you could probably adapt that technology to mattresses too 

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 5:19pm
Heres the deal toolbags. Have everyones goddamn hotwater heaters do all the work in winter. Run off from homes connected to tubing buried in the fucking concrete of roads during winter heating UP THE FUCKING ROAD FOR FUCKING FREE. Snap to it DUMBASSES. 

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 5:20pm


The tax is estimated to bring in a paltry $11M per year versus a backlog of paving projects in the area of about $700M. This means that in your lifetimes you will likely NEVER see any appreciable improvement in the roads. We're only going to repair 1.5 % of the damage each year and that assumes that the streets don't CONTINUE to deteriorate.  Get real.

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 5:25pm
Transfer the heat from homes in the winter to the roads. Like you probably only have to bury some kind of metallic leads from homes into streets. 

SNAP TO IT MEGAMINDS

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2013 @ 5:26pm
SO SOUR. Were you weened on a pickle? 

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 5:27pm
Gee why do manhole covers never freeze over in winter?

I'M A GODDAMN MORON

by tacoma_1 on 10/11/2013 @ 5:46pm
We really should have more funding to help the mentally ill. Just sayin. 

by low bar on 10/11/2013 @ 6:10pm
The definition of mental illness is doing the same street design over and over again and expecting different results. Those who support this never succeeding approach to civil engineering are truly batty as a fucking macaque. 

by Jesse on 10/11/2013 @ 7:27pm
From Fred's last comment, I'm glad he's on board for funding even more street repairs.  

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 7:51pm


Taxpayers are already providing enough funding to keep the streets in repair. Council refuses to prioritize funding so we get a bunch of half-assed pet projects that nobody cares about instead of maintained infrastructure.  

by JesseHillFan on 10/11/2013 @ 7:59pm
Why are we fixing streets for a Tacoma motor vehicle dependent  infrastructure when the fuel for these motor vehicles will in decades become as costly as gold and an electric car will
become so prohibitively expensive in several decades in the multi millions of dollars range.
Cars are just unsustainable.Only the few very wealthy will be able to drive them on near empty roads (except for bicycles and velomobiles).
Cars are the past not the future.Build for the energy poor yet much more energy efficient future not the past.Putting money into an obsolete infrastructure
is foolhardy.
Building or maintaining streets and roads designed for motor vehicles would be like building thousands of new Zepplin hangers for the future.

by fredo on 10/11/2013 @ 8:26pm


JHF I guess that would be a NO vote for you.

by NineInchNachos on 10/12/2013 @ 10:27am
www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/1...


by NineInchNachos on 10/22/2013 @ 8:05pm
vote yes! postdefiance.com/proposition-1-and-the-p...


by NineInchNachos on 10/26/2013 @ 12:56pm
THIS CARTOON HAS SOLD!  THANKS COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN MELLO!