Interesting article, and it makes a lot of sense. A rail system is only as good how close a person is near a train stop. A person living in Clearwater amnd wanted toi go to St Pete"s would be great. But living in the :Largo area could pose a problem
getting to to a train stop. But, no judgement can be made 'till the full details are know. Until then the best approach is to look, listen, and learn, then make a judgement call

I have been reading and re-reading this for the past few minutes and i can honestly say I've never seen such a column so filled with half truths and distortions. For starters, how can you compare a single starter line with a fully built out road system? Of COURSE it won't go everywhere. Sheesh.

One other thing: don't you think it makes sense to be able to easily connect at stops to get where you want to go? The word "intermodal" isn't a buzzword. It's simple common sense.

We will be asking about light rail in a new Pinellas County poll later this month, and yes we will be including the word "taxes" in our questions.

Last year we asked St Petersburg voters about light rail and there was strong support, but we did not include the word "taxes" in our question. It will be interesting to see how adding that word affects the results.

I recently had a nice conversation with Commissioner Welch about this subject, and he brought up that in 2016 the PSTA bus service will be out of money and will have to scale back. It is currently only funded by property taxes, and not even from all Pinellas County property owners. So, just to maintain our current level of bus service there will need to be some kind of increase in revenues. That is completely without any discussion of light rail, that would be extra.

People seem to think that roads pay for themselves when they don't (local roads are paid for with property taxes and general revenues, in addition to state and fed gas taxes) , while transit should be profitable. This double standard sets us up for funding crises for public transportation. A lot of people also seem to think that "everyone" drives but that's not the case. A substantial number of people are physically unable to drive (impaired or seniors), or can't afford to drive and use public transportation to get to work or simply want a choice. The point is that any modern society works best when there is a portfolio of choices to meet all the needs of the community.

Very short sighted. Why are Florida residents so afraid to "walk" outside. People all over this Country walk or bike to rail stations. With the growing population in Pinellas and Hillsborough Counties transportation has to be talked about. Could imagine going over the Howard Franklin at 5 on a train non-stop while cars are sitting on the bridge. That's worth a 10min walk and $10 a year tax increase!

Rail can work yet it has a horrible precedent in Florida in the TriRail in S. Florida. The planners and promoters of rail here are hurting the cause by focusing on a Clearwater to St Pete route and associating a tax increase for this line that will be used by a marginal amount of people. TriRail has the conditions that Doc Webb identifies and as a result, only 12,000 or so riders use it daily (in Florida's truly most congested region) Car traffic is backed up, big time, when the at-grade train goes through Miami-Dade-Broward counties at crossroads. There are numerous accidents, too at these car/train intersections. Back to Tampa Bay....it is highly doubtful that a train proposal to Clearwater will have any influence on keeping the Rays in Pinellas County. We need to create a much less expensive rapid-transit bus line to Clearwater to test the waters and look seriously at getting the main problem solved in the region....Tampa/Pinellas traffic, primarily on the bridges. Other regions situated on such bodies of water have municipal ferries. We should, too.

GaryFla: Light is a reality in many communities and it's a success, drawing riders and economic activity that generates jobs and additional tax revenues for the community at large. So, yes, I would support paying my taxes to do this.

What do you mean by economic feasibility? Do you mean profitability? Transit will never make money in the classic sense. Transit used to be privately owned and oerated as a for-profit business until that modeal was destroyed by taxpayer supported roads. transit operators went out of business or had their services taken over by the public to keep the service going. This is where we are today.

That said, I think transit (including light rail) performs a valuable function and should be supported, just as we support streets, roads, Interstate highways, ports aviation and so on.

Bill:
The complete fallacies in your comment is firstly, people do not think roads pay for themselves,and secondly a modern society accepts portfolios of choices (such as public transporation) based on their individual economic assesment of the need and desireability of such services. Do you really believe a society is not modern if it doesn't meet all the needs of the community? Perhaps you meant to say a modern society works best when it meets the needs determined and approved by the majority of the community?

I'm wondering how many of you against light-rail have ever lived in a city that has a good system. It's amazing how quickly it becomes a part of the economy and culture. I've lived in Washington DC, Baltimore, and Denver, and have spent considerable work time in Boston. All are very successful, but were subject to the same misplaced reluctance I'm hearing here. Think about a light rail from Clearwater to downtown St. Petersburg, or from downtown St. Pete to downtown Tampa. The commercial, economic, and cultural benefits are obvious. Get with it Tampa Bay!

