Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd like to see something like this happen. GRTA, which is an existing state transit agency that receives state funds, that doesn't have all the negative/political/polarizing connotation, and that already operates in 13 metro Atlanta counties- would absorb all of the other transit agencies of the region, and all of their assets and staff and everything. So that would be MARTA, CCT, GCT, and whatever else. Consolidate it all into one official entity, and the existing MARTA sales tax agreements in the 3 counties would carry over.
Yes, on the downside there would be a good bit of cost associated with all the re-branding. But that might be a good idea to get new riders and a fresh image, anyway.
The tax and the operating would go something like this. All the member counties would receive the baseline level of state funding, which would give some basic commuter bus options or whatever. But they (13 counties + 1 city of Atlanta) could all individually raise their own sales tax, by whatever increments and whatever amounts they want, for capital for transit projects- and maybe as an added incentive, some of the raised funds would be matched by the state at large. And the projects could be commuter rail, heavy rail, light rail, local bus services, rapid bus, express bus, ART/BRT, streetcar, whatever is appropriate for each county, and whatever they choose.
So the city of Atlanta could have a 1.5% GRTA tax for projects solely in its borders, Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton still paying their 1% or 1.5%, and Cobb or any other member county could vote to have a 1% sales tax for transit. (With some reasonable geographic assumptions, like Cherokee county can't up their tax/services, if Cobb also doesn't.)
But, key difference vs. the current situation- Cobb and Gwinnett would be members of the agency, regardless of what they choose to pay for it. So, bus routes could be seamless and routed irrespective of county lines. And heavy rail to SunTrust Park (or Gwinnett Place) would just be a matter of funding. Maybe Cobb could raise a .5 penny tax just to bring rail to the Cumberland area, or something like that. Or maybe the Cumberland CID could pay for it, or a P3 funding arrangement or something. But it would be possible, because GRTA is allowed to operate in Cobb.
Status quo is ridiculous. We need drastic change, and no more committees and studies and vision plans. And, to be fair, it needs to be jointly politically controlled half and half by liberals and conservatives, a mix of D's and R's. (And hopefully Keith Parker would be the top dog in charge of the whole thing, which would be a step up and good for his career, too.)
I'd like to see something like this happen. GRTA, which is an existing state transit agency that receives state funds, that doesn't have all the negative/political/polarizing connotation, and that already operates in 13 metro Atlanta counties- would absorb all of the other transit agencies of the region, and all of their assets and staff and everything. So that would be MARTA, CCT, GCT, and whatever else. Consolidate it all into one official entity, and the existing MARTA sales tax agreements in the 3 counties would carry over.
Yes, on the downside there would be a good bit of cost associated with all the re-branding. But that might be a good idea to get new riders and a fresh image, anyway.
The tax and the operating would go something like this. All the member counties would receive the baseline level of state funding, which would give some basic commuter bus options or whatever. But they (13 counties + 1 city of Atlanta) could all individually raise their own sales tax, by whatever increments and whatever amounts they want, for capital for transit projects- and maybe as an added incentive, some of the raised funds would be matched by the state at large. And the projects could be commuter rail, heavy rail, light rail, local bus services, rapid bus, express bus, ART/BRT, streetcar, whatever is appropriate for each county, and whatever they choose.
So the city of Atlanta could have a 1.5% GRTA tax for projects solely in its borders, Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton still paying their 1% or 1.5%, and Cobb or any other member county could vote to have a 1% sales tax for transit. (With some reasonable geographic assumptions, like Cherokee county can't up their tax/services, if Cobb also doesn't.)
But, key difference vs. the current situation- Cobb and Gwinnett would be members of the agency, regardless of what they choose to pay for it. So, bus routes could be seamless and routed irrespective of county lines. And heavy rail to SunTrust Park (or Gwinnett Place) would just be a matter of funding. Maybe Cobb could raise a .5 penny tax just to bring rail to the Cumberland area, or something like that. Or maybe the Cumberland CID could pay for it, or a P3 funding arrangement or something. But it would be possible, because GRTA is allowed to operate in Cobb.
