Is it Halloween yet?
As with most anti-transit campaigns, the tactics of the newly-announced "Committee for Sensible Transit" will be to build on fear and uncertainty. They're not selling sensible transit, by the way, only spooks and shadows.
The main arguments are:
1. The ballot language doesn't include the exact route or station locations. I think KC learned a lesson from Clay Chastain's 2006 ballot initiative: less is more when it comes to a ballot language. While the tin foil hat crowd will try to convince voters this is a bad thing, it's a good thing from an engineering and cost perspective. Regardless, anyone who's been following the Alternatives Analysis can tell you the general route and station locations at this point. Missouri's Hancock Amendment — essentially dictating that taxes must be spent only to the letter of the law — makes it necessary to leave the route and station information out to prevent going back to voters if a change is required. Here's the ballot language:
For the purpose of funding a light rail passenger system running from the area around the intersection of Bruce R. Watkins Roadway and 63rd Street on the south to the area around the intersection of Northeast Vivion Road and North Oak Trafficway on the north, which can ultimately connect to a regional public transportation system, shall the City of Kansas City impose a sales tax of 1/4% under the authority of Section 94.577, RSMo, for the purpose of funding capital improvements, and a sales tax of 1/8% under the authority of Section 94.605, RSMo, both for a period not to exceed 25 years, beginning April 1, 2009, and which may include the retirement of debt under authorized bonded indebtedness?
2. Lack of regional funding or support. Mayor Mark Funkhouser attempted to push regional funding first, but the promise the Council made to voters was a November ballot for light rail. Regional funding is maybe a year behind and will replace the local tax. North Kansas City has pledged to put a 1/2-cent tax on their November ballot since the route passes through their borders. The line runs through no other municipalities outside of Kansas City and North Kansas City. Bus routes that connect to the KCATA system are already funded by cities in the region (KCK, Independence, Lee's Summit, Liberty, etc.).
3. The exact cost is unclear. As with any municipal construction project, costs are likely to rise if expensive NIMBY-driven changes are required or material costs rise. A solid contingency has been in the budget since early on, which should allow the current price tag to absorb any "gotchas". The federal funding match is not guaranteed at this time, but no application has ever been turned down (just adjusted to meet the funding criteria). Since the terminii would be codified into law, other construction (more basic stations, no utility relocation) or operational (less frequency, fewer hours of service) specifics would need to be adjusted to absorb any cost increases not covered by the contingency.
10 Comments so far
Leave a reply
I will never understand why so many people are against light rail transit in their cities. What happens when you introduce efficient, reliable mass transit to a neighborhood? Businesses spring up around transit hubs, people move closer to transit hubs spurring transit oriented development. More money is put into the tax rolls. City land is inevitably used up to develop these TOD’s. Well, damn, when you look at it that way, I guess i wouldn’t want mass transit in my neighborhood either. I like my property values to stay right where they are. how dare anyone try to make my home more valuable…. :-\
Alternatives Analysis was a joke little was said about the cost and use of streetcars [a third of the cost].The Northland is left out again like always,no bus shelters,no talk of more week-end service or later service,and to cap it off no certain route,no cost on the stations or where they will located. Just like a car salesman, just sign here lady I will take care of everything else. Yes Jeremiah it’s nice to have you home value go up but for those on a fixed income they will be forced to sell,just like those in the Crossroads Dist.
Northlander, it is a proven fact that mass transit spurs economic growth. That is always a good thing, for everyone. More jobs, more affordable housing units per square mile, more shopping, more tax revenue, more public funding for programs, more more more. While, yes, sometimes a city will use Eminent Domain in order to acquire land, the city is still required to pay a fair market value. I know what you’ll say, “fair market value is a subjective term and usually ends up with the owner of the land/house/property getting screwed out of their property”. Which can be true. But let’s face it, the areas where these TOD developments end up being located are in underdeveloped, blighted neighborhoods that need the resurgence. It may be coldhearted or whatever to force people to sell their shacks in the face of economic prosperity, and so be it. Look at Jacksonville, Florida. Areas like La Villa where nearly complete gentrification has taken place. Forcing those few residents in the area to sell in order to make way for modern developments and mass transit stations will only help the city. It may suck in the short term to have to find a new home/apartment or whatever, but in the long run the whole city, including those few who were forced to sell, is better off. It’s a win win for everyone.
Also, if you read the article, the reason specific station locations are left out is because when bills like this are written and approved it becomes law. If the station locations are changed at a later date there has to be another vote of approval from the voters. This takes time and more money and ultimately slows down the process. This is in no ones best interest. From where I’m sitting, KC has one hell of a plan that is nearly ready to move forward and people bitching about language will only slow down major progress.
just because you disagree with the results of the AA doesn’t mean it was a joke. the selection of full LRT was supported by public survey results that basically told the city not to “half-ass” it.
not “half assing” it would require putting the train in a different horizontal plane, either above or below ground, at least between the plaza and downtown. the plan is better than nothing, but it is still “half assed”.
If you look at some other towns its TIF or something like that that help improve growth,but only around the stations [with Light Rail]. Streetcars improve along the whole route for a much lower cost. We wouldn’t need federal money for 14 miles of streetcars, we could do it ourselves for $210 million. not a billion.
Uncertainty is what you get if you vote for Light Rail. What if NKC votes down Light Rail? Does the Northland not get anything or is there a plan “B” ?
the current budget doesn’t not rely on funds from NKC. since NKC is in clay county, they’ll be asked to vote for regional funding when that lands on the ballot.
there’s your Plan B.
Northlander,
I’m not sure what a TIF is. “Growth around the stations” in a typical city that decides to introduce reliable mass transit like light rail is in the order of a square mile with the transit station at its center. Street cars are a nice start and go a long way to helping tourism, since tourists like the nostalgia of a street car in a historic city. See cities like San Fransisco and Birmingham and I believe Charlotte. But Street Cars don’t address the larger need for reliable mass transit for THE WHOLE CITY. A 14 mile track is a HUGE start. Could it be smaller? Probably. But the fact that your city is willing to take that large of a step forward to better the city as a whole is a good thing. Look at other cities with similar mass transit infrastructures and the growth booms around those transit stations. The go back and look at those same areas before mass transit. You won’t like what you see 9 times out of 10. Light rail is not an uncertainty. It is a boom for business and economic prosperity.
TIF = tax increment financing. it redirects taxes collected in a TIF district to be spent only in that district, versus going into the general fund. in KC, it usually helps pay for streetscaping, utility work, and parking garages. it’s an economic band-aid for years of deferred maintenance.
TIF districts already exist along the *entire* route, including the northern and southern terminii (not just downtown, as some might have you believe).
a recent state law allowed transportation sales taxes to be exempt from TIF to ensure transit agencies will have reliable revenue streams.