Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[Rizzo]

Another state effort on transit funding getting some attention:

http://www.mibiz.com/absolutenm/templates/...4&zoneid=25

Are all these people working in concert with each other?

They have their own mission statements, but in general they're working for more transit.

[LA Dave]

Re: Seattle

I drive in hell traffic every day, but even I was amazed how bad Seattle's was. The problem is that there is basically one north-south freeway (I-5) that is impossibly clogged when, i.e., Boeing is having a shift change.

LA County has also (apparently) approved a sales tax increase to fund County transit projects. The vote is close, however and some ballots are still being counted.

While I live in a city where some idiots don't even know that we have a subway, I take it almost weekly and it is quite crowded during rush hour. The Blue Line, a light rail line that goes from downtown to Long Beach, is quite heavily patronized. Trains have been lengthened from two to three cars to handle the passengers.

[GRDadof3]

Great article about the old interurban in Holland that used to run to Grand Rapids and Saugatuck.

http://www.hollandsentinel.com/lifestyle/x...c-train-stopped

[Rizzo]

Wanna train station -- just buy one! Developer puts up $1.5 million for an Amtrak station at New Buffalo.

Edited November 17, 2008 by Rizzo

[Rizzo]

House Bill 6114 passed through the House by a 78 to 22 vote. House Bill 6114 (attached below) will allow the creation of local transit tax increment finance authorities or TIFAs to help fund public transit improvements. The next step is a passage through the Michigan Senate. It's speculated that both the downtown streetcar and the Division Ave. bus route may need this bill passed in order to go forward.

A majority of metropolitan legislators voted for this bill even in suburban and rural areas where transit isn't served. On the other side of the coin, some representatives in areas where emerging trends suggest a need for more transit voted against this bill (Ottawa County.)

2008_HEBH_6114.pdf

This would be a great opportunity to encourage your representative in the House for their stance on public transit funding. You might also take the opportunity to notify your senator of this incoming bill.

Roll call votes for metro area legislators:

Yeas:

Tom Pearce

Edited November 18, 2008 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

House Bill 6114 passed through the House by a 78 to 22 vote. House Bill 6114 (attached below) will allow the creation of local transit tax increment finance authorities or TIFAs to help fund public transit improvements. The next step is a passage through the Michigan Senate. It's speculated that both the downtown streetcar and the Division Ave. bus route may need this bill passed in order to go forward.

I can't imagine why anyone would vote NO on something like this (giving power to communities to enact TIFAs). Apparently some people like to concentrate all taxing authority at the state level.

Now they need to compliment this with a bill to give local sales tax authority to counties or metro areas.

[Rizzo]

Yeah, especially the the Nays comming from the areas where transit is looking to be needed in the near term.

One of the transportation funding reports identified a local sales tax option. I believe a Detroit area representative has renewed interests in a constitutional amendment to allow a local sales tax authority. From the sounds of things that option is a non starter, because of the political and economical reality. With a modest penny increase in sales tax The Rapid could bank $80 million into a trust and could set projects on the community's own terms rather the State and FTA. Could you imagine the kind of quality transit that could be realized with that modest tax increase? Then county could vote a 1% increase to pay capital costs for rapid transit projects and rollback to a 1/2% or less to cover operating costs. What is it, $1 investment results in $6 gain in economic benefits?

Edited November 18, 2008 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

Yeah, especially the the Nays comming from the areas where transit is looking to be needed in the near term.

One of the transportation funding reports identified a local sales tax option. I believe a Detroit area representative has renewed interests in a constitutional amendment to allow a local sales tax authority. From the sounds of things that option is a non starter, because of the political and economical reality. With a modest penny increase in sales tax The Rapid could bank $80 million into a trust and could set projects on the community's own terms rather the State and FTA. Could you imagine the kind of quality transit that could be realized with that modest tax increase? Then county could vote a 1% increase to pay capital costs for rapid transit projects and rollback to a 1/2% or less to cover operating costs. What is it, $1 investment results in $6 gain in economic benefits?

Didn't a study just come out that the state needs to double transportation funding? For that to happen, it sure would help if the communities that need it the most could enact their own local sales tax. Why should people in lightly populated areas bear the brunt of the bigger cities' transportation projects?