....focus on Tampa to St Pete.......we just spent billions on improving US 19 to Clearwater......that rail proposal to C'water will hurt our local beaches...St Pete Beach, Treasure Island, Pass-a-Grille, etc.....and please know that there are many of us out here who support, wholeheartedly, a move to better transit options besides buses and cars yet are very skeptical of a train from St Pete to Clearwater....and know, also, that municipal ferries aren't luxuries...they are necessities on bodies of water like Tampa Bay and in many cities around the globe, they are an integral part of the transit mix. San Francisco, Seattle, NYC, Sydney, Australia, etc......Chicago has an extensive mix of boats to navigate their downtown via the Lake Michigan shoreline and the Chicago River. Be wary of at-grade trains in crowded urban environments, too as other regions either go above or below grade when trains get into densely populated areas.....i.e. the Loop in Chicago and subways.....google accidents at any urban rail line in any city and you will be amazed at how many people die or are injured at railroad crossings in cities.....again, not against upgrading urban transit options.....not whatsoever, just urging some open minded discussions.....

Have any of the negatives or the author ever been to Europe or Lived in rail cities?. I travel extensively abroad and in larger cities with rail and always choose to increase the revenue in those particular locations that are closest to the rail, increasing their economy. I've even chosen not to vacation in a spot because they don't have good rail transit to get around easily. It may only start from Clw-St.Pete but it would continue just as the rest of progression in society will. I'll pay a few bucks extra to walk or ride my bike to my station, to ride my rail with ease in no time flat, and yes, carting my bags along. It's done everywhere else and look at the health and obesity problems they Don't have, because they walk! Accidents happen everywhere. I was just in densely populated NYC where a Taxi hit and killed a horse and the person in the carriage in Central Park! If you start with St Pete- Clw it's only a matter if time before the beaches are added on, then addition to Tampa, Orlando, statewide. If you build it they will come. Has everyone forgotten this state is Vacationers Paradise for not only other Americans but International Families and we do not have a good system for them? I'd like people's opinions who actually have lived with a rail system to respond. Those who have not really have no clue how great they are. Its just my opinion.

NYC, Tokyo, Philly, and other cities have been my residences and daily commutes on public transportation have been a part of my experiences there......Lonny, comparing Florida urban design with Europe is moot and, again, it is realistic to support forward thinking with mass transportation here and not support a rail line to Clearwater, which will use up a disproportionate amount of tax revenues to support. The TriRail in S. Florida is always in the red and seeking more revenue. It is a not a one-size-fits-all prescription of mass transit options and, again, comparing a taxi accident in Manhattan to a light rail proposal to Clearwater....(Clearwater?...why?) is not relevant

speaking of NYC....they just installed a monorail to JFK airport.....because they are much, much safer and less expensive to maintain........and nary is there an at-grade urban rail line in any of the five boroughs until the density of population decreases....and, by the way, did you take the Staten Island Ferry while there? It's generally packed with commuters and visitors

At grade little densely places that are moot such as Rome, Barcelona, etc? Why are you even speaking about Batobus? I think any yes thinking is forward. Nays are stays. Relevance to taxi was anothers' comment to google traffic vs rail accidents. They happen on every transit. I went to U of M. Very familiar with all types. The high speed was shut down, although in my opinion was a huge mistake for vacationers and locals alike. Not all are a perfect fit but its better than none. It would grow. Do you have special interest in water taxi Rider?

FYI the reason and location of the most expensive auto rates in Florida and our auto insurance costs in Florida is the highest rates in the nation? Drivers in Miami Dade County. They cause auto accidents for the 10k PIP. Well documented. Can't sue the rail if you can't hit someone with the 500 dollar Junkers they use to purposely and collaboratively use to swindle the system. A poor example of location.

I noticed at the bottom of the article is a link to "Stop the Lense" petition as well. Enough said I guess.

GaryFla: I said transit will not make a profit because we support highways to the near exclusion of all else. That open ended support for roads---with a LOT of non-user taxes---is one big reason why transit and passenger rail does not make a profit. That does not mean we should not have public transportation. Just because something does not turn a profit doesn't mean it isn't needed.

Again, no mode of transportation is self supporting. Not highways, not aviation, not transit, or intercity rail. There may be user fees, but they do not come close to paying what it costs to support the need. By the way, here's a little tidbit: since 2008 Congress has propped up the Highway Trust Fund to the tune of $53 billion, with billions more on the way. Gas taxes do not bring in enough and that means non-user revenues must be used.

Finally, as others ask: have you ever been on a light rail train? I'd bet not and if driving is all you've known, it's not surprising that you have the views you do. Maybe you should take a ride on a light rail train in another city. It might be a learning experience.

