Light Rail is a Responsible Investment

by Patrick Mclarney

Light rail has proven to be successful in many other cities and it will be successful in Kansas City. On May 14th, 2001, the Kansas City Chamber of Commerce stated that the Community Proposal for light rail "is the most progressive and well thought out plan for Kansas City in more than 25 years." Though many believe that the current plan is the best light rail plan to face voters, detractors still question whether Kansas City needs light rail, as well as questioning whether light rail will succeed. In fact, opponents of the proposed system are quoting many of the same arguments heard in Denver, Dallas, St. Louis and Salt Lake City; all of which opened light rail systems in the 1990s. In every one of these cities detractors questioned the cost of building and operating light rail, the ability to surmount ridership projections in automobile dependent cities, as well as the general need for such a system. All four cities have full Funding Grant Agreements for a second phase and three are working on a third phase.

On August 7, 2001, Kansas City voters have the opportunity to vote for their initial light rail spine. The rail spine will eventually become a part of an entire metropolitan transportation system that includes commuter rail, light rail, and trolleys. Forty percent of the proposal is financed through a 25-year 1/2-cent sales tax and 60 percent of the project will come from the federal new starts program.

The current proposal could be the last foreseeable chance for Kansas City to acquire significant federal funding for a light rail system. The federal new starts program is a pot of money out of which Kansas City would receive its federal grant. The line for that money is getting longer and longer. Fortunately Kansas City has reserved its place in that line. President Bush has left the current transit funding in place until 2003. After 2003, the future of transit funding is unclear. Recent tax cuts and slowing growth for tax revenues may put pressure on President Bush to minimize the budget for transit projects. In turn, cities could face more restrictions on federal funding for transit projects.

In general, aggregate transportation costs are expensive, but light rail only makes up a small portion of our costs. According to the Mid-America Regional Council long-range transportation plan, the Kansas City metro area will spend $13 billion on our transportation network over the next two decades. Approximately 30 percent will only cover maintenance of our existing infrastructure. Kansas City's local funding for the construction of light rail equates to a meager 2.4 percent the total figure.

The argument that light rail ridership cost is too high is erroneous. Highways don't pay for themselves with their "use." Taxpayers pay for them with taxes. The same is true of light rail, but here there is an opportunity to capture revenues because of fares. Bruce Watkins freeway didn't pay for itself and it required immense federal funds.

Furthermore, light rail will create a development impetus that helps reuse existing under-utilized infrastructure. In the urban core and in growing areas of our first-ring suburban areas, such as North Kansas City and areas in Kansas City, we have the ability to create opportunities for reinvestment.

Light rail will increase real estate values adjacent to transit stops. In turn, light rail can increase tax revenues for the city. According to the Paul Zykofsky, co-author of Building Livable Communities, Portland, Ore., found that the assessed value of station area properties had increased by 112 percent to 491 percent from 1980 to 1991,
compared to a national average increase of 67.5 percent. Portland's transit agency, TriMet, estimates that its light-rail line has generated over $1.2 billion dollars in development, exceeding 10,000,000 square feet, immediately adjacent to its light-rail line. Another $440 million worth of improvements are being planned. And in Washington, D.C., during the first three years of operation, the Metrorail system attracted $970 million in new development to locations near transit stops. This new investment yielded an increase in tax revenues in 1985 alone.

For the past half-century our lives have become increasingly dependent on the automobile for moving from place to place. This has had a tremendous effect on the way our community has grown and developed. Kansas Citians now spend more time than ever commuting in traffic. In 1987, the average Kansas City commuter spent only 2 1/2 minutes extra in congestion at rush hour. That number grew to more than 27 1/2 minutes by 1997. Our decisions today will inevitably shape our city's economic and social development. Light rail is an opportunity to help shape the future of our city and provide transit alternatives for generations to come.