My Way for the Highway

MoDoT: Tell me what you think about my plans.
Public: What plans?
MoDoT: I'll tell you when I think you should know, but I want to get your opinions first.
Public: How can I have informed opinions until I know what your plans are?

The Missouri Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration are launching a study process for changes on I-70 from State Line to 470. In what appears to be a classic example of cynically controlling input while appearing to be transparent, they are hosting a "listening post" a "public" meeting - at the St. Paul School of Theology, Holter Center on Truman Road between 4 and 7 tomorrow evening.

Nowhere in the invitation, though, do they talk about what sort of changes they are considering, so if you, like most people, have things other than highways on your mind, you have no reason to attend the meeting. Then, when they do something colossally stupid to the highway, they will blame you for not attending the meeting and being heard.

This is not public input - it is insider control. If you control affected land, or plan to sell asphalt to the State, or are one of the insiders who has moved the plan to this stage, you know what is in it and you can make sure the meeting and comments go your way. If you're an average citizen, you don't know what is in it, so you won't know whether your ox is getting gored until it's buried in asphalt.

Frankly, I have better things to do on Tuesday night than watch the charade of public input. In my absence, I have a few thoughts I would like to share with the planners:

1. Do NOT change that view of the city through the overpass when you're headed west between the stadiums and 435. If you mess with that, I will come at you like a spider monkey.

2. Do NOT smooth out the Van Brunt curve, or take away the flashing lights that congratulate drivers for going through it fast. It might be cool, though, if you could post a high score or a special light for the people that manage to double the recommended speed. Give us something more challenging to shoot for.

3. DO create an interchange between I-70 and 71, so that I can get to eastbound 70 from northbound 71 without cruising down Truman.

4. DO create "blinds" for motorcycle cops to run radar. It's undignified the way they hide behind the pillars around the 435 interchange - just give them little shelters so they can stalk their prey in comfort, just like duck hunters do.

5. DO install wireless access along the length of the highway, so that commuters from the western suburbs can check their email on their laptops on their way to work. It's a shame that right now they can only shave, put on make-up, read the paper and eat Egg McMuffins.

6. DO NOT fill in the potholes on the Manchester Trafficway overpass. That would destroy the tire and hubcap businesses in the vicinity.

7. DO NOT eliminate any of the "Exit Only" lanes - those are the best places to box in BMWs with Johnson County plates.

8. DO move the highway closer to the outfield of Royals Stadium, so that opposing batters can have something to aim for when our relief pitchers serve them hanging curves.

9. DO put up some kind of high-tech filter for the sun so that it doesn't shine in our eyes when we're headed east at sunrise or west at sunset. It's a freaking nuisance.

10. DO NOT tell us how much you are going to be spending on all these changes, because that might make us think again about regional light rail, and, apparently, we're just not ready for that kind of thinking.

Looking Down Ballot: Question - Light Rail

The last item on next Tuesday's ballot will be the Light Rail question. I've struggled with this one, caught between the hopeful image of clean rail cars swiftly delivering workers around the city, and the staggering reality of spending a billion dollars for an abbreviated gimmick. As much as I want to embrace the change, I cannot get on board for the light rail extravaganza, and I will be voting against it.

I reach that conclusion regretfully and respectfully. I think the vast majority of the supporters of Light Rail are forward-thinking and well-intentioned. I simply think they are not paying enough attention to the reality of the proposal. In my opinion, the light rail proposal costs too much, accomplishes too little, disproportionately burdens the poor, weakens our city's ability to address the future, and contains way too many unresolved questions.

Costs too much. Even the proponents of this measure acknowledge that we're looking at spending a billion dollars on the starter line. That's over $2,200 dollars for every man, woman and child in Kansas City. Now, I'm perfectly willing to blow big taxpayer dollars for the right project, but not for a train that doesn't even get me to the airport. And, after we install it, we have to pay operating subsidies every year to keep it running. In the face of an economic slowdown and a tightening of credit, can Kansas City truly afford to saddle itself with another expense that keeps on charging?

Accomplishes too little. This line won't get anyone to the airport. This line won't get anyone out to South Johnson County. You won't be able to ride it to the stadiums. It won't serve the West Side, or the Northeast. It will probably skip Westport, and it will definitely skip The Legends. It's only a starter line - a truncated version of what we all wish we could have.

While my optimistic friends claim that we have to start somewhere, the truth is that this "start" will have us paying 3/8 of a percent in sales tax for 25 years. Does anybody believe that we will be able to afford to toss in another, probably higher, tax to run it up to the airport in a few years? And then another to run it to the stadiums? No magic genie is going to make our starter line grow into a robust rail system. Instead, we will blow all our money on a starter line that will remain a starter line for at least a quarter century.

Disproportionately burdens the poor. Sales taxes are regressive - those who spend everything they own on goods to survive bear a disproportionate measure of the tax burden. Sales taxes in a city surrounded by other shopping venues are even more regressive. Ironically, those of us blessed with personal transportation will be able to cruise over to a locale with a reduced sales tax rate while those dependent on the rails will be stuck with high taxes.

Weakens our city's ability to address the future. The billion dollars we are talking about spending on this starter line is money that will not be around to meet future wants, or even our current needs. We have a host of infrastructure needs that aren't as pretty or exciting as a rail car, but they must to be met. If we go "all in" for light rail, we will be taxing ourselves to the hilt and we will not be able to go back and tax ourselves to address our delapidated sewer system, or upgrade our buses, or build a downtown stadium, or any of the dozens of desires and must-haves that we will develop in the coming years. We're kind of like the kid swearing to his parents that if he can just have this bike, he will never, ever ask for anything else again. Smart parents know better.

Too many unresolved questions. What route will the plan take through downtown? Cordish wants the route adjusted away from Grand even though that is the most logical route available, and nobody will tell Kansas City voters what route we will use. (A cynic might be justified in concluding that the planners simply don't want to announce Cordish's victory until after voters are fully on the hook.) Similarly, we don't know what the ridership projections are - yet we're supposed to tax ourselves without knowing them. Even more shockingly, we don't know how much, if any, the federal government will toss into this project. The economic feasibility of the project hinges on the feds coming up with almost half of the money, but there's no promise that we'll get anything remotely like that amount. But, regardless, the tax will start being imposed right away.

A light rail system would be a nice thing to have, and I want one. I don't dispute that it would help some workers get to some jobs, and it would have some economic development benefits along the line. Light rail is a great idea. But so are a lot of things that we cannot afford. We cannot afford to blow a billion bucks on a starter line that will take too few people too few places.