Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Streetcars give a lift but at who's expense?

Tampa FL - A Wall Street Journal story that was picked up by many papers focuses on Tampa's streetcar system in an attempt to show how having a streetcar will spur massive development. It at least acknowledges that the $68 million streetcar line in Tampa as a transportation tool is a total dud.

Unfortunately, the story by Thaddeus Herrick of the WSJ barely mentions anything about how the massive development is funded. It sings the praises of using streetcars as a development tool while glossing over the fact that the taxpayer is shelling out billions of dollars to developers each year across this country. From tax breaks, grants, low interest loans that are often never repaid and other sweetheart deals, the cost to lure developers often is never recovered in tax revenue from the development.

The public is routinely spun a tale of how a rail line will spur development on its own. Sadly that isn't the case in most instances. The public pays for the development through the various sweetheart deals that the politicians create.

I would love to see the true amount that a developer is given in taxpayer money through various incentives versus the cost of the actual development for transit projects. It's a closely guarded secret it seems as I have tried to obtain this data and have been stonewalled every step of the way. I have been told off the record (but haven't been able to verify with my own eyes) that many times the tax breaks for developers on transit oriented development exceed the actual cost of development. That really doesn't surprise me given other sweetheart deals in non-transit project related development where this was in fact true.

The taxpayers need to understand that the development isn't free. They are paying for it though their taxes. While transit systems struggle, police and fire are being cut back and other other important services curtailed, a nice chunk of that money is given to the developer in one form or another. Either as a grant or loan or through having their tax burden greatly slashed or even eliminated. The taxpayer is left holding the bag either way.

Then there is the congestion argument once again:
While streetcars lack speed and mobility, proponents say the role they play in urban development makes them a worthy transportation choice. They (proponents) argue that by helping to draw development to urban areas such as downtowns, and by providing a transportation link in those areas, streetcars reduce the need for extra lanes of highways to the suburbs and limit the need for cars in and around downtowns.

Actually that isn't true. No streetcar line built in the US has reduced traffic congestion. It's had the opposite effect of causing more traffic congestion. Proponents refuse to understand that easily observable and documented fact.

The final part of the article goes into how Tampa's streetcar line is losing $1 million a year. It's attracting tourists but I must ask, does the revenue from the approximately 195,000 tourists that visit the Tampa area each year and are reported to ride the line cover the losses of running the line? Obviously the answer is no since the line is losing $1 million a year and the city has decided not to pony up more money to keep it running. If the line was such a boon to the city coffers, they'd have no problem stepping up and pouring more money into keeping the line operating.

The bottom line is that the WSJ article is just a bunch of pro-rail rhetoric designed to help generate support for getting more streetcar lines slapped into various cities. A real story would have included the cost to taxpayers for subsidizing the private developers. If the developers truly believed the streetcar was a draw for their development as Fida Sirdar, president of Key Developers Group LLC stated in the article, they wouldn't need sweetheart deals to build there.

No comments: