Clay Chastain coming back with light rail

[flyingember]

I believe that this time the ballot language is such that if approved, it basically acknowledges the funding may be inadequate to do the whole thing and to pretty much "do what you can" and doesn't specify any priorities, but it would have to be used for rail and buses.

This is very smart of him. It lets the plan look good and something gets built without waiting on more funding. And we know that it's easier to build onto what already exists with rail

The council also has new chastain plan language which in theory could extend the streetcar system. Like it moved to having a stop in NKC and down to the plaza which could work off the phase 2 segments already planned on both sides of the river, crossing on/near the HOA bridge and not repeat track work, like not building on Broadway and up the extension.

I'm not so sure that if the committee sub gets on the ballot that they would kill it if it passes. The TDD extension requiring federal funding to happen and this being designed not to, take the two local funding sources together and the streetcar could cross the river and head further south than UMKC without federal funding being needed.

If trump wins the election and the current rail funding dries up, and both items win the council is putting together plans to actually build.

Also, if this wins and the TDD fails, which seems the least likely to happen, this would let the city still build to UMKC. I bet the council could decide not to take the bus tax and implement the new one only in this case. 3/8 is a lot of money citywide.

Saying they'll just kill the plan seems ignorant of the greater money issues that could be in play in 2017.

[flyingember]

Below is a line to the committee sub. Notice how a line down Burlington and Main and a The trolley trail would meet that versus down Broadway and Wornall like the Chastain map shows. And you can see how it follows the Linwood line the city studied already. It doesn't mention hospital hill so it could split directly off at Liwood and Main.

AND by using the rock island line this would be the city connection to the future commuter line and could even be how that system gets to downtown, without needing to deal with The terminal trench or KCS

It's actually quite ingenious how it was changed. It's redone to work with a bunch of regional priorities if it passes.

And that's why saying not to vote is a bad idea. Because voting no could mean the Makn line to UMKC doesn't get built as quickly. Voting yet would be the city paying for rail to the east side, to the commuter system and would provide for the reverse commute into the northland that could help downtown grow more.

https://mobile.twitter.com/kclightrail/ ... 6970591232

[miz.jordan17]

So all debate aside, what are the realistic chances of any of this happening? Does anyone have connections with City Council to measure how they feel about all of it? Obviously Clay Chastain has been a thorn in the side of the City, but perhaps it is possible they spin this to their favor.

[flyingember]

So all debate aside, what are the realistic chances of any of this happening? Does anyone have connections with City Council to measure how they feel about all of it? Obviously Clay Chastain has been a thorn in the side of the City, but perhaps it is possible they spin this to their favor.

the last time he got a citywide yes vote he implemented no new taxes.
It has the expensive but visible line to the airport on it that people often say they want
It doesn't ask the east side to vote a big tax just for them

I'm going to give it a 40% chance of passing.

If it gets sold as expanding the streetcar system to more people and voting yes for this and the TDD will mean track does get built no matter what, that federal funding is not a given so neither project is a given to build otherwise, I could see it being tight.

[Highlander]

So all debate aside, what are the realistic chances of any of this happening? Does anyone have connections with City Council to measure how they feel about all of it? Obviously Clay Chastain has been a thorn in the side of the City, but perhaps it is possible they spin this to their favor.

the last time he got a citywide yes vote he implemented no new taxes.
It has the expensive but visible line to the airport on it that people often say they want
It doesn't ask the east side to vote a big tax just for them

I'm going to give it a 40% chance of passing.

If it gets sold as expanding the streetcar system to more people and voting yes for this and the TDD will mean track does get built no matter what, that federal funding is not a given so neither project is a given to build otherwise, I could see it being tight.

Even with the streetcar's popularity, I give this a 0% chance of passing. It's not that I like to take absolute positions, but Chastain's name is now a huge negative factor in KC that even though he seems to sweeten the deal (modest tax increase/airport connection), there's no way KC voters will approve. Like always, Chastain has promised far more than the funding mechanism can deliver (its a pretty extensive line) that goes well beyond what is needed in KC. Frankly, I think it confuses issues and could set back getting the streetcar system expanded simply out of guilt by association (even though its not associated in the slightest).

[grovester]

A billion dollar ask is mock worthy.

[DaveKCMO]

Even with the streetcar's popularity, I give this a 0% chance of passing. It's not that I like to take absolute positions, but Chastain's name is now a huge negative factor in KC that even though he seems to sweeten the deal (modest tax increase/airport connection), there's no way KC voters will approve. Like always, Chastain has promised far more than the funding mechanism can deliver (its a pretty extensive line) that goes well beyond what is needed in KC. Frankly, I think it confuses issues and could set back getting the streetcar system expanded simply out of guilt by association (even though its not associated in the slightest).

i agree with your absolute position. it won't pass. it might get 40% approval for being on the presidential ballot. his watered down 2014 ballot questions got only 30% (he ended up 'campaigning' against them, then immediately became obsessed with his mayoral run). that won't stop the civic community from hedging their bets and making it clear that this robs the existing transit system -- fixed route and paratransit -- and should not be approved (or allowed to stand, if approved).

there is actual polling that indicates clay chastain is not popular with KCMO voters. of course, his name is not in the ballot language, but the people who make it to the end of the ballot on election day know better.

to assume the council has some trick up their sleeve would be false. if it's true, they've literally told no one about it (which is equally implausible). while i would love it if they said "let's spend $2 billion on transit", it's laughable to think that this council would pivot so quickly on this topic (a majority is lukewarm, at best).

it certainly doesn't help the streetcar effort, but again voters who make it to the local questions know better. streetcar doesn't have to persuade the entire city, strictly speaking, since only those inside the TDD will vote. that first TDD vote will be after the november election so the dust will have settled on chastain once again.

[beautyfromashes]

In a lot of ways, I think this plan is better than the streetcar extension plan. Larger plan, cost is spread out to a larger piece of the community and gives a plan for transportation over the entire metro. Negative- came from Clay Chastain. Also, how did he get this plan to voters before the streetcar extension. Beaten to the punch.

[DaveKCMO]

Also, how did he get this plan to voters before the streetcar extension. Beaten to the punch.

simple: he wasn't working with others.

[flyingember]

Also, how did he get this plan to voters before the streetcar extension. Beaten to the punch.

simple: he wasn't working with others.

Except for he talked with the city to make it constitutional this time around. Saying he didn't work with others is wrong when the city states he worked with them on this.

They're just different paths. One has a drawn out petition process with a court review and special election. The other goes to the city council and can go on any citywide election.

Given both require a signed petition with a certain number of that part could in theory take about the same time. Except I believe the chastain petition needed several hundred people compared to the minimum 50 the TDD needs

He picked the easier method up front with less odds of success and would definently be building something. The TDD is more drawn out but has good odds of passing the election but we will need to wait until we have matching funding and no one can say that's a given. Look at how many expansion projects nationwide get drawn out or cut in scope over funding. New Orleans is only about halfway through their expansion projects they want to do and they started planning years before KC and that's just one city.

And these federal funding projects are executive branch. This whole thing about Trump comes into play in that I fully expect he would demand the executive department score projects better than show they are doing the cheapest possible plan

[FangKC]

The fact that he doesn't work within the confines of the community stakeholders who work to put together transit plans is a big tell. Who is his constituency? Himself. He's never been an elected official, or part of a coalition of transit advocates. He takes advantage of the ease of referendum process in Kansas City to promote his ideas. This is about ego.

[Highlander]

The fact that he doesn't work within the confines of the community stakeholders who work to put together transit plans is a big tell. Who is his constituency? Himself. He's never been an elected official, or part of a coalition of transit advocates. He takes advantage of the ease of referendum process in Kansas City to promote his ideas. This is about ego.

That's exactly right. Chastain's motives have not changed much. His project is idiotic. Two far flung end points at the airport and Cerner guarantees that the longest and most expensive portion of the line would rarely be used. He still has the Penn Valley Park component. He wants to run the line through Union Station to realize his long held advocacy to undo the Bi-State election and the changes it made to Union Station including Science City (despite the fact that bi-state saved the station). The line would also simply duplicate an existing streetcar system a couple of blocks further west of the existing system and not be integrated into any comprehensive transportation system. Chastain not only has no constituency; he's the anti-constitutent going against the wishes of the community. I don't know who the hell signs these petition efforts but this one belongs exactly where the other were placed - in the dumpster. The city council should never put this thing up for a vote and kindly tell Chastain to come back when he has something realistic in mind. Putting unrealistic, disingenuous, pie-in-the sky proposals on the ballot should never be an option.

[flyingember]

His project is idiotic. What the city wants to put on would put in place multiple parts of the planned rail network.

There's been exactly two rail plans get a yes vote in decades. One of his, one of the city's. His was plainly impossible to do as all the money came from the busses but it showed what people will vote for. I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand for that reason. The city is absolutely moving to change his 2016 plan to look more like his 2008 plan + streetcar phase 2 + pieces needed for the commuter network. They wouldn't do this if there was no interest in building it.

Here's the map of his plan that passed http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?t=9488&s ... 20#p501679
Now compare that to the committee sub https://mobile.twitter.com/kclightrail/ ... 6970591232

Compared to 2008: Add the branch towards Cerner from the zoo, follow Brookside instead of Volker and Troost. Move midtown coverage to Main instead of Broadway. Add the Linwood branch to the stadiums to connect with commuter rail. Then north of the river take his 2008 plan exactly and that's what the committee sub could build. And they did it in a way they can take four of the next/northrail study corridors and build them and part of the 2009 light rail plan the city = KCATA proposed.

And if both plans pass it means the city has enough money to build a train to UMKC in 2018 and start on other segments like a bridge to NKC immediately. It could do all the engineering before the TDD vote even gets the result. If the citywide tax raises $500 million and the TDD $200 million the system could build to UMKC and a little more without federal fundinging and the greater amount for a match could also mean the city can aim for a larger federal fund grant, it's not like the city shouldn't try regardless.

This sure looks like a plan they want to build if it passes. They're just piggybacking off his petition to get to that point.

And guess what. This item could potentially also allow NKC to implement it's never implemented tax without a new vote since that project was for a route from 63rd and 71 to N. Oak and Vivion, which this current plan could build.

[DaveKCMO]

it's officially on the november ballot: http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics ... 14092.html

[UrbanKC]

He's ridiculous and completely narcissistic. But to be very honest, I'm probably going to vote yes. If it passes, the city has legal grounding to strike it down or use the funds elsewhere.

Obviously it's stupid to completely cannibalize the bus system as he's proposing. But the city could probably do some legal dancing and move the funding to expanding the streetcar system while also including bus funding with it.

[flyingember]

He's ridiculous and completely narcissistic. But to be very honest, I'm probably going to vote yes. If it passes, the city has legal grounding to strike it down or use the funds elsewhere.

Obviously it's stupid to completely cannibalize the bus system as he's proposing. But the city could probably do some legal dancing and move the funding to expanding the streetcar system while also including bus funding with it.

You know what's really amazing at the same time. His plan also is supposed to fund bus lines serving as connectors to the train.

My hopes is if it passes the city keeps the new tax and throws that part out. It would still end up with a new tax to lay down track which is what we need right now.

[DaveKCMO]

it only made sense to vote yes when the city was doing nothing. now they're doing something, don't foul the works. there is ZERO interest in building what clay is selling.

[flyingember]

it only made sense to vote yes when the city was doing nothing. now they're doing something, don't foul the works. there is ZERO interest in building what clay is selling.

Let's assume it passes, which I still admit seems unlikely.

It's no longer his plan, again. The city made it a streetcar expansion plan with the committee sub.

Changing it is the admittance that they want a plan that can be built if it passes and not duplicate efforts or repeat work already done. Why change it if the only goal is to repeal it?

Do you think a city that has seen *one* citywide transit tax for rail pass in years (Chastain's take all the bus tax money one) is really going to not take a new tax that would let it build what it's failed to get for decades and it can do so without a penny of federal money? That's a holy grail of transit money.

If it passes and the city fails to act it's giving up on rail transit expansion for a generation. It will fuel the flames against the TDD.
"They had a plan, they had the money, now they're asking you for more of your money to build less track" is not hard to sell.

[Highlander]

I would certainly be careful about supporting any Chastain proposed system. In fact, I would not. Ever.

Like all of Chastain's proposals, this one promises more that it will ever be able to deliver. So lets say voter accept the plan. What next? What part do you actually build? In naïve fashion, most people without thinking it through want a KCI link. Do you build that part of the system and not the rest? Or what about the people who think the ridiculous link to the Cerner complex would be a good idea? Do we build that? There's no way that entire line is going to be funded - not even close, so what decisions do you make.? I think this issue is the critical issue in creating voter dissatisfaction, even bigger than not building at all.

Furthermore, anyone who thinks that Chastain won't be in the courts fighting an attempt to cannibalize his project for future streetcar projects has not learned the lesson of the last 20 years of Chastain's dealings in KC.

Frankly, I don't think unrealistic projects should ever be put on the ballot. This one needed to be ignored by the council. Now it needs to be rejected by the voters. If passed (which it fortunately will not), it needs to be once again rejected by the council. All it does is confuse the issue and its much more a threat to KC developing a workable transportation system than it is any kind of asset.

[flyingember]

I still don't think it passes, but if it does repealing this plan could be A LOT harder than in 2006. And any changes would just increase the chance of a lawsuit, like not taking the bus tax for the train instead of making an effort to replace the tax in the 8 years the city would have to do so.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/Docum ... ycyvo199wv
The 2006 repeal didn't have the city council making changes ahead of time so it could build only part of the system. It didn't have the city council making changes so it could follow streets where there are formal rail studies completed and it knows are realistic. The city also already said this plan is constitutional as described so that eliminates one method for a repeal.

I would bet that the city will take the new tax and build the aspects of his plan that overlap existing regional planning and go for federal funding to put more in.

Chastain would be a big winner that led the city to build more rail than anyone else has in decades and do it with a citywide election. He would have to be inane to fight against this. He would be the big winner that did what the city couldn't.

There's another thought why the city won't repeal it if it does manage to pass. We'll know the results before the first TDD election can be held. The council would have to accept the election or tell everyone in the TDD they don't want them to pay less taxes to get rail to the same destination. The second TDD election is a year later and I don't see how they could delay certifying the election that long. I wouldn't take the bet that they could repeal a citywide tax that can build to UMKC and then get the district to pay more in taxes than the citywide tax would.

The council could approve it, pause, and then when the final TDD result comes in they have the final number to work with. Another $200 million could build 3 miles more track in some direction. Meanwhile it's using the gap to go for federal funding and do engineering and studies to find the final route and possible segment end points and start the train order planning process. Imagine cutting a year off the calendar to get to UMKC