Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2006 Metro Tax for the Zoo? Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Merchantgander
Member
Username: Merchantgander

Post Number: 1450
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 150.198.164.127
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:02 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060112/M ETRO/601120367

Just wondering would you vote yes if on the ballot?

Side note: Gail Warden is not a women but nice assumption by the news based on the name.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jenkje
Member
Username: Jenkje

Post Number: 131
Registered: 04-2004
Posted From: 69.212.255.133
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:04 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Uh. No.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dabirch
Member
Username: Dabirch

Post Number: 1304
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 208.44.117.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:17 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I already pay my tax, it is called being a Detroit Zoological Society Member.

Have the keychain card to prove it...
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6401
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 10:34 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Still, Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson isn't sure a special zoo tax is the answer, either.

Patterson said he'd like to see the zoo improve its operations and broaden its support base under its new management before hitting voters up for a tax hike.

"There are other ways to solve a $4-$6 million (shortfall) without looking for a tax levy," Patterson said.




Is this his comment for everything. Mr. regionalization doesn't want to support the zoo now that Detroiters aren't eating $5 MM annually.



(Message edited by jt1 on January 12, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Udmphikapbob
Member
Username: Udmphikapbob

Post Number: 83
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 206.81.45.34
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:03 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

people don't want to pay taxes for amenities like a zoo, then they biatch about there being nothing to do around here! no wonder we're all fatties, pretty soon the only entertainment we'll have will be bars and restaurants.

i would vote yes, and find some way to deal with the loss of ten whole freaking dollars a year.
Top of pageBottom of page

Itsjeff
Member
Username: Itsjeff

Post Number: 5339
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 208.27.111.125
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:10 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

We tried this. With the ridiculously puny .25 mil "arts tax" that would have secured funding for the DIA, DSO, Zoo, Cranbrook, Pontiac Art Center, Channel 56...

It went down in flames.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1540
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.234
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:27 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It's not that people don't want to pay extra taxes for things like the zoo, It is that we're overly taxed already and are unwilling to pay more. If you want money for the zoo, figure out a way to lower the amount we pay for everything else. Many people would go along with this.

The tax burden in Detroit and Michigan forces businesses and people to move elsewhere. We need to stop taxing the living daylights out of ourselves.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6403
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 11:30 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!
MORE ROADS! LESS ARTS!

signed,
The cultural wasteland that is SE Michigan.

Why support arts, the zoo, museums, programs for children when we can push to increase taxes to support more roads.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dabirch
Member
Username: Dabirch

Post Number: 1305
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 208.44.117.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 12:00 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's
Less trash pick-up and more NEZ's

...oops, wrong thread
Top of pageBottom of page

Eric
Member
Username: Eric

Post Number: 286
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 35.11.158.84
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 12:59 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

While the taxes in Detroit maybe too high overall Michigan is middle of pack. Engler cuts taxes for years and still businesses aren't flocking here. I don't how other major metro area more thriving than us can support taxes, but we can't.
Top of pageBottom of page

Gildas
Member
Username: Gildas

Post Number: 336
Registered: 12-2004
Posted From: 147.240.236.8
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:37 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Other major metro areas, Chicago, Atlantia, New York, etc. have the population base that Detroit lacks and there is no regional cooporation here to make things happen that cross political boundaries.

Thats one way that they can do it and we cannot.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1154
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:58 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Huh Gildas? Detroit is the 6th most populous metropolitan area in the nation (even bigger than the Atlanta Metro area). It's not like there is a dearth of financial resources in Southeast Michigan.

With that being said, I think a zoo tax is kind of silly. Pass a tax to support decent public transit, then we'll worry about the zoo.
Top of pageBottom of page

Zulu_warrior
Member
Username: Zulu_warrior

Post Number: 2429
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.251.27.41
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 1:59 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes, we need it. Or else it will close
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1181
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 69.220.230.150
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:47 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Is this his comment for everything. Mr. regionalization doesn't want to support the zoo now that Detroiters aren't eating $5 MM annually.




Uh, Raising taxes to cover budget shortfalls are just a bandaid until next year. They need to find the real problem.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1155
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:49 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Is there any reason the Huron-Clinton MetroParks can't take over the operation of the zoo?
Top of pageBottom of page

Skulker
Member
Username: Skulker

Post Number: 3368
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.103.104.93
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:50 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

DaninDC:

Equal population sizes ¹ equal fiscal resources between regions. You are smart enough to know that.

The overall economic health and economic base of an area will have a huge impact on its fiscal resources. Currently SE Michigan is sucking wind with relatively high unemployment, low tax revenue cause by massive underemployment issues and an automotive industry gasping to stay competitive. Even thriving and growing Macomb County has had to dip into their rainy day funds due to significant revenue shortfalls.

To really get out of the mess, clearly we need to raise our tax burden by 15-20% to construct a rail transit system to move a few people around at a huge subsidy cost......
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 1541
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 129.9.163.105
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 2:52 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Is there any reason the Huron-Clinton MetroParks can't take over the operation of the zoo?




Same reason they don't want to take over Belle Isle. They already don't have enough money to take care of the things currently on their plate. Why would they want to pick up another expense without any new cash?



(Message edited by ndavies on January 12, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Susanarosa
Member
Username: Susanarosa

Post Number: 658
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 208.39.170.90
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:03 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

And the last time someone mentioned it the City Council got all bent out of shape because it was just another attempted "land grab" from the suburbs.

(Edit: Above post referring to Belle Isle, not the Zoo)

(Message edited by susanarosa on January 12, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1156
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:17 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Skulker, I wasn't necessarily referring to the fiscal health of local government entities. I was commenting on Gildas's post regarding size of metropolitan area versus ability to support a zoo. You and I both know that there is enough money among the 4.5 million residents of Southeast Michigan to support the zoo, among other things. The lack of political will is something else entirely, which is really what this issue is.

Now, one can argue that, with the nation's highest unemployment rate among states, and the hurting of the auto industry, money might actually be a little tight. Michigan, however, seems to find enough money to continue building freeways and producing McMansions like there's no tomorrow, so I would think there's 5 million bucks somewhere out there.

I know you're smarter than that.
Top of pageBottom of page

Psip
Member
Username: Psip

Post Number: 829
Registered: 04-2005
Posted From: 69.246.13.131
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:31 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Support the Zoo tax, this will expand the zoo train so that we will have a transit system in the metro area. Imagin, those sleek trains couseing up Woodward to bring people to the Zoo.
Sometimes we have to be creative. Call a goat a horse and we might get a mule.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hamtramck_steve
Member
Username: Hamtramck_steve

Post Number: 2620
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 204.25.242.51
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 3:48 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

To really get out of the mess, clearly we need to raise our tax burden by 15-20% to construct a rail transit system to move a few people around at a huge subsidy cost......




Or we can continue to build new freeways and widen roads, paving over farmland, all at a huge subsidy cost.

Only difference is that one subsidy cost is readily apparent (mass transit) and one is hidden (current M.O.)
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6408
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:15 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Uh, Raising taxes to cover budget shortfalls are just a bandaid until next year. They need to find the real problem.




This is not raising taxes in a regional sense. It is distributing the cost of a regional asset to the region. Right now there is a 5 MM subsidy from the city. This is pretty much asking the entire region to help with the costs as opposed to just the city.

Some people may see a tax hike but total dollars to this will be a wash. I guess it is fine if Detroit eats the dollars but heaven forbid that cost be spread to everyone.

HMCA is good although no parks are in Detroit.
This is bad because Detroit was funding it and the rest of the region was not.

Sounds like Detroiters have been getting hit with a doubley whammy of pay us for suburban based regional assets (HMCA) and pay for a suburban based regional asset (zoo).

Nice policy.
Top of pageBottom of page

Skulker
Member
Username: Skulker

Post Number: 3370
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.103.104.93
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 4:16 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

DaninDC:
I don't see any current or real proposed freeway building here in metro Detroit. I see major projects stopped because there is no money. Just my observation from here.

The $5 million is an annual operating subsidy not a one shot deal as in find $5 MM under the couch cushions once and we're set. This would require about $75 million capital campaign to establish an endowment that covers the annual gap alone. That ask would not address updates, expansions, resoratioans and renovations which is where you find the large corporate and foundation donors. Those would be separate and later asks. I sit on the board of directors of a non-profit and see first hand what folks are willing to pony up for and it is tough work here. I really don't foresee the Zoological society being able to capture $75 MM+ for an annual operations endowment, ESPCIALLY after the local coffers have been drained by DIA, the Max, The Opera House, the Riverfront Conservancy, the Charles H Wright....all very large asks that have not yet met their goals. Some of these asks are nearly 5-6 years old as well. A small regional tax for the zoo is not an unreasonable burden nor an unreasonable request.


quote:

Now, one can argue that, with the nation's highest unemployment rate among states, and the hurting of the auto industry, money might actually be a little tight.




No, if one were to leave the bubble of DC, one would come here and find that money IS tight. No fucking "maybes" about it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1159
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:01 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Skulker, why do you always have to make things so damn personal? For you to continually insist that I'm living in a bubble is plain ignorant, and to be honest, quite unfair.

NOTE: See I-75 expansion. I guess $1.3 billion to add a lane in each direction is just chump change, right?
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6412
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:04 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

NOTE: See I-75 expansion. I guess $1.3 billion to add a lane in each direction is just chump change, right?




That is a deferred project that people in OC are fighting for. It is not set and does not have money allocated. But why let facts get in the way.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1162
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:24 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Deferred as part of Jenny's Fix-It First, but still in the works. MDOT hasn't given up hope on it just yet.
Top of pageBottom of page

Skulker
Member
Username: Skulker

Post Number: 3372
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.103.104.93
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:37 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So its a widening of I-75, not a new freeway....and its not currently happening...as part of a policy of Fix It First...

That is a far cry from the statement that says...


quote:

Or we can continue to build new freeways and widen roads...




