Errors of Enchantment

Councilor Isaac Benton created a task force and stacked it with his friends and supporters of the streetcar. Recently, the task force released its recommendations. Not surprisingly, they recommend continuing the 1/4 cent gross receipts tax that is up for renewal at the end of 2009. Also, given Benton's bent towards control of development and personal mobility, he urges more financial support for transit. Lastly, while his task force supports the idea of the streetcar, they naturally view additional funding (more tax hikes and subsidies) as essential in order to move the project forward. Specific recommendations are below:

By a unanimous vote, the Task Force recommended continuation of the gross receipts tax for transportation, set to expire at the end of 2009. This tax will provide continued funding to maintain, improve, and repair city roads and to help maintain and operate the ABQ Ride transit system. The recommendation to continue the tax, which generates approximately $38 million annually, is tied to new comprehensive policy recommendations for each of the tax’s five programs: road maintenance, road rehabilitation, road deficiencies, trails & bikeways, and transit. A central focus of the Task Force’s recommendations is increasing capacity of the city’s existing street system by improving efficiency and flexibility for private vehicles, transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists.

The report also contains a recommendation about how the tax should be allocated in the future. “One of the most important recommendations from the Task Force is to increase Transit’s share of the tax from 20% to 36%,” said Councilor Benton. “More and more people are using ABQ Ride every day. We must respond to the citywide demand for transit that has resulted from $3- and $4-dollar-a-gallon gas.”

On the question of the modern streetcar, a two-thirds majority of the Task Force supported the concept, further analysis, and development of the streetcar. However, it would limit such use of the tax to a maximum of 14% of the total proceeds, and only if leveraged on a 3:1 basis with other sources. These could include State and/or Federal support, private sponsorships, and a Tax Increment Development District.

The report, once introduced at Monday’s Council meeting, will be referred to the Finance and Government Operations Committee, which could hear the report as early as their October 15th meeting.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 11:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Congress just passed a $700 billion bailout bill. While that deal will inevitably hit average Americans in their pocketbooks there is another "bailout plan" on the ballot this November in New Mexico...whether or not to bail out the Rail Runner. Unlike the Congressional bailout which voters had little real power over, voters will be able to support or oppose the bailout of the Rail Runner that will increase the gross receipts tax by 1/8 cent.

As I point out in today's New Mexico Business Weekly, the Rail Runner is already nearing completion and there is no reason for voters to bail out this overpriced project now. If we'd been asked to give an up-or-down vote on the project before it was already rolling down the tracks, then a "yes" vote may have been a reasonable choice. At this point, if voters approve this tax hike they are saying nothing but "tax me more." This seems like an absurd move while we're in the midst of an economic crisis, but voters are easily duped.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 01:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

With a hotly-contested Presidential race, not to mention Senate and Congressional races on the ballot here in New Mexico, there has not been much discussion of a tax hike that voters throughout the northern and central portions of the state will be voting on.

Voters in in Bernalillo, Sandoval, Valencia, Santa Fe, Los Alamos, Rio Arriba and Taos counties are being asked to approve a one-eight cent increase in the gross receipts tax to fund the Rail Runner and various transit projects in November. I debated the issue with Laurence Rael, Executive Director of MRCOG before the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce's transportation task force recently. The powerpoint of my presentation is available here.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 04:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

News stories this week cited the fact that Amtrak ridership has risen significantly in recent months in response to high gas prices. In a free market, a record number of riders would mean record profits (or at least increased profits), but Amtrak is America's state-owned, socialist rail system (government ownership of the means of production, in this case a railroad), so profits are not even a consideration. In fact, Illinois Senator Richard Durbin has used increased ridership to argue that more taxpayer dollars should be funneled into the rail system, in part to purchase more train cars.

As the story points out, however, rail advocates shouldn't get too excited about the railroad's so-called "success": Even though Amtrak ridership last month increased 14 percent compared to July 2007, the railroad provides less than 1 percent of all trips made nationwide, as car and air travel reign. Air and rail rely far less on subsidies on a per passenger mile basis.

This one-percent is at a relatively high cost to taxpayers of more than $1 billion per year. The Southwest Chief, which runs through New Mexico is one of Amtrak's most heavily-subsidized routes operating at a cost to taxpayers of $236 per passenger.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 03:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

With all of the hullabaloo over the Presidential election and US Senate and House races, voters in and around Albuquerque may not be aware that they could face higher taxes if they and their fellow voters approve a tax increase for the RailRunner and "other transit projects." Recently, the New Mexico Independent did a story on the vote complete with quotes on the issue from yours truly.

