Warning: The magic method __get() must have public visibility and cannot be static in /home/supporth/public_html/2012/wp-content/plugins/wp-custom-google-search/CustomGoogleSearchOptions.php on line 482
Support Houston Transit » What No (against) Means

No (against) Choice Impacts

In 2014, ends the General Mobility Program approved by voters in 2003

The 25% of sales taxes that Metro pays out to unincorporated Harris County and 15 multi-cities ends and Metro retains all those funds.
Presumably, Metro would then pursue completion of the 2003 referendum promises, which include the University light rail line, more bus service, more bus routes, more park and ride lots, more transit centers, and more than 250 miles of 2-way all day park and ride service.
Presumably, as the University light rail line comes into service, Metro would then proceed to construct the Uptown/Galleria light rail line and the other rail lines promised in 2003
The other rail service would include Greenspoint, Bush Intercontinental, Hobby Airport, the Inner Katy corridor the Sunnyside area, Gulfgate Center, Telephone Road the Southwest Commuter line to the Harris County border

Harris County and developers have said they would go to the Legislature seeking relief from voter action, possibly including the following:

Change makeup of Metro board, presumably to give Harris County full control
Establish the General Mobility Plan permanently, possibly at more than 25%

Mayor, Metro chair statements about the No vote:

Mayor Parker (KUHF comments): “If the referendum fails, the METRO board can decide anything they want to do with that money and I would fully expect them to commit, going forward, to continuing the general mobility payments in some form. It is naive and, frankly, foolish to simply assume that if it were voted down suddenly 100 percent of that money is spent exclusively on building rail in Houston.” [Note: no one has suggest using the money exclusively for rail, but rather that spending would include rail, completing promise made to voters in 2003 referendum]

Chairman Garcia (KUHF comment):  “If … this referendum … did not pass, it would just be even longer before we could take on another rail project because we would need to do these two items — increase the ridership and pay down the debt to have greater capacity.”