Rail RUnner for Lobo Games?

[PHILLY_1982]

http://www.abqjournal.com/news/metro/592861metro09-08-07.htm

nm

[junior2430]

Heck yeah!!! It's been long overdue. It would help attendence a ton. PLEASE DO THIS!!!

[loborick]

It's a great idea. But it could only be used for certain games, primarily the weekends when the Rail Runner does not have regular service. And will they be running from Santa Fe? As anyone from Santa Fe knows, the traffic is practically bumper to bumper back to Santa Fe after games. A lot of people go down from Santa Fe.

It would save me hundred of dollars in gas, which I would surely appreciate.

[LoBo LoCo]

Last summer I was in DC for a baseball game...you should have seen the DC Metro...it was unreal for a Nationals game. Every single metro car was filled to the brim. And on the way out...they have both directions running from the stadium stop to get people out to their destinations quickly. And this was at a BASEBALL game!!!

[loborick]

I was in Berkley a few years ago and caught an A's game. It was awesome to take the BART almost to the front of the stadium! Talk about convenient...wow!

[Burro lobo]

When you mention Espanpla and Santa Fe, they need a spur to Los Alamos too. The traffic from Espanola to Santa Fe and Los Alamos every day is unbelievable and Santa Fe to Los Alamos too. Then tie Albq. to Los Alamos and the housing and living in a city would help those who already commute every day. Next one to Puerto Vallarta and I could catch all the games too!!! Ai ya ya I can see it now!!! All jokes aside it's a great project and now is it's time!!!

[loborick]

The problem here is they are already saying the RailRunner is going way over budget, using up road money. They are talking about maybe raising the gas tax because they're running out of money to maintain roads.

[Roob]

All jokes aside it's a great project and now is it's time!!!


It's a great project until I start having to pay an additional 6 cents per gallon of gas to fund this thing. :eek:

[Roob]

The problem here is they are already saying the RailRunner is going way over budget, using up road money. They are talking about maybe raising the gas tax because they're running out of money to maintain roads.

I hadn't read your post when I brought up a similar concern Rick (or is that RPS?). Concept is great when it's free. Unfortunately these programs aren't self-sustaining (revenues don't cover the expenditures). Bah humbug.

[PHILLY_1982]

Theres talk of toll roads as well. A gas tax is very realisitc. WHich no one likes, but the state and ABQ metro area needs to do somehting in terms of mass transportation.

I'm tellin ya guys, if you give the people an alternative, they will take it!

Nothing in this wold is for free.

[loborick]

The big problem with the RR is it is losing a large federal grant that will now have to be made up by the state. I know that you are very pro-growth, Philly. But toll roads and a higher gas tax for something that a small fraction of people are using is not smart. And I am not going to fund Albuquerque mass transit either. That is a municipal thing. There could be some heads rolling in the legislature if this kind of stuff passes.

Albuquerque needs better mass transit, but they need to fund it themselves. For that matter, so does Santa Fe. If you want to bus across town, it can take two hours. It is already costing me hundreds more in gas to go to Lobo games. An increase in gas tax and a toll on the road may cause me to give up my Lobo tickets. As it is, I am hurting financially.

[EPluribusUNM]

I feel your pain, Rick. About all I can say in favor of the RailRunner and the games is that they need to explore new revenue opportunities like this. Mass transit in western cities almost always needs a boost from the tax base. Maybe you can pick it up at Bernalillo

Unfortunately, they can't change their routes and go to the State Fair like a bus. Maybe more event based travel (Bernalillo Wine Fest, Balloon Fiesta, Isotopes, Crawls, UNM BBall and Football) can help keep the tax man away from your door.

[Roob]

Great post Rick. Dr. M and I were having a similar discussion at the tailgate. His point was that these types of programs have not proven to pay for themselves - they always require some form of subsidization. When the Federal Grant subsidy is removed, the burden to subsidize falls on the local taxpayers. OUCH! If there are only 200 regular users of this service, does it make sense to have everyone else pay for this service? Certainly the program looks great in concept, nobody will argue that. But the program may place an undue financial burden on the general population (see Rick for Exhibit A).

