Citizens for Better Transit

"Some of us ride it. ALL of us pay for it."

***24th State blog (www.24thstate.com) just put out a great piece on more Metro propaganda that completely misleads the public…

The Lie That Is The Metro Tax Advertising

I’ve now heard radio commercials and seen television commercials for the Metro Tax increase we’re supposed to vote on in April, and can say with a straight face it’s not truthful.

Some of us ride it, All of us need it.

How very clever, but that’s not what we’re voting on in April.

No matter how the vote goes, we will still have Metro.  People will still ride it to Cardinals games.  Wash U students and Wash U faculty and staff will still get free passes, and those who use Metro to get around currently are still going to have the services.

The increase in funding is to be used for expansion.  Note that nowhere in the advertising do they discuss extending the line.  No one talks about the fact that Metro has been losing money for years, long before the economic crisis hit. Metro is a money-losing operation.  If they wanted the money to shore up the program, they should say so.

But they don’t.  They want to take money and expand it, leaving us even further in the red in the future.  It’s like being underwater on a house, and then using a line of credit to add a garage.  It’s insanity, and the purpose is to shovel more of our money to the people building the lines and those running the campaigns.

Who do you think pays for those commercials?  Who is paying for the phone bank? Why is SEIU MO/KS State Council, the political arm of SEIU, in the Greater St Louis Transit Alliance?

It’s because this is about taking more of our money, and giving it to their pals.

If the Vote Yes on Proposition A people won’t even bother to tell you the truth about why they want the money, how can we trust them to take care of the money when they get it.  The loss in Metro services that will occur when the stimulus funds runs out is still going to occur.  This tax won’t fix it.  It will instead be siphoned off for $150 million a mile expansion.  That means they will have to come back to us in a few years, demanding more.

Educate yourself.

http://www.24thstate.com/2010/02/the-lie-that-is-the-metro-tax-advertising.html

Share on Facebook

Eliot Davis, reporting for Fox 2 St. Louis, asked Bob Baer about Metro’s spending on art. For some reason, they are required to spend 1% of their Federal funds on “Arts in Transit” – somebody ought to talk to their Congressman about that – but in this case, Metro also spent a great deal of locals funds on the art. Check it out:

Share on Facebook

On the Yes on Proposition A website, they say “MetroLink is one of the most successful light rail systems in the country with 70,000 riders per day on a typical weekday.” We’ll take that as fact, even though Metro’s most recent annual report (pdf here, see page 78) puts weekday ridership at 58,272. So does that make MetroLink successful? That depends upon one’s definition of success.

In 2006 and prior years, MetroLink ridership was about 44,000 a year. With the opening of a second line, which has brought Washington University, Clayton, and Maplewood into MetroLink’s service area, ridership increased, but not proportionate to our investment. The added passengers have been very expensive compared to those served by the rest of the system. So you can’t call MetroLink a success in terms of what our recent investments have brought us.

How about compared to other cities? Since cities vary widely in size, the meaningful way to compare them is daily boardings per mile. That is to say, a system with 50 miles of track ought to serve twice as many passengers as one with 25 miles of track. How does St. Louis stack up in that measure? According to a summary in Wikipedia, not well. The most successful line in America, in Boston, has a daily ridership of nearly 8,500 passengers per mile. Minneapolis carries nearly 2,700 passengers per mile.  In Philadelphia, they carry nearly 1,600 passengers per mile. St. Louis is way down the list, with just 1,252 passengers per mile. So by that measure, we certainly aren’t successful. And of course, if we expand MetroLink to suburban areas where ridership will be low, we will drop farther in this measure of success.

So how exactly is MetroLink successful? Well, if you stand at North Hanley station in the hours just before a baseball game, you can see lots of people in red shirts boarding the train. So I guess it’s a success in the “Gee, Bob, that’s a lot of people getting on that train” measure. But by any meaningful measure, MetroLink is a costly failure that must be stopped.

That’s why Citizens for Betters Transit believes that people who depend on our transit system should vote no on Proposition A. Metro needs to return with a reasonable proposal: A small increase in operating subsidy, no rail expansion, and implementation of a 21st century bus system. That is a transit system that could call itself a success.

Share on Facebook

You can trust Metro this time...really."

Citizens for Better Transit

–Principal points–

VOTE NO on PROP A, the Metro Tax!

1) Tax increase hurts the poor

Prop A is a 14% sales tax increase that hurts the poor disproportionately.

2) Likely to be huge cost over-runs

Metro isn’t trustworthy. a) They won’t tell voters which light rail route they are definitely going to build b) they won’t tell us precisely how the money will be spent c) the last Metrolink expansion ran at LEAST $150 MILLION over budget, and taxpayers are going to be paying down debt for 30 years.

3) Local population numbers won’t support

St. Louis City/County does not have the population density necessary to make Light Rail viable. St. Louis City has a population density of 6K/square mile. St. Louis County has a population density of 2K/square mile. An area needs a density of 10K per square mile to make light rail viable

4) Most will never use, but all will pay

Only 10,000 people in St. Louis County use public transportation, and not all of them use Metrolink. Why should St. Louis County tax payers fund something they’re never going to use? It would literally be cheaper to buy a car for every St. Louis County public transportation commuter – EVERY YEAR, IN PERPETUITY – than to raise taxes to fund metro another 80 million dollars.

5) Will take years to build

How is the extreme cost of light rail justifiable? In the best scenario, it costs $60 MILLION/mile. Light rail routes also take a MINIMUM of 5 YEARS to build.

6) Other options are cheaper and faster

Buses and Bus Rapid Transit (high tech buses and bus routes) are a fraction of the cost, and deployable in a fraction of the time it takes to build a light rail route.

7) Many more taxes will be needed

Prop A is a bailout for Metro mismanagement. Prop A, should it pass, will only be the FIRST of MANY new Metro taxes. Why? Because Metro has major pension liabilities, overly ambitious expansion programs, and wrongheaded expansion approaches that are BANKRUPTING METRO. And all of this while metro isn’t anywhere near self-sufficiency. 25% of Metro revenue comes from fares.

8.) Bus line cuts will hurt the poor

When metro expands light rail, it cuts bus service, also hurting the poor.

9) New taxes in the recession will keep unemployment high

Passing a new tax does NOT stimulate economic growth. Taxation in a recession is a BAD idea and hurts those hardest hit by the effects of the recession.

10) Metro is supported by special interests

Tax payers are being asked to blindly fund an irresponsibly managed organization so that wealthy special interests can receive subsidies. Special interests will get fat, as the tax payers get thin.

11) Metro is deceiving the public.

The publicized “plan” is nothing more than a wishlist. It lacks specifics. Voters have no clue what to expect. Again, it’s Metro and the East West Gateway Council’s mentality of, “Give us your money, and we’ll be sure to make the right decision for you.”

Share on Facebook

by Nick Kasoff
Unfortunately for the future of transit in St. Louis, the advocacy community is dominated by a light rail fetish. Does that sound like a bit much? A fetish is “the attribution of religious or mystical qualities to inanimate objects.” I can think of no other reason why a transit advocate would push for light rail rather than the less expensive, more effective bus rapid transit.

Because Metro runs a bus system which hasn’t been updated since the 1950s, many local transit users have a negative view of buses. But bus rapid transit, or BRT, is a horse of a different color. BRT uses specially designed buses on dramatically different routes, to provide transit that is nearly as fast as rail without the huge cost of a rail line. Several important differences distinguish BRT from traditional bus service:

• Limited stops allow BRT buses to keep moving. Because a traditional bus line is intended to provide pedestrian access over its entire route, it must stop at every intersection. BRT is a “limited access” system with strategically placed stops at much longer intervals.
• Traffic signal prioritization allows BRT buses to move move quickly. Imagine a world where every traffic light was green. Signal technology allows for automatic light changes as BRT buses approach an intersection.
• Purchase of tickets before boarding eliminates delays from fare payment. Local buses must wait as passengers pay for boarding. On BRT buses, tickets are bought at kiosks prior to boarding, much as is done with light rail today.

