The daily digest of Twin Cities culture | Secrets of the City

"whopping 37.5-percent increase"

That says it all about Colman. Instead of making a serious argument he comes out and throws a pointless phrase meant to shock. Its 25 to 50 cents. Considering how much fuel costs have going up - its a reasonable increase. Get over it.

The timing does stink. But the argument that Metro Transit should just attract more riders and that would solve their budget woes is a little simplistic.

It's my understanding that MT gets a large chunk of their money from the sales tax charged when people buy new cars. And because people aren't buying new cars, Metro Transit is also losing big time in that budget area.

I agree that it's not trivial, especially because it starts to bring the cost of Express Bus service close to the cost of parking. $7.00 round trip to ride the bus versus $9 to park starts to be a closer call for many.

"whopping 37.5-percent increase"
As long as we're talking percents, the gas tax increase was more than 40 percent. :P And starting today, transit is sucking an additional $95 million out of the metro economy. :( So I think it's only fair to ask actual riders - like me! - to kick in a little bit more as well.

Sure kwatt, but will you actually pay more, or do you have a MetroPass that is paid with pre-tax dollars and heavily discounted?

Think about $7.00 round trip for someone who makes $7.00 an hour. One full hour, before taxes, goes to getting to work. That's a lot of money.

and kevin, that 40% increase is over the current gas tax, not on the overall price of gas, where the increase was negligable.

the increase in transit fares is the entire cost someone pays.

also, "sucking" money out of the economy? I'm sorry, but an investment in transportation infrastructure is not a drain on an economy, it's an investment.

unless you think glorious highway construction is also a drain on the economy...?

p.p.s. max, the food links disappeared also.

What the hell are you people talking about?

I blame Nick Coleman.

Highway construction is a great investment. It facilitates the movement of goods and millions of people per day. Transit moves no goods and infentisimally fewer people.

I'm viewing it in IE7 and it looks like the MTC and Luverne story ate up the food post. Also, everything below the MTC link is in italics.

transit can move a great number of people with a smaller amount of land and resources, kevin. so once you get any densely built-up area transit is a great opportunity to save resources and move more people without tearing huge gashes through urban fabric to widen highways.

fixed

Oh holy Hannah, does Internet Explorer suck. One broken line break code and it goes haywire!

The fare hike proposal is frustrating...the Met Council is proposing fare increases without expanding service. If you check out this policy brief, you'll see that many regions have comparable fares to the Twin Cities, but they also have bigger transit systems...so, in effect, we pay more for less service.

And I'll come clean...the policy brief is published by the organization I work for (Transit for Livable Communities).

So where do people propose the money for the budget shortfall come from? (And virtually everyone uses highways, they're critical for interstate commerce, so it's not exactly a fair comparison to the transit situation. Buses and LRT can't carry giant shipments of food and other products.)

@derusha- I propose they raise everyone's taxes. Gas taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, whatever. This should be priority number one. It strikes at the heart of so many things like the environment, the war, people's health, and the economy.

And since I'm prioritzing, health care for all should be second, schools third, and alternative energy forth.

here goes again:

1) freight rail traffic is at an all-time high. tons and tons (and tonnes?) of freight is moved by rail and off-loaded to trucks for the last-leg of the trip. a good portion of those trucks you see are just delivering things the last bit of the journey, often times on the same highways you commute on because it's taking the stuff out to your suburb.

2) People drive and use highways so much because they essentially have to. We have poorly-thought out development that necessitates the use of a car and poor/little alternatives. Sure those express buses from MG are busy, but how many people are they totally impractical for because of the limited service? I imagine you, for one.

3) Highways are really a poor choice for moving people around any densely built-up area. They're a waste of space, require constant (costly) maintinence and do not scale-up to meet increased demand. If you run into capacity problems on a highway, you have to raze a couple blocks on either side of it for several miles and add more lanes. Transit congestion? Add more buses/trains to the existing lines.

I could go on and on (of course you already know this), but for intra-metro transportation highways just plain suck and the money would be better spent on transit.

Private business built the railroads.

With millions of dollars in governmental subsidies.

Not to mention, also raking in huge cash by buying up private land on the cheap and turning around and selling it for huge profits as the railroads were built.

That never happens with light rail. No siree.

But seriously folks, that's what light rail is all about: Urban redevelopment.

Exactly Kevs, which is why if you can buy a house now, I suggest SLP (hurry up and get here, LRT!).

Gas taxes do not go directly to transit.

