 |
 |
By BOB NORBERG
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
The bicycling community is resigned to seeing the budget for a pedestrian and bicycle path that would parallel SMART’s Santa Rosa-San Rafael rail line cut by a third as a necessary step to get the commute trains running by 2014.
The pathway was a critical factor in winning voter support for a quarter-cent sales tax to pay for the Sonoma-Marin Area Rapid Transit line. Like the trains, it had been promised as a 70-mile, Cloverdale-to-Larkspur project.
With sales tax revenue and SMART’s ability to raise money by selling bonds severely limited by the recession, SMART has scaled back its plans and is focusing on an initial rail line and pathway from Railroad Square in Santa Rosa to downtown San Rafael.
As part of the cost savings, $14 million for that stretch of bike and pedestrian path is among the $88 million in cuts SMART is considering.
“It does sound like that is what is going to have to happen,” said Christine Culver, executive director of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition. “I am not OK with it, but it is the situation we are all in. Everything is getting cut, not just the path.”
Bicyclists are asking SMART officials to make a commitment that the path will remain a priority and not be discarded as the agency struggles with the gap between how much money it has and what it wants to build.
The proposed $14 million cut from the $42 million pedestrian-bicycle path could mean some gaps in the pathway from Railroad Square to San Rafael, which closely follow the train right-of-way for much of the way, during the first phase of construction.
Other agencies are still on track to build bike path segments, such as Santa Rosa in the city and the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, Marin County and Caltrans for stretches through the Novato Narrows.
The estimated cost is $470 million to build the Santa Rosa-San Rafael stretch of the commute line and operate it for 14 years, which is $104 million more than SMART expects to have in bond sales and other local, state and federal money.
“We need to have a contingency plan on what would be cut to be able to build the system with the money that we will get,” SMART spokesman Chris Coursey said.
SMART staff has a list of $88 million in cuts that include deferring building stations at Corona Road in Petaluma and Atherton Drive in Novato, building a bare-bones maintenance facility and reducing the initial number of trains it buys.
The pedestrian and bike pathway always has been envisioned as a key component of SMART, projected to draw 7,000 to 10,000 users a day for the entire 71-mile, Cloverdale-to-Larkspur line.
An analysis of the cost-cutting measures, along with a priority list, will be given to the SMART board when it meets at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Santa Rosa City Hall council chambers.
The board will meet again April 20 when it is expected to approve selling construction bonds, which financial consultants believe will raise $161 million.
Together with about $206 million that is available in other local, state and federal funds, it leaves a gap of about $104 million to build the Santa Rosa-to-San Rafael segment.
You can reach Staff Writer Bob Norberg at 521-5206 or bob.norberg@pressdemocrat.com.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
“Tin Foil Hat Alert: UN Agenda 21!
be afraid…be very afraid”
Please, give it a rest. Really.
Kevin-
I believe a man named John is the one who started the Repeal SMART page and Facebook group- I’m in contact with him, and will ask where things stand. The other strong opponent is Mike Arnold of Novato- I haven’t been able to find a way to contact him.
I’d say at least join the Facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-SMART-Train/107179216018877
I’m going to see if John will let me become an admin, which would allow me to keep it more active, and make contact with people.
We need to get organized, and build a coalition to make the change- apathy is hard to overcome, even when it comes with a billion dollar price tag.
I don’t have a ton of time, but I’m willing to put some into it, if it will make a difference. Feel free to shoot me an email at notary_one (at) netzero (dot) net if you’re willing to jump on board.
I’m a huge fan of trains… just not this one.
Good Lord, just THINK what more than a billion dollars over twenty years could do for Sonoma and Marin. That’s 50 million a year that will instead be wasted on this crazy train fantasy.
SMART has already broken its contract with the people. We paid for one thing. We’re getting another, a mere fraction of what we were promised when we voted. We’re supposed to just take it.
People, if all we do is talk then this train will roll over all objections. It will BE the train to nowhere if we don’t take a hand now to stop it.
A petition committee willing to devote time to signature collection could make a huge difference to the city councils and boards of supervisors, in Sonoma and Marin, who are struggling right now with this issue.
