» Transit Funding

A review by Courtney Sloger

Last night, St. Louis hosted a free screening of Beyond the Motor City: The Past and Future of Transportation in the U.S. at the Tivoli Theater in University City.  Aaron Woolf, who wrote, produced and directed the film, joined viewers for dinner at Pi East Loop and spoke on a panel moderated by KETC’s Patrick Murphy following the film, along with U.S. Representative Russ Carnahan and Citizen for Modern Transit’s Tom Shrout.  The strong crowd of about 200 people (the majority of whom were 35-and-under) had very interesting thoughts and questions about the future of transportation, both locally and nationally.  The interest was not on all things flashy and modern: The big topic of conversation was how can we move transportation forward, and how can we pay for it.

KETC's Patrick Murphy, Director Aaron Woolf, Rep. Russ Carnahan, and CMT's Tom Shrout

If you are reading a public transit agency blog, you likely have a heightened interest in transportation infrastructure.  Beyond the Motor City is not necessarily an all-in rally for public transportation.  It is a look into the history of transportation planning in the U.S. and how we have gotten to where we are today.  But it is also a call-to-arms for America to pursue long-term transportation solutions for a new economy: Not ones based on American auto manufacturing and inexpensive land and oil, but ones that will help us compete as global communities in a changing industrial and global world.  There is an emphasis on the plural of solution – we most likely won’t rise to our infrastructure challenges with a singular strategy.  Mass transit, roads, bikes, and pedestrian accessibility will likely all play roles, with an emphasis on connectivity and energy efficiency.

The film shows rich pictures and details of Detroit’s downtown area during its heyday in the 1920s – vibrant skyscrapers, retail and industries surrounded by neighboring burroughs and connected by bustling corridors with streetcars, automobiles and pedestrians.  The rise of the American automotive industry ushered in a boom for the Motor City, and many of the city’s residents and industry moved to the suburban areas with the explosion of highway infrastructure and affordability of the automobile.  Now the depopulated city (which had lost over half of its residents by turn of the century, but maintained its land acreage) is having problems affording services when people and places are so spread out.  Providing services like public transit, fire, police, streets works, sewers, etc. have become almost prohibitively expensive, and residents lament the loss of community that happens when people do not live and interact with one another on a daily basis.  The images of Detroit are stark, and the frustration of its citizens and leaders are palatable.  As the movie points out, there are very significant costs, both economically and socially, of sprawl.

Another of the more poignant points of the film is revealed when Spanish public officials talk nostalgically about the U.S., pointing out that the it was the model of transportation for the last century.  Now Spain, with its high-speed rail investments and leading in infrastructure manufacturing, looks to itself.

One hundred years ago, St. Louis was home to the country’s busiest railroad depot, Union Station.  Major cities at either end of the country looked in envy upon St. Louis’ comfortable nexus of transportation, the circulatory system of commerce and travel in the U.S.  But our transportation system redefined itself during the automobile age, largely leaving behind the nation’s system of railroads and streetcars.  Not only has St. Louis become a different city, but the ways that we philosophically view and use transportation have changed in the U.S.  Information moves instantly, but we’ve become more mindful of how our goods travel, and people have evolving preferences of personal and professional mobility.  As resources become more expensive and people choose to live in more dense, walkable communities, where are we as a region and a nation going to direct our transportation system?

The film itself offers no easy or clear-cut solutions for American transportation infrastructure, especially for cities such as Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis, and others that have lower levels of density and waning concentrations of industry.  What the film does is inspire those who care passionately about the role of transportation in shaping our economic and social lives to call for strong leadership, at all levels, to look beyond our present system towards long-term vision and investment, as well as embracing multiple modes of transportation use and ownership.  To develop our own transcontinental railroad or interstate system highway systems for our next generations.  To look for long-term transportation models that will shape America for the next century – models that are effective, innovative and sustainable given our economic and environmental climate.

Obviously, that’s quite a lot to ask, but people are increasingly passionate about it.  Think that transportation policy discussions aren’t your typical draw for the Hulu set?  You’re not alone.  Mr. Woolf told the audience on Monday he appreciated the number of people, especially young people, willing to come out and watch a documentary on infrastructure.  In response, one enthusiastic young viewer yelled, “Infrastructure is sexy!”  Maybe that’s the kind of attitude and optimism that this country’s leadership should recognize, and embrace, moving forward.

To watch Beyond the Motor City, visit Blueprint America.

Photo via NyMag

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)of the New York City area approved a series of service cuts that will drastically change the levels of service available to customers.  The cuts, along with 700 job layoffs and the removal of the free ride for students program, were unamimously approved by the authority’s board to deal with a $400 million shortfall.  The deficit came after the state reduced transit funding, revenues from a payroll tax produced less than expected (enacted to avoid cuts last year), and a court ruled that the authority must give raises to its unionized workers.