[Rizzo]

Didn't a study just come out that the state needs to double transportation funding? For that to happen, it sure would help if the communities that need it the most could enact their own local sales tax. Why should people in lightly populated areas bear the brunt of the bigger cities' transportation projects?

Yes, that was the report I referenced in my previous post.

I'm not too sure about the redistribution of monies from other areas of the state. As it stands now the state pretty much penalizes transit for expanding -- I believe it's the Peter-Paul scenario. Under the proposed plan it sounds like it would be a much more equitable system. West Michigan better get into the front of the line. If the region is paying tax dollars to play it better get into the game. One lonely BRT project however stunning and innovative will not move the region forward much. You can't rest on your laurels.

[yankee_farmer]

Didn't a study just come out that the state needs to double transportation funding? For that to happen, it sure would help if the communities that need it the most could enact their own local sales tax. Why should people in lightly populated areas bear the brunt of the bigger cities' transportation projects?

Does anyone know the reasoning behind the specific "no" votes? Those for voted for the Bill are from both parties, and it has already been mentioned that geography was not completely a factor, either.

[Rizzo]

You would have to go through their voting records on previous transportation (transit specific) bills to find out. My hunch is ideology. Their constituents sure do like transit though. Grand Haven and its surrounding areas passed the Harbor Transit millage by a landslide.

Edited November 18, 2008 by Rizzo

[aowwt]

Judy Emmons

Edited November 18, 2008 by aowwt

[fotoman311]

Judy Emmons

[Rizzo]

Judy Emmons

Edited November 18, 2008 by Rizzo

[aowwt]

Coopersville doesnt get bus service that much plus Grandville, and Jenison doesnt do bus service. They have very little in the means of built up areas that will use the service. So to get elected which is the cheif job of any politician it is best to look at the district you represent to see if your voters would use the service if not why vote for it. Now he should have voted for it IMHO but he was looking more at all of the rural areas he serves rather Grandville.

[Rizzo]

So, essentially what you're saying is that the rational for a no vote is that some rural constituents are valued more over urban and suburban constituents? Mary Valentine representing rural Muskegon County voted for this bill along with Goeff Hansen who represents some of the most remote areas of West Michigan with no transit. My point would be that there are probably different reasons beyond geography for why someone voted for or against this bill.

Edited November 18, 2008 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

Coopersville doesnt get bus service that much plus Grandville, and Jenison doesnt do bus service. They have very little in the means of built up areas that will use the service. So to get elected which is the cheif job of any politician it is best to look at the district you represent to see if your voters would use the service if not why vote for it. Now he should have voted for it IMHO but he was looking more at all of the rural areas he serves rather Grandville.

This was not a vote for specific transit projects, which might be why some of these representatives are either confused or just dumb. It was a vote to allow municipalities to propose Tax Increment Finance Zones for certain areas to help fund transit. These TIF zones will have to be individually voted on (the bill was an approval to get more approvals).

So the chances of a municipality in Barry County voting to set up a TIF zone for transit infrastructure are slim to none, so it really doesn't hurt someone like Brian Calley to vote yes. Same with Montcalm County. They're almost being obstructionists for something that won't even affect them or their constituents.

HOWEVER, when a TIF transit zone is set up in a community like Grand Rapids, for instance, I believe the tax capture that would normally be spread throughout the county goes right back into the pot at that particular site to upgrade infrastructure for transit (ie I build a new $50 Million development near a BRT stop and the INCREASE in taxes would not go to county property tax rolls, but would go into a bus platform). Keep in mind the county would have never gotten any additional taxes anyway if the property were not redeveloped.

This is the debate going on with the county right now and Ren Zones. The County now is balking at Ren Zone extensions because they will lose future taxes, not taking into account that there probably wouldn't be future taxes without the Ren Zone incentives.

So in essence, going back to the reps who voted against it, they probably just didn't want ANY bill that had ANYTHING to do with taxes attached to their resumes, no matter where it would be used.

[Raildudes dad]

This was not a vote for specific transit projects, which might be why some of these representatives are either confused or just dumb.

So in essence, going back to the reps who voted against it, they probably just didn't want ANY bill that had ANYTHING to do with taxes attached to their resumes, no matter where it would be used.