The Metropolitan Councils rainy day fund has $19 million in its reserves. Tapping half of this fund would buy time for the 2009 legislature to decide whether fare increases or service cuts are appropriate or needed. This would buy time to find other funding opportunities in the long run.

Good point. People who can't understand "LIMITED STOP" probably can't be counted on to understand much of anything.

The majority of feight cannot be hauled on trains. The trains bounce around too much and break things, also most trains boxes are not cooled.

So Interstate freight vs railway isn't a very good comparison.

3) Transit congestion? Add more buses/trains to the existing lines.

Sure, then there's still the fact that it'd take many people hours to get to their job by bus and I'm not talking about suburbs. I live in Saint Paul and work in Roseville, It's an hour and a half to take the bus near to where I work. A three hour commute? No thanks.

Oh and they aren't done with raising the gas tax by the way. They're already bellyaching for another dime.

Previously rail had the capacity to haul anything
Not true. Think flat screen tv's, glassware, or pretty much anything breakable. Companies will never switch this type of frieght to trains. The claim rate is too high.

But they have significantly less capacity than they did even 30 years ago.

This is true, and not liekely to change without huge fights. No one wants a freight train after freight train roaring through their city at 3am.

jacc- I've just spent some time googling and I can't find anything about how it is safer to transport things like TVs on trucks than on rail. In fact, my understanding that at least passanger rail is pretty smooth and less likely to have an accident. What are your sources?

I know this is pedantic and dumb and I shouldn't even bring it up, but Metro Transit hasn't been MTC for a quite a while now. Like since the '90s sometime.

Really? I knew there was a downside to constantly moving from state to state, beyond not being able to make or maintain lasting relationships and essentially restarting your career every three years.

Fixed.

also, people used to have to give transportation more consideration in choosing where they lived. now that gas is so pricy, they probably will again soon. so if it's not easy or cheap to get to work, you might have to work somewhere else or live somewhere else.

ps, there's a super-fast express bus from DT mpls to roseville that's really frequent. st paul gets shafted for transit in general anyway.

I like the name of the bus system on Oahu. It's called: The Bus.

Oh also I raised the freight rail issue earlier to highlight that highways are not actually critical to interstate commerce. The fact that trucking is such a huge industry is yet another piece of social engineering to come from the highway system.

Oahu has a great bus system. I love how you can get off and on all day long.

If it is shipped by intermodal container, it can be safely shipped by rail
Let's not deal in fantasy land. Intermodal containers are mostly used for things coming off of International ships. I am simply telling it like it is, not like it could have been 30 years ago.
Companies will not pack their long haul shipments in intermodal containers. It's cost prohibitive.

I don't even see what your arguement is, aside from hypothetical freight advantages that could happen in an utopian railroad society, the majority of freight cannot and will not be cost effectively shipped on trains. Call your local freight forwarder or logistics company for further proof.

The fact that trucking is such a huge industry is yet another piece of social engineering to come from the highway system.

Lies.

It came to be so out of cost and efficiency. Take a masters level logistics course while you're still in bubbleland.

Intermodal containers are mostly used for things coming off of International ships.
You mean like most consumer goods made overseas... Foreign companies can and do pack their shipments in intermodal shipping containers. It is a question of scale. If you are only moving a dozen pallets or so, you choose trucks if you are a drop shipper you use containers. Fantasyland is in Anaheim not Long Beach.

Let's just agree that you both live in bubble-shaped fantasy land and return to civil discourse.

We can develop a bus/rail system to get JACC to work in less than 2 hours

I don't think anyone has said otherwise, but cost is an issue. We could have a bus that picked me up at my door and dropped me off at work in the same time it takes me to drive, but it won't happen.

"won't" is different that can't.

Just like we could make it so trains could ship the most delicate things in the world, but it becomes impractical and cost prohibitive.

So it won't happen.

We "can't" even figure out how to keep bus pricing cheap enough so that it's affordable for those that really need it and people want to talk about social engineering and redesigning an entire logistics system for which they have little understanding.

Please.

If it's going to be that sort of a discussion, I'm just going to pull my penis out and put both of you to shame.

So what do the contents of international shipping containers have to do with transit fares and whether I decide to bike, bus, or drive to work?

I know it's all related, but a pissing contest over who knows more about the logistics of shipping flat screen TVs from Japan seems a little off topic.