I agree that having GRTA lead the way on regional transit expansion beyond the existing MARTA service area is the best way to go.
But what I do not necessarily completely agree with is the one-size-fits-all approach that is often advocated for regional transit expansion.
I do not think that basically dissolving MARTA's operations into the operations of a much larger regional GRTA might be the best approach because of the political and social differences between Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton counties and the rest of the Atlanta metro area/region.
I think that keeping MARTA largely intact in its current operating area in Fulton/DeKalb and Clayton counties while transforming existing local suburban transit agencies like CobbLinc and Gwinnett County Transit into sub-regional transit agencies overseen and coordinated by GRTA (along with forming new sub-regional transit agencies for North Fulton/Forsyth counties and for outer-suburban South Metro Atlanta) might be a good way to go so that distinctly different parts of the Atlanta metro region feel that they have political, financial and logistical control over the transit that runs through their areas.
...Which is a concern that has often been cited in various parts of the Atlanta metro area (...Cobb County and the I-75/I-575 Northwest Corridor (Cobb, Cherokee, Paulding and Bartow counties) wants control over any future high-capacity transit infrastructure that is expanded into its area from Atlanta...North Fulton County and the GA 400 North Corridor wants control over any future high-capacity transit infrastructure that is expanded into its area from Atlanta...Gwinnett County and the I-85/I-985/GA 316 Northeast Corridor wants control over any future high-capacity transit infrastructure that is expanded into its area from Atlanta...Meanwhile, Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton counties wants to keep control over the transit infrastructure that they currently have in the existing MARTA service area)....Different parts of the metro area just do not necessarily feel comfortable sharing political control of their transit infrastructure with other parts of the metro area that they may not necessarily have much in common with.
The I-75/I-575 Northwest (Cobb), the GA 400 North (North Fulton) and the I-85/I-985/GA 316 Northeast (Gwinnett) corridors kind of each seem to want their own individual sub-regional suburban/exurban high-capacity transit setups while Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton wants to keep control of an urban transit agency that they have invested heavily in (and take much pride in) in MARTA.
Meanwhile the south side of the Atlanta region understandably wants to make sure that they don't end up sending their transportation dollars to a Northside part of the region that often gets the most money and attention from regional and state leaders.
The one-size-fits-all approach to transportation planning in a very diverse Atlanta metro region is one of the various major reasons why the regional T-SPLOST referendum went down in flames in 2012....Because each part of the Atlanta metro area/region thought that they were getting screwed in favor of other parts of the region.
Also, different parts of the Atlanta metro/North Georgia region have different political, logistical, developmental, social and cultural needs and wants....So we have to be careful to be considerate of those differing needs and wants when advocating for high-capacity transit expansion throughout the Atlanta metro/North Georgia region.
For example (as has been expressed before), I can tell you straight up that North Metro suburban Atlanta (Cobb/North Fulton/Gwinnett) and urban core Metro Atlanta (Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton) do not want to share political control over a regional transit agency with each other....The political and social differences (in addition to the logistical and developmental needs) between those areas are just too great at this time.
I can also tell you that the Southern Crescent of the Atlanta metro region (most everywhere south of I-20) is very leery of sharing political control over anything with the Northside because the Southside thinks that it will get ignored and overlooked by regional and state interests who they understandably think will pay much more attention to the Northside than the Southside.
I also think that we need to get away from the approach of pushing tax increases that will need the approval of voters as the primary means of funding transit upgrades and expansion throughout a notably tax-averse Greater Atlanta metro/North Georgia region.
Voters in Fulton, DeKalb and Clayton counties may be receptive to the idea of voting for tax increases to fund transit upgrades and expansions, but voters outside of Fulton/DeKalb/Clayton clearly are not very receptive to the idea of voting for tax increases for transit upgrades and expansions.
primaltech is on the right track when talking about funding future transit upgrades and expansions with P3s (Public-Private Partnerships).