And no, I don't think a society is modern if it does not meet the needs of all.

BTW, I met a lot of people who think roads pay for themselves and are quite adamant in that belief. Not a fallacy.

Lonny, wow, you don't need to start name calling! My gosh, chill.....and open your mind to various modes of mass transit......there is a trend to go above ground in order to prevent deaths and impairment. If you really think that the route to Clearwater is the place to start, what are your objections to a rapid transit bus line with a dedicated lane on US 19? It will accomplish the same goal, be much less expensive, and will cater to the commuters and occasional visitors who go that route to Clearwater and vice versa. My gosh, dude, Europe's trains were installed long ago and things have changed since then. The world standard in mass transit is the maglev monorail in Shanghai. You didn't address why you think that NYC went with a monorail on Long Island instead of an at-grade train....there is more open space on Long Island than there is in Pinellas so why would they do this? Please try to respond without any slams and what experience have you had with municipal ferries? They are a vital part of mass transit in more evolved cities and regions around the world and can work here....and, no, I have no vested interest in a water taxi, just amazed that Tampa Bay doesn't have one considering the constant traffic jams on the bridges and the response by the transpo planners?....cater to the suburban commuters with a less efficacious transit line, an at-grade train. Let's keep this respectful.

I think given the population density in Pinellas County this would be quite successful. I had to work in Charlotte, NC for a couple of years, during the time which they were launching their own light rail. The "old guard" whined and moaned but at the end of the day the light rail was wildly successful and highly praised this summer at the DNC. Furthermore, what is wrong with having less cars on the road? Reduced smog and pollution? Since when is that a bad thing? Sure you might have to drive a mile or two to your local light rail station, but that is far less than the 20 some odd miles you might be driving to Tampa regardless.

The metro rail line in Charlotte began with the resurrection of the authentic streetcar line downtown....which was so successful that it paid for itself in six years.....and sparked an awareness of aesthetic mass transit and the need for expansion...the downtown line is now incorporated into the suburban rail line that goes downtown....we need to focus on a similar approach here and accept nothing less than a cooperative plan with Hillsborough while being prudent with the scarce transit funds for Pinellas, not to be squandered on an inaugural line to Clearwater.....not the best place to start......keep in mind, too, that the global auto industry is finally realizing some exponential growth in green technologies and flex time/home offices may be on the upswing too.....there are a whole lot of soccer Mom's too (Dad's also) who need their cars at work in order to get to school well before quitting time at the office to pick the kids up....when most suburban/urban rail lines were created in the States, there were stay-at-home Mom's and Dad's, generally, did the 9 to 5 bit. The times, they have a-changin'!!!!.....factors to consider when evaluating our evolution into better mass transit...the "one size fits all" urban rail line is deficient and may not be the best option to begin our transition.....we really could be the catalyst for a high speed monorail, Shanghai style that goes across all of Central Florida, servicing Tampa Bay along the way (Orlando metro, too).....

Gary Fla: Yep, a lot of fools.

GaryFla: OK, you've been around. You offer an interesting theory, but I think the real world experience is a bit different. Powerful interests have worked and continue to work to keep us driving and we have junked what was the world's greatest public transportation system in the process, one that was privately owned and operated in favor od publically owned roads and airports. Read "Getting There" by Stephen Goddard. Fast forward to the current day and some disturbing trends emerge: Airlines are cutting back service to many communities, state transportation departments are caught in a double whammy of declining revenues and increasing costs, the federal gas tax is not paying the cost of the highway trust fund, intercity bus service has declined drastically, local transit is undefunded and is under constant threat of cutbacks and Amtrak is carrying record numbers of passengers on a subskeletal system. Bottom line: we have to pay for transportation but we have not faced that fact.

Bill:
I was wondering how long it would be before you would assert the conspiratorial ruse. What I described is in fact what is currently real world. As to Amtrak carrying record passengers, has such an increase in any way diminished the outragious subsidy which Amtrak receives from our taxes? Bottom line, we are indeed paying for transporation on a level which the majority of the population is willing to support from a combination of user fees, local, state and Federal taxes.

roads and airports are heavily subsidized.....so, GaryFla, is there not a double standard when you address the rail component of national transportation? Amtrak shares rails with private companies and always has to yield to them, which jeopardizes arrivals and departures and sets a negative tone about train travel. The national rail system, too, could be upgraded at a fraction of the cost of installing new rails, which would allow Amtrak's present fleet to achieve 110-150 mph, similar to the successful and packed Acela line in the Northeast. These speeds would compensate for the trains yielding to commercial trains and would increase demand for short distance travel like Tampa to Miami, Detroit to Chicago, Atlanta to Charlotte, etc.......so, if you delve into the details about our train system, you might be surprised at the missed potential that continues with Amtrak, due to political quagmire

Bill-Jeannie:
Bill:
I'll leave you with some additional thoughts. It is incomprehensive to most sensible taxpayers to seriously consider additional transportation proposals to spend additional taxpayer monies that completely ignore the economic impact. These are not the best of economic times to consider such spend-it-now-benefits-will-come- later transportation proposals. I do not personally object to the concept of lite rail, but not at a totally uneconomic (both service and monetary) result (meaning unwelcome, unjustified taxpayer cost).

