Opponents of a tax increase for Grand Rapids transit (previously discussed here) have a new ad, illustrated below.
If you experience cialis generic france low libido or sexual desire. It also helps in normalizing the hormonal levels of the hormones fall, resulting the womb lining to be shed just as a monthly check out these guys generic viagra rx period. Iatrogenic causes of impotence include consequences of viagra online overnight rectal or prostate surgery, and bad effects of certain therapeutic drugs. Goldstein’s new analysis on the consequences of seat stress and stress cialis free samples on the penis artery.
They are paying the transit agency $290 to carry a 2-foot-by-6-foot version of the ad on one of its buses. Isn’t freedom wonderful?
Randal:
Over the years it is clear that you generally support better bus service, mainly to improve the lot of transit dependents. Based on what I’ve seen in Grand Rapids, this is clearly the goal of The Rapid’s request for additional funding to improve service on specific routes. Transit agencies are usually not so explicit to voters about what they want to do with additional funds.
Their proposal for a downtown streetcar circulator aside, The Rapid also has a $35 million BRT plan for their busiest transit corridor to the south, projecting I believe around 5,000-6,000 riders per day. At this level of cost, they’re talking about new vehicles, improved stops, some traffic signal priorities, and probably “queue jumpers” at some intersections, not wholesale taking of lanes. This level of spending is about the same as in Eugene, but is about 2.5 times longer so has a much higher “traffic density” if you will.
I’m curious exactly what you think can be justified for improved bus service, e.g., economic sound level of capital expenditures, and any other criteria you think is important. Putting together various postings you’ve made on the subject, I’m not sure what exactly you support.