My basic arguments from the article follow:

Even if gas hits $5 or $6 a gallon, Gessing said, not enough people will use the Rail Runner to reduce congestion on I-25 or warrant the train's high operating cost. "We'd be much better off maximizing bus service," he said, by running more buses and taking riders directly to the places they want to go, such as Albuquerque's West Side, rather than to fixed stations.

Though his group will fight the tax proposal, Gessing said he isn't sure whether it will pass or fail. "People don't like to raise taxes, especially in tough economic times. But there are a lot of people who can't get enough mass transit," he said. "There's something that warms the heart of a lot of people to see a bus on the street, even if they don't use it and it's only partially full."

Posted by Paul Gessing at 04:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The conventional wisdom is that projects like the RailRunner and Mayor Marty's proposed trolley are inherently "green" because they get people out of their cars. While this is usually the case if a bus or train is full and automobiles contain only one passenger, this is not how the equation usually works.

In fact, Brad Templeton does an excellent analysis of various transit systems and compares them with automobiles of different sizes and occupancies and finds that construction of new transit systems and even the use of buses is not necessarily green, especially when compared with small cars and cars containing multiple passengers.

As he points out:

A full bus or trainload of people is more efficient than private cars, sometimes quite a bit more so. But transit systems never consist of nothing but full vehicles. They run most of their day with light loads. The above calculations came from figures citing the average city bus holding 9 passengers, and the average train (light or heavy) holds 22. If that seems low, remember that every packed train at rush hour tends to mean a near empty train returning down the track.

After all, how often do you see empty or out of service buses driving around town? The Rail Runner certainly isn't always full.

Templeton isn't the only one who is skeptical of the relative "green-ness" of transit. Randal O'Toole over at the Cato Institute argues in a recent research paper that rail transit doesn't save energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Before we embark on massive new transit projects, we should carefully analyze whether or not these projects are really good for the environment.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 01:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Although taxpayer activists managed to beat back previous efforts by the Mayor and many on City Council to put a $28 million a mile streetcar down Central, bad ideas never die. The Albuquerque streetcar is one that has recently resurfaced via a consultants report outlining how the project should, in their minds, move forward. View their presentation here.

Jim Scarantino over at The Alibi, wrote an excellent article on the streetcar in which he questions ridership assumptions and whether it makes sense to spend $28 million a mile for what would be at best marginal gains in ridership.

Thankfully, Scarantino is by no means the only voice of opposition to this crazy proposal. The excellent blog Eye on Albuquerque questioned the project's merits in a recent posting. Mario burgos also has an interesting analysis.

Even the Albuquerque Journal questioned the project's merits in a recent editorial. Hopefully our illustrious representatives on Council and Mayor Marty will abandon this project once and for all due to the widespread and well-reasoned opposition.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 10:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Bad ideas never die. While Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez's streetcar is one well-known local example, high gas prices have given Virginia Senator John Warner an excuse to propose a plan to return America's speed limit to 55 mph.

With every supposed crisis (high oil and gas prices being only the most recent) some propose pro-freedom solutions, like more drilling in this instance, and others decide to restrict freedom like Sen. Warner. In fact, contrary to the rantings of Ralph Nader and his left-wing allies, eliminating the 55 mph speed limit actually saved lives rather than resulting in additional deaths.

While driving faster may reduce gas mileage, shouldn't it be up to the individual whether their time is more important than a few additional mpg? I'd rather drive a smaller car than drive 55 mph; some people would rather pay a little more to save time, especially on long trips. The fact is that with gas prices rising, people will react in the manner that is best for them. The last thing we need to do is return to a Congressionally-mandated 55 mph speed limit nationwide.

Hopefully Sammy Hagar won't have to rejoin the "I can't drive 55" protest movement.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 03:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It never ceases to amaze me that David Roybal was a speech writer for Governor Richardson. His columns are often incoherent and never really seem to make a policy point one way or the other. Perhaps that is a strength when it comes to writing politicians' speeches? If you never make a clear point, you never have to defend unpopular positions...Barack Obama is certainly learning that lesson!

Nevertheless, Roybal, writing in today's Albuquerque Journal, implies that he'd like to see one of New Mexico's congressional delegation obtain an earmark to pay for some of the costs associated with the Rail Runner. Among the supposed "benefits" of using the earmarking process is the fact that "an earmark escapes scrutiny that it would otherwise have to face as a stand-alone measure....worse, if the process shows a project to lack merit...it might be voted down."

