Boise Trolley FAQ's

Transportation Policy

Boise Trolley FAQs: Our Future as America’s Most Livable City

Transportation planning has evolved since a focus on cars and roads seemed imperative. We should evolve, too.

By Chris Blanchard, 10-13-09

The proposed streetcar in downtown Boise has generated a lot of comment and controversy. But even with all the news coverage and discussion there still seem to be a number of questions. I try to get to the most important ones in a series of trolley FAQs:

Just where exactly is Boise getting the $60 million to pay for this thing?
Earlier this year President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) into law. As part of that Act, the U.S. Department of Transportation is making $1.5 billion available to state and local governments through the TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Discretionary Grants Program. TIGER grants can be used for most any kind of transportation related project, but it must also achieve certain outcomes such as increasing livability, sustainability, economic competitiveness, and job creation. Grants will be announced as soon as possible after September 15, 2009, but not later than February 17, 2010.

If the City of Boise gets the grant those funds will partially cover the start-up costs. To generate the remaining monies needed they are considering the establishment of an LID or Local Improvement District. Under the LID, the City would levy an additional tax on businesses along the streetcar route. There is still no consensus among business owners as to whether there is support for the creation of an LID, but Idaho state law 50-2601 allows Idaho municipalities to create LIDs (or BIDs - Business Improvement Districts) with a simple majority vote of the Council. The Mayor and Council will then have to cobble together funds from the City’s general fund and CCDC to pay for ongoing operations.

Why do we need a trolley, anyway? What we need is better bus service, or congestion reduction on I-84 between Nampa and Boise.
The most important thing to consider in any policy debate is the objective of the policy. The Mayor/Council’s objectives are stated clearly on the Boise Streetcar website: ”A streetcar would boost economic development in Boise’s downtown core, increase the “livability” of downtown, relieve traffic congestion and reduce the city’s collective carbon footprint.”

This is not a transportation project; it is an economic development project. When it comes to economic development and rail vs. buses, transportation planners are in general agreement on several points. First, the permanence of rails and the related infrastructure is what increases property values along transportation routes, not the mere existence of a route. Bus routes can change at any moment - it’s just a matter of moving a sign. A rail stop is more permanent, and generates higher property values for building owners and businesses. Second, in general, people prefer to ride rail transportation over buses.

As a transportation project, the goal of the streetcar is to move people from one end of the City to another in a convenient fashion. There are over 40,000 jobs in Boise’s downtown core and those workers run errands, go to lunch, and go to meetings throughout the day. The streetcar will enable more of that to take place and reduce car trips in the city.

This project is only part of a larger rail vision for the city and the Valley. Eventually, the streetcar would be expanded to run up Capital/Vista serving BSU and the Boise Depot. Additional westward routes would expand the line to the 30th and Main master planned area of Boise; eastward expansions would go out past MK Plaza and Park Center.

If Senator Crapo is able to get funding for the re-establishment of Amtrak’s Pioneer Line, we would then have a system that could carry people in from Nampa, drop them at the Depot, then take them to virtually any part of downtown from 30th street to Park Center. So that’s the vision.

We used to have a Trolley and it didn’t work. Why on earth would we do this again?!
Not true. Boise and the Valley had an extensive rail system that operated from 1891-1928, and it served the public quite well. Streetcar lines ran through all of downtown Boise, and the Interurban Lines ran out to Collister, Pierce Park, through Eagle, Star, Middleton, to Caldwell, Nampa, Meridian and back into Boise. Like many rail systems across the globe, however, the system ran into financial difficulties which led the owners to shut it down in 1928.

Art courtesy of Adele Thomsen, Nick Casner and Valeri Kiesig

This of course coincided with the rise of the automobile. The car was not immediately well received, but soon gained favor as the rail infrastructure fell into disrepair. At this time too, the city planning profession was young and very preoccupied with relieving congestion in city centers. They saw providing more space to cars and wider roads as the way to make that happen. That is hardly the prevailing theory in planning practice today.

What are other places doing about rail?
The Mayor points to 10 cities that have a streetcar, and another 3 dozen or so that are considering building some sort of rail based circulator. The Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) has written a couple of pieces poo-pooing the proposed Boise system because our conditions are not like those found in Little Rock, AR, a system Mayor Bieter points to as a success. The IFF makes some good points if we view the proposed streetcar as a transportation system. But 1) it’s too early in the build out of the system to judge whether the streetcar makes sense (of course it does in the wider scheme that I outlined above); and, 2) this is an economic development project. What the Mayor needs to demonstrate is that there will be a net positive return on investment for the city and the local landowners. Current academic literature shows extremely high rates of return on fixed-rail investments.

