Detroit biggest holdup on regional transportation Crains

[szla]

With all the talk of bus cuts and a city going bankrupt you would think Detroit would be trying to spread the cost regionally especially with regard to transit but according to Mary Kramer of Crains it is Detroit that is holding the region hostage. Why? We cant afford two bus systems.

[ndavies]

You need to talk to the unions. They are a huge voting block in the city of Detroit. The City Council knows this and in the past have made many decisions to ensure they receive those votes.

DDOT merging with smart would mean union job losses.

[Detroitnerd]

Don't think of it as one entity holding the whole system hostage. Much better to think of it as two bus systems playing chicken with each other.

[ndavies]

Don't think of it as one entity holding the whole system hostage. Much better to think of it as two bus systems playing chicken with each other.

It was the unions that went to court and stopped the last consolidation attempt.

[Detroitnerd]

Oh, right. I forgot I was posting on DetroitYES! It's all the unions' fault.

Can we change the name of this site to UnionsNO! ???

[Novine]

It was the unions that went to Court but they only won because the laws being used didn't pass the judge's legal review. Blame the state legislature which hasn't passed the appropriate legislation to make this happen.

[ndavies]

It was the unions that went to Court but they only won because the laws being used didn't pass the judge's legal review. Blame the state legislature which hasn't passed the appropriate legislation to make this happen.

The only reason the unions took it tko court was to protect their little peice of the rapidly evaporating turf. They didn't do it for the public good.

[DetroitPlanner]

PS you know that the State does provide a ton of money to operate transit and matches nearly all federal dollars that come into the state for transit don't you? You do know those funds are siphoned off of the gas tax, a user fee to pay for transportation by motorists; do you not?

I agree with you that transportation is woefully underfunded in this state. This is nothing new. We get what we pay for. When the cost of gas went up to levels of $4.25/gal or higher people bought less gas. This impacted the amount of funding that went into the state and federal coffers to pay for transportation and has hurt transportation across the board. Since the price of gas is fixed on the dollar, it did not go up and the state got 19 cents per gallon bought and the feds a little less. The only ones to make out on this was the State general fund because the state tacks another 6 percent sales tax on top of what you pay per gallon. Yes the state taxes you twice. But the six percent goes to the general fund and schools and you would have a huge fall out if this was ever devoted to say transit or bicyles instead.

Most regions see value in transit and will pay more than 1/3 mill for transit. We do not [[and in some cases, communities pay $0, and in others like Detroit considerably more). Transit users need to start paying more through the farebox for this service so it stops being seen as welfare and new revenues must be developed that are not tied to a fixed gas tax.

[ghettopalmetto]

Since the price of gas is fixed on the dollar, it did not go up and the state got 19 cents per gallon bought and the feds a little less. The only ones to make out on this was the State general fund because the state tacks another 6 percent sales tax on top of what you pay per gallon. Yes the state taxes you twice.

Oh, the horror! Michigan taxes things just like every other state! Someone call the wahhhhhhmbulance!

[kraig]

DetroitPlanner is right. The State does tax more than once. The state's tax rate on gas ranks pretty high on the national average.

DARTA would have gone a long way in regionalizing transportation. Unfortunately, it was ruled that Granholm and Kilpatrick violated the law when signing the agreements [[no surprises there).

[kraig]

Another big problem is MDOT. They waste a lot of money.

[DetroitPlanner]

Oh, the horror! Michigan taxes things just like every other state! Someone call the wahhhhhhmbulance!

I don't think you're getting the meaning. When gas was $1.25 a gallon, the Michigan Transportation Fund got 19 cents of which about 1.5 cents went to transit. When gas was $4.25 a gallon some ten years later, the same was going in, but the costs to provide transportation has gone up remarkably over time and inflation made that to be worth much less. Only the six percent sales tax increased, and none of those dollars went to transportation. At $4.25 people buy a lot less gas than they do when it costs $1.25, but the demand for public transport goes through the roof; giving the transit agencies a double whammy. The already underfunded transit system is now woefully underfunded. Now that property taxes are begining to decline, that 1/3 mill that macomb county pays and some communities in wayne and oakland will be much less as well.

At the same time it costs the same to ride the bus now as it does 12 years ago. That needs to change, not only that but without that change you will not get the political will to increase funding if the riders are seen as pariah.

As far as I'm concerned PS is right as well. My contrairan approach was to introduce the issue that funding is complex.

[ghettopalmetto]

I don't think you're getting the meaning. When gas was $1.25 a gallon, the Michigan Transportation Fund got 19 cents of which about 1.5 cents went to transit. When gas was $4.25 a gallon some ten years later, the same was going in, but the costs to provide transportation has gone up remarkably over time and inflation made that to be worth much less. Only the six percent sales tax increased, and none of those dollars went to transportation. At $4.25 people buy a lot less gas than they do when it costs $1.25, but the demand for public transport goes through the roof; giving the transit agencies a double whammy. The already underfunded transit system is now woefully underfunded. Now that property taxes are begining to decline, that 1/3 mill that macomb county pays and some communities in wayne and oakland will be much less as well.

At the same time it costs the same to ride the bus now as it does 12 years ago. That needs to change, not only that but without that change you will not get the political will to increase funding if the riders are seen as pariah.

As far as I'm concerned PS is right as well. My contrairan approach was to introduce the issue that funding is complex.

I completely agree, and I think you concisely illustrate why Michigan needs some sort of stable funding for transit. These are issues that large transit agencies across the nation have had to come to terms with the past few years, and presuming that the price of oil will rise in the future, will become larger. Since Detroit's transit is entirely bus-based, however, it is more prone to large spikes in the cost of providing service versus an agency that has an extensive electrically-powered rail network.

I retract my comment from above, but understand that I made it because your remark on "double taxation" reeked of anti-tax politicism.

[DetroitPlanner]

I retract my comment from above, but understand that I made it because your remark on "double taxation" reeked of anti-tax politicism.

I consider this my own fault. Many of my comments are intended to be sarcastic, therefore folks can't tell when I am serious or being a goof. Then again I like it that way too.

[digitalvision]

Pretty much every poll I've seen, having been around candidates in all three counties, show that any fundraising for transit beyond what we currently have is a no go - and in fact, for most areas except Detroit and southern Oakland County, expanded transit service is a negative campaign issue with voters, much like being against sprawl [[some 80% of metro Detroiters feel sprawl is a positive, not negative, word).

That's why you won't see too many candidates being anti-sprawl, and as to your regional vote, PS, there's lots of [[with much money spent) test polls and the like put out before such an initiative goes out.

In tests, it fails, and fails hard; it takes literally millions of dollars to do what you suggest, and if it has a low chance of success, you won't be able to raise the money to properly do it, and without money, initiatives lose.

Lilpup has it right to an extent. I'd say though it's not considered enough of a problem in the suburbs to pay that much more. Most view it as if the buses were overcrowding, then we'll do something, but they're not, so the demand isn't that high and what we're doing is fine. I categorically disagree based on the evidence from other regions, but that's another story. That's normal Detroit region behavior.

This is why you see the powers that be silent. I believe some know what needs to be done, but the voters are nowhere near ready for it yet.

So in short, we are going to have to work with what we have, the best we can, for something we desperately need. It's very disappointing Detroit will not sign on; but with the current union battles Bing is fighting, I don't think you can expect anything different. If he were to pull that card out now, he'd mobilize many of his opponents and give them fodder for calling him a suburban sellout [[even though the facts are different). Maybe after November.

[ghettopalmetto]

Professorscott is dead-on--the problem is one of money. Funding for both DDOT and SMART is piss-poor when compared to other large metropolitan areas. And let's not hear the crap about how "Detroiters love their cars", because it's clear that nearly 200,000 people a day in fact, do not "love their cars".

DDOT is plagued by its rather unique manifestation as a city department. Year after year, the unstable budget of the City of Detroit makes DDOT yet another victim in a parade of cuts. As the article indicates, these cuts are not without resulting economic impact for the City. SMART, on the other hand, is simply too tiny, attempting to provide bare-bones service over a geographically large [[and in parts, thinly-populated) area.

If the State of Michigan can find money to build expensive, unneeded freeways left-and-right, they can find a way to fund transit. Looked at another way, the entire annual subsidy for DDOT would cost less than 1 mile of freeway construction. Stop making excuses, and get it done.

[bailey]

And let's not hear the crap about how "Detroiters love their cars", because it's clear that nearly 200,000 people a day in fact, do not "love their cars".

Isn't that about 5% of Metro Detroit? 200k out of 4 million--give or take?bus/mass transit around here is not about loving or not loving cars it's simply the choice of last resort.

[crawford]

Isn't that about 5% of Metro Detroit? 200k out of 4 million--give or take?bus/mass transit around here is not about loving or not loving cars it's simply the choice of last resort.

This is correct. Detroit is the poorest major city in the country.

Those 200,000 DDot + SMART riders are overwhelmingly poor folks who want a car but can't afford one.

And the billion-dollar light rail nonsense wouldn't do a thing to help them. Woodward already has, by far, the best transit in the region.

[Trainman]

Professorscott is dead-on--the problem is one of money. Funding for both DDOT and SMART is piss-poor when compared to other large metropolitan areas. And let's not hear the crap about how "Detroiters love their cars", because it's clear that nearly 200,000 people a day in fact, do not "love their cars".

DDOT is plagued by its rather unique manifestation as a city department. Year after year, the unstable budget of the City of Detroit makes DDOT yet another victim in a parade of cuts. As the article indicates, these cuts are not without resulting economic impact for the City. SMART, on the other hand, is simply too tiny, attempting to provide bare-bones service over a geographically large [[and in parts, thinly-populated) area.

If the State of Michigan can find money to build expensive, unneeded freeways left-and-right, they can find a way to fund transit. Looked at another way, the entire annual subsidy for DDOT would cost less than 1 mile of freeway construction. Stop making excuses, and get it done.

Stop making excuses DYers. And get out to vote NO next August 2010 to defeat the SMART millage.

YES means 25 miles of NEW freeway lanes.

NO means the restoration of state fuel tax money for community transit and public bus service

Since 1995, Southeast Michigan has lost over $32 Million per year in operating subsidies for mass transit and $14 Million per year in Federal transit grants.

Your NO vote is needed to stop the Freeway Madness that is off the shelf and a concrete part of our regionnal plans to improve our transportation system for everyone.

See the Trainman website in DETROIT LINKS to learn the complete details of the regressive SMART property tax.

[EastsideAl]

There are other, darker, issues here. And other reasons why support for mass transit to/from Detroit is unpopular in many suburban areas and wouldn't pass a vote in those communities, in fact it wouldn't even be close. Those reasons were front and center way back in the early '70s when mass transit on the Woodward corridor was being seriously discussed, now they're only whispered but are nonetheless powerful.

[professorscott]

Digitalvision skirted the 800 pound gorilla in southeast Michigan when he started a post with this: "Pretty much every poll I've seen, having been around candidates in all three counties, show that any fundraising for transit beyond what we currently have is a no go".

Let's start with some facts, which I claim are unarguable:
1. All successful urban areas, everywhere in the world, have effective mass transit.
2. Metro Detroit is not successful, by any metric you care to apply. If you want to argue this with me, you must meet me at the Detroit Buddy's, and you must buy the drinks.
3. Metro Detroit does not have effective mass transit. [[If you want to argue this with me, you are dropping acid, which is very retro but still illegal and probably harmful.)

Now here's the 800 pound gorilla: in order to fix the City or the region in any way whatever, we will need political leaders. What we get instead of leaders are people who pay attention to comments which start with "pretty much every poll I've seen". The point of leadership is to lead, not to follow.

As long as our political class consists of poll-watching lemmings, we aren't getting any leadership at all; and that goes a long way toward explaining why we are where we are.

By the way, in 1960, desegregation would not be an issue that polled well. I would venture to guess that all over the United States, even in the north, things like fair housing laws and forced efforts to desegregate would have been non-starters in opinion polls. Thank God that America, back then, had some actual fucking leaders. Shame we don't seem to have them anymore.

[lilpup]

Let's start with some facts, which I claim are unarguable:
1. All successful urban areas, everywhere in the world, have effective mass transit.

Mass transit is not emphasized in any newer [[i.e. western/southwestern) US cities.
Mass transit is not self-supporting in ANY US city.

[crawford]

Let's start with some facts, which I claim are unarguable:
1. All successful urban areas, everywhere in the world, have effective mass transit.

LA? Houston? Dallas? Phoenix? Miami? Tampa? Charlotte?

I don't think so.

2. Metro Detroit is not successful, by any metric you care to apply. If you want to argue this with me, you must meet me at the Detroit Buddy's, and you must buy the drinks.

3. Metro Detroit does not have effective mass transit. [[If you want to argue this with me, you are dropping acid, which is very retro but still illegal and probably harmful.)

Agreed 100% with #2 and #3 but I do not see any causation.

Effective mass transit does not appear to be correlated with successful cities worldwide.
There are successful cities with terrible transit, and failed cities with excellent transit.

[professorscott]

Crawford asked about "LA? Houston? Dallas? Phoenix? Miami? Tampa? Charlotte?"

Let's examine.

Los Angeles has light rail, subway and commuter rail, in addition to its bus service.

Houston has MetroRail which runs every 6 minutes from early morning to mid-evening on weekdays, in addition to its bus service. In metro Detroit we no longer even have any bus routes which run as frequently as once every 6 minutes.

Dallas has almost 50 miles of light rail and is the seventh most-ridden light rail system in the United States. Dallas is undergoing a rapid expansion of its light rail system.

The Phoenix light rail service runs every 10 minutes all day on weekdays.

Miami has a 22 mile elevated light rail system.

Even Tampa, which is one of the more anti-transit regions in the United States, has the TECO line streetcar system.

So to sum up, Crawford, every city you chose to name has some type of regional rail transit, which metro Detroit does not. So what was your point?

[ghettopalmetto]

Houston and Charlotte also have plans for massive expansions of their rail systems. I'm not sure about Charlotte, but I think Houston realized that a THIRD beltway was not going to be affordable, nor "solve" its notorious traffic congestion.