I think you said it all

[aowwt]

One thing that I noticed is that if a rural area wants somebody out, they will come out in droves to get somebody out. So even though this is not a Tax Increase it is essentially a redistrubution of the future tax amount. But trying to sell that to people is hard to do if your opponent goes its still a tax increase and goes on and on and on about it. I do agree that it is a smart move to have this as we need to get at least 3 to 4 lines built in the city.

[Rizzo]

One thing that I noticed is that if a rural area wants somebody out, they will come out in droves to get somebody out. So even though this is not a Tax Increase it is essentially a redistrubution of the future tax amount. But trying to sell that to people is hard to do if your opponent goes its still a tax increase and goes on and on and on about it. I do agree that it is a smart move to have this as we need to get at least 3 to 4 lines built in the city.

I don't know if rural folks really care enough to drive out representation over investment into a gainful and wanted service. If you take a look at who is pushing for more transit connections its coming from commuters and disadvantaged in rural and suburban Ottawa and Kent Counties who don't have adequate transit. This is why Kent and Ottawa are studying areas of the region where transit gaps exist.

Edited November 20, 2008 by Rizzo

[Rizzo]

A good two part video from the folks in Perth, Australia on the choice of rail over bus.

[Rizzo]

I didn't realize it, but this past summer there was a real push by local business to see a regional public transit plan in place. There was even a endorsement by the President of Western Michigan University.

Endorsements:

John Dunn, President of Western Michigan University

WMU.pdf

Grand Haven Main Street Authority

Grand_20Haven_20Main_20St_20DDA.pdf

Harbor Industries

Harbor_20Industries.pdf

Light Corporation

Light_20Corp..pdf

I.V.C. Industrial Coatings

IVC.pdf

Edited November 24, 2008 by Rizzo

[suydam]

A good two part video from the folks in Perth, Australia on the choice of rail over bus.

Care to summarize? The problem with video is that I have to watch 13 minutes of video.

My entire "session" in UP is usually limited to about 5 minutes at a chunk, so I'll never be able to watch this.

[Rizzo]

Probably not a bad time to tell the decision makers your vision for rail transit in West Michigan: itoldthepresident.org and change.gov

[metrogrkid]

Probably not a bad time to tell the decision makers your vision for rail transit in West Michigan: itoldthepresident.org and change.gov

Rizz:

Here's what I posted at itoldthepresident.org:

"President-Elect Obama:

With the State of Michigan's Governor - Jennifer Granholm - working feverishly to remake Michigan into a national center of alternative energy and green practices (such as transit-oriented development), I would like to take a moment to make sure you are aware of Michigan's showplace for these issues: Metropolitan Grand Rapids.

Since this region, known as "Michigan's West Coast", has crossed the one million-population threshold in 1996, it has grown into a four county area of 1.3 million people midway between Chicago and Detroit. Among recent significant happenings including the world-wide showcase of GR during President Gerald R. Ford's burial, the garnering of national LEED-certification per capita dominance and the current $2 billion of downtown development, Metro GR is poised to begin the institution of world-class fixed guideway mass transit.

With this region's growing leadership concensus in supporting streetrail, bus rapid transit (rubber-tired lightrail) and metrowide commuter rail, Metro Grand Rapids - with support from you - could be positioned as a national example of how transit and transit-oriented development can work hand-in-hand in struggling cities across America to redevelop/reinvigorate sagging urban areas and create thousands of new jobs from the construction and development of these sysytems as well as the ongoing jobs created by the residential/retail/office/entertainment functions housed within and adjacent to the stations of the resulting transit-oriented developments.

The fact that this scenario supports green practices in a highly visible fashion and would create a green alternative for the Big Three auto companies to manufacture transit vehicles for and ongoing replacement parts for would go far toward bolstering the Obama call for change. It would create change in a way that was far removed from being rhetorical and that would be seen in the future as ingenious, practical, pragmatic and environmentally responsible.

Sincerely,

<Metrogrkid>

President, <Local Society Enhancement Organization>

Associate of Patrick Miles Jr., Obama Harvard Classmate & <Local Society Enhancement Organization> Legal Counsel"

Edited December 4, 2008 by metrogrkid