Transportation funding assertions/questions/thoughts

There’s good information in Jim Redden’s Tribune report, Money comes for rail, but not roads, published last Friday … and perhaps even more insight in the reader comments on the web version.

The article basically says both the federal and state governments pony up tax/lottery funds for big transit projects like light rail, but not for smaller improvements or street maintenance. Transportation funding advocates haven’t made their case for more money clearly enough yet, is what the comments say to me. Citizens still raise the cost of light rail, the streetcar, and the tram, when discussing how to raise money – or how to use existing sources – for basic maintenance and safety improvements. Check Jack Bogdanski’s blog and comments, today or most weeks, for confirmation of that.

Commissioner Sam Adams and other proponents of expensive transit projects say:

* Light Rail, the streetcar lines, and the tram, were all or almost all paid for by state and federal grants and the adjacent property owners.

* These fixed-route transportation lines are “development engines” that promote construction and redevelopment adjacent to them – or at the ends, for the tram.

* Construction and redevelopment near fixed-route transportation lines creates more jobs and fosters more overall prosperity than improvements to low-tech transportation such as bus service and pedestrian/bicycle facilities.

Many Portlanders don’t seem to believe these assertions. At the very least, more work needs to be done to give information to citizens that might be persuasive. More than a few Portlanders believe:

* The general citizenry did help pay for light rail, the streetcars, and the tram.

One example I cited in a previous post is that we all pay an “Urban Renewal Areas” assessment on our property taxes. At the very least, the assertion that the general public didn’t help pay the city’s $8m portion of the tram costs needs more discussion. The City should post easy-to-find, easy-to-check summaries of how the tram and each of the light rail and streetcar lines were funded. Maybe such information is buried in PortlandOnLine, and I can’t find it. But if I can’t, probably others less used to navigating the City’s web site can’t, either.

* Locating “transit-oriented development” adjacent to fixed route transportation lines may not be working out as intended.

The City should study and report back on whether residents of condominiums, apartments, and other homes near transit really are owning and driving fewer cars. Otherwise, citizens may believe the policy of reduced parking spaces within the projects spurred by the “development engine” may be contributing to parking and congestion problems.

* Jobs are important. Being able to walk safely in your neighborhood is important, too. And most neighborhoods depend on good, efficient bus service to allow neighbors to get to their jobs that aren’t on fixed-route lines.

The City and Tri-Met should prioritize funding to improve bus service, especially with routes that don’t funnel through downtown.

I think citizens haven’t seen/heard/participated in enough public discussion about balancing decisions in the City’s budget, or at Tri-Met.

The brief exchanges engendered by my Next Up at City Council post over the weekend, mentioning the new Archives facility at PSU, is a good illustration. When the Council is in the process of approving a budget of around two billion dollars, most citizens don’t have time to think about the Big Picture or all the line items. Almost all those who participate in the Budget meetings focus entirely on getting their desired line items funded. Now that the Budget is done, we need more discussions with/within, and information disseminated to and from the community, to reach a greater consensus.

I also believe the approval and construction of the tram has had far greater impact on public confidence in fiscal responsibility in Portland than appears immediately obvious. Proponents point to the continued presence and expansion of OHSU in the city, and the massive developments in South Waterfront, as evidence of the success of the tram. But its cost in terms of the impact on public trust in government has been enormous. The price-tag overruns, escalating from $9m to $57m, are well-known. The needs of regular citizens living in Homestead and Corbett-Terwilliger-Lair Hill were disregarded in favor of the fortunes of powerful landowners, developers, and corporate interests. Portlanders believe in getting value for money, in fair play, in protection of the little guy. The Council can’t expect to preside over a project that stomped on all those values, and expect citizens to forgive and forget so quickly. If more funding for transportation projects in neighborhoods isn’t approved by voters whenever it goes to the ballot, I believe one reason will be the lingering bad taste left over from the tram project.

The needs for basic transportation improvements in Portland’s neighborhoods are clear and pervasive. In my opinion, more funding will not be approved for them by Portland’s voters unless and until there is more widespread understanding of/agreement on the costs and benefits of the big-ticket items such as the tram, streetcar, lightrail, and major highway improvements.

Particularly, who paid, and who benefitted.