Michael Sanera, a policy director for the John Locke Foundation, urged the Raleigh City Council on Tuesday not to support a transit plan that he called misguided and too expensive.
But Sanera wasn't afforded the same speaking privileges that he got in a similar appearance this month before the Apex Town Council. In Apex, Sanera was given equal time to Wake County Manager David Cooke and TTA Director David King, who are traveling around the county to build support for their transit blueprint.
Sanera got three minutes in Raleigh, the same as anyone else who shows up to the citizens hearing portion of the meeting. And it came two weeks after the City Council heard from Cooke and King.
Sanera said he was disappointed that he wasn't allowed to make a rebuttal, and he questioned whether Raleigh leaders are open to opposing viewpoints.
The difference in treatment isn't a surprise. As a suburban-minded community with a fraction of the transit riders in Raleigh, Apex has been skeptical of the pro-transit movement. That's why the Apex council was willing to hear from Sanera, a right-leaning transit critic who has assembled a presentation that he calls "a devastating critique" of the transit plan.
The John Locke Foundation says it agrees with the need for improved bus-based service. However, it says the plan "as now proposed, is not technically or financially feasible and is unreliable as the basis for decisions regarding transit investment in Wake County."
Raleigh is eager to move forward. The city wants Wake County commissioners to commit to a referendum, ideally on the November ballot, on a half-cent sales tax for transit improvements.
The transit blueprint is divided into two parts: What the county is confident it can pay for, and what the county can only hope for.
The core tier would expand local and commuter bus service and build a rush-hour, 37-mile commuter rail service from Garner to Durham. It would also provide amenities such as park-and-ride lots, sidewalks, signage and bus shelters, benches and other improvements.
The enhanced tier would build light rail service from downtown Cary through downtown Raleigh, up to Millbrook Road in north Raleigh. The route would cover 13.9 miles.
City Council members listened to Sanera's presentation but did not ask any questions.
Comments
Yet another waste of taxpayers' money.
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 16:29 — HenryMillerA "commuter rail service from Garner to Durham?" Oh, please... Who commutes between Garner and Durham? Why would anyone want to? A "light rail service from downtown Cary through downtown Raleigh?" I've lived in Cary for almost twenty years and have been to downtown Raleigh perhaps half a dozen times--for most people outside of Raleigh, there's little reason to go to Raleigh.
A few years ago, the former Mayor of Raleigh, Mr Meeker, was pushing exactly this sort of proposal (perhaps the same one--I don't know) not because it would benefit the majority of the people of Wake County, who would be expected to pay the bills, but because it would benefit the city of Raleigh. It would, Mr Meeker insisted, make it easier for commuters to work in Raleigh and shoppers to shop in Raleigh. But those assertions utterly ignore the facts that most of us wouldn't benefit in the slightest from subsidising the commutes of those commuters and very few people go out of their way to shop in Raleigh when there are many better and more convenient places to shop in the areas surrounding Raleigh.
This sort of expensive boondoggle, on a national scale, is a big factor in the financial straits presently hammering the country. It's right up there with the foolish proposals to build "high speed rail" between cities already served perfectly well by highways--and "high speed" is in quotes because the door-to-door time of the proposed system is no faster than using the extant highways.
A lot of years ago, Nikita Khrushchev said "Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river." This transit proposal is a great example of that--they want to build all these railroads despite the fact that there's no one really wants to ride them.
public transit needs: a different approach
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 22:18 — intobserverAbout 20 years ago I was keen on the idea of transit development in the area of light rail in the Triangle. A couple of developments have occurred which cause me to think differently now.
First, the advent of the internet has brought the ability to transact many activities from home, to include both work and education.
Second, the current global economic and financial crisis has unfolded with its related government debt level increases, unemployment, income stagnation, decreasing property and other asset values, etc. Government, corporate, and individual constraints are increasing rapidly with no relief in view.
Any rational person could conclude that the vast majority of travel taking place now within this and all municipal areas in the Country is related to people going to work or school, so light rail transit would primarily serve those individuals.
Existing activities in government and business offices, classrooms and other centralized locations needs to move to people’s homes. Many office workers are already doing this on a flexible basis. That needs to change to become everyday. The traditional mindset is that people have to come to an office to work or to a classroom to learn. This includes, but is not limited to, things such as supervising others or meetings, and attending lectures in educational institutions. Creative educators have implemented online education, but it could be expanded. Televised education has existed since the 1950s. The traditional concept that people have to come to an office to work or have to learn in a classroom needs to evolve significantly.
In summary, what really needs to happen not only locally, but also nationally is searching for and finding alternatives to the need for individual transportation to and from central locations, rather than spending vast sums of the people's money we don’t have to support it.
Government, to include education, and business leaders need to expedite this process with all due speed and diligence. Proactive leadership in honestly presenting and implementing this is essential. We need to be thinking more creatively and connecting the dots about our present actions and addressing the future.
Limited resources, both present and future, are staring us and the world in the face. We need to start considering and doing more about this now.