UNC Charlotte has not been portrayed very favorably in the press this past week because of the evidence that a UNC Charlotte study on light rail was not entirely independent and was undertaken in collaboration with the Charlotte Chamber. However, most of the people pushing the investigation along and fighting for “academic disclosure” are really just trying to find one more way to fight against the half-cent light rail tax which will be voted on this November.

A quote from the Charlotte Observer article on the investigation ordered by UNC System President Erskine Bowles clearly and unabashedly provided an example,

“This needs to give way to common sense,” said Tom Ashcraft, an
attorney who opposes the half-cent sales tax. “It makes sense for
someone who doesn’t work with the university to take a look at it.”

How is UNC Charlotte’s collaboration with the Chamber worse than paying for signatures on the petition to bring the light rail tax to ballot? According to the Charlotte Observer on June 7th 2007,

Jay Morrison, who launched the petition drive effort by hiring
Michigan-based National Voter Outreach to collect signatures, has
refused to disclose how much he spent. Those close to Morrison say he’s
paid for about half of the cost for the petition drive. National Voter
Outreach pays its circulators between 75 cents and a $1 per name.Morrison couldn’t be reached for comment. Former county commissioner
Jim Puckett, a spokesman for the petition drive, declined to say how
much was spent on the repeal effort.

The “objectivity” that Charlotte citizens are blasting UNC Charlotte for should not be championed by those fighting for disclosure. Special interests are at work on both sides. But ultimately Charlotte will have to decide if a half-cent is too much to have a reliable and convienent method of transportation that reduces emissions and makes it easier for those that want to drive to find parking.

Those fighting against light-rail are hoping that an investigation will reveal that UNC Charlotte doctored or manipulated the data to provide fuel for their campaign. Collaboration does not mean manipulation. Just because the university has priorities that certain Charlotte citizens do not agree with does not implicate corruption.

UNC Charlotte has become the battleground of a war between the two sides of the transit debate.

If the half-cent tax is repealed the only possible outcome is a significant increase in property taxes. Citizens of Charlotte should be happy with what they’ve got now in the way of taxes. They will only go up.

Facts on how Light Rail will Save Taxpayers Money in Charlotte from LightRailNow.org:

Light rail will save taxpayers’ money in the long run.

It is generally true that light rail costs more to build than busways.
However, as the old saying goes, “You get what you pay for” – and this
has never been more true than with light rail.
We often see in the media how much more light rail costs to build.
However, approximately 50% of that expense will be paid by grants from
the federal government.
(This is transit grant money that would simply be allocated to another
city if not to Charlotte.)
From the media, we never seem to hear about the high cost of labor to
operate a busway, or that buses need replacing nearly 3 times as often
as light rail vehicles.
In a few years any money that was saved building a busway (rather than
LRT) will be lost to cover the high cost of operating and maintaining
the system – costs which must be covered locally.
Once that has happened, we will continue to pay these high costs for the lifespan of the system.

These systems have on the average a very long life expectancy.
For example, the systems in New York and Chicago are now well into
their second 100 years, and show no signs of going away anytime soon.

Even more important, the operating and maintenance cost of these rapid transit
systems are paid for almost entirely by local government through their transit
agencies, sometimes with a little help from state government.
We cannot expect any assistance at the federal level to help cover these costs – therefore it makes sense to install a system which minimizes operating costs.

Anti-rail critics seem to concentrate solely on the construction costs of rapid
transit without regard to the operating and maintenance costs of running a system.
They either don’t get it, or don’t want to get it!
The operating and maintenance costs of running rapid transit are far more
important than the initial cost of its construction because we will likely be paying
for them out of our own pocket for the next 100 years or more!
(See Cost, Budget, & Financial Issues and Feasibility Issues.)

For all the above reasons and many more, we need a good, attractive, cost-effective public transportation system in the Charlotte/Mecklenburg area.
A healthy system badly needs the funding that the half-cent transit sales tax provides.
Now is not the time to turn back the clock on something as vitally important to our future!

This is why Citizens for Efficient Mass Transit is asking voters to vote NO on the repeal of the transit sales tax at the referendum this November.