Their winged monkeys in Olympia: Pridemore, Moeller and Jacks; are out shilling for their gerrymandering bill that will give us all the opportunity to pay their taxes in addition to their horrific tolls, without once being asked if WE want this.
They won't ASK us, because they KNOW the answer... and they don't want the facts to interfere with their agenda.
Well, here are just a few "facts" that any sober individual could utilize to conclude what a colossal and horrific waste of money loot rail really is.
Light Rail Fact Sheet
“It’s hard for me to understand why intelligent people, who have access to the same information I do, continue to support light rail even though it is clear that it does little to nothing to relieve congestion problems.”
–Don Benton, State Senator, 17th District (http://www1.leg.wa.gov/senate/benton)
.
· Six of the West Coast light rail systems (Los Angeles, Portland, Sacramento, San Jose, San Diego and San Francisco) require taxpayer subsidies to pay for 73% of operations and 100% of capital improvements per year and on average remove between 0.39% and 1.1% of cars from the roadway. (Washington Policy Center. http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Centers/transportation/policybrief/08_Ennis_LightRail.pdf )
.
· The per mile cost of an urban freeway is comparable to light rail. ($30 million) However, a highway can carry five to ten times as many person-miles of travel as a light rail line. (Goldwater Institute. http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Files/Multimedia/122.pdf )
.
· Tri-Met projected that the Eastside MAX would take 3 years to build and cost $135 million to construct. Actual time and cost: 4 years and $214 million. Tri-Met projected that five years after completion the Eastside MAX would carry 42,500 people per day. After five years, the MAX averaged 21,000 riders daily. The cost was 55% higher than projected and the actual ridership was 50% of the projected. (The Thoreau Institute. http://www.ti.org/FS3.html )
.
· Nationwide, the average cost of light rail $1.50 per passenger per mile. (Double the cost of bus transit per person per mile and FIVE times the cost of automobile transportation per person per mile.) (Goldwater Institute. http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/AboutUs/ArticleView.aspx? )
.
· Nationally, light rail brings in revenue of $226.1 million, while the annual operating costs total $778.3 million, leaving a $552.2 million burden on tax payers. This does not take into consideration construction costs. (Light Rail: Boon or Boondoggle, Molly Castelazo and Thomas Garrett of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf)
.
· Sound Transit officials in Seattle estimated that nearly two‐thirds of its ridership would have come from the existing transit system if its second phase had been approved in 2007. (Washington Policy Center. http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/Centers/transportation/policybrief/08_Ennis_LightRail.pdf )
.
· A study of the Bay Area Regional Transit (BART) system in the San Francisco Bay Area estimated that only 18 percent of the residents within one-half mile of a transit station used rail to commute to work. Also, monthly ridership on Cleveland’s new Waterfront Line has fallen 42.8% since its opening in 1998. This decline is consistent with national trends. (Buckeye Institute. http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/docs/RailStudy.pdf)
1 comment:
Welcome to our world.
The voters went along with a plan to build 15 miles of light rail from downtown Portland to downtown Gresham, at a cost of $214 million. Most of the cost was federal and state tax dollars intended for highways; Portland area voters themselves ponied up a mere 5% in funding. Ever since construction started in 1982, it's been characterized in glowing terms: Represents our region's shift toward innovative land-use and transportation planning, Catalyst for more than $4.7 billion in development and revitalization (particularly in Portland City Center and the Lloyd District), Ridership has exceeded expectations.
Despite the glowing reviews from Metro's "planners" and other governmental dweebs, voters rejected Metro's next two light rail ballot measures. We recognize lies when we hear them, and one of the big lies, as we all know, involves the "catalyst for development". Virtually all development along the line has been taxpayer-subsidized. We recognized that the line was nowhere near the success story they claimed, and plainly put, we'd rather have freeways and roads that are in good repair. Metro can't stand that.
Thereafter, no light rail plan has ever been submitted to a public vote.
Post a Comment