Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Transportation topics in KC
User avatar
beautyfromashes
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4306
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by beautyfromashes » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:05 am

Seems an extension would be built more quickly since builders would have more experience in construction from the starter line.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:09 am

The downtown line was further along in design by the time the final election was held. The city was ready to issue bonds for construction shortly after the TDD revenue election was certified (December 2012), but was delayed about a year by the KCAF lawsuit.

The current line is not even at 30% design or NEPA clearance and is following a different funding path. The only thing that could best the mid-2023 opening estimate is a scenario where the private sector provides enough equity to skip federal funding completely.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28704
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by KCPowercat » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:17 am

Is that last funding thing....a possible thing?

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:23 am

KCPowercat wrote:Is that last funding thing....a possible thing?
Possible, yes. Assured, no.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:26 am

Do you mean private bond financing?

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:44 am

WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:49 am

DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. :P I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:55 am

WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. :P I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations and maintenance contract is only five years.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:00 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. :P I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.

I'd be interested to see the proposal.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:05 pm

WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. :P I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.

I'd be interested to see the proposal.
I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:13 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.

I'd be interested to see the proposal.
I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.
Point made, and that's awesome they're exploring it. P3 style deals might become more important, especially if we get less state and federal support.

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1125
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings » Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:32 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.

I'd be interested to see the proposal.
I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.
We originally presented the option of private equity as well as debt. IIRC Airport Ownership elected to go with the 100% debt option.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw » Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:12 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
WoodDraw wrote:
DaveKCMO wrote:
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. :P I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.
If you do it as a DBOM -- design, build, operate and maintain -- with stable sources of revenue for 30 years, it's possible. That's just one of the scenarios to consider. Think about how the airport and convention center deals came together.

FYI - The current operations and maintenance contract is only five years.
I'm actually super interested in this now. This actually is making more sense than I gave it. I have so many questions.

Would the streetcar company and country (Spain?) be interested in a debt or equity deal to keep their line running?

I'm talking completely out of left field, but it seems like there could be some buy America/terriff deals that could make that not dumb.

tower
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 238
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:45 am
Location: Midtown

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by tower » Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:30 pm

Couldn't a DBOM contact lead to a situation like Cincinnati's with too many hands in the pot?

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16712
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jun 11, 2018 9:38 pm

tower wrote:Couldn't a DBOM contact lead to a situation like Cincinnati's with too many hands in the pot?
It's unlikely we would change our governance model to make it work:

City = owner/sponsor
Streetcar Authority = operator (via contract)

Cincy's problem is their operations funding is not dedicated (and they're generally f'd up).

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4306
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by beautyfromashes » Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:45 pm

Not sure I understand. If you don’t get federal funds and borrow for the initial construction, what would you borrow against? Wouldn’t this require longer payment of tax revenues within the district? Plus, wasn’t the funding mechanism set up to only collect funds if matching federal funds were in place?

dnweava
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:03 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by dnweava » Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:04 pm

today is the big day, last day of the election, when will we get the results?

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6913
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by flyingember » Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:49 pm

The last election it was 3 days later for 3,642 ballots
For the starter line it was one day later for under 500 ballots.

I would expect Friday or Monday.

swid
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Financial District

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by swid » Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:54 pm

Per Twitter, noon on June 20.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6913
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by flyingember » Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:04 pm

beautyfromashes wrote:If you don’t get federal funds and borrow for the initial construction, what would you borrow against?
Different sources of revenue

A state or county match
A local match from KCMO
It could be given as a grant from a private business.
Private bonds. A bank or business funds part of the streetcar in exchange for a portion of the ticket revenue.

But you don't borrow against a match. A government grant would be used directly to pay for part of the cost, you borrow only to cover the part that's paid through dedicated revenue sources like a tax or tickets. It's exactly like a car loan with a down payment.

The existing bonds are $71.5 million total.
beautyfromashes wrote:Wouldn’t this require longer payment of tax revenues within the district?
This wouldn't work. The tax is set with a fixed term. The city can't certify revenue based on voter renewal that may not happen and would probably have problems selling the bonds if the term is way longer. than normal.
beautyfromashes wrote:Plus, wasn’t the funding mechanism set up to only collect funds if matching federal funds were in place?
Not exactly. Two things must happen and I'll just quote the ballot language
The revenue sources of the District shall not be collected until (a) the Starter Line District is abolished, terminated or dissolved, or merged with or into the District, or its revenue sources reduced to zero by action of the Board of Directors of the Starter Line District or otherwise, in accordance with then applicable law, and (b) the Board of Directors of the District determines that there are sufficient funds to be derived from sources other than revenue of the District in order to make the construction of a substantial portion of the Project financially viable when aggregated with revenue of the District.
It doesn't matter where the funds come from as long as there's enough.

Post Reply