Toellner Tells it

Kansas City Citizen Satisfaction Survey

The Star announced today that the city has just released its 2008 Citizen Satisfaction Survey. It certainly is interesting timing -- a) right after the election, not before. I'm assuming that this was an effort to not remind everyone how disgruntled they are in hopes of passing the light rail vote and b) right after the election of the first non-white as President in the history o fthis country and the survey could more easily get buried in headlines a bit because there is other stuff going on.

There aren't a ton of surprises in the survey, however the city saw pretty significant drops in satisfaction in 32 areas of city services.  Ouch. 

Sixteen areas got below a 20% approval rating.

Six of those are directly related to programs and availability of programs that are the responsibility of the parks department (swimming pools, city sponsored athletic programs, ease of registering for programs, etc).

Five are directly related to basic infastructure issues (building, road, sidewalk maintenance and cleanliness).   

Two are directly related to codes enforcement including abandoned buildings and overgrown weeds.

Certainly I think the mayor's declarationg of war on weeds and metal plates has raised public awareness of how bad these situations are in the city...but suffice it to say, they have not seemed to show improvement at this point. I certainly think the codes enforcement issues seem to have gotten worse over the past couple of years, and not better.

Two are particularly disturbing as they show a concern for the lack of effectiveness of city boads and commissions and the amount of public involvement in local decision-making.  Three other areas just barely made the 20% cutoff with "how ethically the city conducts business", "overall quality of leadership by the city's elected officals" and "effectivenesss of the city manager" all scoring at 23% or below.

I would certainly say that the lack of satisfaction with the administration and the council as a whole certainly came out in the disapproval of the city council and the mayor's Light Rail plan yesterday.

Overall, the city was graded fairly well as a place to live and a place to work -- but horribly as a place to raise children. Concerns over the amount of crime -- particularly in eastern neighborhoods and in public parks at night -- and no doubt the schools (even though they are measured in the study) are playing a role in that.

There's a lot of data in here -- and I'm sure I'll be pulling out nuggets for awhile, but thought it was worth sharing.

Reasons I'm Voting for Light Rail Tomorrow

There are a lot of reasons why I'm voting yes on the plan for light rail tomorrow. I think it's an important vote for the city, but not an end-all vote. However, unlike the misleading advertising by those who don't want the light rail plan, I feel like now is the perfect time for us to be moving forward.

1) Alternatives for transportation -- I'm a strong believer in providing multiple alternatives for people to move about the city. Light rail is yet another option -- and it will bring new riders into public transit.

2) Democratic Power in Washington -- it is very likely that Barack Obama will be voted in as President tomorrow, along with a couple of dozen other House and Senate seats going to the Democrats, giving them a strong majority in both houses. With the Democrats being more in favor of energy efficient transportation options, there will be no greater time to get Federal dollars than over the next 2-4 years.

3) Kansas City Needs this -- not just in the "keeping up with the Jones" kind of way (although there's that too). We are badly in need of routes that will move people from the urban core to the jobs in other parts of the metro. In leiu of adequate bus service -- particularly in our suburbs -- a regional light rail plan would fit the bill nicely. 6 of the 20 top zip cods for jobs in this city lie either directly along the most likely connector rail line that would come in from Johnson County -- with another 3 major job hubs being easily connected with circulator bus routes in those areas.  We must find a way to open up those jobs to the large percentage of urban Kansas Citians that don't have access to them because they don't own cars.  While this plan is not a regional rail plan, a truly regional rail plan that includes the Kansas side of the state line is unlikely in the same tax vote. Kansas City, MO dedicating itself to the starter route (and the eventual regional route on the Missouri side) is the best way to put pressure on the Kansas side of the line to develop their commuter rail line.

4) Urban development -- rail will move more people more efficiently than buses can (once the line is up and going) -- which will (and has everywhere) spurred density growth along the rail routes. The replacement of surface parking lots in exchange for urban development and population density will be great for the city, and will bring a population tax base into the city that can then help the city pay for other services (like those pesky sewers).

5) Rising Gas prices - - now that gas prices have fallen below $2 a gallon,it is easy to forget that the price of gasoline continues to go up. (click on the 6 year map to see the trend). The government has allowed prices to drop following the collapse of our credit flow in this country -- and leading into the election -- to improve consumer confidence. However, it is undeniable that the trend in gasoline prices is up. And will continue that way for the next 5-10 years. Having this ready to go in 5 -7 years will be important, vs waiting for the gas price crunch to get us.