I checked the ‘Repeal SMART’ website, but it seems inactive. Does anyone know of an active organized effort to stop this stupid train?
This needs to go back to the voters. This is not what they voted for. This is now a complete different animal.
@Pearl You have everything right except naming the problem. The problem is ICLEI Sustainable Development. Our local government has signed onto an international plan that has a very specific agenda and it’s called United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. ICLEI is an NGO (non-governmental organization) tasked with infiltrating government agencies and guiding policies for their member cities and counties. Every city and county around here is a member of ICLEI. Supervisor Valerie Brown is on the board of ICLEI USA and is in complete lockstep with ICLEI’s agenda. Sonoma County wants to be the leader in Agenda 21 policies.
UN Agenda 21/ICLEI is already rampant in Europe and is gaining steam in the US. ICLEI’s agenda includes getting rid of private cars, getting rid of private property (no kidding) and having us all live with less money and a lower standard of living. Bicycles and trains are a huge priority for them, and paved roads are bad too according to them. Control over all resources is part of their agenda. They want people off the land and moved into dense urban villages next to the train. That’s why they want the train. It’s a formula they must follow even if it doesn’t work.
It’s all being justified because of the global warming scare. Some cities have Kicked ICLEI Out and we should do the same here. A quick Google search will yield a wealth of information on the subject. If we don’t do something pretty quick, we’re going to be in a lot of trouble. They are in the process of collecting information about all of us and calculating our carbon footprint. UN Agenda 21 with its paranoia about carbon threatens to usher in a new period of medievalism in which we will be reduced to surfdom. . Don’t believe it? Check it out.
Can we vote again ? SMART had numerous shots at it, until they lied and ‘Fudged” numbers to get the votes.
Repeal SMART, and run the bike lanes and enhance the bus service, as people actually use Sonoma County Transit.
For this kind of money, we can have usefull transit, instead of a payoff to developers and consultants.
Stop the dumb SMART, sue and investigate !
I am beginning to notice that anytime our political people make a Bad decision we have NO option but to keep on going no matter what the cost! They have NO way to be held accountable or the guts to cut their losses and stop the bleeding; all we have to show is another staff of Bureaucrats at taxpayers’ expense!
Good points, Steveguy.
Here are some more facts about SMART that were reported at the S.R. city council study session on 3/15/11: The estimated daily ridership for the initial 37-mile linkup which they are planning to build first is 2,900 with growth to 4,800 by 2035. For the entire 70-mile line, when finished, the daily ridership is projected at 5,300-6,000.
Considering that according to the 2010 census S.R. now has about 167,000 resident, Sonoma county has about 483,000 and Marin county’s number is about 252,000, these ridership figures represent a sliver of the population. Also compare those small SMART ridership numbers to the number of people who use 101 every day: back in 2006, it was 125,000; now, it is safe to say, more.
According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoma-Marin_Area_Rail_Transit#2010_-_Overall_cost.2C_funding_shortfall.2C_responses), “SMART’s total capital and operating cost from 2008 to 2028 has been estimated by SMART to be 1.1 billion dollars.” Why does it make any financial sense to expend that kind of money on a train line that will only cater to a tiny percentage of our population instead of using it to improve our roads and find other ways to ease transit?
Too bad about the cut in the bike path: it’s my guess that more people would use that than the train.
The SMART (dumb) Train was financed by those that planned to profit. Some of the big money came from the same type of people that are now into or on the verge of bankruptcy. ( See related stories in the Press Democrat at the Windsor Green and Sebastapol Road ‘new urbanism’ debacles.
They think that the property tax revenues generated from the near the depots development will offset the tremendous costs associated with the project. ( Which they greatly underestimated to get votes, like over-estimating ridership, etc).
The false numbers came from those that helped finance their own money grab. Go figure.
Be smart, STOP SMART. Sue them, and call a moratorium until the Marin and Sonoma County Grand Juries can look into this fraud of a mess.
Signatures for a Ballot measure anyone ? I’ll sign and gather !
