Light rail expansion into South Phoenix???

[Bondurant]

Originally Posted by Ritchie_az

The light-rail loses money every time someone rides on it. Ticket sales cover only 25% of the annual operating costs.

I agree that a private company should own and run it, if we are to have one. It would have cost much less to build (and probably run and maintain), and ticket prices would be higher. But at least the users would be paying for it and not the non-users.

Too bad I'm not a billionaire businessman

Though I'm not sure how a private rail would pan out. Cities and states (regardless of political ideology) tend to scoff at anything that is logical and they can't benefit from/control themselves.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Ritchie_az

The starter line was approved by voters. No expansion has been approved by voters as far as I'm aware.

This is where a correction is needed. Light rail was approved in two separate phases: in 2000, a vote to expand the bus service and introduce the light rail line was passed by an overwhelming majority ... and in 2004, another initiative was approved to extend the half cent sales tax to expand/improve the freeway network & expand light rail service.

I very much agree with your statements about limiting government spending & saving taxpayers money. The thing is that with the transit vote, the taxpayers are the ones who said yes to light rail TWICE. When the voters approve something, it should rest with them. In other words: the voters should always have the final say. Calling for a halt to further expansion of rail, freeways, transit, or other things the voters approved would be a violation, and it would likely result in a higher government authority getting involved.

I too would like to see more of these amenities privatized, or at least partially privatized. In fact, I keep saying the same thing about things like public schools. Think about how much tax money could be saved by turning education over to private enterprise. Initiate a user fee to people who actually use these services (schools, light rail, freeways, etc.), and see how much more efficient they would be run by a private entity. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than the gov't running everything.

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

This is where a correction is needed. Light rail was approved in two separate phases: in 2000, a vote to expand the bus service and introduce the light rail line was passed by an overwhelming majority ... and in 2004, another initiative was approved to extend the half cent sales tax to expand/improve the freeway network & expand light rail service.

I very much agree with your statements about limiting government spending & saving taxpayers money. The thing is that with the transit vote, the taxpayers are the ones who said yes to light rail TWICE. When the voters approve something, it should rest with them. In other words: the voters should always have the final say. Calling for a halt to further expansion of rail, freeways, transit, or other things the voters approved would be a violation, and it would likely result in a higher government authority getting involved.

I too would like to see more of these amenities privatized, or at least partially privatized. In fact, I keep saying the same thing about things like public schools. Think about how much tax money could be saved by turning education over to private enterprise. Initiate a user fee to people who actually use these services (schools, light rail, freeways, etc.), and see how much more efficient they would be run by a private entity. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than the gov't running everything.

Think about how much more we would all pay in taxes for prisons and rehabilitation if education was shifted to the private sector.

Only the rich would be able to afford it and everyone else's children would not have the same level of learning or opportunity to succeed.

Other public services like mass transit, roads, libraries, police, 911, and fire service should also be paid for with taxes so they are available to everyone who needs them. I don't want to see only the elite wealthy class having access to these basic services.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I too would like to see more of these amenities privatized, or at least partially privatized. In fact, I keep saying the same thing about things like public schools. Think about how much tax money could be saved by turning education over to private enterprise. Initiate a user fee to people who actually use these services (schools, light rail, freeways, etc.), and see how much more efficient they would be run by a private entity. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than the gov't running everything.

The Problem is this is Phoenix not San Francisco. We don't have a plethora of Fortune 500 companies and wealthy contributors. I agree with you in theory that these projects should be partially payed for with private capital but the reality is private capital does not exist here relative to other cities. If you want to get a light rail created, you will need taxpayer money to get it accomplished otherwise you won't ever get one built here.

[_Charles_]

LR (or any other form of mass transit) succeeds when people can use it to reliably commute to work.
The current LR does not connect enough people to their jobs - hence the low usage rate.
Same problem has existed with bus lines here. Unless one has bankers hours and evey holiday known to western civilization off - the buses could not be used by most commuters.

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by _Charles_

LR (or any other form of mass transit) succeeds when people can use it to reliably commute to work.
The current LR does not connect enough people to their jobs - hence the low usage rate.
Same problem has existed with bus lines here. Unless one has bankers hours and evey holiday known to western civilization off - the buses could not be used by most commuters.

The existing light rail is a starting line, give it time and allow further expansion then you will see a lot greater usage.

The existing line has received tremendous usage for just being a starter.

Simply building more freeways or widening the existing ones is not enough. A metropolitan area like this needs expansion of both roads and mass transit.