[Mark]

Great discussion guys! Makes me wish I knew more about it all!

[PHILLY_1982]

The big problem with the RR is it is losing a large federal grant that will now have to be made up by the state. I know that you are very pro-growth, Philly. But toll roads and a higher gas tax for something that a small fraction of people are using is not smart. And I am not going to fund Albuquerque mass transit either. That is a municipal thing. There could be some heads rolling in the legislature if this kind of stuff passes.

Albuquerque needs better mass transit, but they need to fund it themselves. For that matter, so does Santa Fe. If you want to bus across town, it can take two hours. It is already costing me hundreds more in gas to go to Lobo games. An increase in gas tax and a toll on the road may cause me to give up my Lobo tickets. As it is, I am hurting financially.

I hear what your saying Rick. And I agree with you. NM really lost out on that Fed. money that the Rail Runner was supposed to get. I'm kinda divided on the subject, but totally favor the RR being successful. But at what cost?

The only thing I disagree with you is the the Rail Runner is not just an ABQ thing, as most of the stops are outside of the ABQ city lmits. As soon as Santa Fe is connected by next year, there should be a HUGE ncrease in ridership. This thing can work in theory if all the counties help pay for it. But thats not to say Bernalillo county shouldn't foot more than half of the bill. Realistically, smaller counties can only help out so much. The NMRCOG needs to help get everyone an baord to cooperate with this deal. It's a Metro thing, and all countied connected need to help pay a little extra.

Unfortaunately Rick, it's not just the RR that is affected. Like you mentioned, the RR is dipping into State money for Roads. NM is growing at a steady pace, but is too fast for money to secured. I've heard that there are half a BILLION dollars worth of road projects tat were approved last year, that are on hold because funds have been diverted. In the long run, the RR will help tremendously in the growing probelm of road construction here in NM.

The Guv needs to give up this unrealistic goal of being president, and help out more in the State. I was in favor of him running at first, but you got seriously take look at the situation, and see he is a second tier candidate. At best he is a VP, and he is not prepared for the media scrutiny, as he has fumbled all over america.

[loborick]

I hear what your saying Rick. And I agree with you. NM really lost out on that Fed. money that the Rail Runner was supposed to get. I'm kinda divided on the subject, but totally favor the RR being successful. But at what cost?

The only thing I disagree with you is the the Rail Runner is not just an ABQ thing, as most of the stops are outside of the ABQ city lmits. As soon as Santa Fe is connected by next year, there should be a HUGE ncrease in ridership. This thing can work in theory if all the counties help pay for it. But thats not to say Bernalillo county shouldn't foot more than half of the bill. Realistically, smaller counties can only help out so much. The NMRCOG needs to help get everyone an baord to cooperate with this deal. It's a Metro thing, and all countied connected need to help pay a little extra.

Unfortaunately Rick, it's not just the RR that is affected. Like you mentioned, the RR is dipping into State money for Roads. NM is growing at a steady pace, but is too fast for money to secured. I've heard that there are half a BILLION dollars worth of road projects tat were approved last year, that are on hold because funds have been diverted. In the long run, the RR will help tremendously in the growing probelm of road construction here in NM.

The Guv needs to give up this unrealistic goal of being president, and help out more in the State. I was in favor of him running at first, but you got seriously take look at the situation, and see he is a second tier candidate. At best he is a VP, and he is not prepared for the media scrutiny, as he has fumbled all over america.

Nice post, Philly. Actually, the thing you say we disagree on, we don't. I think you mistook my post to say that Albuquerque should be paying for the RR. You mentioned mass transit, and my point was each municipality is responsible for taking care of their own. As I mention, SF is lacking in this.

I was excited about the RR when it was first conceived, and very impressed when I took a tour of one of the cars. But it has turned out to be a financial nightmare, as many had predicted. I understand the state will be trying for another grant, although it won't be as big as the one that was lost.