Let’s vote again, this is our \Big Dig \ !
$42mm bikepath?
How about we fix the potholes before we start paving more?
The writing is on the wall. The very fact that these letters needed to be written in the first place is insulting and absurd.
http://marinbike.org/Campaigns/SMART/SMART-MUP-Letter-3-15-11.pdf
http://www.marinbike.org/Campaigns/SMART/PathwayPrinciples.shtml
What other projects are you going to have to cannibalize to make this happen under SMART’s version of how your priorities are going to shape up?
And just to be clear about my own perspective- I voted No on Q for one reason, and one reason only- the train. Had you said to me. “tax yourself for a system of bicycle and pedestrian pathways that are the envy of the world, and that interconnect with/within cities and recreational destinations that you and your family can use and feel privileged to have helped make happen” I would have voted for it in a second. Hell, I would have been willing to pay 1/2 cent and gone out of my way to spend more money locally to see it happen that much sooner. The MCBC, SCBC, and the taxpayers now have an opportunity to unite for a common cause and reshape our future in a meaningful way for the benefit of everyone. Or, you can stay on board with the train and watch it implode itself, taking you along with it. Time to get rid of the train and the tiresome weekly reports of what’s going wrong, and who’s getting screwed now, and to see our best intentions and interests looked after and fulfilled in a way that we can ALL take pride in for a change.
Liars.
“Other agencies are still on track to build bike path segments,such as…Marin County and Caltrans for stretches through the Novato Narrows”.
The Narrows was the most talked up section of SMART’s bicycle path and it was a lie. SMART never intended to put fill on wetlands for bicycles, it was always part of Caltran’s plan for widening 101.
So if cyclists really want a path between Petaluma and Novato they will have to get behind the campaign to widen 101.
To bad the rail authority ever got funded. We could have had a truly great biking and hiking trail running from Eureka to San Rafael with spurs to Sebastopol and Sonoma.
Both Cloverdale and now the cyclist are unhappy that they are not getting what they want and are threatening to sue. This project was Never financial a good Idea from the start and all it turns out is that they were sold a bill of goods by politicians catering to the special interest groups to get this boondoggle passed! Remember the old saying “If it looks too good to be true – it most likely is not true!!”
This isn’t Europe & we are not Europeans. And believe it or not, some of us DON’T WANT TO BE! Some of us are quite content with admiring the positive aspects of Euro culture while keeping our own.
We don’t want round-abouts or “Smart Trains” or tiny little tin can cars. We don’t want $10.00 a gallon gas or 50%+ income tax rates. We don’t want the GOVERNMENT to control our Health Care or force our neighbors to pay for it. We want to hop in our gas guzzling, CO2 spewing SUVs & drive ourselves on our own schedule to wherever we want to go on the route of our choosing. We don’t want the GOVERNMENT to control every little aspect of our lives. We want to succeed or fail on our own and reap the rewards or face the consequences without being forced to share either. And we WILL keep our guns just in case we find ourselves living under a GOVERNMENT that has become what our founding fathers fought & died to escape. If that frightens you, you really need to move to a Country where you “feel” safe & nurtured while you still have the right to do so.
Any bike that cost more then $400.00 should be treated like a vehicle. The owner should be licensed, pay a registration fee, and be insured. Why should tax payers who will never ride a bike fund the bike lanes on our city streets or bike paths? Let the free ride be over. If you want to ride along the train so bad then start helping to pay for it.
The SMART Board will discard everything, except for the projects that enriches their cronies and ‘contributors’ that benefit for big $$$$$$’s.
SMART has been a scam from the start. They have lied about everything. 7-10,000 riders a day ? More like 2,000.
The SMART (dumb) Train will be a huge money-suck in perpetuity.
Be smart, STOP SMART
@Eric-
You claim that the central problem is the reduced revenue- I would contend that at least as big a problem is the \increased\ (read under-estimated) costs- It was reported back in November that the cost overruns were at least $154 million. And that is AFTER a 20% cost overrun contingency built in.