It's meant to. I had them tattoo the scariest paragraph in the Book of Revelations.

kal,

I'm pretty sure the shitty rush-hour service downtown is due to a couple things:
1) simple congestion- there are too many buses downtown at rush hour on the same few streets (not to mention a few of them share street space with cars
2) I the lights are timed as such to move cars along the highway feeder streets (the ones that go directly to ramps). Notice how the lights always seem to favour cross-streets on nicollet mall? (or Hennepin for that matter)

I think they should consider not stopping on every block downtown, actually. But I also think they need a bus tunnel under nicollet to bypass all the cross-streets (with limited stops/stations) too. What a fantasyland I live in, where someone would consider investing capital in improving transit! ha ha ha ha ):

driving is just peachy in jacc's world, so obviously it's a waste of time for anyone to do anything to fix the fact that the whole system is broken for most people. he's obviously an expert at everything and knows what's best for all of us and why nothing will ever work, because of how things are set up now.

not that things were ever different and changed to how they were now. nosiree, they were always like this.

So what do the contents of international shipping containers have to do with transit fares and whether I decide to bike, bus, or drive to work?

Agreed. I made the mistake of pointing out trains are not the answer for everything and that highways are crucial to freight.

What do they have to do with how you decide to get to work?
Possibly, a lot. When the cost of freight goes up so does the cost that you pay for almost everything. Which most likely affects how you decide to spend your money and money and commutes are related.

Look at the number of people that bike this year versus prior years.

Now, it's because the logistics are too difficult and expensive.

Right, put cooled cars onto trains would cost huge amounts of money and would packing everything in magic shock absorbant fairy dust.

The goal posts haven't moved, pretending everything isn't connected is foolish.

Nice try, though.

In my fantasy land, we'd all be able to think about where we want to go and just show up there. But my guess is that my logic is faulty because how many people really "want" to go to work?

And Kal, there are actually some busses that don't go through downtown. In mpls there is the 2,8,21,23,32,46, and 515

Agreed. I made the mistake of pointing out trains are not the answer for everything and that highways are crucial to freight.

And we're arguing that we can drastically shift away from that. Instead of truck after truck leaving Port of LA heading to Luverne, save the trucks for end point distribution from Chicago, Minneapolis, or even Fargo.

As for fragile freight, if we can develop "air ride equipped" trailers that can protect the cargo on our pot holed infrastructure, we can devise ways to protect it in rail cars.

Will anyone ever make a valid complaint about Metro Transit's service?

1) Wait. 2) Get on. 3) Pay. 4) Ride. 5) Get off.

It's really quite ingenious and simple, and no different from any other mass transit system I've ever ridden.

What is it that everyone (including Nick Coleman) takes issue with here?

I'm flummoxed.

jacc- still waiting for proof that we don't send electronics by train

tpitman, it's usually 1&3. 1 is too long and 3 is too much.

And 3 is complicated.

oh I assume you're an expert in logistics?
I am Wayne, with the 6 figure salary and real world job to back it up.
JACC: I didn't know you were a logician. That must have been very, very satisfying to be able to respond to that question!

Lunch: what is a reefer car? Or is it what I think it is.

cjc: I miss the MTC, because we used to say to each other "MTC you later" when we had to take the bus. We were dorks.

hey jacc, that article actually illustratred how critical freight rail is to the economy.

Oh. Boring.

Let's none of us be douches, please. Except Douchebag McFanne, who registered yesterday and hasn't posted yet.

Yes Alie, yes you are. I'm not sure what I am considering I drive an suv.

It doesn't matter, Alie as Wayne comes out spewing most days, whether anyone is disagreeing or not.

JACC: Interesting article - thanks for the link. And as dire as they make train congestion sound, the article also talks about overloading truck transport so why wouldn't we invest to upgrade our rail system if it saves us in the long run?

hey jacc, that article actually illustratred how critical freight rail is to the economy
I agree, I never said it wasn't.

It's just that it's a piece of the puzzle and expecting it to solve problems in other areas is unrealistic when they are having issues solving problems of their own.

@kc Call Manna. They are the largest distributer of flat screen tv's in the world and they are local.

Suddenly, I'm feeling very pro bus fare hike.

I found something KC:
One example of possibly misleading results due to failure to disaggregate is for the commodity class of Electrical Machinery". This class included both heavy electric motors and light consumer electronics. So railroads would likely haul mostly the heavy electrical machinery such as electric motors and transformers which they can do most efficiently. A lightweight type of "electrical machinery", consumer electronics, would go mostly by truck, where the truck can haul it with a moderately good energy-efficiency due to the lightness of the truck as compared to the much heavier rail cars. If rail had to haul this lightweight consumer electronics in heavy rail cars, the energy-intensity might be little if any better than hauling it by truck and would be much worse than for the heavy electric motors, etc. rail actually hauls.