These factors allow BRT to move more quickly than a local bus, with speed on some systems approaching that of light rail. Bus rapid transit also offers other benefits:

• Much lower cost per route. According to a recent document from Moving Transit Forward, bus rapid transit can be implemented here for $30 million per route, while light rail costs $60 million per mile.
• Flexibility to change routes to meet shifting demand. St. Louis, like many places, is constantly changing. The places we live, work, and play today could be completely different ten years from now. With BRT, you can quickly and economically change. With rail, you’re stuck forever.
• Aesthetic quality comparable to light rail. This is not your father’s Bi-State bus. BRT vehicles are larger, and dramatically different in design, providing accommodations on par with light rail.
• Real-time information providing arrival times. No more asking when the next bus arrives. Real-time displays at bus stops display the next arrival time, using a system updated by a GPS on each bus. And in some systems (here’s an example from Chicago), you can track bus arrivals on the web, or from your cell phone.
• ADA accessible buses provide service for all. Accessibility is important, because the disabled are often transit dependent. With accessible buses, BRT provides the disabled with access to the same service as the rest of us, providing better service for the disabled and reducing the demand for “Call A Ride.”

Citizens for Better Transit believes that BRT is the common sense approach to expanding our transit system. We encourage the folks at Citizens for Modern Transit to visit the website of the National BRT Institute to learn more. And we ask voters to say no to Proposition A, which links Metro’s future to a costly, inefficient light rail expansion.

In fact, bus rapid transit is better transit in every way. That’s why Citizens for Better Transit says yes to BRT, and no to Proposition A.

Finally, for a little background, here’s a short video on BRT in Los Angeles:

Share on Facebook

Another day, another 30 second spot full of lies from Citizens for Modern Transit. Shame on the Post-Dispatch for publishing, without any comment or analysis, such blatant lies. Simply put, it would take at least 4 hours to deliver 10,000 people to the stadium for a game.

Fortunately, they allow reader comments. Enjoy!

http://interact.stltoday.com/blogzone/the-platform/uncategorized/2010/02/whos-for-transit-contd/

Share on Facebook

The New Metro "30 Year Plan."

See Link to Post-Dispatch article below..

Metro’s Bob Baer was apparently put on the defensive as a result of mounting opposition to the Metro Tax. Baer scrambled to defend Metro’s new 30 year “plan” in the face of opponents who demand details. “30 Year Plan” (read: “MEET THE NEW BOSS, SAME AS THE OLD BOSS”). The “plan” is filled with the same non-sense as all the rest. It’s a typical Metro bait and switch plan. Fact is, voters still don’t know what they’re going to get. And frankly, it’s not in Metro’s best interest (or the best interest of the special interests that drive Metro) to give details.

Metro has utterly failed to explain which light rail route will take priority. Relying on platitudes and feel good politicking, the plan has drawn sharp criticism from Citizens for Better Transit and others, who assert Metro lacks transparency, irresponsibly manages its budget and caters to wealthy special interests such as Edward Jones, Tarlton (construction), and a litany of construction, litigation, and development firms.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/3FC4C5400DFC9B51862576C9000868EA?OpenDocument

Share on Facebook

FROM 24th State Blog…

http://www.24thstate.com/2010/02/metro-tax-campaign-using-seiu-phone-bank-for-support.html

Metro Tax Campaign Using SEIU Phone Bank For Support

update: To voice your opposition, head on over to stoptheprop.com or follow on twitter.com/bettertransit.

One of the advantages of sustained research time is being able to connect the dots between different organizations as they push issues onto the Missouri taxpayers.

The latest in scams is the Metro tax, which is yet another attempt to shuffle money to consultants and construction companies at the price of a sensible transportation policy.

I’ll let other people talk about the tax, but I want to draw your attention to the people that are pushing this tax.