With respect to my Amtrak comments, it was you who brought up this example, not me. As to those specific subsidies you also mentioned, I expect in the not to distant future all of these, and most others involving Government largess, will have to face the fact that we simply can not afford to continue spending beyond our means. Hopefully our voices will be heard when it comes time to determine how and where our spending will be throttled back.

Jeannie:
I lived in Elizabeth, NJ for a number of years and am very familiar with Amtrak services. If your proposal made a shred of economic sense, do you really think the political quagmire is to blame for not implementing your proposals to reduce the subsidy?

Both you and Bill fail to see the need to at least put forth the total economic benefits/costs when considering such proposals before we the voters decide on spending additional transportation taxpayer dollars.

Ciao.

GaryFla: Ok, then let's put all modes on the same playing field and have them all pay for themselves. There. Problem solved. All Interstates are toll roads and gas taxes go up to replace non-user support, such as general revenue funds or property taxes. How's that?

Bill:
I'll leave it to the other readers to determine if what you propose makes any sense at all.

Good point, Bill!!!!!.....and, GaryFla....one point was missed in your thoughtful retort (not being sarcastic here!!!).....Acela high speed trains in the Northeast do boost the economic viability and competitiveness of rail...between the cities just far enough away that driving is cumbersome yet close enough that air travel is expensive and time consuming....enter, or re-enter urban rail travel between cities that the airlines have been eliminating as stops and bus travel is....well, it's bus travel!!!! Enough said! Have a great Sunday all!!!!

Rider: Thanks! Fair is fair!

I have used light rail in numerous cities in Europe; it works, and it alleviates what would otherwise be an increasingly untenable situation of seriously crowded (to the point of hopelessly dysfunctional) roads.

Government is what the people want it to be, and government at all levels already "subsidizes" all forms of transportation: (1) no local or county roads are built, or maintained, without cost to taxpayers; (2) the air traffic system was created and is maintained by federal revenues; (3) the regional rail system is kept alive by Federal and sometimes State revenues.

The idea, proposed by some, that no transportation system should exist with government support is ludicrous; we all have a stake in our national transportation structure, and we will succeed, or fail, depending upon how well we execute those various parts of that system.

What is needed is a dispassionate and objective study of our comprehensive transportation networks.

Part 2:
Make no mistake: light rail is big business, BIG business. These projects can run into the billions and summon very powerful forces to sway political and public option. Additionally, these powerful forces have two very important allies: federal funding and light-rail envy. The prospect of federal funding generates some very predictable behaviors from both citizens and politicians: “if they are giving out money, let’s make sure we get it!” This thinking crosses party lines and is rarely tempered by the project’s total price tag or ongoing costs; as politicians see money spent in their district as ensuring reelection and/or a positive legacy. Light-rail envy of other cities is equally as powerful. What politician or citizen wouldn’t want to be part of a “world-class city”; since light-rail is commonly viewed a badge of membership to that club.

Part 3:
All that said, there are some (albeit few) areas where light rail could make sense. These have a very specific combination of geography, culture, demographics, population density, lack of competitive transit options, etcetera. My general understanding tells me our region is not one of these places. Experts might disagree, and certainly the powerful forces described above will ultimately determine our fate.
Bibliography:
“Urban Light Rail Fail” Warren Meyer, Forbes Magazine, Sept 21, 2010
“Marge vs. The Monorail” season 4/episode 12, The Simpsons, Jan 1994

Part 1:
On a personal level, I love the idea of light rail. Hopping on a sleek train and being whisked to my destination without the hassle of driving or parking seems so hip, so European- just plan sexy.

Unfortunately, reality is much more convoluted. The few domestic examples of successful light rail projects are dubious, as the definition of “successful” tends favor subjective metrics over objective metrics (e.g. ridership satisfaction surveys versus measured reduction in traffic congestion). There is a good reason for this: objective measures usually paint a bleaker picture. In most cases, cost per passenger mile (capital and operating) relative to other forms of transit (car, bus) is usually much higher. Optimistic ridership projections rarely materialize, and the promise of economic development around rail stops simply doesn’t happen very often.

good analysis by S. Ripley......what has happened with the idea of installing rapid transit buses to Clearwater from St Pete along US 19? Buses aren't sexy like Euro light rail...yet may be much more utilized here and a much better use of scarce transit funds.....