So it's not even less efficient, just not as much MORE efficient.
sauce

so why wouldn't we invest to upgrade our rail system if it saves us in the long run?

That's a good question, for the same reason we don't build more highways. We'd have to destroy neighborhoods to build more tracks.

ALso, remember that little ordeal down in Rochester a few months back? People fight the freight trains tooth and nail. They don't like the increased traffic, especially in the middle of the night.

For the record, I am pro expanding all manners of transportation right down to building more bike paths. And yes, neighborhoods will be lost.

what a great little circle jerk you have going on here.

I guess arthappy was probably right.

We'd have to destroy neighborhoods to build more tracks.

After how much ROW was divested and still sits empty?
I doubt it.

I guess you can dish it out, but not take it, right?

MB, shhhhhh.

Also, don't that I talked about everyone when they left.

@wayne - 'no, alie, you're not a rich smug prick talking about why we can't do anything you don't like'

I'm smug? Now that's rich.

Wayne sometimes makes good points, but his venom can obscure them. Tone it down a bit, your signal is being obliterated by the noise. Winning an argument is more about points from the judges than K.O. punches.

Re: fare hike -> do it. It might get me a seat.

mb- what a monster!

You should have seen his wife. What at B*TCH. 8 mos pregnant and forcing me to take all the jam making equipment she washed and prepared for herself. Ugh...

What I'm getting at here is personally insulting someone because they don't agree with your transportation ideas is ludicrous and petty.

Wayne, let's not forget that you were the first to swing the asshole bat, which some of us think is both highly unneccessary and a rediculous over the top reaction to someone replying to your conjectures.

MB: Hell-2-the-Noes! I got other pinky doody heads to attend to. Plus, I liked arthappy's 2nd insult better - I think it was the finger fest of some such thing.

JACC: From the article, it talked about alleviating some of the congestion through technology vs. having to build more track - but my guess is that the solution would be a combination of the two.

no there really is a back-scratching club here that shuns anyone who doesn't come out and be irl bffs.

No, you like to think that so your martyr status raises even higher. I have disagreed with kc a lot in the past, but i've never called her a smug prick. Bixby and I disagreed on several things over the last few weeks, yet we still manage to smile and hug when we see each other. Why? Because it is the mature thing to do... you know, respecting someone's right to their own opinion.

oh mb honey, you've called me plenty of names in the past. I have nothing but love for you, baby.

zippy

Yeah, I'm one of those people

@Erica, I would be too if there was a decent route. I commuted for two months last year and found the 17 miles, one way, to be a death trap. It seems to me that bike path funding is more needed than bus funding.

I'd probably ride the bus more if no one sat next to me and everyone was silent (and no, I'm not being snarky).

Not to pour more gasoline on the fire, but you know who also challenged the status quo?

Hitler. That's who.

Hitler built the autobahn, they'd love him here!

wakka.

and here I was decrying fascism in america when I should be embracing it!

Re-elect GWB! 40 more years!

There are a number of people on this thread who agree with you
Even I agree with some of Wayne's transportation issues, but the simplistic one-size-fits all solutions combined with the-sky-is-falling reasoning just doesn't cut bacon with me.

I do become amused how often some people will try and pick one or two words out of a comment and make that the entire issue. One thing seems to allude some here every single day, context.

17 miles from Roseville to downtown St Paul?That seems hard to believe
Did I say downtown?
Did I say where in Roseville?

You are more than welcome to bike from my house to my job and clock it, mainly because my biggest concern in life is makeing mnblrmkr a believer.

It is getting to the point where they should begin some sort of distance penalty and/or bonus. Perhaps do away with "free transfers" or take some other steps to make it more reasonable for short distance riders.

I completely agree. I've been wishing they'd do a zoned-fare system for routes that go really far out of town for a while now.

Not a fair judge: I think mnblrmkr is a speed racer kind of biker, so he could probably get from Maplewood to Maple Grove in 12 minutes on bike.

JACC, your comment on bike paths reminds me, I came up with a brilliant idea this morning: heated bike paths! That way I could bike to work in the winter. (Now don't chide me, you winter bikers. [Thank god vlado seems to be lying low lately.] I'm afraid of falling. The cold I don't mind, it's the ice and snow on the ground.) Sure, it's a major undertaking, but if the economy is tanking so bad it's going to be a Depression, well, didn't they have all sorts of public works jobs created during the Depression? Who's with me on this?

I try to also remember that, when it's at all feasible for me to take public transit places, that there's more to it than just the cash-flow-out-of-my-pocket part.