There are some major problems in regards to roads and transportation in this state. I hope a way can be found to fund what we need to without putting an undue burden on the populace. We have a multi-billion dollar surplus fund that could be used. But the governor and legislature are scared to death to touch it. So we will all die, but we will have a fabulous surplus fund to brag about.

[PHILLY_1982]

Ok, gothca!
I understand what your saying.

And I agree with your thoughts.
Especially on the last sentence.

Like I said earlier, this deal comes at "what cost?"

Unfortunately Rick, I don't see any favorable solution. And there is a good chance we get screwed as a whole.

[Dr.M]

Mass transit is sort of like peace or communism, utopian ideas which don't fly in the real world. Mass transit has been successful in old established cities with a dense population. Western cities on the whole exploded post WW-II. Because of the available space and advent of the new turnpikes built around the car, we developed urban sprawl with the corresponding low population density that does not support public transportation. Society can choose to fund public transportation systems, which involves transfer of money from you and me to be used by a few, but when it increases our taxes or leads to unfixed potholes, then the grumbling begins.

Unfortunately, politicians are always promising free services and pie-in-the-sky platforms, witness talk of "free" medical care, universal day care, college education, etc. Are these all bad ideas? Not necessarily, but the voters have to be educated about their true costs. If I were someone whose house was near the RR line and I drove to Santa Fe daily, would I be in favor of the commuter line? Most likely, even though I would be subsidized by taxpayers who on the whole were less well off than I am.

One of my favorite aphorisms is : "When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you rarely hear an objection from Paul." Unfortunately, mass transit systems usually involve a lot of Peters and few Pauls. There has been no demonstration in western cities other than San Francisco that these systems reduce traffic congestion or improve air quality.

I hate to sound so cynical, but that's just the way the facts lead me.

[SpanaBaller]

So many possibilities with this!!!!!

[loborick]

I agree, Dr. M. SF has been the only Western city I've been to that has a successful mass transit system. The BART is very convenient and well run. I don't know how their experiment is going in LA. I know they've been throwing millions of dollars into their subway system. I haven't used the bus system here in Santa Fe except for a couple of times, and there are rarely more than 10 or 15 people on a bus. And they only run every half hour, except for a couple of busy routes, which run every 15 minutes. So, with transfers, it can take a couple of hours to get across town. It is really hard to justify that when I can drive in 15 minutes. The only couple of times I've taken it downtown is when I planned to do some drinking and took a taxi home!

[PHILLY_1982]

Your right on the money Dr. M. And it is a risk.
But!
I'm huge proponent to Seeing it work. You have to try, and ABQ could really use a new way of thinking that involves planning communites around Mass Transportation.

ABQ has a long way to go, but I think they are making strides.

I believe Light Rail would work well in a long term for ABQ. Denver, and SLC are good success stories, They help redevelop areas where there are stops, and indirectly pump money into the economy. They cost alot, but like most public roads, don't generate revenue.

[judas_priest]

is so uneconomic is that it has to compete against the incredible subidies given to owners of private vehicles. The taxes we collect on gasoline and road use don't come anywhere close to the cost of creataing and maintaining the infrastructure that they use, not to mention that excessive private driving contrivutes to air pollution, thus imposing health costs not to mention many others, as well as global warming. The last figures I saw (which I cannot locate) were from several years ago and they pegged the subsidy at about $100,000,000,000 annually - yes, that's one hundred BILLION dolars - and this has certainly gone up. And that's not counting the added costs imposed on others (people like me with respiratory problems, etc.).

IN 1992 both Pasul Tsongas and Ross Perot argued for gradually increasing the gas tax by $.25/gallon to encourage more fuel efficient vehiucles. I have read that the gap is now more than $.50 per gallon between the taxes and fees collected versus the costs of creating and maintaining the system.

Imposing a carbon consumption tax would involve a non-regulatory way of improving gas mileage and increasing the use alternative fuels and public transit. It also reduces air pollution, slows global warming and weakens certain of our adversaries in the world. Despite the compelling logic of this situation, the chances of passing that or something like it are as close to zero as you can get. All this without the bureaucratic inefficiencies of the CAFE standards.