Rider, that's a good question. We need express bus service and transit hubs where people can easily transfer to local or feeder buses. I'm all for light rail, but we need more than that. We also need regional rail and bus service, this being such a widespread area and we need a direct cross-bay transit link for both buses and light rail. Portland OR is building such a bridge over the Willamette River for transit, pedestrians and bikers...no cars!

Bill - How many of those are taxpayer subsidized? What percentage of their budget? has the percentage been going up or down? what trend?

Dan: Wow...short answer: they are all subsidized, just like every other mode of transportation. I don't know the percentages, except to say that transit has broken records not seen since the 1950's and that light rail has led the increase. I'd suggest going to the American Public Transit Website (APTA) website for more info.

Correction: that should be "broken RIDERSHIP records not seen since the 1950's"

Re: Dan Pressler's question about light rail subsidies. Again, ALL FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION ARE SUBSIDIZED. Subsidyscope.com averaged nationally the states and federal government are paying only 51% of highway capital investment and expenses out of motor-fuel taxes and other user fees. The rest comes in the form of subsidies using revenue from taxes unrelated to motoring—sales, income, property, excise—whatever a particular state can draw from—and at the federal level the subsidies come in the form of periodic bailouts in which Congress simply writes a big check to the Highway Trust Fund whenever revenue from the Federal Motor Fuel Tax dips ($53 billion since 2008).

I never—EVER—hear any commentators or critics using the term “highway subsidy” or “giveaway to the highway interests” or “highway-contractor welfare queens.” Yet this sort of thing has been going on since the 1960s, when Eisenhower had Congress write a big check when he learned the new federal gasoline tax created by his 1956 Interstate Highway Act was bringing in so little revenue that his Interstate network, which was supposed to take 20 years to complete, actually would take 50.

The fiscal hard-liners want to kill or cut public transportation, but nobody ever utters a peep about highway subsidies. //rant off//

Minneapolis-StPaul light rail services a seven county area similar in many ways to what is proposed here. It is particularly convenient for working people, shoppers and sports fans to the baseball stadium and basketball arena Clean, quiet, fast, and a focus for small business development all along the route(s). Car and bike parking are available, too. Other than most conservatives being old men, I am not sure why it has become a conservative position to oppose light rail and high speed rail as part of a comprehensive transportation system. Oh well, like other obsolete positions held by them, time will take care of bringing needed changes.

with all these comparisons between taxpayer support for roads vs light-rail what percentage of people use the road directly (car/bike) or indirectly (bus/taxi) vs what percentage would be willing & able to use the light-rail.

I live in safety harbor but work over by the hard rock cafe & i have looked into a bus ride but I could get a bus early enough to be at work at 7:00 as the commute would be 2-3 times as long as it is now. *Maybe* an elevated train (disney style monorail?) from st pete to clearwater to TIA to netpark with no other stops. Put commuter lots at those four spots & you might have something that would work if it ran frequently enough with low enough fares & low enough tax-based subsidies.

If the need for light rail between St. Petersburg and Clearwater is so great, why don't we have Express buses serving those customers now?

If "the majority" of citizens support light rail and the added taxes it brings, then why did PSTA spend $300,000 on a Public relations firm (Tucker Hall) to do a PR campaign to convice us rail is "good?"

How is it that the proponents of light rail can confiscate our tax dollars to promote their plan, while opponents get nothng?

Installing a rail line to Clearwater is not solving the major problem we have in the Bay Area and smacks of that old and tired argument and rivalry...Pinellas vs Hillsborough. US 19 to Clearwater has undergone multi million dollar improvements and congestion on that road is not a problem. With the bridges built over intersections along the route, installing light rail is increasing in difficulty and expense....and to answer how a rail to Clearwater would hurt our beaches...it may draw visitors in St Pete to visit Clearwater instead of St Pete Beach, etc as many visitors come here for a day trip. I support the proposal for a real, municipal water taxi from Tampa to St Pete and a real streetcar that connects to that line here (like it does in Tampa) that goes to our beaches. Now that is getting around in style and is pragmatic, too. Spending all this money on a train to Clearwater just doesn't make sense as a priority and it probably will have no impact on the Rays' situation (they're hoping it will convince the Rays to build at the Gateway area)......