Oh uh. I suppose that means we'll soon have the most expensive water/sewer rates in the universe to make up the loss. Or maybe an outrageously expensive 'services' fee for the privilege of living in the World's Most Livable City. I'm sure promises have already been made to some powerful party or another and there won't be any stopping it now...

I think this story has to be read in conjunction with the Oregonian's series on state finances. They're talking about an inability to fund core services, and this one MAX line (to Milwaukie) is going to cost us over $700 million.

It's like people in Salem can't hold two facts in their head at the same time to see how one might be related to the other.

When will the politicians and candidates that can affect the outcome of MLR speak up?

Metro candidate Hughes needs to respond. Stacy's response is almost a given. Dudley has in at two cases spoken about the misuse of state lottery funds in these economic times for MLR. Kitzhaber has said nothing. All the other candidates and all present office holders have said nothing except that MLR is a foregone conclusion. It is not. All five contributing governmental agencies besides the federal government have not even begun to secure their total matching funds. And the price of MLR keeps on increasing.

For public officials like TriMet and Metro to now say, after learning that the fed's matching funds have been decreased from 60% to 50%, "no problem" is hilarious.

There are also legal issues developing on how "public involvement" has occurred during this run-a-way train of a forgone conclusion.

If the politicians and candidates are so sure of public support in these economic times, why don't they call for a vote? But please don't frame a vote using a push poll question like Sam Adams formulated for plastic bags that he claims 70% of Portlanders support a plastic bag ban:

"Since light rail spurs economic development, increases density that furthers our Green agenda, decreases crime, will achieve 27% ridership of all transit trips, will not affect our integrated bus system, that the cost of $210 Million per mile exceeds the cost of express bus or freeway-per-mile cost is still correct for the environment, and provides modal diversity for all in our region, do you support Milwaukie Light Rail?"

End TriMet's monopoly!

Tell you what, Sam. I will support a plastic bag ban if you stop the Milwaukie MAX? Deal?

There's a "tipping point" for projects like this. When so many monied interests are involved (including public monied interests), and so much *federal* money is forthcoming, it's a near certainty. The reasons for support aren't environmental, they're economical.

But I don't believe that light rail does much of anything its promised to do. There's a prevalent, almost subconscious belief amongst people who plan stuff like this that if you *look* like Amsterdam/Germany/[insert city you're trying to emulate here], you'll *be* like Amsterdam/Germany/etc.

The same promises were trotted out for the eastside/Gresham light rail years ago--dreamy development along Burnside, economic stimulus, doves singing. The result? An increase in crime, an increase in cheap apartment boxes, an increase in the required number of transit police, and little if any business increase. Most glaring of all, of course, was that per capita auto use in that corridor *increased* since it was developed.

This story is repeated across the US, in fact. The long-range goal is to densify and thereby force business, social structure, and development to conform. Of course the proof's already there that it doesn't work, economically or ecologically or socially. Places like Gresham become farms of crackerbox apartments to accomodate poor residents (and, importantly, immigrants). Places like Beaverton, Hillsboro and Tigard grow, grow, grow.

The slogan, in other words, is this: "if only we keep growing, resources won't run out and people will purchase shiny condos, shop at Starbucks, and take the light rail everywhere."

And ecological concerns get diluted to pet issues like "plastic bags" and "Twitter feeds from the Mayor to tell you about the handful of vegetables that came from the City Hall garden".

Consider it tipped nearly over.

Little or none of the prior local match was really funded to begin with.

It was to be borrowed against the lottery, against TriMet's own operating revenue, against property taxes, against parking fees with $140 Million in fed gas tax flex funds coming through Metro.

The more realistic estimate.
Cuurent TriMet $1.54 Billion
Interest to retire the $250 million in lottery backed bonds. More lottery dollars- $100 million
Interest to retire Urban Renewal bonds. More Property taxes- $100 million
Interest on TriMet bonds
More trimet revenue - $20 million
Filling the funding hole will mean additional financing costs.
More local funds- $100 million
Cost of moving SoWa streetcar/Moody street/lift site 14 feet. More local funds- $50 million
Rising costs, updates toland aquisition and construction estimates.
More local funds- $90 million

Total $2 BILLION


And here
http://portlandafoot.org/w/index.php?title=Portland-Milwaukie_light_rail_project#Current_funding

"Possible delay in construction
"If TriMet cannot cut its costs or find another $300 million by fall 2010, the project will be postponed. If the project is not in final design by fall 2010, Fetsch said, construction of the Willamette River Bridge would be postponed until 2012 and the full line couldn't open until 2016 at the soonest."