New York State finds itself with a $6.8 billion deficit, and cuts in state funding will become a pattern for New Yorkers.

Starting in the spring of next year, MTA will reduce bus and subway service during late nights, weekday afternoons and weekends.  Some bus lines and subways lines will be reduced or eliminated.  The free ride program for NYC students will be phased out.  Seven hundred workers will be laid off, management salaries reduced by 10 percent, and a fare increase is scheduled for 2011.

This is obviously serious business for New York, which has one of the most highly used transit systems in the country.  The very fabric of life is dependent of the flow of transportation (many people, little space = big need for smart transportation planning).  These cuts will especially effect those who work in off-peak shifts and students who use the system to access education throughout the area.  But it is a sad reflection of the budgetary crises transit agencies face across the country, including Metro.  Metro will face a budgetary deficit  for fiscal year 2010, and will also have to cut service and jobs without additional funding.

Representative Jim Oberstar (Photo: Wikimedia)

The focus in Washington and across the country is the issue of health care reform and the economy, but another big dilemma is looming on Capitol Hill: transportation.  SAFETEA-LU, the current transportation funding authorization bill, is set to expire on September 30.  Without a new source of funding, the Federal Highway Trust will bankrupt, interrupting  projects and threatening thousands of jobs across the country.

But the White House and the House of Representatives seem at odds with what is the best course of action. (more…)

For those of you who are interested in learning about some of the finer details that went into Metro’s Restoration 2009 decision-making process, be sure to check out our new Featured Video.  Dianne Williams sits down with Metro’s Acting Chief of Planning and System Development, Jessica Mefford-Miller, to talk about what to expect with the August 3rd implementation of Restoration 2009, as well as some of the planning creativity that was required during this challenging effort.  An insightful video – I highly recommend its viewing!

Members of the U.S. House and Senate are trying to pass their War Bill (via Streetsblog) this week, which will provide supplemental funding for efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.  But the bill also includes a provision to allow the many struggling transit agencies across the nation to spend 10% of the money they receive in federal capital stimulus funding on operations.  According to the original stipulations of stimulus transit funding, agencies could only spend the approximate $8 billion in stimulus funding on capital projects such as building new rail lines, improving bus transfer centers, purchasing vehicles and repairing tunnels and bridges.  But many transit agencies across the nation lack adequate funding for daily operations, and are forced to implement layoffs, cut service and raise fares at a time when ridership is growing.  The provision could provide some much needed assistance to alleviate some of the squeeze.

St. Louis area U.S. Representative Russ Carnahan has signed on in support of Rep. Pete DeFazio’s (D-OR) provision, and Missouri U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill released a statement in May supporting federal assistance for transit operations.

The funding is not a permanent solution, however, to many transit agencies budget deficits, including Metro.  Many agencies, including Metro, will need to seek a more permanent dedicated source of funding to prevent future loss of service and job layoffs.

Update 07/08/09: New York’s MTA today sold the naming rights of its Atlantic Avenue/Pacific Street subway station in Brooklyn to the British bank Barclays. The $4 million deal  precedes the completion of the Barclays Center, a sports arena set to open in the next few years.

Planetizen pointed out a thought-provoking story about (Arizona) Metro’s Rail Management Committee’s proposal to auction off light rail station naming rights to bring in revenue. Apparently, something similar has been done before by transit agencies in other locations. One place sold the right to name an entire bus line (“Healthlink”) to two hospitals along the route.

It’s an interesting thought. Do you think that public agencies should sell naming rights to commercial entities or other interested groups? After all, we don’t have a “Rams Dome” here, we have the Edward Jones Dome. And the ScottTrade Center. Educational institutions name buildings after benefactors; museums name new wings or improvements after large donors. One issue I could think of re: naming a bus route is, what if the bus route changes? Is there a limit on how long the agency promises to keep that line in operation and with that name? After all, we don’t know exactly what transit needs will exist twenty or fifty years from now; so any sale would have to take into account the transit agency’s need to tweak routes.

Tell me what you think: Should transit agencies consider selling their naming rights to bring in extra cash? And if so, how much should a light rail station name fetch on the auction block?

Congestion Trends, 2007-2008 (Wall Street Journal)

As the economy slumps, there are fewer and fewer cars on the road as people drive less to reach jobs, goods and services.  It in turn means, of course, a reduction in congestion in major cities.   While such a decrease may seem like a dream for automobile commuters, its a quandry for transit agencies dependent on fuel tax, road and bridge tolls and sales tax to fund transportation projects.  Just as the demand for public transit is at a 50-year high, agencies are scrambling to find money as auto-dependent revenues decline.  Here’s the paradox: less cars on the road, the less money for public transit.

The article highlights how other industries suffer as well: taxis, rental car service, drive-thru restaurants – all whom provide sales tax revenue.  Transportation agencies will have to struggle in the next few years to provide funding solutions as more Americans alter their transportation habits.