Rep. Yvonne Selcer: Southwest Light Rail Is A Smart Investment
"We still face a $627 million dollar deficit, and still owe our schools about $250 million in delayed school aid payments. I am proud to have authored House File 1, which pays back that debt to our schools."
Dear Neighbors,
This is a busy time at the state capitol, with the February forecast bringing both good news and challenges to our state, an Education Finance committee meeting on the governor’s budget which I was honored to chair, and productive conversations with many of you in our district on the important issues facing us.
As I mentioned in the clip you just viewed, we have a better fiscal outlook than we previously thought. However, we still face a $627 million dollar deficit, and still owe our schools about $250 million in delayed school aid payments. I am proud to have authored House File 1, which pays back that debt to our schools. Southwest Light Rail is another of those smart investments that will promote economic development and job growth in our community, and I will also continue to lead in the effort to bring that project to fruition as I serve on the Transportation Committee.
In other Transportation Policy Committee news, this week we will be considering a bill authored by Transportation Policy Chair Ron Erhardt. This bill provides a comprehensive plan and blueprint to deal with aging infrastructure in our state, as well as allow for strategic investments to make us competitive and attractive to businesses looking to locate to our state.
On Monday, March 4 we discussed the Minnesota Health Care Exchange on the House floor. You can tune in on public television to watch the proceedings. This was another issue we spent a great deal of time talking about during our coffees this past weekend. Many of you have also sent me emails expressing your views on the exchange.
The insurance exchange bill we will be considering attempts to balance quality control with free market access principles. About 60 plans will be available on the exchange in the proposed plan, and access is not restricted to any particular segment of the insurance industry. There is a conflict-free governing board which will be appointed by the governor in this legislation, as well as an advisory group on which industry experts will sit. There are about 50 proposed amendments to this legislation for Representatives to consider, so I look forward to an informative and spirited discussion on this important addition to our state.
After the House and Senate have both passed their versions of the Health Care Exchange, a conference committee will work to hammer out a compromise.
On a fun note, I was happy to welcome the Glen Lake Elementary School’s fifth grade class to the capitol. They were very interested in the work we do at our state Capitol, and happy for the opportunity to tour the “people’s house.”
Please feel free to contact me at any time with thoughts, questions, or concerns. I do read the hundreds of emails I receive, but often it takes me a little while to respond. Know that I am taking your thoughts seriously, and appreciate you taking the time to participate in our great democratic process.
Thank you for allowing me to be your voice at our state Capitol.
Best regards,
Rep. Yvonne Selcer (48A)
David
5:02 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013
As another posted commented about light rail during the last campaign, some questions for those supporting this boondoggle:
Part 1: Can you share with us which transit system line in the state is operating in the black without taxpayer subsidies? Or name any in the five state area that are operating in the black?
Can you point out any real economic activity? Specifically, provide examples of newly operating “powerful economic engines” that exist where LRT is operating today? If there was to be all this economic activity, wouldn’t you think private enterprise would already be willing to support the cost of a train? As a taxpayer, I am not getting sucked in again over empty promises. In fact, I am still waiting to see that “powerful economic activity and redevelopment” around the HHH Metrodome promised by WCCO Sports reporter, Sid Hartman and others, in the early 80’s. Other than a bar named Hubert’s, the economic activity in that area looks sort of thin.
It is apparent to many taxpayers that the Met Council is simply replacing existing bus routes, some successful and some not, which is hardly a recipe for new self-sufficient development.
David
5:02 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013
part two:
Who is auditing the estimated ridership numbers for 2030? The Met Council? Or is it other faceless special interests of LRT? Bold assertions were also made at the start of the Central Corridor, yet it appears to need subsidized tickets to maintain ridership. I believe these subsidies are a direct result of LRT failing to meet ridership estimations. The taxpayers are left with the bill.
Even if ridership meets that quota, can anyone explain why the opportunity cost comparison of busses appear to be MIA? Anyone disagree with the obvious fact that buses can do the same job (transportation) at a fraction of cost of $1.2BB train route? (Has anyone even heard of a billion dollar bus proposal?) Wonder why?
Why is no one putting a number on the efficiency of capital usage comparing trains vs busses? It doesn’t exactly take a transportation engineer to realize the ROI of capital spent on busses is significant better vs capital spent on trains.
ROI Example: we can easily reallocate underutilized busses to other routes for maximum capital usage. During slow periods, we can reallocate or using DFL’s favorite word, easily ‘redistribute’ buses.
ROI Example: Speed to adjust: Bus transit management can respond within the hour to move transit capital to new areas where the specific need exists. (ie. State Fair Time or highway construction, bridge repair)
David
5:02 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013
LRT Proponents will say you can move train assets, too, but can you move a train for less than the cost of a quarter tank of gas? It is all about opportunity cost.
What about the 800 pound gorilla in the Met Council Chamber? What do you do with a train and tracks and depots when the demographic need changes? If we maintain a bus system, you can simply change the bus route. Ever try to change railroad tracks and bridges? Imagine the horror if the same people that designed US169 are in charge of this. It has been almost 18 years and MNDOT is still ‘fixing’ 169 to make it drivable. Again, taxpayers getting stuck with the tab.
How many believe if we build the train once, the train exists permanently forever? Let’s not even get into the repair and replacement cost of infrastructure due to frost wedging. The train infrastructure will deteriorate like our MN roads, whether they are used or not. Taxpayers again will be on the hook for replacing every bolt, track & bridge. Even if 75% of road traffic is removed from city streets, deterioration issues with roads still occur and MN taxpayers will need to continue to pay for repairs of roads in addition to rail infrastructure.
Is there Federal financial help already lined up to pay for replacement maintenance in the out years? In 1982, how many of you thought we would have been replacing the Metrodome? I didn’t.
David
5:03 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013
There is no "Free Money" from the Federal government for this. Neither the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) nor does the Federal Government create wealth. Only productive taxpayers create wealth through work, productivity and savings. The state is constantly fighting deficits. They are worse with Dayton at the helm passing out goodies to his cronies and special interests. The last time I looked the Federal Government is 16 Trillion in debt, that is $16,000,000,000,000!!! But that is concern for future email.
In short, what does a train do that a bus cannot do at a fraction of the cost?
Until these questions are answered and fully understood, discussed and debated by the taxpayers there should no approval to move forward.
Informed
10:53 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013
The mean commuting time for Eden Prairie residents aged 16+ according to the 2010 census is 21.3 minutes and only 3.7% of our workforce use public transportation. WE DO NOT NEED THE LIGHT RAIL. We will be subsidizing this boondoogle for years to come. Check out the statistics and do your homework before you decide to spend our money on something we do not need: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_5YR_DP03
Jeff Simon
4:33 pm on Thursday, March 7, 2013
If there was a good economic case for light rail, private business would have already taken advantage of the opportunity. A public business venture by definition means it is not economically justified, and will forever be subsidized.
Its "success" is defined by the fact it will never give back to the community more than it costs -- therefore, its "success" is in reality a method of wealth confiscation and transfer.