last week or maybe 2 was 6 years since EWG approved Metro's "Moving Transit Forward" (metro board approved it 2/12/2010)
and if i had to grade it i would say its been a tremendous failure.

Short-Range (1-5 years)
Restoring services cut last year to increase coverage and frequency back to levels before the reductions
Planning and design for the next MetroLink extension that would be determined by EWGCG
Two Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) routes. BRT offers higher speed, high capacity service (also to be determined by EWGCG)
Improved passenger amenities and technology

Did they increase coverage and frequency?

Planning/Design for next MetroLink- Nope

BRT- Nope- they wont even consider it at this point

Improved amenities/Tech- probably not.

Lost passengers- yes 15% decline in the last 2 year.s



We are in this phase now.

Medium-Range (5-10 Years)
Construction and operation of one light-rail expansion route
Additional BRT routes
Additional transit centers

on this one i guess the North County Transit Center crosses off that one...other 2- nope

Long-Range (10-30 years)
Planning, construction and operation of a second light-rail alignment
Begin planning and engineering for a third light- rail extension

Clearly wont get to either of these

So in conclusion, time for new leadership at Metro?

So in conclusion, time for new leadership at Metro?

Hard to argue against it.

They substantially restored the service cuts. Frequency is still pathetic on the vast majority of routes. The only notable increase is to the 70 Grand.

They have real-time bus tracking, so that's a tech improvement.

They've made some safety enhancements at Metrolink stations.

Have or are planning improvements to bus transfer centers.

Obviously they're way behind on the Metrolink expansion promise. Is that on EWG or Metro?

^ technically/publicly its on EWG but behind the smoke screen EWG board doesn't move unless Metro says move.

They plan for 15 years and 800k miles out of each bus, more than other agencies go for.

Metro has been getting a lot of bus replacements through the CMAQ program at East West Gateway.

Metro is a joke and it was confirmed when John Nations, former mayor of Chesterfield, was selected as CEO. Metro gets an obscene amount of local money, even more local money than regions that are expanding their transit systems. Not only that, they have done very little to get creative with financing or seek state funding. Maybe if they actually came to the state with a reasonable long term plan, with ya know, financial projections and timelines for system expansion, they could actually get the state on board with funding. Lets hold our breathes that new federal guidelines will make states contribute to public transportation, but even then I could see Metro screwing off the money.

I would suggest you check out their annual report before you criticize too much to see what they are working with financially. As one example, compared to Portland's transit authority, Metro serves the same geography on about half of the revenue. Is it Metro's fault that sprawl is so rampant yet they must serve the sprawled areas? Metro receives a pittance from the state. They attempted to get planning funds for their BRT lines but were unsuccessful. And with dropping ridership... Too bad most St. Louisans are too stuck up (or worse) to consider stepping foot on a bus. Metro has real time tracking information now and are (yes, still) working on the new pass system.

Their Chesterfield leadership... I don't get that either.

^ sprawl and the land metro covers wasn't something that developed since Moving Forward was adapted...it was known when they made MF and the promises in it.

goat314 wrote:Maybe if they actually came to the state with a reasonable long term plan, with ya know, financial projections and timelines for system expansion, they could actually get the state on board with funding.

This seems really unlikely to me. In my experience Republican legislators, even in the broader StL area, are ideologically opposed to spending state money on transit. They don't know or care anything about Metro's financial projections.

dbInSouthCity wrote:^ technically/publicly its on EWG but behind the smoke screen EWG board doesn't move unless Metro says move.

You think so db? I view it the other way around. I think it's up to the tax-payers and pols to drive and fund expansion and then Metro to execute on it. For instance with the County right now, Stenger is making the study happen, the County will have to decide to shift funding from debt payments to capital investments, after that has happened some combination of EWG and Metro will apply for federal funding, and then it'll be up to Metro to build and run it. So it's really up to the Country to drive the process. Same goes for Slay and the City. Metro can execute all the studies they want, but ultimately it's up to the pols and people to generate the popular and financial support.

But, I might just be reaffirming your point. By quietly sitting on the sidelines and waiting for others to advocate and execute on expansion they haven't succeeded in "moving transit forward."

Making Cortex Station a reality and seeing actual tangible progress on a County line (wherever it is), would go a long way toward turning failure into fulfillment (albeit on a slower timeline than advertised).