Roybal goes on to question whether the Rail Runner should be funded as an earmark and touches on the price of gasoline, but he never takes a particular position on the issue. The fact is that the Rail Runner is not a viable project from a transportation perspective, even with expensive gasoline, because it won't go where people need to go at the times that they need to be there. Otherwise, someone in the private sector would have thought of it a long time ago.

Sad to say it, but New Mexico taxpayers should (and will probably have to) foot the bill for this boondoggle on their own.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

All of the controversy over the Rail Runner and its negative impact on our transportation budget is just a sideshow to the very real problems and opportunities facing us when it comes to transportation. You read that right...as one of the leading critics of the Rail Runner, I'm telling you that it is not at the heart of our transportation problems. The problem is the government itself and, unless we reduce the government's role in making infrastructure decisions, the roads in this state are bound to deteriorate and grow more congested over time.

That said, there are systemic solutions available. Pennsylvania, led by Democrat Ed Rendell, is currently working to lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Unfortunately, protectionist sentiment has reared its ugly head and is making things politically difficult. While leasing our infrastructure to "foreigners" may make the blood of some protectionists boil, it actually is a way for the US to allow investors to plow money back into American roads and bridges rather than letting it flee the country. Besides, with the government wasting money on transit and other boondoggles, isn't it time the private sector made transportation profitable again?

For a more in-depth discussion of the need for public-private partnerships and market forces in transportation, check out a new study by Missouri's free market think tank.

There are solutions to gridlock. While New Mexico has not been as negatively impacted as Pennsylvania and Missouri, the longer we let the government waste our gas tax revenue, the greater the likelihood of tax hikes in the not-too-distant future. We need to move towards market-based solutions and we need to start by passing legislation to enable public-private-partnerships now.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 08:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

According to a new report from a panel that included some of the nation's leading transportation policy experts, we are not paying nearly enough in gas taxes and the tax should be increased by 40 cents a gallon.

Most New Mexicans will dismiss such findings out of hand and justifiably so. But the fact is that there are several major road projects around the state that should be top priorities including the Paseo and I-25 interchange in Albuquerque just to name one.

The problem is that governments are poor stewards of transportation resources. Congress wastes hundreds of millions on "bridges to nowhere" and diverts ever-growing amounts of gas tax revenue to wasteful transit projects. At the same time, New Mexico is wasting $400 million plus $20 million in annual operating costs on the Rail Runner and diverting millions of dollars in state gas tax revenue to the General Fund.

Instead of raising the gas tax, shouldn't we re-allocate gas tax revenues to pay for roads and bridges? Let transit users pay for their favored mode of transportation and stop stealing from tax paying motorists!

Posted by Paul Gessing at 10:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It was inevitable. While campaigning for President, Richardson stated that tax hikes to pay for the Rail Runner were "off the table." Now, that he is out of the race, he has put them back on the table. Given the fact that voters in the southern part of the state have been asked to pay for a portion of the Spaceport via higher taxes, it is probably "fair" that residents of the areas served by the Rail Runner pay the costs, but it makes no sense to vote on this now.

After all, the Rail Runner is a fait accompli. It isn't going anywhere. The trains will run whether voters raise their taxes or not because Richardson wants it to be his legacy. Thus, if taxpayers go along with higher taxes to pay for the train, they'll essentially be choosing to pay higher taxes for no good reason. Hopefully voters will decide to give Richardson and his boondoggle a firm rebuke at the polls, but I'm sure the Governor and his minions will try to convince the voters otherwise. Nonetheless, these votes are a good thing because they provide voters with their first real chance to express themselves on the train.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 03:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Lawrence Rael, Executive Director of the Mid Region Council of Governments, argued today in the Albuquerque Journal that New Mexico's Rail Runner is a great deal compared to the Utah Transit Authority's Commuter Rail project because we are getting more train for less money.

Rael looks at the cost increases that have happened in Utah and argues that the Rail Runner's costs are "on-target," despite the fact that Phase II which requires the laying of new track is only in its early stages. The fact that New Mexico could see the very same cost increases seems like an impossibility to Rael.

Of course, regardless of whether or not the Rail Runner is ultimately a better deal than Utah's commuter train, that does not mean that we are getting a good deal. In fact, roads like Paseo del Norte are a far more efficient use of limited transportation money than projects like the Rail Runner or commuter rail in Utah.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I live off Coors just south of Montano. While I don't oppose buses and often notice full buses -- both Rapid Ride and regular -- on Central when I'm over there. Unfortunately, the new Rapid Ride buses which form the so-called Blue Line along Coors are constantly empty or they have one or maybe two riders. Of course, if you believe the transit department's press releases, the Blue Line has been nothing but a success. Unfortunately, getting objective data out of the transit department is not an easy task, but it would seem that the city could have gotten away with smaller buses or even vans rather than the massive, articulated buses now used.

Outside of a few isolated areas in this city, traditional mass transit is simply not feasible. We should keep this in mind as another round of public hearings and comment sessions (you can comment online) is held on mass transit in and around Albuquerque.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 11:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

New Mexico is facing a well-documented transportation crisis. Everything from raising taxes to shifting existing revenues around has been discussed as a means of bridging the gap.

While stopping the Rail Runner must be seen as a bare minimum in the effort to resolve this crisis and shifting transportation revenues back to transportation must also be considered, the fact is that new revenue sources are needed. The question is, do we want to keep funneling transportation money through the government or can the role of the free market be expanded. As transportation expert Bob Poole writes in today's Albuquerque Journal, toll roads, if done correctly, can be a part of the solution here in New Mexico. At the very least, enabling legislation should be enacted to make such efforts possible.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 01:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

As I looked through the paper this morning, I noticed the Parade Magazine cover story "Can We Save Our Trains?" While I don't expect stellar journalism from such a fluff-oriented magazine, I was astonished by the biased nature of the article. For the record, I like trains and enjoy riding them when it is the sensible thing to do, but the article read more like it was written by Amtrak than a genuine news story.

For starters, the author states that our national rail system is "inadequate, relying on aging equipment and a shrinking route map." Of course, these woes are the result of "inadequate government support." So, why aren't the airlines facing the same problems? The answer, quite simply, is that they buy their own equipment and don't rely on the federal government because airlines can actually make money. Amtrak, on the other hand, is a politically-designed train system that diverts resources away from popular routes in the Northeast in order to fund routes in sparsely-populated areas (like New Mexico!)

The so-called underinvestment problem is further discussed in the Parade article when the author states that Amtrak received $1.3 billion while highways got $40 billion and the airlines $14 billion. Of course the difference is that much of that money allocated to roads and airlines is in the form of user fees. Amtrak on the other hand is funded out of general revenue.

The fact is that long-haul passenger trains are viable in densely-populated regions like the Northeast Corridor, some places in California, and perhaps Florida. Unfortunately, until we kill Amtrak and sell its assets to private investors, we'll never know and America will never have a viable rail system. Iin the meantime, Congress will continue to waste taxpayer money on a socialist railroad ignorantly advocated for by the media.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I have ridden the Rail Runner before, if for no other reason than to know what I am talking about when I criticize it. That said, I had my nieces (3 and 4 years old) in town this week and "Uncle Paul" had the pleasure of taking them on the train during the afternoon rush hour from downtown ABQ north to the 550/Sandoval County stop.

While the train's two cars were never filled to capacity, the train did pick up significant numbers of riders heading to the south. Of course, with a day pass costing just $3, most of the costs of riding the rails are borne by taxpayers, not riders. It would be interesting to see what would happen if maybe 25% of the train's operating costs (rather than the current 10%) were borne by riders as opposed to the rest of us.

The fact is that the Rail Runner in its current form is not going away. The best we can do is to stop the train before Phase II to Santa Fe is complete. Running through all those miles of barren Indian Country to a city of 70,000 or so people will drain transportation funds that could otherwise be used to improve the Paseo/I-25 interchange or alleviate the myriad maintenance problems facing this state. And that doesn't even account for the millions of annual operating costs that will only increase over time.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Our spiritual friend in Arizona, Coyote Blog, takes a look at the Rail Runner following this article about it in the AZ Republic, which brushes off the RGF as an 'anti-tax foundation.'

Give it a read.

Posted by Justin Smith at 12:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Albuquerque Journal columnist and former Richardson advisor Ned Farquhar wrote an article recently in which he argued that western cities (including Albuquerque, Denver, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City) need to "pump up" their transportation networks. It may not have been a direct response to my recent article in which I argued against extending the Rail Runner to Santa Fe, but it might as well have been. That said, I'll pick his arguments apart from the beginning.