The only time this could have been adopted woould have been as part of our response to 9/11. Bush and Cheyney, with their background in the oil industry, couldn't conceive of it and wouldn't have supported had they been made aware of the situation.

That problems that people only object to the subsidies that "those people" get, while thinking of the subsidies they get as part of the natural order of things.

[Loboexpat]

Dallas runs a light rail and there's still an active commuter train from OKC to Dallas.

[loborick]

is so uneconomic is that it has to compete against the incredible subidies given to owners of private vehicles. The taxes we collect on gasoline and road use don't come anywhere close to the cost of creataing and maintaining the infrastructure that they use, not to mention that excessive private driving contrivutes to air pollution, thus imposing health costs not to mention many others, as well as global warming. The last figures I saw (which I cannot locate) were from several years ago and they pegged the subsidy at about $100,000,000,000 annually - yes, that's one hundred BILLION dolars - and this has certainly gone up. And that's not counting the added costs imposed on others (people like me with respiratory problems, etc.).

IN 1992 both Pasul Tsongas and Ross Perot argued for gradually increasing the gas tax by $.25/gallon to encourage more fuel efficient vehiucles. I have read that the gap is now more than $.50 per gallon between the taxes and fees collected versus the costs of creating and maintaining the system.

Imposing a carbon consumption tax would involve a non-regulatory way of improving gas mileage and increasing the use alternative fuels and public transit. It also reduces air pollution, slows global warming and weakens certain of our adversaries in the world. Despite the compelling logic of this situation, the chances of passing that or something like it are as close to zero as you can get. All this without the bureaucratic inefficiencies of the CAFE standards.

The only time this could have been adopted woould have been as part of our response to 9/11. Bush and Cheyney, with their background in the oil industry, couldn't conceive of it and wouldn't have supported had they been made aware of the situation.

That problems that people only object to the subsidies that "those people" get, while thinking of the subsidies they get as part of the natural order of things.

You know the two reasons why this is unlikely to ever happen. You mentioned one...the "logic" of it. The other is the strongest lobby in the world, the oil industry. So many politicians have oil dripping out of their pockets, so anything logical is highly unlikely if it is detrimental to the oil industry.

[Loboexpat]

Also, I wish there had been a light rail to Santa Fe when my wife had to commute there everyday. I'd have much rather paid whatever to have her safely and conveniently transported to and from rather than drive amongst the morons who think it's best that they drive 100+ on I-25 even in congested areas like Bernalillo or in dense fog where visibility was barely to the front of the car or in rainstorms...

[PHILLY_1982]

That I-25 drive from ABQ to SF is VERY DANGEROUS. Especially in bad weather!

The RR will only help in the efforts of congestion. Can you imagine indirect numbers that result? Like, DWI deaths?

The RR needs to succeed!

[GoLobos]

That problems that people only object to the subsidies that "those people" get, while thinking of the subsidies they get as part of the natural order of things.

Couldn't agree more.

"Change is often painful and scary. In general we fight any kind of change, whether it be economic change, technological change, personal change.....change is good and often good comes from change." - Michael Dennis Borin

"People only see what they are prepared to see.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Always do what you are afraid to do.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Go Lobos!

[Roob]

is so uneconomic is that it has to compete against the incredible subidies given to owners of private vehicles. The taxes we collect on gasoline and road use don't come anywhere close to the cost of creataing and maintaining the infrastructure that they use


JP, taxpayers paying to subsidize the use of private vehicles is not the same as taxpayers paying to subsidize the use of mass transit. In the case of private vehicles you have 100&#37; of the taxpayer base subsidizing 100% of the private vehicle user base. This is like robbing Peter to pay Peter, unlike mass transit where you're taking from 100% of the population to pay for the <1% of the population to use mass transit.

