Deena Winter: Time for a transit?

 6 comment(s)  
 E-mail Story
 Print Story
  Share

 digg it!
 Facebook
 del.icio.us
Seed Newsvine
Fark It
Reddit

Text Size: 

Tools Sponsor

The most interesting idea Mayor Chris Beutler may seek during the 2009 Legislature is approval to establish a separate transit authority, as Omaha did in the early 1970s.

Omaha’s autonomous Metro Area Transit is overseen by a five-member board appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city and county boards. It has taxing authority and provides bus service in Omaha and surrounding communities, for a fee.

Lincoln City Council members seemed surprisingly receptive to the concept, given the keen interest they’ve taken in StarTran’s budget in recent years. Creating a transit authority would mean the council would no longer get involved in route changes or bus fares — and could no longer squeeze money out of the system.

[+]Enlarge

That would seem to make things easier on both StarTran and the council, ending public fights over the budget, routes, advertising and fares.

But it wouldn’t ease the burden for taxpayers. Public transit costs would just show up as a separate line item on their tax statement.

And if nobody pays attention to the new transit board — as is often the case with more obscure government subdivisions, such as the Railroad Safety Transportation District — it’s easier to increase the tax without a hullabaloo.

Councilman Jon Camp said he wants more details on the concept.

Mayor’s wish list

Among the mayor’s priorities for the upcoming legislative session in January:

*  Secure $1 million from the state for the 2010 Special Olympics, which will be held in Lincoln.

*  Allow cities to use cameras to enforce red light and speeding laws and create a separate administrative system to charge fees for such violations. Omaha has tried to do this.

*  Lift the requirement the city buy specialty vehicles, such as ambulances and fire trucks, from a licensed Nebraska dealer.

* Repeal legislation passed last year that prohibits the city from refinancing its Antelope Valley bonds, which are backed by cigarette tax revenue.

Little help?

Councilman John Spatz said one thing that has surprised him since taking office is the lack of communication city leaders have with their local state senators.

“I would like to see a little more dialogue,” said Spatz, who worked as a legislative aide to Omaha Sen. Jim Jensen from 2000 to 2003.

He suggested regular coffee or breakfast breaks with the local delegation.

“Doing something is better than what we’ve done in the past,” he said.

Time for two-year budgets?

The mayor has been talking about going to biennial budgeting.

As it is now, by the time the city wraps up its summerlong budget-fest, it’s about time to start crafting the next budget.

On Monday, mayoral aide Denise Pearce said the city would not need legislative authority to go to a two-year budget.

“We already can do it,” she said.

And then there was strife

Council Chairwoman Robin Eschliman ended Monday’s informal meeting by saying she doesn’t want to see people recusing themselves from votes too often — which lit a fire under two of her colleagues.

Conflicts of interest — or perceived conflicts of interest — have led to more divisiveness on the council than perhaps any other issue this year.

This year the council adopted legislation allowing members to abstain from voting on issues if they have a real or perceived conflict of interest. In recent weeks, Eschliman, Camp and Dan Marvin have used the recusal rule.

But Eschliman said she thinks it should only be used if someone might financially benefit from a vote. For example, she abstained from voting on a redevelopment project next door to a property she has for sale.

Councilman Doug Emery — who proposed the recusal rule — said he thought that was unfair because the rule has only been used a handful of times. He said it’s not up to Eschliman to decide whether they’re “right or wrong” in recusing themselves.

Marvin said Eschliman was obviously directing her comment at him, since he surprised some when he recently recused himself due to a business relationship.

“Obviously you don’t trust my judgment to decide,” Marvin said.

The fracas prompted Ken Svoboda (who opposed the recusal rule) to say, “I’m not gonna say I told you so… .”

He said he would have liked a heads-up from Marvin before he abstained, but said, “I’m certainly not going to publicly call anybody out of place when they do that.”

Marvin said he probably should have explained his decision to everyone.

“I told the chair and obviously my explanation didn’t sit well with the chair,” he said. Eschliman is the chair.

Camp advised everyone to “disarm,” but Emery went on to say he didn’t think Camp should have participated in a public hearing on a redevelopment project that he eventually decided not to vote on, due to allegations of a conflict. He said he introduced the legislation to protect the council’s reputation when things don’t pass the “smell test.”

To which Camp asked how far it should be taken.

“What if my neighbor has a sidewalk issue? Should I recuse myself?”

Not the only ones

Eschliman wasn’t the only one thinking about what would happen if Councilman Dan Marvin got elected to the state Legislature.

Eschliman and the City Council were prepared to hold a press conference the day after the election to explain the process for replacing Marvin. They were among many surprised to see him lose to Republican newcomer Colby Coash.

The possibility of losing Marvin was also a topic at a pre-election meeting of 2015 Vision, where the mayor was asked what would happen if Marvin left. 2015 Vision is a private group of business leaders promoting 10 Lincoln economic development projects.

He said it

“The horse is dead. Dismount.” — Councilman Doug Emery, advising everyone to “stop beating a dead horse” when council members got into an argument over conflict of interest recusals. Again.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.