---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Peggy Scott <rep.peggy.scott@house.mn>
Date: Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM
Subject: Re: Cutting rail transit funding 55406
To: sota767
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for contacting me regarding rail transit funding. I
appreciate the opportunity to respond.
I wanted to provide you with some information that helps underscore my
disappointment with Minnesota’s rail transit system. Cost-benefit
analyses of these projects show that increases in rail transit mobility
do not translate to an increase in total mobility for the community. All
transit use currently makes up less than 2% of trips in the Twin Cities
metropolitan region. Rail transit is by far the most expensive mode of
transportation compared to more practical alternatives. The taxpayer
cost per trip for automobiles is measured in the pennies; the cost per
trip for a commuter rail is measured in the tens of dollars. The
taxpayer subsidy for a round trip on Hiawatha Light Rail is $7.90 out of
a total cost of $10.06. The taxpayer subsidy for a round trip on
Northstar Commuter Rail is $47.70 out of $54.72 total cost. Both of
these numbers include amortization of capital costs. In contrast, the
tax payer subsidy for a bus ride comes to a much more reasonable
$2.00-$2.50.
It remains unclear how much business growth has occurred around these
lines as a direct result of rail transit. I understand that some
businesses have opened in the Bloomington area. Key economic influences
in the area include the Mall of America and the airport; the Hiawatha
line remains just one of the many factors that could have contributed to
this growth. Economic development around the Hiawatha line has vastly
under-delivered compared to what was projected.
My current priority is to tackle our $5.1 billion state budget deficit,
and I do not feel that use of our limited resources on these projects
makes for a good return on our investment. Please note that I appreciate
and recognize your input on the merits of rail transit in Minnesota, but
I believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits.
Once again, thank you for contacting me. Please let me know if I can be
of further assistance to you on matters of state government.
My best,
Peggy
Representative Peggy Scott
District 49A
477 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155
651-296-4231
Fax:
Email: Rep.peggy.scott@house.mn
Please sign up for my email updates at http://www.house.mn/49A
---------
>>>
Please do not cut funding to the Hiawatha or Northstar lines. I use to
live in Coon Rapids and intentionally moved to Minneapolis 3 years ago
because of the lack of transit options in Anoka county. I use the
Hiawatha now every day to get to work, my parents use Northstar from
Ramsey to visit my home, and my in-laws use it to get from Big Lake to
the VA by the airport.
If Andover & Coon Rapids up-zoned the land around their stations they'd
see more dense growth, but right now the area around those stations are
just single-family acre lots. Ramsey has a much better TOD and they
don't even have a Northstar station yet. Elk River, Anoka, and Big Lake
are also better setup to utilize the stations than Andover.
Cutting funding to rail transit is a huge, shortsighted mistake. More
roads are not going to move commuters around Andover faster.
Andrew Balfour
Minneapolis MN
-----------
I disagree with her "pennies per taxpayer" cost of roads. I'd argue purchasing a car, insurance, taxes, fuel, and paying taxes on the roads makes car transportation more expensive, it just shifts the cost directly onto the user. I pay less to use rail, but a larger percent of my state taxes go to fund it making up the difference. But overall my fare+state taxes are much less than the cost of operating a car and paying for the road. I also don't believe she factored in the amortization cost of constructing or maintaining the roads but she used that in her rail calculation. Rail transit mobility does translate into more total mobility - you're adding more ways to get around! Would you like the 30,000 riders on Hiawatha LRT each day to clog up the roads instead? She also didn't include revenue lost to externalities like congestion which costs the state a ton of money each year.
And her business growth argument is junk. First the Hiawatha line is primarily through a residential part of the city. Houses within 6-blocks of a station are on the market an average of 1/3 the time houses located elsewhere in the city. From the 2010 census you can see every neighborhood with a rail stop has gained over 500+ people while other neighborhoods next to them have showed little growth or stayed flat. I would also argue that large projects like Target Field and the new VA in Ramsey are built where they are because of the availability of rail. With her criteria we should ask why every town along an interstate highway hasn't bloomed into a metropolis over the past 50 years.
Fundamentally I don't believe in cutting spending on basic services to balance a budget. You don't stop paying your mortgage when things get tight, you cut out fluff like movie rentals and dining out. Likewise you don't stop paying for roads, transit, police, fire, schools, and medical services that are fundamental to your community. You cut out fluff programs and you make sure everybody is paying a fair share in taxes - including wealthy individuals and companies that are increasingly paying less percentage-wise in taxes each year than the rest of us.
I suppose it's easy to complain about funding of mass transit when the community you represent has none. If I were an Andover resident I'd be more upset that there aren't any other options than driving.
No comments:
Post a Comment