OFFICIAL - Main Street Streetcar Extension

[pash]

.

[DaveKCMO]

Last, although the Star article linked above doesn't mention it, I've heard that one of the reasons the people behind the effort to expand the streetcar are willing to compromise on the timing of the authorizing votes is that the timeline for receiving enough new vehicles to operate the lengthened line from CAF is already so far out—like six years out—that delaying the votes won't matter. Is that true? And if so, is the Streetcar Authority looking at different vendors? CAF has been bad so far, and this would be worse. Is there no supplier that could step in and build us enough vehicles to operate the full extended line within five years, allowing us to sell our existing rolling stock to Cincinnati or somebody? If not, would placing orders now funded by the existing TDD speed thing up? Is that possible?

It is true, unfortunately. You can blame Congress, which recently tightened the requirements for Buy America and the FTA, which has toughened their stance on "piggybacking".

I don't believe the City can start the vehicle procurement until they enter the federal process, but you can expect (I think) city staff to keep that moving because it is literally the critical path for opening in 2023. There is some indication that FTA will view KC differently now that we have rails in the ground, thus negating the need to have the local funding 100% approved before starting their process (other cities get away with this, including KCATA on Prospect MAX).

So, it was either piss off an already agitated Council who could delay the critical path or capitulate on the election schedule... AGAIN.

[DaveKCMO]

There has to be some internal polling in the city that indicates support for the $800M election is mediocre, but city leaders fear - even more than the GO bond failing - the public's medium-term response if the city doesn't have money to fund the types of infrastructure improvements/maintenance that keeps citizens satisfied.

Polling in October, I've heard. Most decisions thus far appear to be based on citizen satisfaction scores -- streets, sidewalks, and transit score low and are also ranked as high priorities.

[DaveKCMO]

updated election schedule based on feedback from the city council:

[DaveKCMO]

editorial: http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/edito ... 32362.html

The Kansas City Regional Transit Alliance last week quietly posted a “delayed schedule for streetcar extension” on its website. The nonprofit organization is leading the expansion efforts but will need the city to apply for tens of millions of dollars in federal assistance for the $227 million project.

Here’s what prompted the changed time-line.

A month ago, Mayor Sly James and several City Council members gave a less-than-enthusiastic reception to the alliance’s original plan to hold elections in 2017 to push expansion along.

The elected officials have their sights set on wooing Kansas Citians in April 2017 to endorse an $800 million bond plan of basic improvements such as better roads and sidewalks. City Hall wants voters focused on approving the bonds, not on streetcar-related issues.

[flyingember]

Streisand effect.

If you don't want people to focus on something don't give a reason for people to do so.

And the city putting focus on the Go Bond as the cause will only fan the flame on questioning if the both items will pass, of if the city thinks people will vote for two new taxes close together.

Conversely it could mean the city wants the anti-group off the train to ensure it passes, by putting all media attention on the bigger item, but I think that's the weaker argument.

[chingon]

Conversely it could mean the city wants the anti-group off the train to ensure it passes, by putting all media attention on the bigger item, but I think that's the weaker argument.

I'm going to go ahead and tell you this theory is not in the city's calculus.

[mean]

"Ehhh, we'd really rather you shelf your silly train thingy so we can pass a tax to improve roads for the real transportation." This is what passes for progress in KC?

[flyingember]

Conversely it could mean the city wants the anti-group off the train to ensure it passes, by putting all media attention on the bigger item, but I think that's the weaker argument.

I'm going to go ahead and tell you this theory is not in the city's calculus.

I didn't think so, but I wanted to be nice.

[DaveKCMO]

the star's coverage: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/kc ... 52371.html

Proponents initially hoped the first election could be held late this year. But they postponed that timetable until after April 4, when the City Council plans a major citywide infrastructure bond issue election.

So now, the first streetcar mail-in ballot election is expected to take place between May and July. If voters approve the new streetcar district, an election would occur in September 2017 at polling places, to elect board members for the new taxing district.

Finally, there would be another mail-in election between November 2017 and January 2018 to actually approve the taxes for the new streetcar district.

Even if all those approvals occur, an expanded streetcar route isn’t expected to open until 2023 at the earliest, because of the lengthy design, construction and vehicle procurement process.

full judge's order (rebutting several key complaints from the public hearing): https://www.courts.mo.gov/fv/c//Streetc ... i=10042466

schedule info: http://kcrta.org/streetcar/

[kboish]

From the ruling

opinion regarding needing a city-wide vote for the use of any city funds (ie. not TDD-specific taxes) on streetcar related projects:

A determination by the governing body of a municipality to appropriate municipal funds
to all or a portion of the cost of the development, construction and/or maintenance of a public
improvement is a power vested in the municipality’s legislative powers, and does not require, in
each instance, a vote of the public. That the City may determine to apply otherwise lawfully
available municipal funds to the Project is legally no different from the City determining to
construct or widen a public street, or improve an intersection. The fact that such public
improvement may be constructed in a portion of the City in Platte County and may or may not be
“used” by a resident of a portion of the City in Jackson County does not require a vote of all of
the electorate of the City. Such potential appropriation of otherwise lawfully available municipal
funds for the Project by the City does not render the District illegal or unconstitutional.

gerrymandering:

There is simply no evidence before the Court, nor does the Court conclude on its own,
that the boundaries of the District are irregular or have otherwise been proposed in a manner that
constitutes unlawful gerrymandering as that phrase has been defined under Missouri law

Why don't non-residents get to vote...

Some individuals who testified at the Public Hearing in opposition to the Petition claimed
that it is unlawful to levy a special assessment based only on the approval of registered voters
residing in the District without also allowing nonresident landowners to have a vote in their
capacity as landowners. This is incorrect. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly made
clear that “a government unit may legitimately restrict the right to participate in its political
processes to those who reside within its borders” and that such a restriction does not violate the
Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution

[OPIchabod]

So, um, the announcement of two additional train units being ordered for the first district kinda mutes the argument that the delay in expansion isn't too big a deal due to the lack of availability of additional trains, no?

[DaveKCMO]

So, um, the announcement of two additional train units being ordered for the first district kinda mutes the argument that the delay in expansion isn't too big a deal due to the lack of availability of additional trains, no?

the two additional vehicles ordered soon (2017) would fall under different procurement rules than those ordered much later (2019?) for the expansion.

[pash]

.

[grovester]

I'm going to guess that cars ordered today have to be paid and used for the existing line, not an extension.

Ordering cars for an extension that has not been approved might be illegal? How do you buy assets for something that doesn't exist?

[aknowledgeableperson]

How do you even pay for the streetcars with no funds available since a funding mechanism hasn't been established?

[pash]

.

[aknowledgeableperson]

1. The current TDD has to have it's own interests as it's top concern. Don't believe it is in the position to speculate on expansion that may or may not happen. It is not prudent for it to spend money for something that is outside of it's current district.
2. The City is not an entity that can loan cash.
3. Political will? Why should the streetcars jump to the top of the lit of city priorities?

[grovester]

EXPLICITLY purchasing vehicles for a system other than the current one seems like it would run into either legal, political or ethical issues. I doubt they could use TDD funds to even study the extension.

Purchasing 2 for the current system and perhaps integrating them into a future system to speed up the roll out is likely what they are doing now.

Edit: I really don't know anything, I was just pondering over coffee.

[WoodDraw]

What type of option does Cincinnati have? Is anyone familiar with their system enough to know what they want?

I don't know enough, but if we can work with them on that option, that seems like a very rational way forward.