This is one reason regions are looking at rail transit. One of the most famous examples is Portland, OR, which has an international reputation for its rail transit operated by Metro (a regional governing body). I would posit that our neighbor to the south, Salt Lake City, will one day be much the same as Portland. But the ability of those cities and regions to raise finances for operations far exceeds Boise’s. Boise has no ability to create “local option taxes” to fund transportation. It is also not likely that though 50% of the state’s GDP comes from the Boise-Nampa MSA, that the state will ever invest in rail though that is exactly who pays for the rail line that runs from Sandy to Ogden (the Utah Transit Authority). That leaves us with a lot of work to do from a governance standpoint if we are ever to get any of this to happen.

Do I support the trolley/streetcar?
Yes. I think that it is a good first step in developing transportation infrastructure for this region that we will need in the next 40 years. Can we do everything immediately? Nope. Have I seen evidence that property values will increase along the streetcar line more than enough to offset the taxes levied by an LID? No. There are still many questions and details to sort out. But I do commend the Mayor and Council for exercising LEADERSHIP on an issue that is critical to our future.

And what about simply funding Valley Regional Transit (VRT) to a greater extent so that we can have better bus service? The federal funds available through TIGER and other ARRA funds cannot be used for that and cities have no way to raise revenues to pay more for bus service. Cities facing reduced revenues are cutting back their payments to VRT which means bus service is going to get worse in the Valley long before it gets better.

The streetcar debate opens the door to so many policy questions - policy debates we need to have. So even if we don’t get the TIGER grant, I’m glad to see so many people talking about transit, taxes, governance, and our very future as America’s Most Livable City. It would be unfortunate to get to 2050 only to lament, “I (Boise) coulda been a contender.”

Chris Blanchard is a Ph.D. student in the acclaimed urban studies program at Portland State University where his research focuses on urban planning and economic development.

Litster Calls for Streetcar Vote, Thomson Calls for Calm

Friday, October 9, 2009

elections

Litster Calls for Streetcar Vote, Thomson Calls for Calm

Posted by Andrew Crisp on Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Today, Boise City Council candidate David Litster announced that he intends to launch a petition drive to force a popular vote on the proposed downtown streetcar.

In a press release, Litster stated “I am opposed to the Mayor’s proposed $60-million trolley and the $20-million property tax increase that comes with it.”

Litster feels that “the taxpayers should have the final say on a trolley that will cost $2 million per city block and $2 million per year to operate.” He plans to file the initiative petition by the end of next week.

The City of Boise has not settled on a funding mechanism for the construction of streetcar line, though it has applied for a $40-million federal grant. Estimates for the annual operating cost have been less than $2 million.

The Boise City clerk advised Litster that 6,500 signatures from registered Boise voters would be needed. If he can collect the signatures, the proposed ordinance to require voter approval would be put before the City Council for consideration.

“With enough citizen support, I am confident the required number of signatures could be collected before the Nov. 3 election,” Litster stated.

TJ Thomson, Litster’s opponent, argues that the trolley is still just a concept, and that a lot of work needs to be done before the trolley is ready for a decision.

“This race needs to be about substance and facts, not grand standing,” Thomson stated. "There will be ample opportunity for public input on the Boise Streetcar in the months ahead — as there should be."

Thomson said that Litster is opting to “begin the discussion by throwing the first hand grenade.”

Thomson’s stated that Litster, “who has claimed to be a fiscal hawk, is now proposing spending thousands of tax payer dollars on a special election on a project of which we have not yet received all the facts.”

Streetcar PR contract a bad idea.........

close

October 09, 2009

Our View: Streetcar PR contract a bad idea, in many ways

OUR VIEW DOWNTOWN BOISE STREETCAR

- Idaho Statesman

OUR VIEW DOWNTOWN BOISE STREETCAR

The Boise City Council almost got it right Tuesday night, by tapping the brakes on a streetcar public relations contract worth up to $90,000.

Too bad the council didn't kill this tin-eared idea outright. Let's hope that day is coming - and soon.

There's so much wrong with this contract that the challenge is figuring out where to begin. But here goes:

® It's a misplaced priority. The bottom line isn't a bad place to start, of course. If city leaders can find money for this costly frill, it's a little bit difficult to take them too seriously when they lament tough times and tight budgets.

City Hall argues that the money doesn't come from taxpayers. But it is still public money, from a city economic development fund bankrolled by Union Pacific Railroad leases. That being the case, we'd rather see it go toward more immediate economic development efforts.