6) Rising demand for public transit -- With the higher gas prices, more people moving to the urban core, and a greater emphasis on our environment, there is a greater demand now for public transit. Bus ridership is up to a level not seen in decades.  Amtrak has seen it's numbers go up 30% on the year.  There is no reason to believe this trend, which is taking place across the US, will go down any time soon.

Is the plan perfect? No. Not in my mind. But it's a good, workable start -- that will give other areas in the metro confidence that we are moving forward as a city and that they will be left behind if they don't participate. It's a good plan. And the timing is right to move forward.  Let's get on board.

No Car Day

 In 2007, the city of Kunming China joined 100 cities from around the country for a "No Car Day".  The idea went over so well, that the city is now doing a no-car day once a month.  No private cars are allowed on the roads, only motorcycles, taxis and buses.

I'm not sure if this would work in Kansas City. However, let's assume that say, in 2011, when the city opens the light rail line (yeah, I'm optimistic, shoot me) and reconfigures the bus routes to tie into the light rail line. Let's also assume that we've created more bike-lanes that also feed into the routes. Let's say in order to get people to experiment with the new transit routes, they instituted a no-car day so that everyone was forced to use the public transit for the day - - and found out they kind of liked it. 

It would seem like a good way to encourage people to try out a new public transit system.  Not all would stick with it, but I think many would. Now, where's that new public transit system? 

Hat Tip: PSFK.

Editor's Update: Kunming does their car-free days on the fourth Saturday of every month.  Certainly the decrease in the amount of traffic without the commuter traffic makes this a possibility on a weekend.

Is American Car Culture Running out of Gas?

The Philadelphia Inquirer had an editorial a couple of weeks ago entitled, "Is American Car Culture Running out of Gas?"

While the writer doesn't assume people are going to instantly give up their automobiles, he does note that the car culture developed in this country hasn't turned out to work so well.  He notes that on top of the enviornmental problems that come from too much motor traffic and suburban sprawl, it hasn't been good for individuals either.  The average American spends 100 hours in communting every year -- slightly more time than the average American spends on vacation.

How, then, can I say that car culture doesn't work? Because the cost to individual and communal life, and to the environment, has been too high. And the bill is just now coming due.

Interestingly, KC Light Rail Blog has a post today that several Johnson County Bus Routes are becoming overcrowded.  JOCO can't afford to add more buses, so they're left trying to deal with what they have -- but it's encouraging that bus ridership is growing.

My company this week has offered us an incentive to car-pool, take public transit or walk/bike to work. I made the decision to bike (it's an easy ride for me although the lack of bike lanes made it a bit dicey in rush hour traffic). Many of my co-workers have opted for the bus -- and have found out just how difficult (and time consuming) it can be to get from our suburbs to downtown on the bus.  I hope to have a few anecdotal stories to share later on this. It's pretty clear that there may be a lot of room and demand for improvement in public transportation in the near future.

On a related note, it looks like the Dutch have offered an incentive where every three years, people can buy a new bicycle with pre-tax income.  The idea is to encourage people to buy bicycles, which have much less strain on infastructure and the environment.  Not a bad idea.

It's very evident that as we become more concerned about our environment and gas becomes more costly, we must provide more and better options for people who want to take public transit -- and possibly incent using other options of transit for the betterment of the environment and our infastructure.

New York Times Reports Increased Use in Public Transit

On Friday, I noted that the increase in gas prices was going to have a long-term affect on how people commute, use automobiles, choose places to live, work and shop.  The New York Times reported yesterday that at least the affects are being seen in increased use in public transportation throughout the country.

The article also noted that on top of high gas prices, the portability of laptop computers making commuting time productive time, increased traffic congestion and increased costs in parking are also leading to the surge in public transit use.

New York and Boston, cities that have always had heavy use of public transit, have seen transit usage go up by over 5% so far this year -- including 10-15% increases in traditionally car-commuter areas like Long Island.

Denver has seen transit use go up 8% in the first 4 months of this year.  Charlotte (which added a light rail line in the past year) has seen commuter traffic go up by 34% over a year ago. Some lines in San Francisco have seen 9-10% increases.  Miami and Ft. Lauderdale are also seeing increases.

