Dear Oregonian, your title for this article is misleading. This plan appears to be based only on income, with mere arbitrary assumptions about the relationship between income and fuel consumption. Regardless of income, there's no incentive here to use public transit, bicycle, or use more fuel-efficient cars.
Show me the incentive, in this plan, to telecommute or make fewer drives to the grocery store.
It's either sloppy, lazy, or disingenuous to say this plan is based on gas consumption. Please pick a title that's more accurate.
Thanks.
Read more insights at thediscussionator.blogspot.com.
Given the dead lock, the advisory vote is worth a try. Of course, Paul Romain won't like it. If voters say they'd prefer a fuel tax, it will be slightly harder for Romain to advocate ignoring that opinion.
Here's the article.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/12/portland_street_fund_steve_nov_1.html#incart_river
Now Councilor Novick suggests a non-binding vote on what type of tax to impose for street improvements.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/01/portland_street_fund_city_coun.html#comments
Given the dead lock, the advisory vote is worth a try. Of course, Paul Romain won't like it. If voters say they'd prefer a fuel tax, it will be slightly harder for Romain to advocate ignoring that opinion.
ReplyDelete