RTA Spending Plan

What is wrong with the RTA Spending Plan?


The current estimated cost of all the projects must be made. The projected income from the half cent sales tax must be made. The two figures must be compared. The termination date of the RTA must be discussed as a reality deadline and not something that will get even more money eventually. This RTA thing should be finished at the sunset date: this means any debt and the projects.

It is obvious that paper compliance is more important than the reality of what revenue the RTA is expected to generate and what the community can afford from these tax monies. Going in debt because 'scheduled' projects are projected to cost so much more than will actually be generated is both costly and foolish.

Poor planning.

Practicality would indicate that a spending pattern based on what is actually generated per month would be adopted. Just starting a project with no funds to finish it is not "compliance" with what the voters thought they were getting; it is a waste of money. Voters need to revote on the RTA. Why is this illusory 'compliance' so important? Could they lose their revenue stream due to nonperformance?

Since they are non compliant, perhaps voters should decide how this remaining RTA money should be spent. The RTA people want to go into debt, which would add $35 million to the cost of these projects they just want to get started on. Taxpayers cannot afford any more public debt that ties up future revenue streams in debt service. The cities need more ready cash from local taxes, not more encumbrances that suck a 35% profit out of local taxpayers, reducing the value of the tax dollar to 66%. Moneylenders will walk away with $35 million out of this community. We cannot afford this just to hurry up and get started.

Reduce the scope of projects. Focus on the project with the most safety concerns or focus on funding sidewalks, bike paths, bus pullouts and all those things that actually benefit the citizens. How about a nice bike path that could be used for the Bicycle Tour and others and then by the locals? This would be a tourist draw, useful for locals and affordable, according to actual RTA revenue, not borrowed cash that ties up cash for years to come. A nice safe Tour track winding all around Tucson would be a boon to the community.

What I am really saying here is that the RTA projects need to be rethought now, not after the RTA borrows and squanders $135 million in tax money, leaving behind an interminable debt. We never voted to give away a third of the money to moneylenders. We voted for the money to be spent on the projects. Since they obviously cannot afford to complete all the projects, let's forget them and start over. Take it to the voters in the next election. In the meantime, slow the spending and collect the funds as they come in. No more borrowing. Contract only for what funding actually exists.

Come up with some projects that would benefit the community, bring in seasonal tourism, open up small business zoning, and encourage the use of bicycles and buses around town. Revamp the bus system by creating bus centers in shopping malls and near medical facilities and the University. Repair existing roads. Stop the RTA from wasting money on beginning projects they don't have the money to finish.

I call for a forensic audit of the RTA planning and spending. The RTA appears to be following the same reasoning and actions that the Rio Nuevo boondoggle followed. The Tucson City Council and Pima County need to revisit the RTA election promises and get started on a logical action plan that does not further indebt the taxpayers.

According to Councilman Steve Kozachik, the planned borrowing by the RTA will result in $50 million of taxpayer money going to moneylenders for interest. The new fire station cost $38 million, just to give you an idea of what this borrowing is costing the Tucson community. You can add the new fire station and the new parking garage downtown as an example of what $50 million taxpayer dollars will buy. The city of Tucson cannot afford to lose $50 million just because the RTA is behind schedule.

We need a revote on the RTA projects because not enough money will be generated to pay for them and they are behind schedule. The hierarchy of the RTA has also said that a $9 million project that now will cost $22 million is what the voters wanted. Their callous attitudes towards cost overruns and taxpayer money is blatantly obvious.

I call for an audit and a commitment to deny further cost overruns on RTA projects. If bidders cannot meet their bid, then call in their bond and get somebody else.

Support Governor Walker!

Thoughts on the Hassle in Wisconsin

I retired from a career as a public school teacher and thus may some say I am biased. I am perhaps more knowledgeable because of the time spent on duty, not biased.

Being a teacher brings with it more responsibilities than meets first perusal. You have to be there in lieu of guardianship and you are legally responsible for those students. You have temporary custody of them. Being a teacher is a complex job, much of which has nothing to do with the actual curriculum you are charged to teach.

Are teachers paid enough? May I ask if prices are too high? Is it the same question?

Frankly, I am embarrassed by the actions of many teachers in Wisconsin. They even want to be paid for demonstrating. Some are apparently collecting phony doctors notes excusing them to get a sick day when they were not sick. These doctors should lose their license and teachers who claim the phony sick leave should be fired. What are these 'teachers' teaching the students? That it is ok to commit fraud for a cause? That it is ok to demand that you join a union if you want to work? You have to join my gang or you can't work here.

The unions are fighting the end of this forced servitude. The unions will lose money when people have a choice on whether to join a union or not. How much are union dues? How much was lost in the new contract? What is the difference? Maybe the teachers can exercise their right to free choice on what organizations will collect dues from their paychecks and save money that way. It's all about freedom from being forced to give money to an organization. The unions are afraid to lose this money: they might lose their jobs. These teachers who are demonstrating are attempting to force union membership on everyone else. They already conceded that they would pay more of their own pensions and benefits.