Brian Wahby – the City Dems

Joe Keaveney – State Senator (tied at the hip to Wahby)

InsteadofWar – that’s right – the radical peace activist coalition that for someone reason thinks Metro tax money will help stop fighting, or something.

Sierra Club

MOPIRG

Jobs With Justice

Basically, every troll, goblin, newt, shrike, and mushroom cap leftist is on board, which can only mean they are getting paid, and are mobilizing because they know there’s taxpayer money for them.

We saw this in Jefferson County with the 911 Dispatch.  SEIU members and Missouri ProVote were all over their elections, and sought to get council members elected who could shift taxpayer funds back to the progressive groups for activist campaigns.

And so now Jobs with Justice is asking for volunteers for their phone bank to try to drive attention to the Metro tax (which was defeated in November when it was half as much).

One has to ask why groups like InsteadofWar are supporting a Metro tax initiative.  The ANSWER (pun slightly intended) is that these groups are getting money to push it.

The phone bank is run by SEIU MO/KS State Council, the political arm of SEIU.  No doubt that the usual assorted groups of leftwing losers are seeking to make a little scratch, and a reward for sucking up to the county is cash donations.  Sadly, much of the money trail is going to be hidden – we won’t be able to tell who is giving money and who is taking it, but we can be assured that if there is a phone bank, ACORN, SEIU, Missouri ProVote, JobsWithJustice, and the like are getting paid to push the tax.  This is how the siphoned off funds in Jefferson County.  The same cast of characters is at it again, seeking to add hundreds of millions of dollars to the budgets of politicians.

For the rest of the article, go to www.24thstate.com

Share on Facebook

This map is 'right on the money.'

Share on Facebook

Citizens for Modern Transit, one of several pro-tax Metro mouthpieces in favor of Proposition A (metro tax), recently cut a commercial for the Olympics.  The ad runs Friday, Feb. 12th.

This may not come as a shocker to some, but the ad is really a piece of work. A group of special interests with a lot of money to be gained at taxpayer expense prominently, proudly, and boldly identify themselves to the public.

Featured are Mark Wrighton, Chancellor of wealthy Washington University,Kitty Ratcliffe -- President, St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission, Zelema Harris -- President, St. Louis Community College, Denny DeNarvaez -- President and CEO, St. John’s Mercy Medical Center, Mike Shannon, Al Hrabosky, and Fredbird -- Cardinals broadcasters and entertainers, Joe Edwards -- billed as the “mayor” of the Loop, Thomas R. Voss -- President and CEO, Ameren, Rev. Tommie Pierson -- Pastor, Greater St. Mark Church, Max Starkloff -- President and CEO, Starkloff Disability Institute.

Chancellor Wrighton of Washington University is notable in this ad because tax payers subsidize Wash U heavily. 9.3 MILLION DOLLARS heavily. The fair market value of the services Washington University receives from the Metrolink is roughly 11.5 million dollars. Wash U pays about 2.2 million. THE DISABLED PAY MORE MONEY TO RIDE THE METROLINK THAN ELITE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY STUDENTS! Of course Wrighton is happy about Metrolink. He’s getting a great deal!

Kitty Ratcliffe of the St. Louis Convention and Visitor’s Center is voting for Prop A because again, she and her union buddies stand to make some money off of the deal. More metrolink, more tax dollar subsidies to her organization.

And the same goes for the Cardinals as well. Everybody loves the Cardinals, without doubt. But the question is, why should taxpayers in St. Louis County be asked to subsidize the Cardinals?

Why should the tax payers subsidize all of these special interests?

Too bad the commerical didn’t include, but very well could/should have, bond seller EDWARD JONES*, MAUNE DEVELOPMENT, TARLTON, and the two dozen other special special that donated to the Advance St. Louis pro metro tax campaign…interests that stand to profit at the expense of the tax payer, should Prop A pass.

*Edward Jones has not yet, as far as I know, donated to Advance St. Louis’ pro metro tax, pro Prop A campaign. If they do, you’ll be the first to know.

Share on Facebook