John Ball Zoo

[organsnyder]

I don't think it will fare well. The other recent millages/tax increases—roads, transit, parks, schools—have all had broad coalitions spanning ideological divides, including the GR Chamber, unions, urbanists (I think the Salon group actually has access to a fair amount of clout), and community groups. Regardless of the merits of a zoo and museum proposal, I don't see it garnering the same broad support. And, since it would be county-wide, it would need incredibly high support in the city to counteract the anti-spending mentality of the sub/exurbs (of the proposals I mentioned earlier, only one—transit—reached outside city limits; and that one didn't include Cascade, IIRC).

[RegalTDP]

Hard to say.  People from outside the city go to the museum and zoo, so I would think they enjoy a baseline of support among mid-to-high income earners in the suburbs/exurbs, as opposed to, say, transit.  For some people, museum, zoo, and jury duty are the only times they set foot in GR.  It strikes me as more slightly more fair that a city subsidy - paid for by city taxpayers - would be replaced by a county-wide tax, given that these amenities benefit the whole region, not just the city.

That's not to say I think this should pass (I have no dog in this).  I suspect that if you asked voters - even members who regularly patronize the museum/zoo - if they'd rather see a tax increase or jacked up admissions prices, they might choose the latter.

[walker]

1 hour ago, RegalTDP said:

  . . . I suspect that if you asked voters - even members who regularly patronize the museum/zoo - if they'd rather see a tax increase or jacked up admissions prices, they might choose the latter.

Well I regularly patronize zoos and museums.   Even though I could and would pay higher admission or membership fees, I’d prefer some other way to finance them even if it was a tax.  The trouble with jacked up admission prices is that they have a way of excluding people on limited budgets.  I guess I’m old but I can remember when the museum and the zoo were free anytime and as a kid I’d go to both as often as I felt like it.  It would be nice if kids whose parents are either indifferent or of limited means could still do that.    

[GRDadof3]

5 hours ago, jdkacz said:

I'd say its probably the best time for them to ask for money as the economy of the area is the best its been in ten years (or since the zoo last asked for money). I think supporting these two institutions is valuable to the area in general even if one does not use them as having a good zoo and a good museum are positive cultural attributes for the city.

Chances of passing? I am going to predict 52-48. Voter turnout will be high due to the presidential election.

I'd agree. I think it will pass by a slim margin. I think that most people won't want to see the museum disappear, and most suburban families have experienced the zoo in the last few years. Transit only serves about 5 - 8% of the population so I see this proposal having a lot of general support. The fact too that most kids will be able to go for free if this passes bodes well for its chances of success. 

[WMrapids]

I know these funds can go toward better things but the museum really needs to fix that metal crud facing 131. It's been getting worse by the year. If only I could win that $800 million Powerball...