$1 billion problem has a $1 billion solution
By: North County Times Opinion staff - | ∞
Our view: Trolley extension from Old Town to UTC shouldn't be delayed, it should be eliminated
Like government agencies throughout the state, the San Diego Association of Governments is discovering that the revenue it will raise through the 40-year TransNet tax ---- estimated at $14 billion between now and 2048 ---- won't be enough to cover the 47 transportation projects it put before voters in 2004.
In fact, earlier this month the agency said it expected to come up Panel: Build 'Early Action' projects on time about $1 billion short.
Of course, the fact the association has problems honoring its commitments is nothing new. We're still waiting for upgrades to Highway 76 to be completed. That project was promised to North County drivers nearly 20 years ago.
And the Sprinter, operated by the agency through the North County Transit District, still isn't running, a month after VIPs took it out for an inaugural spin.
But unlike most of the problems facing the regional transit association, this one has a simple solution. It just so happens that there's $1 billion in TransNet money set aside to extend a trolley line in the city of San Diego from Old Town to the University Towne Centre mall in La Jolla.
Staff members at the regional association have suggested delaying the trolley project so that other, more important projects could be given priority.
We think that would be a bad idea. Instead, the trolley extension should be wiped off the planning books altogether.
There is one little wrinkle, however. The trolley was one of three projects that voters put into a "lock box" when they approved TransNet. To take it out will require a two-thirds vote of the agency's board and a majority vote of the people.
That will be no easy task, especially with the all-powerful city of San Diego protecting its turf, but it's an option that voters in North County and elsewhere throughout the county must begin to consider if they want to preserve scarce transportation dollars.
And the timing couldn't be more perfect. The agency is holding its annual retreat next week. Now is the time for North County's representatives on the association's board of directors to launch a campaign to kill the trolley so that other, worthier transportation projects, like the widening of Highway 78, can proceed.
Rarely in life are $1 billion problems so easily solved. Even better, it will give our local politicians a chance to prove they're looking out for North County residents, not the interests of the downtown establishment.
Let's see, we'll get more transportation dollars and local politicians will get points for leadership. Sounds like a win-win situation.
More Stories
Advertisement
Derek wrote on Jan 25, 2008 4:33 AM:If you widen the 78, people are only going to move in along it and clog it back up with cars, and then you'll have to widen it all over again. "If you build it, they will come." Where does it stop?
Traffic on a freeway can't possibly be intolerable if people are still using it. If that isn't good enough, then widen it with toll lanes so they pay for themselves. Especially if the county is going to cut traffic impact fees for new construction.
George wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:42 AM:Hi, Derek! Ah, but people have already moved in and the planners have failed to widen the 78 to keep up with the population growth. It's time to play catch-up! When it takes 90 minutes to complete a 30-minute commute, the traffic is definitely intolerable not only in wasted time but in wasted fuel and artifically increased vehicle emissions. Commuters are already paying for the freeways in gas taxes, sales taxes, registration fees, license fees, weight fees, and income taxes -- but the money has been diverted to non-freeway projects. Charging us a toll to drive on a road we've already paid to construct is just plain wrong.
Freeway wrote on Jan 25, 2008 7:56 AM:The 78 is too narrow and is chocking the economy. Wider is better!
George wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:11 AM:Since the proposed trolley extension would be right next to the existing Coaster tracks, putting a Coaster station at the Gilman Drive offramp (and/or at the Miramar Road undercrossing) would be a much less expensive way to provide the desired service to UCSD. UCSD's existing shuttle bus could make the connection between the station and the campus quick and easy. Furthermore, MTS could offer connecting service to UTC and the businesses on Miramar Road (assuming they're not still discriminating against the riders transferring from the Coaster).
Bizarre wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:32 AM:An article about how to benefit the people in La Jolla. Oh goodie. Maybe if that money was spent on widening Hwy 76 the people in North County for whom this paper is written might benefit. Weird editorial.
Erik B. wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:25 AM:A proposal SDI penned (...) was a bit more complicated than NTC's proposal to spike the project but gets at the same endpoint - because a billion dollars is just the down payment on the line. It will inevitably get more expensive as the UTC community demands (and gets) grade seperations, evalated tracks, better looking stations, etc. etc.