The time-out-of-my-day part is a very real concern. The less-pollution part is worth something. The one-less-car-in-rush-hour-traffic part is worth something. The I'm-not-road-raging-right-now part is worth something. The different-experience-of-my-surroundings can go either way.

But I recognize that I have the luxury of having a little more to spend.

@JACC - Yeah, all those lovely lakes are a blessing and a curse.

Yep, every one of the 17 member council is appointed by the gubernator, but there is a residency requirement. The structure was designed in '67 when the metropolitan area and the governor were more likely to be of like mind. Now, not so much...

Annette Meeks is Met Council Member for District 7. District 7 is north Minneapolis, downtown and south-central. Some of her accomplishments include being deputy chief of staff for Newt Gingrich and served as chief executive officef for the Center of the American Experiment. Does this sound like someone her ward would elect?

I'd rather have trains than bike paths anyway

keep dreaming, heated bike path wanterz

How about those tubes they use in Futurama??? Is that a dream I have to let go of as well?

I actually think the theory of the Met Council is pretty progressive. The idea is to elevate the political discussion beyond just parochial city interests. I'm troubled that they have taxing power without being elected, but I wonder if having elected officials would make things better. We already have elected officials representing the area at the state level. Do we need another tier of elected officials? Not sure.

Since the key to Met Council board is the Gov, who do you MNspeakers would be Minnesota's best "transportation Governor?"

Names? Suggestions? Who should go after Pawlenty's job, with an eye on transport issues?

I understand the "elevate the political discussion beyond just parochial city interests" concern, Jason. I just wonder if that's happening when the Governor has sole appointment power. Even if they require confirmation by the state Senate, rejections of Governors' appointments gets pretty political awfully quick.

Maybe the Governor should have to make an appointment from a list of nominees selected by the Representatives of the affected legislative districts (or city/county officials, or some combination).

One vote for RT for Gov.

Anyone else?

I can't really pass judgment on whether Meeks is at odds with her district, seeing as I have no clue what positions she's taken on the Met Council. I know her background, but I don't know what she's done in her current position.

The council's mission is to enhance transit and regionalism, so I assume her job is to improve transit on the council rather than impede it.

I think it's time for wayne to either get off the cross or take a nap.

Or as I like to say, get off the cross - we need the wood.

oh mb honey, you've called me plenty of names in the past. I have nothing but love for you, baby.

And he does mean butt love.

HOly f*ck! I have to leave right NOW to catch the bus homE!!!!!

I get what you're saying, David... but since none of us really know what we're talking about, it might make sense to hold off slamming someone who may well be perfectly representing her district.

I came up with a brilliant idea this morning: heated bike paths! That way I could bike to work in the winter.

Twice this past winter, after snow storms, I noticed that the Vento bike trail (connecting downtown St. Paul with the Gateway near Lake Phalen) was completely plowed (or swept) and snow-free. This was before even a major artery like Arlington Ave. east of the lake had been plowed after one of those storms. Blew my mind.

Also, why do I have to sit through 5 lights on nicollet when the bus in front has some issue or physically challenged passenger.

So, people with physical disabilities should be left on the curb?

The waits though, seem to be more a function of, there simply isn't room for buses to maneuver around each other on the mall.

Since the key to Met Council board is the Gov, who do you MNspeakers would be Minnesota's best "transportation Governor?"

Names? Suggestions? Who should go after Pawlenty's job, with an eye on transport issues?

Me, obviously.

WAYNO FOR GOVERNOR!

A shiney electric train on every block!
He's not just a whiner, he's a winner!
His hot girlfriend wants to be Minnesota's First Squeeze!

I SO want to be your campaign communications director, wayne!

Good for you, wayne. Don't wait too long. We need younger leaders, with fresh ideas.

I think we need to have an underground system on par with Berlin and I know exactly how to save enough money to make it financially viable. We have tens of thousands of middle and high school "men" and "women" who have nothing better to do than watch American Idol and Big Brother. Let's put a pick and shovel in their hands, a carbide light on their heads and have them do something productive.

Better yet, make some money off the people digging by charging them for the privelege of participation in this new and novel form of exercise. Underground Health and Fitness llc uses the profits to get Wayne his TRAINS!

I can see it now, my logo will be (in tasteful red/white/blue, of course) a train platform with WAYNE '10 on top of it, with "TRAINS!" below.

BTW, the italics are meant to convey speed, because the trains will be speedy.

Tinklenberg, is he loses to Bachmann (ha!). He's a transit genius.

I know he was Kevin, but that doesn't disqualify him from the Guber spot.