Locally, the successes of the K-10 Connector route connecting Lawrence to Johnson County is also being praised, with ridership doubling over the past year, even though some riders express discontent over connecting routes once they arrive in Johanson County.

Also of note, it appears that bike sales also appear to be going up.

Kansas City as a major midwestern hub must follow the trends in demand of a changing generation of people and economic conditions (as well as desire for "green" solutions) in order to maintain its position as a major city.  The trends of demand by people across the country is that they are moving away from their cars and toward public transit. We must work quickly to upgrade these for all members of our community.

Thoughts on the rise in gas prices

The media today made a big deal out of the overnight rise in gas prices.  A regular gallon of gas is now $3.63 here in Kansas City.  This leads to a lot of questions.  One is, why does everyone seem surprised by this when the price of gas has been steadily trending upward for the past 6 years. (you may have to pick the 6 year trend data at the top of the chart).

You may alwo ask why people are so upset by this.  People in general say they want to be environmentally conscious, and want to "go green" and yet people are upset when gasoline (a non-renewable resource) prices go up -- yet a gallon of gas is still less expensive than a gallon of milk (a renewable resource).

Those questions aside, there are some things that the rising gas prices mean for Kansas City -- if people are paying attention.

1) Gas prices are likely to continue to go up.  If prices continue the way they have been going (and there is no reason to think they won't), we'll be looking at $5.50-$6 gasoline by 2012.

2) Even Kansas Citians, who have an afinity for their automobiles, will change their driving habits at $5.50 per gallon.  These changed habits will come in several forms.

3) This means: more time shopping in their neighborhoods vs regional shopping destinations.  This could change the way we look at zoning an land use as demand for shopping, retail, and restaurants actually in neighborhoods vs in major regional dining centers.  It also may mean that KCMO's surplus in regional shopping destinations may already be archaic.

4) More people shopping/dining in their neighborhoods will mean more people walking. Which means less need for parking -- ie Kansas City's 1940s parking mandates for huge amounts of parking for businesses.  This also means that with less parking available, parking prices will go up.

5) People are going to want alternative forms of transportation. Yes, this means better bus systems, and light rail.

6) In leui of public transit or driving, more people will turn to walking and biking to work places -- meaning companies should look at putting in shower facilities in offices and safe/convenient places to park bikes.  The city also needs to put in more safe bike lanes for bicyclists.

7) People are going to want to live closer to where they work. This means that KCMO has a huge opportunity to attract more, upscale residents that want to live closer to downtown jobs.  It also means that if the city doesn't improve resident satisfaction with city services, improve its schools, and create good situations for busineses to stay in downtown and the urban core, we risk losing businesses to the suburbs as companies move closer to their employee base.

8) There may also be increased demand for regional rail transportation via services like Amtrak as driving between major cities may be more cost-prohibitive. So it's good that the State of Missouri is investing in improving the Amtrak service across the state.

There are a lot of opportunities for companies and the city if we notice that this isn't a "new" trend of increased gas prices -- but the direction it's heading. It doesn't take much to look at places like Europe, which have had $5 gasoline for a long time to see the widespread use of bicycles, public transportation and eurorail -- as well as strong city centers -- to see what this would mean in the US.  We can either ignore the trends, or prepare for them.  It won't be going away. 

Meanwhile, use the increase in gas prices to take advantage of next week's car-free challenge and see how doable it is for your lifestyle.

Providing incentives for Kansas City Residents

I was pretty devastated to hear the news today that two locally owned restaurant establishments have, or are soon, going to close their doors.  Apparently the Mango Room has already closed. If I'd gone there as often as I intended to I would have known that already. Meanwhile, Magazines and Coffee looks like it is closing its doors on Friday.  Sad.

It can't really be a surprise that some of the local businesses are struggling. I noted a couple of months ago that I had noticed a decline in business at some of my Midtown haunts following the opening of the Kansas City Power & Light District.  This, combined with the recent smoking ordinance (and the new one that will take affect in June) are definitely having an impact on locally owned businesses. (I will note that both Mags and Coffee and Mango Room were already non-smoking).  That's it, tax incentives for the big guys, restrictions on the little guys.