P3's can be structured almost any way that is wanted and/or needed from collecting voluntary fees from businesses and property owners by way of CIDs, local business organizations and local and regional chambers of commerce to partnering with property owners and developers to generate revenues and ridership from high-density mixed-use Transit-Oriented real estate development along rail and bus transit lines....And the best thing is that they don't need the approval of transit-averse voters in countywide sales tax referendums.
Funding transit upgrades and expansions with P3s can be a good way to demonstrate to highly-skeptical tax and transit-averse voters that transit can be funded without directly asking them for money through unpopular tax increases proposed in voter referendums.
We absolutely need to think much more along the lines of generating revenues from large-scale P3s and Transit-Oriented real estate development along transit lines (along with inflation-pegged distance-based fare structures and the aggressive sales of private sponsorships large and small) and think much less of misguidedly attempting to generate revenues by asking skeptical voters to "please vote for this tax increase in November 2020 or 2024".
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
Status quo is ridiculous. We need drastic change, and no more committees and studies and vision plans. And, to be fair, it needs to be jointly politically controlled half and half by liberals and conservatives, a mix of D's and R's. (And hopefully Keith Parker would be the top dog in charge of the whole thing, which would be a step up and good for his career, too.)
I agree that we need to take action much sooner rather than later.
But we have also got to make absolutely sure that the actions we take are the most effective courses of action....That's because if we take the wrong course of action or do something that comes across as ham-handed (like was the case during the 2012 T-SPLOST debacle/disaster) we will run the risk of setting ourselves back even further in an environment where we are already decades behind.
Also, while it would be ideal for any regional transit expansion effort to be jointly politically controlled by progressives and conservatives, we also have to be realistic that any new state-run regional transit effort is ultimately going to be guided and controlled by the political party (and political ideology) that controls Georgia state government.
Right now, Georgia state government is dominated by a deeply conservative right-of-center Republican Party which currently controls all statewide constitutional offices and holds nearly two-thirds of all seats in the Georgia Legislature....A fact which means that Republicans and conservatives are ultimately going to be the political/ideological group that guides and controls any effort to expand transit throughout the Atlanta metro/North Georgia region for the foreseeable future.
...Which is one of the major reasons why it will be so important to demonstrate any large-scale regional transit expansion can be funded and conducted without asking for sales tax increases either from state legislators and/or from voters themselves.
The more that it can be demonstrated that transit upgrades and expansions can be conducted without tax increases, the higher the chances will be for success of such an effort.
While there is definitely a strong anti-transit contingent in East Cobb, there is a FAR greater anti-MARTA feeling in Cobb. A re-branded transit system would go MILES toward approval by Cobb voters.
The MARTA brand for many in Cobb = 50 years of incompetent management and a horribly run gov't program.
Yes, I know Keith Parker has done a FANTASTIC job ... but that doesn't erase 5 decades of the type of mis-management that Cobb Gov't does NOT want to partner with. What happens if/when Parker gets hired away?
For the cynics (4-lettered poster and 6-lettered poster that ruin every Cobb discussion), CCT had a similarly bad brand among Cobb residents. It was recently rebranded as Cobb Linc and there is excitement from Cobb gov't officials I have talked with about Cobb Linc now.
Please note: those are real discussions with Cobb Gov't members re: transit and its need in Cobb ... not some garbage printed by the AJC or worse.
Drop the MARTA name, rebrand it into something new and exciting ... and you're much closer to MARTA to the NW corridor.
Lastly, the management issue is no joke in Cobb. On time and on budget is a must. Anything else is a deal-breaker.
Funny, CCT can't even be on-time. It just shows the level of incompetence in Cobb local government that a name change and then they get excited. It's still the same routes, no Sunday service, and contractor running new buses.