® It's - at best - a questionable use of public dollars. Like it or not, the city has a history of PR outsourcing. Earlier this year, the city shelled out a $120,000 contract to help explain its new trash and recycling program.

Obviously, there is nothing wrong with getting the word out about something like no-sort recycling - although we're skeptical about the city's claim that it, like other public agencies, cannot maintain adequate in-house staff to take on a big outreach job.

Regardless, the streetcar contract is no how-to on recycling. What the city calls "a comprehensive Boise Streetcar Outreach Communication strategy" sounds like advocacy - on a controversial initiative.

The company recommended for the contract, Cronin and Associates, proposes to "educate residents about why the time is right for a downtown streetcar." The group's proposal says "a strong and consistent case" has been made for a streetcar for years. Media coverage, however, has been "neutral to negative," perhaps because of what the group calls a failure to describe the project in "proper context."

The city says this contract is legal. But it certainly doesn't feel appropriate. Given Mayor Dave Bieter's adamant support of the streetcar, it seems like a project with a preconceived conclusion.

® It's apt to backfire. When trying to make a delicate sale, a hard sell isn't the smartest call. This contract has hard sell written all over it.

The streetcar has run into criticism from people who consider the $65 million project an extravagant waste of tax dollars. A publicly funded pitch won't silence the critics; more likely, it will just further inflame the controversy. Not exactly the best way to sway the undecideds.

® This is a political mess. This contract would be a stinker, no matter who got the job. Perhaps that explains why 18 firms requested information about the contract, but only four actually submitted proposals. Yet somehow, a team of four City Hall and Capital City Development Corp. staffers managed to make this situation worse.

They chose Cronin and Associates - a firm headed by state Rep. Brian Cronin, a Boise Democrat who worked on Bieter's successful 2003 mayoral campaign.

City Hall defends the choice; Bieter was not involved in the review, and Cronin's proposal was superior. Cronin also stands by his proposal and downplays his political ties. "I don't know why that necessarily disqualifies me." But most Boiseans aren't going to scrutinize the fine details of a contract proposal. They will see only a job that went to a Bieter backer - which will taint the way they perceive the publicly funded results of this PR effort.

At least the City Council didn't award this contract Tuesday. The council decided to slow down the process. But no amount of slowing down will make all these problems go away. Better to take a miserable idea and put it out of its misery.

"Our View" is the editorial position of the Idaho Statesman. It is an unsigned opinion expressing the consensus of the Statesman's editorial board. To comment on an editorial or suggest a topic, e-mail editorial@idahostatesman.com.

Former Mayor: Dick Eardley: Streetcar is distracting us from real air quality and traffic issues

close

October 08, 2009

Dick Eardley: Streetcar is distracting us from real air quality and traffic issues

READER'S VIEW BOISE STREETCAR

BY DICK EARDLEY - Idaho Statesman

READER'S VIEW BOISE STREETCAR

As a former mayor of Boise, I have always refrained from giving advice or criticizing current city administrators, simply because I didn't feel it was my place to do so. However, in the city's current rush and push to establish a streetcar in Downtown Boise, I feel I must voice an opinion. I say that because I think city policy-makers and leaders are putting far too much emphasis on a gimmick while ignoring the real problems of air quality and traffic facing Boise and southwest Idaho.

I don't think anyone can argue the fact that the smoggy air over this area and the growing problem of traffic jams are both caused primarily by an overabundance of automobiles and trucks and a lack of roads and/or other transportation alternatives. A better use of federal and local tax dollars would be a light rail system from Caldwell through Nampa and Meridian to Boise and stretching at some time in the future all the way to the Ontario/Payette/Fruitland area and possibly even to Mountain Home on the east side. I say that for the following reasons:

1) A trolley system in Downtown Boise would take very few, if any, automobiles off the roads of Ada and Canyon counties. Commuters would continue to clog morning and afternoon traffic lanes throughout the area, and practically no one would abandon their autos for the trolley that runs only from one end of Downtown Boise to the other. Yes, it would be cute and nice to have - something for the tourists to see and locals to use for a few blocks instead of walking - but it would do little to relieve otherwise congested areas. In fact, it may even add to the congestion of Downtown Boise, with the trolley using up to one lane of traffic at any given time.

2) The cost of $60 million for the trolley system seems exorbitant when compared to the benefits it would give. And make no mistake about it, the $60 million comes from taxpayers, both federal and local. In addition, I have seen nothing to pinpoint what ongoing costs would be, even as "free ridership" is being touted. Somewhere along the line, the city will have to bear the price of maintaining the line, including equipment, personnel and all the other attendant costs that go with such an operation.