[Burro lobo]

As a lot of you know I live out of the US and I want to list a few analogies I fee might be of interest. Gasoline in the US is cheap and most of the "other" world thinks it's too cheap. Until this last jump in Gasoline prices the US were about $1.00 per gallon cheaper than Mexico and as much as $ 4.00 cheaper per gallon than most of Europe. Prices have jumped ahead of Mexico but still lag far behind most of the rest of the WORLD. And let me add that most of that added price are taxes, and is meant to reduce both use, reduce car size, cut pollution, and provide mass transportation as a viable alternative. Mexico has a huge bus system and it has to be, from one end to the other, the worst to one of the best. Lousy locals to great inter-city, country wide. The locals try to race each other for customers at the commuters risk and other traffic too. But like the US, Mexico is becoming more affluent and families who never had cars are getting them, and the new middle class are driving multi cars, but bus and taxi travel is still unbelievable.
Now that was only to show the rest of the worlds thought, gasoline is too cheap, still, in the US.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul is the way taxes were intended if you use Paul as the Public in general. I never thought I would subscribe to that based on my political beliefs, but I do now.
Pollution in Albuquerque is starting to be a problem as with the whole Rio Grande corridor, and anyone who commutes via I 25 weekly much less daily can see part of the problem is the traffic. This is mainly North but also South, East and West, but Santa Fe being the State Capitol and Albuquerque being the largest city plus I 25 and I 40 both being the funnel that most State business must travel through to reach the capitol. When it finishes the line into Santa Fe the State of NM must require the use of it where possible. I feel that other use will build on it's own, slowly at first and faster with the rising cost of fuel and efficiency as people become used to the ease of not having to fight the traffic both ways and hopefully transportation being available at terminals, or nearness of final destination points.
On the tourist side both Albuquerque and Santa Fe should benefit from the line, with historic old town, shopping in Albuquerque and Santa Fe's international appeal. Sports, festivals, concerts, fairs, arts, all should get a boost, and who of us wants their loved ones driving back late at night on that long road, and any of you that have ever happened to hit a snow storm could really be helped by the commuter.
No doubt some will pay more than their fair share, but lives, fuel, time and convenience should help set this off. Gasoline is not going to get cheaper, just the opposite, the air is not going to get cleaner (on it's own), and lives are still going to be dearer.
I know I'm not there and by not being there I have given up on some of my rights to push the system, but I still have my views on the state that I love.

[Garishwolf]

The FED owns N.M. It pays for 84 percents of he labor force in middle income and up. It should pony up. Lab workers save money, get to work on time, more lobo fans at game, more revenue for UNM. Big money with buyers coming from afar. Less Drunks on a huge long highway system.

[EPluribusUNM]

:rolleyes:We should also withdraw funding to public libraries. How many folks have read a book in the last year? Show me how we all benefit from the few who do.

Seriously, the Journal has an editorial today that supports the concept but warns that they've got to get their act together on the shuttle from the stop to the stadium. Otherwise, it's going to fail.

[Mark]

The FED owns N.M. It pays for 84 percents of he labor force in middle income and up. It should pony up. Lab workers save money, get to work on time, more lobo fans at game, more revenue for UNM. Big money with buyers coming from afar. Less Drunks on a huge long highway system.

See Garish! I knew you had it in you. Now thats a post with insight and substance! Nice job and points for you buddy!

[Garishwolf]

:eek:
See Garish! I knew you had it in you. Now thats a post with insight and substance! Nice job and points for you buddy!

Even the blind squirel find a nut now and then. I'll a keein a tryin to be smater,post wise. Will make PRO happy, Don't tell LIDO, jeloso:Afun)

Thank you RPS.

[LIDOakaLJT]

I'll never be "celoso" of you GW....especially when the compliment comes from RPS... :D

j/k guys; don't be burning my images in effigy.


GO LOBOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[loborick]

Those taxes in other countries pay for medical care, education, social services, etc. They take care of their citizens in those countries. We don't here. We allow our less fortunate to sink, while the upper class thumb their noses at them.

[Garishwolf]

RICK, how do you really feel about it?? lol. j/k