A name change is not the solution to transit in Cobb.
Cobb needs MARTA more than MARTA needs Cobb. It is going to be up to Cobb itself / their voters to push for real transportation options in their county. No one is going to force it on them. So I doubt Cobb will see any real transit besides buses or some limited commuter rail for decades. But maybe they will surprise me.
A name change is not the solution to transit in Cobb.
Cobb needs MARTA more than MARTA needs Cobb. It is going to be up to Cobb itself / their voters to push for real transportation options in their county. No one is going to force it on them. So I doubt Cobb will see any real transit besides buses or some limited commuter rail for decades. But maybe they will surprise me.
I hope many more counties than Cobb will surprise you (and all of us!). But, alas, I ain't holding my breath...
I'd like to see something like this happen. GRTA, which is an existing state transit agency that receives state funds, that doesn't have all the negative/political/polarizing connotation, and that already operates in 13 metro Atlanta counties- would absorb all of the other transit agencies of the region, and all of their assets and staff and everything. So that would be MARTA, CCT, GCT, and whatever else.
I would love to explore that idea, but that's fighting words for many folks. There will be an incredible amount of pushback with any attempt of the state to take control of MARTA. I don't think it's a terrible idea by any means, just not sure it is worth the fight.
I would love to explore that idea, but that's fighting words for many folks. There will be an incredible amount of pushback with any attempt of the state to take control of MARTA. I don't think it's a terrible idea by any means, just not sure it is worth the fight.
Just as many are worried of the lack of appropriate political representation with MARTA, so too are the worries with a true state-run agency.
Besides, to use some terminology of cwkimbro, a 'one-size fits all' set up as would likely take place with a state agency isn't a great idea. A full on state agency just isn't on the right scale to deal with the needs of an urban core without the exurbs fussing about wasting money on the danged city, nor is such an agency on the right scale to deal with the needs of the exurban and suburban areas without the urban core worrying they aren't getting enough attention given the larger need.
To me, a two-tiered system is just about right for our metro. Have MARTA serve the core 5-Counties, which are most dense, most populous, have the most jobs, and which are set to grow the most in the future. Have MARTA operate Heavy Rail, Frequent Commuter Rail (Heavy Rail Lite), Light Rail, Streetcars, Bus Rapid Transit, Arterial Rapid Transit, Frequent Buses, Local Buses, Community Circulators, and Paratransit. Focus HARD on Transit Oriented Developments, and nodal connections, providing as much frequent (if not high-capacity as well) transit to allow for alternatives to driving as possible.
GRTA can then take on everyone else, operating Commuter Rail, Commuter Buses,and Paratransit as well as Bus Rapid Transit, Arterial Rapid Transit, Frequent Buses, Local Buses, Community Circulators in towns big enough to necessitate them (Gainsville for example). The focus can be more on pure park-n-rides, without the same dedication to TOD. Just get commuters between nodes.
The only two counties needing to reassess their opinions of agencies would be Gwinnett and Cobb, who are already shifting over towards MARTA as they become more and more urban.
I'd like to see something like this happen. GRTA, which is an existing state transit agency that receives state funds, that doesn't have all the negative/political/polarizing connotation, and that already operates in 13 metro Atlanta counties- would absorb all of the other transit agencies of the region, and all of their assets and staff and everything. So that would be MARTA, CCT, GCT, and whatever else. Consolidate it all into one official entity, and the existing MARTA sales tax agreements in the 3 counties would carry over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tikigod311
I would love to explore that idea, but that's fighting words for many folks. There will be an incredible amount of pushback with any attempt of the state to take control of MARTA. I don't think it's a terrible idea by any means, just not sure it is worth the fight.
Like has been mentioned on other regional transit-related threads before, depending on who wins the governor's race in 2018, I expect that there probably could be an attempt by the state to takeover MARTA and fold it into GRTA sometime within the next decade.