The results can already be felt in other areas -- especially in the 18th & Vine District where the Peach Tree Restaurant is moving to their new downtown location.

Could we at least look at helping small restaurants provide better outside seating options to help them still retain smokers?

The truth is that Kansas City doesn't have the downtown density yet to support everything that's there. It's coming, but it's not there yet. Mayor Funkhouser addressed the density issue at his most recent neighborhood community meeting in the Hyde Park neighborhood.  The question came up about light rail -- and the mayor of course was more than happy to talk about the subject.

He noted, and agreed with the questioner, that KC doesn't currently have the density to justify light rail. However, he also noted that KC as a city cannot thrive unless it builds that density.  The city cannot continue to survive with people continuing to flock to the suburbs and only driving in to work.  The city infrastructure cannot deal with a model that is nearly 100% driven by the automobile and people living in other cities/states.

I happen to agree with him on that, so it got my mind spinning on ideas to encourage people to live in KCMO vs one of the other suburbs...along with some thoughts on encouraging the use of public transit.  Here are a few ideas:

1) How about incentivizing businesses to go to four day work-weeks or providing more opportunities for employees to work from home one day a week. This could lighting traffic load on our highways by 20% instantly and well as reducing emissions, gas consumption and wear and tear on roads.  We also have to spend less public money on things like parking garages and surface parking lots with fewer cars on the road (thanks Shayne for that idea).

2) What if we provided tax credits for money spent on public transportation?  We already are providing credits for people who buy Hybrid cars, why not do so to encourage public transit.  And it should be done in the form of credits, not deductions, as many low-income and young professionals who rely heavily on public transit don't itemize their taxes because they don't own homes.  Maybe this wouldn't make sense on a federal level (because there are some areas where transit is already well established), but certainly would make sense for the state of Missouri and Kansas to offer this.

3) What if we waived the KCMO earnings tax on people who live in KCMO?  The main point of the earnings tax is to get revenue from people who use the roads/infrastructure but aren't paying property taxes that help pay for them.  If we waived the tax for people who lived in KCMO we may encourage more people who work in KCMO to live in KCMO, which would increase overall tax revenue for the city having more people living here...which would help downtown businesses and improve our use of public transit.

I'm not sure of the practicality of all these ideas - or of the unintended consequences that come from all incentives. But I think they at least bear some consideration.  We need to give people more attractive reasons to choose KCMO over our other suburbs in order for the city to thrive - and reward the types of behavior that we want them to take part in.  Plus, I'd love that 4-day work week.

Why the Democratic nomination may affect Kansas City

I haven't voted yet today.  I will, but I haven't.  I'm honestly still trying to figure out who I want to vote for. Heck, I'm not even sure what ballot I want to vote on.

The Libertarian in me wants to vote for Ron Paul. He has no chance of winning, and has some pretty extreme views on some things, but honestly, I like the idea of the federal government staying out of my business as much as possible.

The old-school Republican in me wants to vote for John McCain...I really wanted him to get the nomination 8 years ago....although I confess that the old guard Republicans haven't done a lot to inspire a lot of confidence from me lately.

The Democrat in me -- the one that doesn't like the super-Christian my values must be your values line -- wants to vote on the Democratic ballot. I honestly like most of Hilary's views on economic policy...but can't bring myself to vote for her.  Do I really want the possibility of having 28 years of Bush's and Clinton's in the White House defining the early part of my life? 

From a selfish standpoint, I'd like Obama to win. His foreign policy scares me a little, but I like his fire and passion...and leadership.  Leadership is certainly something that this country has lacked for a very long time.  However, there may be a bigger reason to vote for Obama. 

I've always criticized people for always voting in the Presidential elections, but not in their local elections.  My personal opinion is that a) my day-to-day life is dramatically more affected by local politics than national politics and b) my vote carries much more weight in local politics than national ones.  Plus, if I have a city administrator that I trust, I can call them on the phone, and they likely respond (unless it's Beth Gottstein, then I don't hear back).  I doubt any of these Presidential candidates would ever personally respond to an email.

Obama winning the democratic nomination would most likely have the greatest affect on my life here in KC.  In November, the City Council is planning on putting a light rail plan on the ballot. My overarching feeling is that if you divided the city into two groups -- those over, say 50, and those under 50, those over 50 would not vote for the light rail plan.  Those under 50 would most likely vote for it.