Overly optimistic revenue projections, while not wise, are forgivable. But when the project costs are severely under-estimated, that’s a show of either incompetence, negligence, or willfully misleading the public on the cost of the project. In the private sector, when someone misjudges costs this drastically, they are fired in short order.
Not only that, but there is no meta-factor with the markets or economy that can be pointed to for the increase in costs- real estate costs are still down, labor is cheap due to high unemployment, and construction materials are still inexpensive due to a flagging construction sector.
The fact of the matter is that this project is way over budget, way under funded, will only serve about 2500-3000 riders daily, when it is completed! The first section is slated to serve 60% of the ridership… so $470 million for 3000 daily riders… that’s $156,000 per rider. Really?
This thing is a financial nightmare. The cost/benefit analysis comes nowhere near making sense.
I would have never voted for it without the bike path addition.
@Eric-
You sound like you have a lot of bets going on a change in the political landscape. I wouldn’t start spending any of it just yet. 40+ years of clamoring for power and the progressive democrats managed to turn their own revolution into one of the biggest outcries of public distrust and fear of governmental abuse of power in this country’s history after just two. In terms of generating its own undoing, SMART is making more headway on its own than opponents could ever hope to. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this train is giving ‘smart’ programs everywhere a bad image. Go ahead, call us the villains for sharing our unwavering opinions on what constitutes boondoggles and failure, but we’re not the ones calling the shots and throwing our old friends under the wheels when times get a little tough.
Another bone of this dinosaur SMART train has fallen by the wayside. How much longer before the whole beast crumbles to the earth?
This train was out of place and out of date before those first trains were purchased in Japan. It is a slow death by a thousand cuts as the Chinese say. How much longer before the Board of dreamers realizes the thing is not feasible or sustainable and suspenses operations?
The Board is not able to creditably say they have the tax funding to keep the train to nowhere going.
Time to stop the dream and see the reality. It is not going to get on the tracks and the sales tax needs to be redirected to the roads.
My only issue with the statement is that without something to back it up or without following it with “according to the bicycle coalition” it sounds like an editorial remark and possible bias.
Personally I will get a great deal of utility from the bike path and will have little use for the train.
“SMART still on track”
Proponents of the SMART line, those who actually follow the real action on the ground, as the SMART board grapples with the effects of the greatest recession in modern history, know that they are doing the best they can with a very challenging set of cirumstances.
There is no lack of committment to the full build-out of the SMART line and the bike/pedestrian trail. The central problem is substantially reduced revenues from the 1/4 cent sales tax measure. If we can change the political landscape in the 2012 election, and get new majorities in Congress that support mass transit and transit-oriented development, it is possible that Federal funds can be made available to speed up the build out.
Don’t let the Herber Hoover cranks sow dissension, trying to split off the transit advocates from the bike advocates. They opposed the whole concept of SMART from Day One, anyway. Stay on track, and it will all get built, in due time.
@Fred.
The reporter is correct though there is probably no supporting post election data for it. The campaign for the proposition were focus strongly on the bicycling community. I know that because I am part of that community. The campaign promise were made and now they renegged on it. Seems to me there should be a call for a law suit.
The cyclists should be “not OK with it”. I wonder, how much resignation will you be able to stomach? First of all, based on this article’s account of the cost cutting proposals, it already sounds like SMART is looking to foist off an increasing amount of responsibility for the promised path onto a whole host of other agencies. All that work for only 1/3 of what you were promised, walked for, voted for, with probably very little hope for anything but the most piecemeal expansion from the SMART coffers in the future, if any, because, let’s face it, the train is the centerpiece. At least we’re getting half of our travesty. Ha! The path was just a carrot on a stick…you never get it, but it sure looks good when it’s dangled in front of you. Once they bond, you’re going to get all but finished off by degrees. You’re the expendable part of the dream. Watch.
The reporter states : “The pathway was a critical factor in winning voter support for a quarter-cent sales tax to pay for the Sonoma-Marin Area Rapid Transit line.”
According to whom? What study beared this out? I am willing to bet the vast majority of those who voted for this measure could care less about a bike path.