First, Farquhar laments $3 per gallon gas and its impact on poor and low-income people. These crocodile tears are amusing for any number of reasons, but I'll name just a few:
1) It is environmentalists like Mr. Farquhar (and his associates at the National Resources Defense Council) who want to keep most of our domestic oil supply (ANWR for example) out of production;
2) The Legislature is looking to raise the gas tax to pay for roads in part because the Rail Runner is eating up revenues that would otherwise have been allocated to build and maintain roads;
3) Gas prices are not that high by historical standards.

The rest of his article basically laments "inadequate" public transportation systems in the West and argues that it should be tougher to build roads. While he makes a few valid points about politicians preferring to build new roads than maintain existing roads, Farquhar is barking up the wrong tree if he thinks transit is really the solution.

While a genuine "free market" transportation system is a long way off, the fact is that people are willing to use roads -- even toll roads -- but mass transit has never come anywhere close (page 4) to sustaining itself financially. I'd like to see something approaching a "free market" transportation system in which the government role is minimized, but until that day, it is important to stop wasting taxpayer money on expensive rail projects like the Rail Runner and Mayor Marty's trolley.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

There has been a great deal of talk recently about New Mexico's supposed transportation funding "crisis." Of course, only time will tell if our politicians do the right thing by canceling the Rail Runner or if they continue the train all the way to Santa Fe.

What is it about transit that draws politicians like moths to a flame? As Reason policy analyst Ted Balaker points out, when it comes to politicians, "transit's primary use isn't transportation but a backdrop for photo ops: Cut the ribbon, huddle around the others who fought for funding, smile and then jump back into your SUV."

I wonder how many times Bill Richardson -- when he is in New Mexico -- or Mayor Chavez for that matter, rides the rails?

Posted by Paul Gessing at 08:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The headline in today's Albuquerque Journal (subscription required) says it all, the panel of legislators and other community leaders is going to recommend an increase in New Mexico's gas tax. While any tax hike is completely unnecessary, the fact that the panel's recommendation will likely be to raise the tax by 6 percent a year— or about 1.3 cents a year for the first decade, is especially troubling. The last thing New Mexicans need is tax hikes on autopilot, thus enabling our elected officials to reach their hands deeper into our pockets every year, but without having to put themselves on the line as having voted for higher taxes....a "win-win" if you are a weak-kneed legislator, but a "lose-lose" if you drive a car, run a business, or care about limited government.

No other state has an open-ended, ongoing tax hike like what this task force is proposing. After all, when is enough, enough?

The fact is, as I pointed out in the Journal yesterday, any effort to resolve this so-called "crisis" must begin with scaling back the Rail Runner. I offer a few additional ideas like private toll roads and repeal of New Mexico's little Davis-Bacon law as well.

Ultimately, with spending increasing rapidly in recent years, any crisis is the result of fiscal irresponsibility and our elected officials must take responsibility for their fiscal mismanagement.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 10:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you missed it, Trip Jennings of the Albuquerque Journal had an interesting article (subscription required) outlining what New Mexico's political leaders are calling "a road funding crisis." Of course, if you listen to Richardson's transportation people, shifting scarce funds away from the Rail Runner is beyond the pale despite the fact that:

-operating cost for the Rail Runner -- above and beyond the $400 million needed to construct it -- will rise from $9.5 million to $20 million a year;

-the state needs to make up $75 million in federal funding that hasn't come through for Rail Runner construction and start-up costs.

Of course, when legislators like Tim Jennings and Lucky Varela (both Democrats) even discuss the possibility of using Rail Runner money for roads, S.U. Mahesh of the Department of Transportation accused them of "having a horse-and-buggy mentality" (whatever that means). The fact is that if New Mexico legislators are at all serious about closing the funding gap, eliminating the Santa Fe Rail Runner expansion is a must.

That is not to say that stopping the Rail Runner extension will solve all of our problems. Tolling is another idea but there is a right way and a wrong way to use tolling. The wrong way is to set up government tolling authorities as was done along the Eastern Seaboard. Anyone who has traveled by car between Boston and Washington, DC can attest to long lines and poorly-maintained roads that can also be quite expensive.

The right way to do tolling is to work with private firms that build and maintain toll roads as an investment. Similar roads have been constructed in Southern California and elsewhere and rely on innovative technology to eliminate toll booths while maintenance and landscaping standards exceed those of other roads.

