An offer we can't refuse

Click image to zoom in

"As government expands, liberty contracts." —Ronald Reagan

Light rail transit is rolling down the tracks to a neighborhood near you. As far as the Metropolitan Council and Gov. Mark Dayton are concerned, taxpayers and those who live in the trains' path have three options:

• Lead
• Follow
• Get out of the way

Three lawsuits against the Central Corridor LRT line illustrate this.

When Minnesota Public Radio complained that light rail trains rumbling down Cedar Street in front of its downtown Saint Paul lobby doors could disrupt its broadcast and recording studios, the Metropolitan Council refused to re-route the tracks. When MPR asked for a spring-steel floating slab system that has proven to reduce noise and vibration from a similar transit route in Basel, Switzerland, Met Council Chairman Peter Bell said, "I think MPR does an excellent job in news and classical music. Engineering light-rail systems is not their area of expertise." MPR's subsequent lawsuit against the Met Council was dismissed. A less-expensive rubber-based floating slab system will be installed, which the experts at the Met Council assure MPR will work just fine.

When the University of Minnesota balked at the prospect of vibration and electromagnetic interference from light rail trains disrupting sensitive laboratories through the heart of its campus, they proposed an alternate route on the northern outskirts of campus. When the Met Council declined to reroute the tracks, the U sued. The University dropped its lawsuit in an agreement with the Met Council that includes mitigation measures that the Met Council assures the U will work just fine.

When the Saint Paul NAACP complained that potential negative effects of the line on residents and businesses have not been adequately analyzed, St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman's office commented, "I'm not sure it's inevitable bad things will happen." The NAACP's lawsuit against the Met Council, the Federal Transit Administration, and the federal Department of Transportation is still pending.

Governor Dayton is a big supporter of the proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit route. Just don't confuse him with the facts.

When Gov. Dayton's own Department of Employment and Economic Development rated the proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit last out of twelve metro area projects for grant money (see chart), Gov. Dayton ignored his own agency's scorecard and awarded the proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit a $2 million DEED grant.

The Southwest Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement lists "severe" noise impacts "in a number of residential locations...[due to] high anticipated speeds of [sic] or light rail vehicle-mounted audible warning signal (bell) use at some stations and crossings;" vibration; noise and vibration from freight trains re-routed to make way for the light rail; up to hundreds of property acquisitions depending on the final route; and safety and security impacts.

I wouldn't bet against the Southwest LRT getting built due to environmental, noise, vibration, or safety concerns from property owners and residents. Light rail transit in the Twin Cities metro area is an offer from the Met Council we can't — or won't be allowed to — refuse.

INFOGRAPHIC: Minnesota Transportation Boondoggle

Light rail: unsustainable

As reported in the Star Tribune ("Flush with riders, transit is short on money and options" by Jim Foti, January 4, 2009), the unsustainable source of funding for the misfit transportation boondoggle called light rail is proving, well, unsustainable.

The economic reality that whatever you tax, eventually gets less abundant is being exacerbated by the downturn in the economy. Forty percent or more of the motor vehicle sales tax was supposed to be the golden goose for metro area mass transit (read: light rail transit) — but then the economy turned south and Denny Hecker closed or sold nine dealerships in 2008. Meanwhile, in spite of increased ridership, the Met Council is being forced to choose between unpleasant options like increasing fares or cutting back service — or both.

The dark joke in transit circles is that if you don't want fares to go up again, you should buy a car and then keep riding the bus...

The motor vehicle sales tax has "virtually collapsed," said state Sen. Scott Dibble, a Minneapolis DFLer who is on the Senate Transportation Committee. Recurring funding shortfalls have him concerned about the system's viability, and he noted that raising fares by a total of 75 cents in less than a year would amount to a 50 percent increase in non-rush-hour fares.

Legislation that robs Peter to pay for Paul's light rail ride will always have the full support of Paul, but that doesn't make it good transportation policy. Yet light rail proponents won't let reality, common sense, Minnesota Public Radio or the University of Minnesota derail their utopian plans.

MPR to LRT: not in our front yard

MPR reports that a fascinating showdown is brewing between the Central Corridor light rail transit (LRT) line, the Met Council, and the City of Saint Paul on one side, versus a group of longtime downtown Saint Paul residents on Cedar Street: two churches and Minnesota Public Radio.

MPR is understandably concerned about the location of the proposed light rail line: twelve feet away from the front door of its broadcast center, where the rolling boondoggle would generate considerable noise and vibration, electromagnetic interference (EMI), and access issues. Central Presbyterian Church and the Church of St. Louis, as well as several concert venues, would also feel the effects of the light rail tracks and its unsightly accoutrements. As MPR reported, lines in the sand are being drawn:

Metropolitan Council Chairman Peter Bell said a study to look at a different route is, in his words, a "Herculean task," that could delay the project by two years. He says MPR's memo to the project office last week has already raised red flags with the Federal Transit Administration.

[Saint Paul Mayor Chris Coleman said:] "Quite frankly, they're threatening the future of downtown St. Paul and the entire city."

In a position statement, MPR says, "MPR continues to support the Central Corridor LRT project." It is asking that an alternate route just one block to the east be considered. This story is developing.