I especially expect that an attempted state takeover of MARTA is probable if powerful political figures like Lt. Governor Casey Cagle or North Metro Atlanta Congressman Tom Price are elected to the governor's office in 2018 because of the very powerful Northside business influences that back them.
Lt. Governor Casey Cagle has frequently over the past few years talked of the state taking over and privatizing MARTA to make rail transit expansion much more palatable to the conservative outer-suburban, exurban and rural voters who dominate Georgia's electorate.
Georgia 6th District Congressman Tom Price represents one of the most affluent and politically powerful areas of the state in North Fulton and East Cobb counties. If elected governor, Price would most likely be pushed into by the powerful Northside business community either a partial or full state takeover of MARTA or carving out of the North Fulton and North DeKalb parts of MARTA a robust suburban/exurban regional/sub-regional transit agency that caters heavily to Northside suburban and exurbanites.
It is not clear what, if any, movement on regional transit expansion would be made if powerful political figures like former South Georgia Congressman Jack Kingston, outgoing West Georgia Congressman Lynn Westmoreland or current Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp are elected governor in 2018.
Powerful Northside business interests (including those in heavily-affluent heavily-populated and politically-powerful Cobb, North Fulton and Gwinnett counties) want to force a state takeover of MARTA because of the sharply increasing value of land along rail transit lines in the 21st Century real estate marketplace.
The land along rail transit lines that has long been overlooked, ignored or just outright shunned during the automobile access-dominated marketplace of the late 20th and very early 21st Centuries is going to be worth tens-of-billions of dollars in value in coming years and decades....So getting control of that land and its potential profits is going to be a rising priority for the powerful Northside business community.
Just as many are worried of the lack of appropriate political representation with MARTA, so too are the worries with a true state-run agency.
Besides, to use some terminology of cwkimbro, a 'one-size fits all' set up as would likely take place with a state agency isn't a great idea. A full on state agency just isn't on the right scale to deal with the needs of an urban core without the exurbs fussing about wasting money on the danged city, nor is such an agency on the right scale to deal with the needs of the exurban and suburban areas without the urban core worrying they aren't getting enough attention given the larger need.
To me, a two-tiered system is just about right for our metro. Have MARTA serve the core 5-Counties, which are most dense, most populous, have the most jobs, and which are set to grow the most in the future. Have MARTA operate Heavy Rail, Frequent Commuter Rail (Heavy Rail Lite), Light Rail, Streetcars, Bus Rapid Transit, Arterial Rapid Transit, Frequent Buses, Local Buses, Community Circulators, and Paratransit. Focus HARD on Transit Oriented Developments, and nodal connections, providing as much frequent (if not high-capacity as well) transit to allow for alternatives to driving as possible.
GRTA can then take on everyone else, operating Commuter Rail, Commuter Buses,and Paratransit as well as Bus Rapid Transit, Arterial Rapid Transit, Frequent Buses, Local Buses, Community Circulators in towns big enough to necessitate them (Gainsville for example). The focus can be more on pure park-n-rides, without the same dedication to TOD. Just get commuters between nodes.
The only two counties needing to reassess their opinions of agencies would be Gwinnett and Cobb, who are already shifting over towards MARTA as they become more and more urban.
It would not work in a state where the rural areas hold all the power. Many leaders in the Gold Dome are not aware of the issues that a large urban area has to face.
It would not work in a state where the rural areas hold all the power. Many leaders in the Gold Dome are not aware of the issues that a large urban area has to face.
As in, a single-tiered system wouldn't work? I agree. We really need a 2-tiered service (maybe 3-tiers if you consider beyond the metro) here, one for the urban core, and one for the outer exurbs and suburbs. Different levels of service for different environments.
MARTA for the core 5 counties.
GRTA for the exurbs and suburbs.
GDoT for the state-wide intercity rail services.
Amtrak (don't know if I count this as a tier or not) for the interstate rail services.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