I call for law and order. The teachers should go back to work or face immediate termination. The cowardly legislators who fled their responsibilities should return and face the budgetary problems. The governor does not want to lay off teachers but the union would prefer layoffs to this new agreement that cuts off mandatory union membership. I never liked mandatory union membership, having worked under it in California. All it generated was a few puffed up individuals going to conferences on money I was forced to contribute. And of course, the union I was forced to join made very public political choices that were against my own political beliefs. The teachers of Wisconsin would be better off without this expensive yoke around their necks. The unions cost too much money.

Part of my hassle about unions, is the lack of responsibility for any consideration of the long term results of any demands they make. If they can get some craven public servant to agree to outrageous demands that are unsustainable, they believe they are successful. Success in the short term that decimates long term practicality is not success: it is irresponsible. If the current union bosses set up huge pensions and cheap benefits for themselves with minimal personal donations, Bell California comes to mind.  Clawbacks!

The public servant who agrees to an unsustainable pension plan should be sued for stupidity. I see these people gain public office, run up the public debt, agree to DOA pension plans, and let the unions run the government like their own cash cow. I do believe the situation in Wisconsin is a microcosm of the problems in our nation today.

I was looking over a federal grant application and noted that the 'affiliated unions' for the proposed project must be listed and guaranteed. All this in Arizona, a right to work state. Why must the Feds guarantee union control of all jobs using federal money? Who set that up? The federal money is derived from federal taxes paid from Arizona, so why does the federal government have the right to tell us how to spend the funding?

It's probably obvious by now that I do not support the anti-government demonstrators. They are anti-government and pro-union and I do not want a union takeover of any state government. Take a look at the states: union demands, pension problems, debt and insolvency. Does that sound like the automakers? Does that sound like we need to support Governor Walker of Wisconsin? Yes it does.

Creating Wealth and Paying Off Gambling Debts

I don't know what all the Dodd/Frank regulation is, but I do know that investors have been gulled into thinking the subprime slippery interest rate mortgages were well documented legitimate loans made by a morally responsible lender. Something needs to be done, like a reorganization of the regulatory apparatus first as the new rules are implemented. Possibly the regulatory problems are related to the structure and hierarchy of the departments, which has apparently fallen victim to incompetency or bribery or indifference to what actions would produce positive results for the economy. What was the true mission of the regulators?

Tax reform should be accomplished in conjunction with this new regulation. Tax those 'investments' that throw the money back and forth way up above that never hit the ground in the form of jobs. Derivatives, mortgage securities, credit default swaps and the like should be taxed at an extremely high rate due to the damage done to the economy and the rise in unemployment. Regulation of them should demand transparency and extensive documentation every time they are sold or insured, like a performance audit of every component.

Reform of the institutionalized government agencies is necessary to implement Rep. Paul Ryan's suggestion that the government must be downsized. Downsizing will not take place without reform of the structure of the bureaucracy. It is interesting that President Obama and Rep. Paul Ryan made the same suggestion, coming at it from other directions. This is an opportunity for bipartisanship.

A down-sizing of the debt load needs to be a focus, by whatever means necessary.

Due to the world situation, cutbacks to the military seem unwise. A reduction in spending can occur as the two wars wind down, but our military is vital to our continued existence and should not be downsized. Full numbers military plus more high tech R&D. Tech is not a replacement for sheer numbers. Expensive, yes. Our military should cut out waste and frivolity.

The space program should be funded for the R&D and jobs and the possibility of lucrative mining ventures on the moon and asteroids. Public and private investment in interplanetary research is integral to world security and international cooperation in this research is needed now. Military outposts in space are crucial.

Long range planning must confront the possible futures of a closed world with a population explosion and increasingly scarce resources and the painful need for sustainability planning in a finite space. Not that infinite space exists, but there is more next door, complete with exploitable resources and presumably no competition other than among ourselves. I hope the USA stakes claim to the best ore deposits but it won't happen if we don't fund more exploration, manned and unmanned. Stuck here or out there exploring, these are the choices.

Create more wealth with more material resources. Colonize the local habitats, then aim for the stars. Any other vision turns us to dust.

                                           TUCSON EQUINOX 2010

How Americans can Honor Representative Gabrielle Giffords

Representative Giffords supports and believes in the space program of the United States of America. Her husband is an astronaut on leave to be with his wife.

We as Americans should pledge our support for the exploration of outer space. Republicans and Democrats working together can help push through an expansion of the current space program that would also create jobs and encourage private investment in developing mining and other business opportunities off planet.

Our economy needs rare earth minerals, titanium and other riches to be found. We already landed on an asteroid and the moon and Mars and bits of our work are probably on the surface of Venus. We have had success. Cooperate with the other technological leaders to create new enterprises. Space Exploration is now our Manifest Destiny.

To honor Gabrielle Giffords, Americans can support her dreams of space exploration and her love of this country. Let us all work together to create a new world of hope and jobs in space exploration. Let us help give Gabrielle Giffords something she knows is important: an expanded space program.