OFFICIAL - Main Street Streetcar Extension
- beautyfromashes
- One Park Place
- Posts: 7296
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Seems an extension would be built more quickly since builders would have more experience in construction from the starter line.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
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.
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.
- KCPowercat
- Ambassador
- Posts: 34110
- Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
- Location: Quality Hill
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Is that last funding thing....a possible thing?
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Possible, yes. Assured, no.KCPowercat wrote:Is that last funding thing....a possible thing?
-
- Hotel President
- Posts: 3421
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Do you mean private bond financing?
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
-
- Hotel President
- Posts: 3421
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.DaveKCMO wrote:Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
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.WoodDraw wrote:Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.DaveKCMO wrote:Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.WoodDraw wrote:Do you mean private bond financing?
FYI - The current operations and maintenance contract is only five years.
-
- Hotel President
- Posts: 3421
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.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.WoodDraw wrote:Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.DaveKCMO wrote:
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
I'd be interested to see the proposal.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.WoodDraw wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.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.WoodDraw wrote:
Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.
FYI - The current operations contract is only five years.
I'd be interested to see the proposal.
-
- Hotel President
- Posts: 3421
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
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.DaveKCMO wrote:I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.WoodDraw wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.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.
I'd be interested to see the proposal.
- normalthings
- Mark Twain Tower
- Posts: 8018
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
We originally presented the option of private equity as well as debt. IIRC Airport Ownership elected to go with the 100% debt option.DaveKCMO wrote:I think you're correct, but it's an innovative delivery in KCMO. That was the point I was trying to make.WoodDraw wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but the airport is all debt I believe.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.
I'd be interested to see the proposal.
-
- Hotel President
- Posts: 3421
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
I'm actually super interested in this now. This actually is making more sense than I gave it. I have so many questions.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.WoodDraw wrote:Interesting, I thought it was a misspeaking. I can see it north, but I struggle to see it south.DaveKCMO wrote:
Equity, not financing. Private equity is possible with both extensions.
FYI - The current operations and maintenance contract is only five years.
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.
-
- Strip mall
- Posts: 297
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:45 am
- Location: Midtown
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Couldn't a DBOM contact lead to a situation like Cincinnati's with too many hands in the pot?
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20072
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
It's unlikely we would change our governance model to make it work:tower wrote:Couldn't a DBOM contact lead to a situation like Cincinnati's with too many hands in the pot?
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).
- beautyfromashes
- One Park Place
- Posts: 7296
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
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?
-
- New York Life
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:03 pm
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
today is the big day, last day of the election, when will we get the results?
-
- Mark Twain Tower
- Posts: 9862
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
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.
For the starter line it was one day later for under 500 ballots.
I would expect Friday or Monday.
-
- Western Auto Lofts
- Posts: 594
- Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
- Location: Union Hill
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Per Twitter, noon on June 20.
-
- Mark Twain Tower
- Posts: 9862
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am
Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC
Different sources of revenuebeautyfromashes wrote:If you don’t get federal funds and borrow for the initial construction, what would you borrow against?
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.
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:Wouldn’t this require longer payment of tax revenues within the district?
Not exactly. Two things must happen and I'll just quote the ballot languagebeautyfromashes wrote:Plus, wasn’t the funding mechanism set up to only collect funds if matching federal funds were in place?
It doesn't matter where the funds come from as long as there's enough.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.