Jaque wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:40 AM:I've sat in on some of the planning meetings for the 76 realignment. Sadly, they are only talking about 4 lane road, when in reality it should be a minimum of 6 (if not 8). There are "parkways" in Scripps that are 6 lanes (3 each way) and with the ever growing north county it seems preposterous to even consider 4 for a regional highway.
Randy wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:59 AM:The trolley from Old Town to UTC would have greater ridership than the Splinter from Oceanside to Escondido!
Walt wrote on Jan 25, 2008 1:06 PM:It's a start, but there is another $10.4 billion in the mass transit capital budget! Examples; $1 billion tunnel under UTC so a tiny number of rail passengers can save 10 minutes, $700 million to double track and extend Sprinter, $735 million for parking at transit stations like at MTS headquarters. (what happened to feeder buses and transit oriented developments?). Whatever approvals are needed, putting the $10.4 billion instead where the congestion rubber meets the road will be noticed quickly. Also there more efficient new automated personal transport systems to start.
For Derek:SANDAG has beeen trying for 20 years to build San Diego out of congestion with lavish transit expenditures. "They" haven't come, but they are already there wasting fuel and time on highways.
George wrote on Jan 25, 2008 6:30 PM:As long as we're offering topics for SANDAG's annual retreat, I'd like to remind them of the three important topics mentioned in "SANDAG's New Year's Resolutions" at http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/01/03/opinion/commentary/19_35_091_2_08.txt
Kevin C wrote on Jan 25, 2008 6:40 PM:There are a lot of problems with TransNet. The SANDAG board isn't going to reopen the issue when they have 40 years of income tied up in it. The situation requires the public to rally and bring the issue forward.
billy wrote on Jan 25, 2008 6:40 PM:Now the Sprinter start up is March 9th.
We need to get rid of SANDAG and all it's board members and start over. This is the biggest BOONDOGGLE! Transit in San Diego County is a mess. Shame on all of the board members.
Tony wrote on Jan 25, 2008 11:57 PM:If you look closely at the article about the Sprinter start-up date, it *does* say March 9th but it doesn't specify the *year*. That means it could get going around March 9th of 2009 and that would fit with the announced starting date. The devil is in the details!
Jake wrote on Jan 26, 2008 7:31 AM:Would it seem unfair or unrealistic to allocate funds by dollar per user? I can't imagine the number of trolley passengers even being close to the number which ride in automobiles. I also cannot imagine La Jolla residents giving up usage of their luxury automobiles. Can you imagine a shopper getting on a trolley burdened by shopping bags from Nordstroms, Macy's, Coach, etc.? This trolley proposal is hardly a good bang for the buck deal for tax paying citizens.
Walt wrote on Jan 26, 2008 8:02 AM:Right on Jake!. The trolley that has spent the major part of 1/3 of all transit funds for 20 years, carries about 0.50% of trips by automobile. How did you vote for Prop A in 2004?
Nonsense wrote on Jan 26, 2008 8:29 AM:The Old Town to UTC extension is vitally important. just because it doesn't help North County (yet) doesn't mean it isn't a huge addition to our mass transit needs down here. The trolley system is finally starting to have an effect because it has expanded enough to be of real use.
Another Tony wrote on Jan 26, 2008 10:23 AM:There was a reason that "lock box" was placed on the Trolley Extension from Old Town to UCSD.
In order to convince the citizens in the all-powerful city of San Diego to vote for the taxes that pay to widened I-15, I-5 and 78 in the North County, there had to be some assurances that the all-consuming North County couldn't steal the rest of the money after the tax passed.
Good luck on this idea and if you succeed you can bet it will be the end of TransNet.
Dave wrote on Jan 26, 2008 3:01 PM:If North County hadn't killed SA 680, and fought Camino Ruiz, and 125 north of Santee, maybe there wouldn't be so much to complain about.
The city of San Diego gets very little from the TransNet extenstion, La Jolla also. Good luck getting them to ditch these few benefits.
Bill wrote on Jan 26, 2008 3:52 PM:Go to hell North County Times.
Walt wrote on Jan 26, 2008 6:49 PM:More Nonsense! 0.50% of trips is real use??
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement