Tonight, passenger rail advocate Paul Marin is scheduled to be in the wrong county. He plans to ask The People's Republic of Northampton County to give him $75 thousand for a regional transportation study. In fact, the plan is to pack the house because "we can't trust the county to do the right thing unless someone is paying attention." Well, he can't trust Lehigh County, either. While Paul passes the hat in Northampton County, Lehigh County's Dean Browning will be filing a motion to shelve Marin's request for funding there.Ruh roh.
Rather than just killing it, Browning is proposing to offer Marin $1. Here's how he explains his thinking.
The effect of this motion is to maintain the option of conducting the study at some point in the future depending on the year-end results for 2008. My thoughts for deferring his are as follows:
* This is yet another project that is dependent upon funding from our counterparts in Northampton County and they have been less than cooperative in funding other joint initiatives such as the regional crime center.
* One of the supposed benefits of this rail service is that it would help in the revitalization of downtown. However, when rail service was mentioned earlier this year, our County executive commented (and wisely so in my opinion) that this could result in increased sprawl in Lehigh County. I think the latter is more likely than the former.
* I have a bias against conducting studies for projects that I don’t think can be implemented. Rail service to New York is an infrastructure project that will require substantial funding. The Federal and State government have made it clear that there would have to be a local component to any funding for projects like this. We have an existing negative gap between spending and revenue combined with the fact that we don’t have enough money as it is to cover our primary infrastructure responsibility which is the County’s 40 some bridges. I can not see how the results of this study could ever be implemented.
Browning in anti urban revitalization. Look at all the decisions he makes. He is consistent.
ReplyDeleteSimple as that.
Browning is right on the mark on this.
ReplyDeleteEspecially in the current financial situation, the county doesn't have $75,000 to throw away.
Anon 8:20, That is ridiculous. You can thank Browning for finding a way to fund community policing. Browning is a fiscal conservative who gets nervous when a county spends more than it takes in. It's as simple as that.
ReplyDeleteBernie, are you saying Browning voted for the safe streets program (full funding as originally proposed)?
ReplyDeleteAnon 10:11,
ReplyDeleteNo, Browning is, is fact, one of the R commissioners who basically shelved the idea. But he was concerned with finding a way to fund it. That was his true objection. He did not want to use real estate tax revenue to pay for it if he could find some other way. Cunningham helped him find another way and now Browning is on board with the idea and will support it. It's in the 2009 budget. It will have at least five votes and LC will fund community policing for three years.
At the end of the day, actions speek louder than words.
ReplyDeleteOf course he is not going to say he is against urban revitalization. A smart politician is going to say they are for something not against something, and that is what Browning is.
Browning believes the cities should pay for everything that happens within their borders roads and all, and everyone should pay for everything that happens outside of their borders. Typical.
Why hasn't Browning come out against the county funding part of the Bicycling Museum in Upper Mac?
Good question! Perhaps he is opposed. I would recomment that you go to tonight's 6 PM and register your concerns. You believe the urban core is slighted while the affluent 'burbs get better treatment. Make yourself heard.
ReplyDeleteIt's great to make a point on a blog, and you may be right. But the best place to make your argument is in front of the commissioners. That's why they're there.
If you go, please let us know what you've learned.
ReplyDeleteBrowning is being prudent, which is good. But how he choses to do so certainly raises an eyebrow.
ReplyDeleteDid Browning vote against funding the replacement of the Linden Street Bridge . . . or should I say vote for letting the thing rot?
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I don't know.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I don't know.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 1:54 PM asked...
ReplyDelete"Did Browning vote against funding the replacement of the Linden Street Bridge?"
The original vote to fund the replacement of the Linden Street Bridge was taken before I was a Commissioner. However, the Administration recently requested an additional $1,300,000 to complete the project. I voted in favor of amending the capital plan to provide the funding.
Dean Browning
Thanks Mr. Browning.
ReplyDeleteanon 10:37, if you go to the meeting(which i know you won't) and wish to speak, you will have to give your name. dean browning is not a politician, he is a concerned citizen serving his community. don cunningham is a politician.
ReplyDeleteAnon 8:20,
ReplyDeleteAllentown Democrats are anti-urban revitilization.
Look at what they have done to Allentown.
Simple as that.
Anon 10:37,
ReplyDeleteShould Canada help pay for what happens in the US borders?
Local government units are supposed to be self-sufficient. The more they need "outside help" PROVES the failure of the politicians running the entity.
Allentown is a crystal clear illustration of failed government and incompetence.
Hmm, borrow $33 million over two years and brag about a $14 million "surplus". That is the type of math that led to the collapse of Enron and the financial meltdown on Wall Street.
Ok Joe that is fine.
ReplyDeleteThen let Hanover Township and South Whitehall pay for Airport Rd., Route 22, and 309. Matter of fact, let Upper Mac pay for their portions of 78, the PA turnpike, and 222.
I assure you taxes would triple and they would be in the same position we are in 2 years.