KCRag Forum

So this will be reducing the local debt service or contribution?

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:47 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:41 pm https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/ka ... lly-funded

$24.7 million more for the streetcar expansion

On top that $66 million more for regional transit in general

For those of you that asked earlier if COVID relief would help reduce the local contribution or debt service -- this is it. It wasn't apparent until very recently. The headline is a little awkward because the project already received its Full Funding Grant Agreement so it was already "fully funded".

Ok, great news. So, I assume the TDD will get this money and will decide to either lower the sales or property tax rates or cut the amount of debt and shorten the term on the bonds making the assessments end more quickly?

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:10 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:47 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:41 pm https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/ka ... lly-funded

$24.7 million more for the streetcar expansion

On top that $66 million more for regional transit in general

For those of you that asked earlier if COVID relief would help reduce the local contribution or debt service -- this is it. It wasn't apparent until very recently. The headline is a little awkward because the project already received its Full Funding Grant Agreement so it was already "fully funded".

Ok, great news. So, I assume the TDD will get this money and will decide to either lower the sales or property tax rates or cut the amount of debt and shorten the term on the bonds making the assessments end more quickly?

I would think that reduction of debt service and the purchase of additional streetcars would be the top 2 choices. If we can buy more vehicles now, it would effectively reduce the cost of expanding in the future

With the first line, ridership was well above projections and we had to wait years for new vehicles to be produced. Would be great if we could buy extras upfront before that inevitably happens with the Main Street extension.

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:13 pm I would think that reduction of debt service and the purchase of additional streetcars would be the top 2 choices. If we can buy more vehicles now, it would effectively reduce the cost of expanding in the future

I'm not sure if making further extensions cheaper allows them to happen more quickly. I guess before that, I'd prefer a reduction on the debt and the creation of a CID for the exact amount of the reduction to improve sidewalks, beautification, bike infrastructure, affordable housing. (I assume the district couldn't do these in the current structure). So, the bill to the neighborhood and businesses would pay the same amount of increased tax but get more with the additional federal funds.

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:01 pm So this will be reducing the local debt service or contribution?

I would not anticipate rate relief until well after the whole expanded system is up and running -- that's the same response given to downtown ratepayers when the district generated more than the pro forma anticipated. Given that the council will be approving the issuance of debt, I suspect that's where the money will go (but it has yet to be decided).

At some point, the reserves will fill up as they did downtown and if there's no need for more vehicles or funding future expansion planning/design then you could see rate relief. I suspect we'd start with special assessments, since that's an easy win and will provide less of the total revenue than the sales tax.

Seems kind of against the point of stimulus. ::shrug::

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:57 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:01 pm So this will be reducing the local debt service or contribution?

I would not anticipate rate relief until well after the whole expanded system is up and running -- that's the same response given to downtown ratepayers when the district generated more than the pro forma anticipated. Given that the council will be approving the issuance of debt, I suspect that's where the money will go (but it has yet to be decided).

At some point, the reserves will fill up as they did downtown and if there's no need for more vehicles or funding future expansion planning/design then you could see rate relief. I suspect we'd start with special assessments, since that's an easy win and will provide less of the total revenue than the sales tax.

I guess I don't really care about "relief" as much as I do maximizing our transit investment in the city. We agreed to put XX towards transit so now I just wanna see that we get the most bang for our buck (better system, more vehicles, more amenities like bike racks along the line, etc).

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:12 pm Seems kind of against the point of stimulus. ::shrug::

There have been decades of pressure on big transit projects to spend more local money, which limits the number and quality of projects. On top of that, various administrations have applied regulatory costs (like the 30% contingency on our streetcar) that has increased the total cost of projects.

Frequency is the big missing piece that we need funding for and I'm more and more wondering if the bus is the wrong choice for many transit decisions, that we need to fund a much more expensive system that is flashier.

I know there's been transit surveys, but how many of the surveys is the system eating it's own dog food, that the survey is limited to riders of lines that later get canceled due to low ridership?

There hasn't been a one seat bus line from NKC to the Plaza for years. The courthouse in Independence to KCMO city hall is further than NKC city hall to the plaza and it has one because Independence will fund it. Now because there's someone talking about funding new transit there's the possibility we could get a train that does just this.

Maybe the problem with transit is precisely because everyone is looking to spend as little as possible?