Lastly, while the task force has not considered it yet, any effort to improve New Mexico infrastructure should include a close look at repeal of our “Little Davis-Bacon Act.” These “prevailing wage” laws drive construction costs up as much as 10-15 percent. Repeal of this law in New Mexico would allow the market, not the unions, to set construction costs.

Maintaining and improving New Mexico’s infrastructure is very important to the state’s economy. While no single solution will solve our problems, implementing the solutions listed above would be a good start.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 02:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have been remiss in not saying anything about the tragic bridge collapse in Minnesota. If you have been living under a rock, on August 1 the I-35W highway bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis collapsed during evening rush hour killing several people.

Naturally, some politicians are using the opportunity to call for higher taxes, ostensibly to fund bridge inspection and maintenance. Of course, if politicians are serious about preventing future events like this, they should consider their own practices of earmarking and diverting gas tax revenues to transit. The earmarking problem has become especially prevalent in recent years which led directly to the "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. Perhaps funds from that wasteful project could have been used to maintain existing infrastructure?

The other major problem is the practice of using highway funds to pay for transit boondoggles. While New Mexico has a relatively good system of highways, Minnesota, at least according to this study, was not that bad either. Of course, investing $400 million in a commuter rail project won't help New Mexico maintain its roads and bridges.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 01:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As my bio indicates, I was born and raised in Cincinnati, Ohio. I am visiting Cincinnati right now and, after having picked up a copy of a newspaper laying around my mom's house, I began to have flashbacks to Albuquerque circa last fall.

It turns out that HDR, the very same consulting firm that nearly succeeded (and continues to try) to push streetcars on Albuquerque, is trying to do the very same thing in Cincinnati. As this article indicates, both the financing plan and justification would have a lot in common with Albuquerque's proposed streetcar:

The streetcar system be funded mostly with tax increment financing, or TIF - a financial tool that earmarks future increases in tax revenues arising from an improvement project to finance the project that will create those gains - and state and federal subsidies. He said the TIF proposal makes sense because a streetcar system would spawn economic growth along its path and into neighboring areas.

'It's not about growing revenue, it's about economic development for the city.'

Sounds mighty familiar to me! Far from being a solution that is "tailor made" to Albuquerque, it looks like HDR is simply trying to sucker as many cities as possible into buying an expensive streetcar system. The plans are the same down to their media strategies of focusing all attention on downtown and the few isolated areas that may benefit from the streetcar while the economic burden placed on the rest of the city is ignored. Hopefully neither city is foolish enough to fall for HDR's slick sales pitch.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 05:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Right now, New Mexico is looking for $75 million in federal money for the RailRunner commuter train. The Albuquerque Tribune editorialized that the project was worthy of federal support and that Senator Domenici should use all of his political wiles to get the funding.

While it may seem simple to New Mexicans who think governments have an unlimited amount of money to throw around, even the federal government must (or at least should) prioritize. The problem is, as I point out in my subsequent letter to the editor, when government provides a particular service or several services, it becomes far more difficult to prioritize.

Although I don't think we'll see full-blown capitalism in transportation anytime soon, I do think that the first step is to return transportation policymaking to the states. That way, at least states will be able to try innovative solutions and compete with each other to find the transportation systems that work and that their citizens and businesses will use and can pay for.

If you want to see what an innovative, free market transportation system might look like, check out the work of Bob Poole and the Reason Foundation.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 12:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Everyone knows that governments tax the rich and give to the poor, right? I've got news for you, the reality couldn't be further from the truth. Whether the issue is raising gross receipts taxes so billionaires can fly into space or shifting massive amounts of taxpayer money into transit boondoggles, usually rail projects, designed to get wealthy people with cars to ride transit, the reality is that government often taxes us all for the benefit of the well-heeled.

This is once again illustrated in the battle over changes the Federal Aviation Administration wants to make regarding user fees. Right now, those who use corporate jets and fly as a hobby are being subsidized by the rest of us schmucks who fly coach and have to put up with the joys of the Transportation Security Administration.

The rich are not going to give their subsidies up without a fight of course.

Hopefully, our elected officials in Washington will do the right thing.

Posted by Paul Gessing at 03:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Did you know that there are as many transit riders now as there were in 1957? What an accomplishment!!! Considering that the country has almost twice as many people now as it did then and taxpayers have invested billions of dollars in new transit systems, this is an amazing non-accomplishment.

Kind of makes proponents of a $300 million streetcar in Albuqeuerque look silly, doesn't it?

Posted by Paul Gessing at 04:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)