THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COULDN'T

Lots of talk about streetcars again (or still). Sometimes I wish the streetcar and train fans would take the next Amtrak out of town and not come back (I'm sure they think the same of me). I know, I know, streetcars bring development and development brings jobs and jobs bring housing and housing brings tax base. And for every fifty cents in tax base it will cost $100. If Warren Buffet gave the city a streetcar system serving downtown and the cultural district it would still cost more to operate than it would make in revenue.

It sounds tempting to have the government offer $25 million to get started. All we need is another $25 million of our city tax money and we can have a streetcar that goes two blocks. With $200 million we might be able to go from the T&P all the way to the cultural district. Trouble is all those things that streetcars bring are already there - the development, the jobs, and the housing. Not the tax base though. I think we gave much of it away already in TIFs and abatements. This city is good at giving away money. Hire fifty people out of the inner city and we'll give you $5 million in a tax abatement. It only makes sense when the Chamber of Commerce comes to explain it. When put into practice you hear that sucking sound of tax money being swallowed up by special interests.

And so it will be with the little train. There was an interesting article in the Economist magazine recently about how America's freight trains are the best in the world and how they'll probably go to hell in a handbasket because the government wants to finance passenger trains that will operate on the same tracks but at different speeds and gum up the freight service. 

Streetcars and light rail will work if you start a city from scratch and put in the rails as you put in the streets and make the main train station in the center of the city. All we need is land and money. Think of the development, the jobs, the tax base and all that. In only a thousand years it will all be paid for. Can't wait.  

Say buddy, can you spare a dime?

The Mayor and Council in Fort Worth have been looking for every extra dime they can get their hands on. The reason, of course, is the recession and loss of revenue from taxes and fees (taxes by another name). Many services, including street repairs, have been cut and some layoffs have reportedly occured.

But, thank goodness, the financial situation isn't so bad that city council members can't take a few junkets to Europe and Africa. Even though the city cut its gift to the Sister Cities program from $350,000 down to $50,000 (Star-Telelgram, Sep 17, 2009), two Sister Cities trips went off on schedule. Councilman Joel Burns went to sister city, Reggio Emilia, IT, and council members Frank Moss and Kathleen Hicks jetted off to Mbabane, Swaziland.

Kathleen Hicks reportedly voted against the 2009-2010 budget because it had been "'balanced on the backs' of laid-off workers and the city's vulnerable residents," according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Sep18, 2009). Well what was it the queen said? Let them eat cake? Ms Hicks was further quoted as saying it's "not about tourism", it's "about AIDS..." Is she taking some over or bringing some back? Ms. Hick's travel is costing taxpayers $5,250. That's about two months work for a lower level (laid off) city employee. 

Frank Moss is on the same soire`but his tab is $6,410. He's taking in Kruger National Park in South Africa. Going to give a little advice on animal control, no doubt. There's another couple of months work for someone.

Joel Burns must be some kind of cheepskate. His trip only cost us $2,275. He took a little vacation in conjunction with his trip to Italy but in the process he missed the most intense budget discussions. Shucks, if he'd been here he might have been inspired to add another $4,000 to his trip. But, alas, it's still another month pay for the laid off worker.

The Star-Telegram did the issue justice in some good reporting and a critical editorial. What's more, I was quoted in the article and the editorial agreed with that position. I had a flashback to when I was on City Council and made a symbolic vote against a city contribution to a childrens abuse group. I was roundly criticized by the council and by the Star-Telegram. I picked the wrong group to vote against but the point was that the city gives a lot of money to non-profits - too much, I thought. At times we gave money they didn't even ask for.

Good old taxpayer. Always willing to spare another dime.