My guess is resident transit ridership will triple with the streetcar to UMKC because it's what people actually will ride, and the frequency clearly isn't going to triple over Main Max

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:36 pm My guess is resident transit ridership will double or triple with the streetcar to UMKC because it's what people actually will ride.

Exactly my thought and exactly why I think we need to push extra funds (stimulus or cost savings) into additional vehicles and eventually more frequent service

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:42 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:36 pm My guess is resident transit ridership will double or triple with the streetcar to UMKC because it's what people actually will ride.

Exactly my thought and exactly why I think we need to push extra funds (stimulus or cost savings) into additional vehicles and eventually more frequent service

We were in a bootstraping problem, how do you start from nothing? And Dave mentioned the financial model we should follow

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 1:57 pm
At some point, the reserves will fill up as they did downtown and if there's no need for more vehicles or funding future expansion planning/design then you could see rate relief. I suspect we'd start with special assessments, since that's an easy win and will provide less of the total revenue than the sales tax.

We should only add new transit service that will bring new development, new residents, new jobs to an area. Then use the tax increase to improve service in a brand new area when the additional service grows the tax base further. A bus line could do the same thing, should always to a cost benefit analysis to be sure.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:35 pm

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:12 pm Seems kind of against the point of stimulus. ::shrug::

There have been decades of pressure on big transit projects to spend more local money, which limits the number and quality of projects. On top of that, various administrations have applied regulatory costs (like the 30% contingency on our streetcar) that has increased the total cost of projects.

Totally agree, but doesn’t really change my point. Stimulus money should go back to the residents (DT first since they’ve paid in longer) so they feel comfortable spending their money and providing jobs or for more transit uses which spurs further development and...creates jobs. Just holding it back for the future seems pointless.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:56 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:35 pm

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:12 pm Seems kind of against the point of stimulus. ::shrug::

There have been decades of pressure on big transit projects to spend more local money, which limits the number and quality of projects. On top of that, various administrations have applied regulatory costs (like the 30% contingency on our streetcar) that has increased the total cost of projects.

Totally agree, but doesn’t really change my point. Stimulus money should go back to the residents (DT first since they’ve paid in longer) so they feel comfortable spending their money and providing jobs or for more transit uses which spurs further development and...creates jobs. Just holding it back for the future seems pointless.

That's what direct payment checks are for. I doubt the amount granted today adds up to anything meaningful for residents after shortfalls are made up for.

Transit stimulus is for covering operations, ensuring projects continue, and supporting industry jobs (through constructing more things).

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 4:19 pm Transit stimulus is for covering operations, ensuring projects continue, and supporting industry jobs (through constructing more things).

The streetcars operation is fully covered and secure. Your #3 would be perfectly good. Putting it in the bank when interest rates are the cheapest they will ever be is a waste.

TDD saw a major reduction in sales tax receipts and will directly benefit from each round of COVID relief.

https://www.buildkcstreetcar.com/ interactive route map with accurate drawings of the proposed improvements, renderings, and a feature for comments

It looks like after the extensions, KC will have the second largest streetcar/tram system in the US (after Portland) at over six miles.

Do they measure the length by single track miles or route miles? Most systems seems to run single one way tracks like KC does in the River Market. So would KC actually have a 12-13 mile system when compared to most other systems?

GRID wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:06 pm It looks like after the extensions, KC will have the second largest streetcar/tram system in the US (after Portland) at over six miles.

Do they measure the length by single track miles or route miles? Most systems seems to run single one way tracks like KC does in the River Market. So would KC actually have a 12-13 mile system when compared to most other systems?

New Orleans has 20+ miles and iirc 24/7

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:11 pm

GRID wrote: ↑Tue Apr 06, 2021 5:06 pm It looks like after the extensions, KC will have the second largest streetcar/tram system in the US (after Portland) at over six miles.

Do they measure the length by single track miles or route miles? Most systems seems to run single one way tracks like KC does in the River Market. So would KC actually have a 12-13 mile system when compared to most other systems?

New Orleans has 20+ miles and iirc 24/7

Yeah, I was just thinking the modern trams, not the heritage stuff like in NO, Philly, Memphis and SF.

Please feel free to pile on the with the wider sidewalk and traffic calming comments. The city still needs to find its mojo on this stuff.