3) I have to doubt seriously the idea that the trolley alone will be responsible for $207 million in new development along the route and in 3,970 jobs that would be created. Some new development would obviously be spurred by creation of the trolley, but in a growing city, to say all new development and job creation would be attributed solely to the streetcar is, I think, stretching the point.

If we really need to spend $60 million of public money, would it not be better to spend it on some form of light rail transportation? A well-operated system would obviously take a good share of commuters off the already-overburdened highways and freeways leading into and out of Boise. That, in turn, would not only ease traffic woes but also could contribute greatly to a reduced amount of carbon monoxide spewing into the air daily. Even though the basic groundwork is already in place for such a system, the biggest roadblock has been funding, and yet we plan to spend $60 million just to set up a trolley system in Downtown Boise, plus the ongoing costs to operate it.

In conclusion, the idea of a trolley in and of itself is fine as a cute way to make Downtown Boise unique, but it does nothing to solve a far more critical problem. It makes me wonder what has happened to all the hyped-up plans for light rail that were, for a number of years, the city's top priority. That idea, by the way, has already included the purchase of several miles of railroad track east of Boise in years past.

Dick Eardley of Meridian is a former mayor of Boise.

Entire community will benefit from Downtown Streetcar

close

October 08, 2009

Clay Carley: Entire community will benefit from Downtown streetcar

READER'S VIEW STREETCAR

BY CLAY CARLEY - Idaho Statesman

READER'S VIEW STREETCAR

Should Downtown property owners support and help fund the proposed streetcar?

In the mid-1970s, the corner of Main and 6th streets in Downtown Boise was highly undesirable. Buildings were in disrepair, and active commercial life was nonexistent. Today, "Old Boise" is the largest collection of commercial historical structures in the state of Idaho and is recognized nationally and locally as a historic district. It is clean, vibrant and has a charm and character distinct in Downtown Boise.

The investment made at that time has paid off in very significant ways for Downtown and the city of Boise. Why did this investment take place? One property owner has been credited with this investment and transformation of an old, tired neighborhood, but in fact many property owners have invested in the district and contributed to its success. However, it did take the vision and guts of the one property owner to stimulate additional investment from others.

I believe the streetcar in many ways reflects the experience of "Old Boise." Today, Downtown Boise is clean, safe and vibrant. However, it would benefit from an infusion of economic stimulus and activity to propel it further toward the goal of "best in class." The streetcar project offers that opportunity.

The federal government has set aside more than $1 billion for TIGER funding. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for our community to benefit from potentially $40 million in federal stimulus money to reinvigorate our Downtown core and accelerate Boise into 21st century urban transportation. The money can be used only for the streetcar, and it is available only in this very small window of opportunity. To pass it up now means to never see it again.

Who benefits from this project? The entire community benefits. Rail transportation in Downtown Boise will demonstrate to all who use it what it feels like and how it functions. It will expose our community to the future of urban transportation.

In addition, property owners along the streetcar's route will benefit. There will be more pedestrian activity on the streets, as the car will attract riders who otherwise would not get around as easily. This encourages healthy retail and commercial activity and also will stimulate urban housing. This, then, will stimulate development in general along the streetcar's route and throughout the Downtown core. Additional foot traffic, increased density, additional investment and a new form of "fun" in getting around will make our Downtown better and more attractive to all who enjoy its diversity.

As a property owner along this route who will directly benefit from the streetcar, I support this project and am excited to pay my fair share of its cost. Since Downtown property owners are the largest beneficiaries, they should pay a fair portion of the cost.

How much is fair? How do we agree to what amount should be paid by each entity? How do we evaluate whether this is truly beneficial and sustainable? The streetcar task force is thoroughly exploring all of these issues. The public is invited to learn about this process and provide input on the pros and cons of this very significant and progressive project.

Like Old Boise's beginning, it takes the vision and guts of a few to gain the support and investment of others. The city of Boise and the CCDC should be credited for this effort and the process being undertaken to evaluate and implement this complex and forward-thinking addition to Downtown.

Clay Carley is the general manager of Old Boise LLC.

Conflict of interest over Boise Streetcar

Conflict of Interest Over Boise Streetcar

Posted: Oct 7, 2009 07:18 PM

Boise, Idaho -- There's more controversy surrounding a proposed trolley in downtown Boise.

It involves hiring a public relations firm to handle the city's message, and the connection the firm has to Boise mayor Dave Bieter, not to mention the issue of just how necessary this project is in the first place.

"The council is still split as far as the streetcar. I don't support it," said Jim Tibbs, Boise City councilman.

Tibbs has been against the streetcar idea from the beginning. He says there's too many promises being tossed about, things like how it will prompt more use of the bus system and how it will increase downtown commerce.