The TriMet bord meeting is tomorrow, Wed. 9:00 AM

Location
City of Portland Building , Room C
1120 SW 5th
Portland, OR

Drop by and help push the tipping MLR all the way over.

How much to just replace the Sellwood Bridge instead (w/o streetcar tracks)?

The public representatives always say "we've gone too far" to stop these projects. There are many projects that can and should be stopped regardless of the economic climate. This would be a good place to draw the line and say NO. Maybe they will pay attention for once.

I think it is about $300 million.

And just imagine, trucks and buses could then resume using the new Sellwood bridge.

Anyone who would like to say somthing to the TriMet board I will gladly take your emails to the meeting tomorrow.

If Jack doesn't mind you can e-mail him and he can forward them to me.

It would be a mistake to underestimate the difficulty of derailing a project like this. Infrastructure spending with federal subsidies has enormous momentum. Short of finding some legal governance issue to take to court or to force a vote, I predict it's a lost cause, irrespective of delays, overruns, cost increases, financing difficulties, etc. This is the aerial tram on steroids.

I haven't seen anyone underestimating anything except TriMet.

I'm pretty sure essentially everyone understands the difficulty in derailing a project like this.

The fact remains the local match is not coming together and is now having to deal with a smaller fed share.

The application for the fed grant has not been submitted and federal approval will not come until June of 2012.

There is a broad spectrum of opposition to the light rail or the funding of MLR, or both.

TriMet is underestimating the challenge they are facing to move this forward.

They do not have the funding, they do not have public support, their plans to raid the already weakened budgets of public services is causing outrage and political battles are heating up in advance of the November election.

Among many other considerations.

Having a voice in all of this is really important. I have attended local government meetings in the past, and I have learned a lot about how things work. I have even carried some of these ideas into my home.

For instance, I recently wanted to purchase a new truck, but my wife complained we couldn't afford it. I smiled, and thanked her very much for her weighing in. I then carefully explained that while her input was very important to me, I intended to go forward anyway.

TriMet will circle the wagons with its project partners in the coming days to explore if more money could be found. But cash-strapped government agencies around the region have been scaling back projects from the Oregon Sustainability Center to the Columbia River Crossing.

The largest single cost in the Milwaukie project is a new $135 million Willamette River bridge. To be built between the Marquam and Ross Island bridges, the crossing will be the first new bridge across the river in 35 years. The current design would accommodate mass transit, the extension of the Portland Streetcar, pedestrians and bicycles, but not cars.

If the new bridge were to accommodate cars, state funding might be available.

http://www.enzymepdx.com/2010/milwaukie-max-line-budget-cuts/#ixzz0uu0pQ4w7

You know times are bad when they start cutting back on the Oregon Sustainability Center and similar "essentials".

Moreover, TriMet's cannibalization of bus service to fund light rail isn't going over well with riders, as far as I can tell. I've heard a number of gripes; one guy even mentioned that although he used to take the bus most of the time, service has been pared back so far that he now drives more than he did before light rail.

In general, the more expensive a rail transit project is on the initial proposed estimate, the larger the cost overrun, both in percentage of the initial estimated cost and in absolute dollars. This has been studied (see: http://flyvbjerg.plan.aau.dk/bftruthlyingpub.php) and on average rail projects go 40% over their initial projected cost (when approval is gained), so some researchers recommend reference-class forecasting where the average cost overrun is simply added to any project estimate.

Given the history of rail megaprojects and overruns, I would expect, even with this economy, that this project will be well over $2 billion. Tri-Met has already demonstrated its prowess in "finding" sources of money to cover overruns, I don't think the orange line will be any different. The amount of ROW that they have to obtain by condemning and buying out private property and businesses means a level of uncertainty never before seen with MAX construction projects, and that simply equals more opportunities for costs to escalate out of control.