Obama has sparked political interest in the "under 40 crowd" as he is someone who -- whether correctly or incorrectly -- people under 40 identify well with. He seems like someone that is not part of the 'old guard". 

I think Obama running for President in November would drive a lot more young people to the polls -- these same young people that would prefer light rail, but tend to not represent themselves well at the polls for policy initiatives.  I think that Obama winning, would dramatically increase the chances of light rail passing in KC in November.  Hillary Clinton winning would likely not spark the younger voters to the polls....and that would likely doom the KC Light Rail vote.

So with that, I'm most likely going to vote for Obama today...and it has very little to do with who I want to be president.

As they say, all politics are local...

40 cent increase in gas taxes?

Yesterday, the Feds announced a proposal that would increase the overall gas tax by 40 cents per gallon over the next 5 years.  That's 200% increase over the next five years.

The reason for the tax increase is the US, at all levels, should be spending between $225 billion and $340 billion in surface transportation each year -- but is generally spending about 40% of that.  The Kansas City area alone has an estimated $5 billion in shortfalls on roads -- including upgrades to K10, K7, 69 Highway in Johnson County, and I-70 in Eastern Jackson County.

That's a lot of $$$.

There was an interesting quote by Missouri Rep. Sam Graves:

"Americans are already paying too much at the pump for gasoline. I believe that we should invest in our roads and infrastructure, but the way to do it is to cut spending on wasteful federal programs."

Hard to argue about wasteful federal programs...however, he's wrong about Americans paying too much for gas. In spite of many, many increases in the price of gasoline over time, Americans continue to trend upward in terms of total travel miles.  I'm no economics genious, but if we continue to buy more gas, in light of rising prices, the price isn't too high...ESPECIALLY when we are burning gas faster than mother earth can make more.  Supply and demand would indicate that Graves is wrong.

Overall, we NEED to do something about the increased shortfall in money spent on transportation.  The gas tax may be the answer.  However, cities, and the Feds, need to be investing in better public/mass transportation systems so that people who cannot afford the higher prices of gas have other options.  We can't afford as a society to just hike up the price of gasoline and not provide other alternatives.  It would be a complete disaster for the lower income brackets (and thus all of us).  All signs point toward inproving public transit.  This means light rail, better bus service, and better rail service between cities (aka Amtrak).

For those of you who don't think that light rail is a viable option given the costs -- I want to remind you that the KC Area alone is looking at $5 BILLION in road improvements over the next 10 years...on non-sustainable traffic improvements. $5 billion, at a cost of $40 million a mile, would build 125 total miles of light rail line over the next decade. That would cover a lot of area.

If this comes to fruition, look for a short-term decrease in urban sprawl, and increased demand for homes closer to the city, and a major increase in demand for public transportation.  Is our city prepared for this?  We should be preparing.  Now.

The KC Star's Light Rail Plan

They're getting roasted for it, and deservedly so. But today, the KC Star launched a piece promoting its own Light Rail plan.  People will criticize that the Star should report the news, not create it. I tend to agree.  I also get a chuckle at how the Star has presented the plan as being this great line of thinking when honestly, it's pretty much the line that is fairly universally agreed upon throughout the city.  Down Burlington, Across the Heart of America Bridge, past the River Market on Grand to the Sprint Center (close to City Hall), then cutting over to Main and going down Main past Union Station, Crown Center, near Westport, to the Plaza.  The only "new" thing is that the Star is actually proposing an East/West line connector running from Prospect down Linwood and connecting with the North/South line there. 

While the Star will get roasted for making the news, or for their lack of creativity with the plan, the reality is that most of what they propose makes a lot of sense for a lot of reasons.  It's the only plan that I've seen that adequately hits the central business corridor (essential if we're ever to get exapansion lines from the suburbs that connect in to the River Market and Union Station) and provides service for those on the East Side that tend to need public transit the most. And, it will be so flippin' convenient for me personally I can hardly stand it.  I'll sell my car.  Seriously.

But what's even more amazing to me is that the Star can put together a proposal in about 1/10th the time the city can spend actually talking about it and doing virtually nothing.  That's pretty sad. So if the city can make their own news outside of having 6 small-community politicians say "we support this", I have no problem with the Star creating their own route.  At least they're attempting to do something.