So what is the deal with future light rail expansion

[TexasTallest]

Originally Posted by stoneclaw

I don't think anyone ever said it was dead, more rather severely delayed (at least until 2025).

This article isn't really saying much different than we already know. The project is delayed indefinitely. The projects discussed in that article will take 10 years or more before getting off the ground, especially revamping the entire plan and starting over. However, at least more quality and probably more aesthetically pleasing developments will be built. Since we have to endure a long delay either way, I say use the time to plan and build it right.

true on the timeline, i guess this wont make a difference as we still wont have those lines before 2025. what a shame. i thought the BRT along Richmond was news but i guess not. that article got me excited for no reason, im not sure why they even posted it if all of that had already been announced. oh well, glad to see the city at least making steps towards more light rail. maybe by then we will have some commuter rail lines to connect into the system. Houstonians arent going to be able to rely on their cars forever. there are supposed to be 10 million people in the city by 2040. getting around town will be a nightmare.

[oceangaia]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Here's your answer

More light rail for Houston? If you’re pro-transit, vote "No" on METRO ballot issue - Oct 2012

That article is full of lies and misinformation. Review the data from METRO for reference.


So what are the effects of a "Yes" vote? First, it would end rail expansion in the METRO area. METRO’s board has specifically agreed that any additional sales tax it receives under the new GMP program will not be used for rail, period.

This is an administrative decision by the board, not a legal requirement. And it only pertains to the 25% under GMP. The law is what is actually stated in the bill. The referendum was purely about the 25% currently used for the GMP. Nothing in it makes any restrictions on the remaining 75%. Metro's board said nothing about the 75%


By now, the recipients of the funds have become dependent on the money, particularly the City of Houston. Under the arrangements, which are executed as a series of contracts with each of the entities, all but the City of Houston get back far more than 25% of the sales taxes collected in their jurisdictions. The city gets only 20%. The allocations are spectacularly unfair, and the end result is that the City of Houston has been subsidizing the other 15 GMP recipients for decades.

Be sure you understand this. They are talking about the 25% allocated to GMP relative to tax revenues from that area. Katy puts in a dollar and gets back a quarter for roads. Houston puts in a dollar and gets back 20 cents for roads. Sounds unfair? Only if you disregard the other 75%, which goes almost entirely to Houston. The quarter that Katy gets back for roads is about all they get for their dollar because METRO isn't running any bus service out there except commuter service which covers itself with user fares. Houston is using it's share PLUS Katy's share of the remaining 75 cents to support bus and rail inside Houston. It's the City of Houston getting subsidized.


people are looking at the streets they’re driving on and wondering what happened to the $2.7 billion that has already been spent on that. Everyone seems to agree that the streets in Houston are in terrible condition and that’s part of what Rebuild Houston is about. But you have to wonder why $2.7 billion —most of which went to the City — appears to have had no effect on street condition.

Aha!Your link even admits that most of the GMP money went to Houston. So much for that deceiving 20% figure. Page 7 of the GMP report shows that Houston received 62% of the GMP distributions. The remaining areas received 38% of $2.7 billion for just a little over a billion dollars. But now refer to page 8 and you'll see those areas contributed over $1.5 billion in tax collections.

What is the basis for "appears to have had no effect on street condition"? How is this measured? Or is it just some biased perception? Given the huge geographical area involved, it would be hard to visibly perceive much. Ask anyone stuck in traffic if they perceive the reduction in congestion that the light rail line promised.


In 1984, the METRO board agreed to allocate $150 million to the 16 “partners” and that became the General Mobility Program, which was approved by voters in 1988

So the voters approved GMP in 1984 and again in 2012. How many times do they have to approve it?

[hbcu]

the university line is on the books as there's a hearing soon

[300zxtwinturbo]

I hope it gets built