Stepping back and looking at the picture, what I see are local politicos behaving as if they have no intention of reconsidering their promises, big ideas, and schemes as if they're confident all the funding they need is just around the corner (like an untapped oilwell), while at the same time telling us that truly essential services will have to be eliminated to the detriment of our communities, which will scare people.

I imagine we'll next hear that a sales tax is the only option left to keep our communities safe and functioning... and of course, be a new source of revenue...

Uh-oh... I might have to agree with Ben about something. Don't know if Jack will be able to help you out with your email request. He is after all on vacation.

But here's my simple rejoinder to Tri-Met, if this were a private sector project there would have to be a very clear return on investment. Given that WES ridership will never live up to what TriMet touted, how can they prove clearly that this project will be any better and how will they clearly deomonstrate ROI to the stakeholders who are footing the bill for this fiasco? And what is their risk remediation plan if in fact the ridership is too low? Will they increase fares to offset the lack of ridership or do they have another plan and what is it?

PS - GO BY FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY

Ben...thanks for your summaries and effort on this, good luck tomorrow with the Tri-Met corruptistas.

Corruptistas or social-engineering zealots with an agenda?

Discussions of light rail projects are having a bonus effect for elected officials. Conversations about PERS are off the table.

JC...you have a point...both.

LucsAdvo,
I know from my very sound sources that
TriMet does not have any plan Bs.
They have no plan As.
That's the problem. The have no business plan, at all, for anything.
Thet proceed with reckless abandon because they are so accustomed to no one ever held being held accountable or taking responsibility for anything.
TriMet management and board members are comfortable in thinking what ever happens it is the nameless bureaucracy's fault or the process' fault.

I hope that many others will join me in shaming them, in public and by name, if they do not stop this madness.

Hmm nice typos

Ben - Some of us have jobs and other responsibilities that mean most of the time we don't have the time or will to waste our time at public hearings that turn out to be meaningless (just watch the SamRand Twins subvert it all) anyway. Once I and the other boomers hit retirement, all hell is going to break loose. The 60s will look like foreplay to the bang that will come next.

LucsAdvo,Will they increase fares to offset the lack of ridership or do they have another plan and what is it?

As Ben said they have no plan.

I imagine public bailout is the plan.
or corporate takeover completely is the plan.
We have no say and we'll have to pay and pay.

Who are we kidding?

It's already too big to fail.

They are gonna cram this down our throats, costs or no costs.

just like they rammed the tram up...towards OHSU.

Roy,
Unfortunately, you have it down.
How many more times do we have to put up with this?
I have been writing about our Bull Run water and not only will they cram these projects down our throats but by the time they are done with us we will have to swallow added toxic chemicals in our drinking water.

These people have no conscience.

I've been dogging the gubernatorial campaigns about this off and on for a couple weeks. Successfully got a deliberately vague but notably noncommittal statement out of the Kitz camp on Monday.

(Yes, the page needs work! We'll have a thorough election guide on these guys' stated transit positions by the fall. Feel free to add any that you guys can verify.)

"This is the aerial tram on steroids."

This is the aerial tram [rimshot] on rails.

Any feedback on how the Trimet board meeting went? Did anyone stand up to oppose/voice opposition?

Just curious.

This new BRT study was presented o the TriMet board today. It demonstrates a far superior approach to Light Rail.

http://www.transweb.sjsu.edu/MTIportal/research/publications/documents/2704_book%20(7.8.10%20with%20Covers).pdf

LA is among the study systems.

The Board heard some pretty gloomy news from the GM, finance and transit planning staff and got another ear full from the public.

Drop in ridership, increased cost of operations but some good question from the board.

From the board I percieved an arrival of some fresh and authentic due diligence.

Mr. Clark requested additonal information be included in TIP and other reports.

Dr. Bethel stated his disapproval of the "focus on the trendy at the expense of providing good transit service to all people and areas."

Given the totality and reality of the circumstances and comments from all I'll predict MLR will be suspended.

Ben,
Thanks for the report.
I hope your prediction that MLR will be suspended will be the case,
as would be a huge drain on our community.

Question is, how will the insiders who would have benefited from this react? They have had their way for soooooooo long.