Thursday, July 24, 2003
Ohio's weak argumentfor dropping expressway
EDITOR:
The state of Ohio claims that it is dropping its support for the Hubbard expressway project on the grounds that the state can now only direct its limited funds to alleviate congestion, not to "economic development."
Mahoning Valley residents should reject this argument even though it at first appears to have some good old conservative reasoning behind it. It is a failed attempt to claim that "good science" has now replaced "bad politics" resulting in a decision-making process that can divide projects into two types.
The first set of projects is deemed to be those that must be done to avoid imminent operational collapse of a stable transportation system that will once again be stable after the project is done. These projects are surrounded with an aura of being "deserved" because a community has done its own economic development the right way by creating a positive economic environment.
The second set of projects is deemed to be those where there is no corridor that can show a continually increasing traffic count that projected into the future will overwhelm current lane or interchange capacity. This is supposed to show that a community has already been provided with an adequate transportation infrastructure. These projects are surrounded with an aura of, at best, charity and, at worst, throwing money down a rat hole in a community that has failed to create a positive economic environment.
The Hubbard freeway (then expressway, now no way) should appear to anyone who looks at a map to be a vital link in an uncompleted basic system for the Mahoning Valley. That is the way the system was originally envisioned 50 years ago, and it has remained valid even after the mill closings.
The location of Warren, Youngstown and the Ohio Turnpike make the roadway system a bit unsymmetrical when compared with a city like Columbus, but there is clearly something missing without a link running through the city to the northeast and Interstate 80. Although the 711 connector will help some, it is primarily the missing link between Youngstown and Warren plus a brownfields redevelopment effort. Even that connector probably would have been dismissed by the state had it not been for an unexpected infusion of federal dollars.
One of the problems with the politically convenient "scientific" process that the Columbus people would like to apply is that the projects that are supposedly not "economic development" are actually just a slightly different type of economic development. Increasing the number of lanes is really "momentum" economic development. We just never had any positive momentum because we never had any expressway lanes at all in places where they should have been.
Adding lanes to reduce congestion on the freeways in Columbus does not return the system to stability, and Columbus knows it. They don't want stability. They want more growth and economic development.
JIM ZUPANIC
Youngstown
Make a good case for levy,and voters will support it
EDITOR:
It is unfortunate that the first newspaper article about the Mahoning County Mental Health Board's decision to put a replacement levy on the ballot in November included George Tablack's comments regarding his bias against such levies. His contention that voters will see "re" on the ballot and assume the issue is up for renewal is off base.
Having worked on a replacement levy campaign recently in an adjoining county, I can attest to the fact that voters consider property tax issues carefully and understand the differences among the three options: renewal, replacement and new.
Although Mr. Tablack may object to the concept of replacement levies, it has been around long enough that voters are familiar with it.
It is up to the Mahoning County Mental Health Board to make its case to the public that it needs the amount of revenue that would be generated by a replacement levy. Whether voters will be convinced remains to be seen, but the board, its agencies and clients deserve a fair hearing.
Mr. Tablack's statement that the board's choice to attempt a replacement levy is an attempt to "deceive" the voters is both incendiary and an example of underestimating the intelligence of the electorate.
KATHIE GAIGE
Canfield