"I think really it's going to create a problem where a lot of businesses are being driven out of business, because there's a lot of businesses downtown that are just hanging on by their fingernails," said Tibbs.

That's because a large portion of the $60 million tab would get picked up by the local businesses.

Another concern involves a decision to hire public relations firm Cronin and Associates for $90,000.

The company would get the job of promoting a pro-streetcar message, but the company's owner, Brian Cronin -- who is also a state representative -- was also personally involved with Bieter's first election campaign.

"I think it does raise the issue of conflict of interest. Whether it really is a conflict of interest, I don't know, but it certainly raises the question," said Tibbs.

Because of that, the issue has been deferred so the staff can provide more information to the city council.

It's a situation that hasn't reached many people living in Boise, but many are talking about the streetcar itself.

"There's a lot of cities that have this type of transportation and I think it would improve the quality of life in Boise and I really think that businesses downtown would benefit from it," said Mary Stunz, a Boise downtown patron.

"I have nothing against a streetcar, but I think they should be spending more money on mass transit -- bringing people in from Eagle and Meridian-- and spending more money on that rather than a streetcar for downtown Boise. We don't really need that," said Holly Rule, a Boise downtown patron.

And according to Tibbs, we don't need the public relations firm either -- at least not yet.

"There's a lot of other work that needs to be done before you start selecting a PR firm," he said.

Bieter's spokesman, Adam Park, says Bieter had nothing to do with the selection of Cronin and Associates. He says the firm was scored against three others based on merit after each submitted their proposals. In the end, he says Cronin simply came out on top.

Boise Weekly -Report

Race Against the Train

Seat 4 council candidates take positions on the streetcar

by Andrew Crisp

click to enlarge

• BW
• David Litster, flanked by Leland Lay and Steven Siebers, launches his City Council campaign.

Boise City Council candidate David Litster launched his campaign outside City Hall on Thursday, voicing his opinion on what he calls Mayor Dave Bieter's "trolley folly." Litster's announcement came on the heels of official endorsements from Steven Siebers and Leland Lay after they dropped out of the race. Siebers and Lay stood beside Litster, saying his platform mirrors their own.

"It's not easy to launch a campaign and then end it, but they concluded that with three people in the race against one relatively liberal, well-positioned candidate, the liberal would be a shoo-in," stated Litster.

Litster now faces TJ Thomson in the race for the seat being vacated by Jim Tibbs.

Thomson said Thursday that Siebers's and Lay's support of Litster was interesting in that the race has become, "not about the city ... it's become about 'beating TJ.'"

Litster's major concern at his Oct. 1 announcement was punctuated by Debra Miller's wood-paneled Boise Trolley Tours bus parked adjacent to City Hall and adorned with a "Trolley Folly" banner.

The controversial project has been painted both as a viable renewable transportation resource that would stimulate the economy and as a decadent example of government waste. It is to be the political football of the short City Council campaign season.

The same morning as Litster's announcement, a few blocks away on Idaho Street, the city hosted an open house to provide information to the public about the streetcar proposal. The plan calls for a 2.3-mile circuit of rail lines for an electric streetcar that would run on Idaho and Main streets.

Thomson, a retired Air Force veteran with a bachelor's degree from Boise State and a Masters of Public Affairs from Indiana University, has yet to declare an official position on the streetcar project. He seeks to avoid what he calls a "knee-jerk" reaction on the issue, opting to wait until the Economic and Engineering Feasibility Assessment is completed by an independent task force.

Proponents of the streetcar believe that the clean form of public transportation would drastically improve the carbon footprint of Boise. According to the official boisestreetcar.org Web site, "the land use and development opportunity with a streetcar encourages reinvestment, economic growth, and neighborhood vitality." City Hall backers, including the mayor, argue that the trolley would be more than what the Boise Guardian blog calls, "just a novelty."

"This is phase one of a larger streetcar system. All of the studies indicate that it needs more than this phase one, but we have to start somewhere," said Boise economic development assistant Cece Gassner.

Gassner said about 350 people visited the city's open house and though the comments had not been tallied, she said they were split by roughly a third for, a third against and a third with questions.

The city is betting that a fixed line would provide businesses along the route a healthy audience of people to advertise to, and potentially pull customers from the trains. And the hope is that the presence of the streetcar will increase property value, create jobs and pay back in dividends.

Those against the idea, including Litster, tour operator Miller and Dave Frazier at the Guardian, feel that the $60 million proposed for funding for the project is an unnecessary cost.

Litster advocated for focusing on a "small government footprint" rather than a "small carbon footprint."