If the shoe fits, wear it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6419
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 5:40 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Defferd and still in the works are not the same thing.

Deferred and being considered might be a better option.

So should we consider all mentioned or considered projects as 'in the works'

You're stretching this one to make a point that isn't there. You also should check to see who is really pushing for this

Show me where MDOTs 5 year plan shows this expansion.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1163
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:23 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Page 157

http://www.michigan.gov/docume nts/MDOT_5_Year_Plan_Expanding system_143171_7.pdf
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6424
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:26 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I stand corrected. I am willing to bet a large sum of money that the project isn't sone within 10 years.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jjw
Member
Username: Jjw

Post Number: 25
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 68.33.56.156
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:34 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The Michigan Zoo----state should take it over, put some money into it, and get it shaped up to the point that people will want to visit it---its been done in other places and quite successfully---baltimore for one---
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1164
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:37 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I bet so too. I don't think the Feds will go for it.

Should we start a telethon for the zoo? If you think about it, it's only $1.11 per year per person in the Detroit Metropolitan Area.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 6426
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 198.208.251.24
Posted on Thursday, January 12, 2006 - 6:39 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That is the frustrating thing. People don't want to pay the $1.11 per person per year for a zoo but will go to Starbucks for an $8 cup of coffee every morning.

That is one more thing that is killing this region. We have gotten so dispersed and people have gotten into a 'bigger house, better car mentality' that many in the metro area completely forget about things like the zoo, museums, theaters, etc.

WE have a lot of great cultural venues and we have a lot of people that consider culture as renting a foreign movie once a year.

Damn shame if you ask me.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jim
Member
Username: Jim

Post Number: 963
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.43.27.192
Posted on Friday, January 13, 2006 - 10:04 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I don't understand how any section of the metro area can be considered 'booming', when in order to 'thrive' other areas must be vacated and left to fall to differing levels of neglect.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mcp001
Member
Username: Mcp001

Post Number: 2009
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 69.14.135.95
Posted on Friday, January 13, 2006 - 10:26 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My my my, the generousity of some individuals here with other people's money never ceases to amaze me.

The "Sorry that you cannot pay your (fill in the blank: mortgage, utility bills, car payment}, but the need for a zoo tax outweighs your base desires" argument is beginning to get a little tedious here...
Top of pageBottom of page

Jsmyers
Member
Username: Jsmyers

Post Number: 1349
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 69.212.226.203
Posted on Saturday, January 14, 2006 - 2:16 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My my my, the desire of many people to live life as hermits never ceases to amaze me. Who needs a public anything? I can hide in my basement and buy anything I'd ever need from the TV and the computer. I can even make a living. Streets? Museaums? Zoos? Those are just wastes of my money.

It is our money. Not other people's money.

By swapping a couple of words, your statement means the same things, but sounds much different:

The "Sorry that you cannot pay your (fill in the blank: mortgage, utility bills, car payment}, but the need for an airforce to keep the enemy at bay outweighs your base desires" argument is beginning to get a little tedious here...

-or-

The "Sorry that you cannot pay your (fill in the blank: mortgage, utility bills, car payment}, but the need for a levy to keep the rising sea level out outweighs your base desires" argument is beginning to get a little tedious here...

-or-

The "Sorry that you cannot pay your (fill in the blank: mortgage, utility bills, car payment}, but the need for police outweighs your base desires" argument is beginning to get a little tedious here...

-or-

The "Sorry that you cannot pay your (fill in the blank: mortgage, utility bills, car payment}, but the need to pay school teachers outweighs your base desires" argument is beginning to get a little tedious here...
Top of pageBottom of page

Huggybear
Member
Username: Huggybear

Post Number: 116
Registered: 08-2005
Posted From: 70.230.16.223
Posted on Saturday, January 14, 2006 - 11:12 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Patterson always has "another way" if it is a question of some miniscule levy for a cultural institution. If he is such a financial genius, we need him on the boards of the various cultural institutions around here.

But it's hard to think that his statements are serious.

Patterson always purports to speak for the taxpayers of Oakland County when he opposes anything having to do with public projects (particularly cultural ones). His rants (if true - I hope not) makes his constituency come off as (1) shortsighted, (2) venal, and (3) uncultured. I wouldn't want him representing me. But since I don't vote in Oakland County, I can only hope that his constituency sees the light and forces a change in the message.

We should impose an arts tax, but if poor people pay it too, these institutions should give a certain number of free or seriously reduced seats (or tickets) a year to people below a certain income level.
Top of pageBottom of page

Citylover
Member
Username: Citylover

Post Number: 1522
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 4.229.123.247
Posted on Saturday, January 14, 2006 - 11:13 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Your right about one thing Huggybear LBP should be on some boards......hell maybe he is.Either way he would do a damn site better job of running things then the current Detroit administration.

I aint from OC.I do however understand the failry simple concept of getting something for my money.And whether you or I agree or not with LBP his motivation(according to him)is seeing that his constituents get a fair shake for their money.And they keep re-electing him so they must like him

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.