Busdad, this might be question for you. I believe St. Louis county is proposing to put the building bond back on the ballot this spring (I think their is various local elections this spring). Is Metro trying to convince the county of something similiar? I think they could craft something tied into a stimulus plan. Smaller tax hikes (1/8 only) with a condition that they only come into effect if Feds provide funds in the stimulus package for construction. The county can even recraft their stimulus request - Light rail expansion inside and Hwy 141 outside of I-270
First, Metro isn't permitted to bring back any referendum for one year. The likely next vote would be spring 2010.
Second, the minimum funding worth attempting is 1/4 cent which would allow Metro to restore most of the service we cut effective March 30, 2009.
Third, there is some chance that that the City may put a 1/4 cent tax on the ballot in April. However, from my personal perspective, I would prefer that they do not if there is any chance of a transit district concept.
Fourth, an interesting concept is to implement a transit district. One approach is to reduce the size of the district impacted by the tax to include the City and something less than the full county. There are problems with this approach in terms of dealing with the existing taxes. Any transit district concept with require some State Legislation. A transit district adds a layer of bureaucracy, but could perhaps be designed to insure accountability. You could either have an elected board (for the District) or have an appointed board comprised of elected officials appointed by the City and the County from the Board of Aldermen and County Council.
The District would be permitted to operate service only through a contract, either private or a contract with Metro. The County could then be another accountability feature.
NO additional Metrolink can be build with an additional 1/4 cent sales tax. The City is probably not interested in another 1/2 cent. They provide a 3/4 cent tax now (1/4 prop M and 1/2 Transportation Sales tax). If the the 1/4 cent tax is ultimately enacted in the City, the city transit tax will be 1 % which is pretty much considering their other tax rates.
In my opinion, more Metrolink is not likely to happen until after 2035 when the Cross County Bonds are paid off. The only thing that could change that would if the State of Missouri agrees to get into funding funding public transit substantially. I would think that is going to be pretty tough to accomplish with the current State Legislature, the Hancock Amendment and Gas tax limitations. While anything to change, who have you heard from the local or State wide leadership that is pushing urban or even suburban issues.
Metro (as well as the State of MO, St. Louis County and the City of St. Louis) included $50 million in the stimulus solicitation. However, Congressman Costello has indicated that the chance of that happening is very very remote.
Finally, if the next referendum is to have more Metrolink, it must be 1/2 cent tax and we must keep the cost of the project so at least 50% of the proceeds of the tax can be retained for operations. You could perhaps do as you suggest, implement a 1/4 cent tax, and a 1/8 tax that is contingent upon obtaining Federal and State Funding to build a new alignment.
Metro must also develop a formal "long range" plan that defines the eventual bus and rail strategy. This strategy must be consistent with East-West Gateway's long range plan. Instead of just studying these alignment, they should adopt North Side-South Side, an extension west and push Cross County South to connect with the south end of the Northside-Southside.
These may not all be federally fundable, but they should pursued far enough to have a good cost and well defined alignment. (It's possible that a commuter rail option could be used to feed into Cross County from the west. Denton County is planning a commuter rail feeder into the new Green Line under construction.)
Metro should also make some investments in the County for Transit Center and high quality bus service.
Now, what I am suggesting is way too expensive and finding a source of revenue even to save what we have already done seems an impossibility. We really need $350 million annual in revenue with annual inflationary growth to run a decent transit system.
We will soon have $180 million budget. This year the budget is $221 million. I have a very hard time being optimistic.
