182 replies to this topic

[wrabbit]

This thread has just been BAZAAR!

Some posters state that the train does not support itself and has to be subsidized with tax payers money, while others say "No", that is not true.

Then a poster brings in some data to enforce the claim that the train does NOT support itself, and another poster says bring me more data.

Then a poster says the ride on the train was filthy, there was a drunk, an abusive man and she didn't feel the tickets were being checked, indicating that anybody could board the train without paying.

I'm waiting for the next poster to claim the train was clean as a whistle, the people on it gave them free coffee,cake and balloons, and the train came in with a surplus this last quarter!!!!

I'm getting the feeling that once again, the tax payers are going to get the big sales pitch to build more tracks, at the cost of more hundreds of millions, and we are now be primed for it, right here on this board.

Is it me, or does anybody else hear that Twilight Zone theme???? Where is it coming from????

Where's my pills? LOL!
Somebody stole my pills!

[Dave Burrell]

This thread has just been BAZAAR!

Some posters state that the train does not support itself and has to be subsidized with tax payers money, while others say "No", that is not true.

Then a poster brings in some data to enforce the claim that the train does NOT support itself, and another poster says bring me more data.

Then a poster says the ride on the train was filthy, there was a drunk, an abusive man and she didn't feel the tickets were being checked, indicating that anybody could board the train without paying.

I'm waiting for the next poster to claim the train was clean as a whistle, the people on it gave them free coffee,cake and balloons, and the train came in with a surplus this last quarter!!!!

I'm getting the feeling that once again, the tax payers are going to get the big sales pitch to build more tracks, at the cost of more hundreds of millions, and we are now be primed for it, right here on this board.

Is it me, or does anybody else hear that Twilight Zone theme???? Where is it coming from????

Where's my pills? LOL!
Somebody stole my pills!

Best bet is to just ride it yourself and come to your own conclusion - I gotta do the same, still never been on it.

[DrKoz23]

Excellent!

Butterfield is huge as is the lot near Watt Avenue. Like I said, thousands of cars.

The dent is during the commute hours. Like the 300 or so fewer cars getting on the Freeway in Folsom, and then getting off in Folsom.

Light rail is getting a higher density of riders than the busses.
How much of the cost for light rail was borne by local funding? How much was state and federal funding?

"Express busses" aren't as safe or comfortable or amiable as trains, nor can they travel as fast as the trains during commute hours, so their appeal would be much, much lower than for the trains.

When you say HUGE... please provide figures. By the way... I found them for you on Sac RTs website.

- Butterfield... 406
- Watt... 498

I HAVE driven past the Watt station plenty of times... and it is RARELY full. On the Folsom line... there are actually only 2840 spots... the majority of the 7482 spots are on the other line. You say thousands of cars... but that is assuming ALL spots are filled along the ENTIRE line. Hundreds would have been a little more accurate without any supporting facts.

You say that light rail is getting a higher density of riders than the buses... but which has a higher maintenance cost.

In terms of operating costs... here is the breakdown...

- Federal assistance... 15%
- State sales tax...29%
- Local sales tax... 29%
- Fare receipts... 21%
- Others... 6%

This just goes to show that this system ISN'T self-sufficient. It needs a MAJOR subsidy. I don't think it matters too much if it is locally or federally funded. Either way... we are paying for it... and it can't sustain itself after built. Now this does include buses as well... but it just goes to show the system is broke. The budget still needs to be cut after all this assistance.

I completely disagree with the fact that an express bus would be slower than a light rail ride. From Historic Folsom to St Rose of Lima park it is 23 miles. It takes a light rail ride 50 minutes to go between the two. An express bus would have to average 19 MPH to go the same distance in the same amount of time. With being able to use the carpool lane between Sunrise and Folsom... it would be very unlikely that the entire trip would average 19 MPH. An express bus would be faster. And why is a bus not as "safe" as a train. Any supporting stats? Why aren't buses as "amiable" as trains? I have heard several accounts as to how dirty and disgusting the trains are here... and didn't the Folsom Stage Coach once run express buses to downtown?

You are the one who was originally asking for facts... and I brought some to you. It would be nice to see them from you to support your argument instead of generalities.

[Robert Giacometti]

This thread has just been BAZAAR!

Some posters state that the train does not support itself and has to be subsidized with tax payers money, while others say "No", that is not true.

Then a poster brings in some data to enforce the claim that the train does NOT support itself, and another poster says bring me more data.

Then a poster says the ride on the train was filthy, there was a drunk, an abusive man and she didn't feel the tickets were being checked, indicating that anybody could board the train without paying.

I'm waiting for the next poster to claim the train was clean as a whistle, the people on it gave them free coffee,cake and balloons, and the train came in with a surplus this last quarter!!!!

I'm getting the feeling that once again, the tax payers are going to get the big sales pitch to build more tracks, at the cost of more hundreds of millions, and we are now be primed for it, right here on this board.

Is it me, or does anybody else hear that Twilight Zone theme???? Where is it coming from????

Where's my pills? LOL!
Somebody stole my pills!

Since we spent Millions of $ building this system. it seems logical to try using the most cost effective means available to increase ridership so that the RT system is as efficient as possible.

I'm convinced the best way to address this is through land use zoning and development process. We have had many opportunities to address these issues since the light rail route was approved, yet when the City has had the opportunity to do so, they give in to the wishes of the applicant.

There is still time to PLAN that light rail will serve the S50 residents, but its my understanding the current plans do NOT include light rail to be built there. This is SO short sighted as at a minimum, there should be a light rail route, with station, reserved into the high density housing area. There should also be a large park & ride lot adjacent to this station, to encourage people to get off the freeway and onto light rail.

This could be partially paid for by impact fees and/or mello roos by those who will be creating the impacts.

One of the other issues to address is to attract riders in going in both directions, so trains aren't returning back empty. I don't see many reason for Sacramentans, to be jumping on light rail to go to downtown Folsom.

[DrKoz23]

Since we spent Millions of $ building this system. it seems logical to try using the most cost effective means available to increase ridership so that the RT system is as efficient as possible.

I'm convinced the best way to address this is through land use zoning and development process. We have had many opportunities to address these issues since the light rail route was approved, yet when the City has had the opportunity to do so, they give in to the wishes of the applicant.

There is still time to PLAN that light rail will serve the S50 residents, but its my understanding the current plans do NOT include light rail to be built there. This is SO short sighted as at a minimum, there should be a light rail route, with station, reserved into the high density housing area. There should also be a large park & ride lot adjacent to this station, to encourage people to get off the freeway and onto light rail.

This could be partially paid for by impact fees and/or mello roos by those who will be creating the impacts.

One of the other issues to address is to attract riders in going in both directions, so trains aren't returning back empty. I don't see many reason for Sacramentans, to be jumping on light rail to go to downtown Folsom.

I like your idea of "smart growth" to optimize usage of the system. The tracks are already there... and we are already paying for it... so we might as well try to make it as efficient as possible.

Unfortunately the light rail system has some flaws... so when the population of this area allows for maximum capacity of the trains... it won't be able to be expanded. Construction of the system only allows for trains that are 4 cars long. It can be no longer that this because of the effects it would have on road traffic. When at stations... trains longer than 4 cars would block intersections... and create a bigger mess instead of solve any problems.

[wrabbit]

Since we spent Millions of $ building this system. it seems logical to try using the most cost effective means available to increase ridership so that the RT system is as efficient as possible.

I'm convinced the best way to address this is through land use zoning and development process. We have had many opportunities to address these issues since the light rail route was approved, yet when the City has had the opportunity to do so, they give in to the wishes of the applicant.

There is still time to PLAN that light rail will serve the S50 residents, but its my understanding the current plans do NOT include light rail to be built there. This is SO short sighted as at a minimum, there should be a light rail route, with station, reserved into the high density housing area. There should also be a large park & ride lot adjacent to this station, to encourage people to get off the freeway and onto light rail.

This could be partially paid for by impact fees and/or mello roos by those who will be creating the impacts.

One of the other issues to address is to attract riders in going in both directions, so trains aren't returning back empty. I don't see many reason for Sacramentans, to be jumping on light rail to go to downtown Folsom.

No offense, but you seem to have a special interest in making the light rail expand and go into parts of Folsom and out lying areas.

You have even suggested ways to generate revue to pay for it and seem to have a projection, like something which could be presented to the City of Folsom, for approval.

Could you be honest with us here and tell us just what sort of involvement you have with Light Rail?

It really seems you have some personal gain you are pursuing here.

[Robert Giacometti]

No offense, but you seem to have a special interest in making the light rail expand and go into parts of Folsom and out lying areas.

You have even suggested ways to generate revue to pay for it and seem to have a projection, like something which could be presented to the City of Folsom, for approval.

Could you be honest with us here and tell us just what sort of involvement you have with Light Rail?

It really seems you have some personal gain you are pursuing here.

Good question, I'm not offended at all.

I don't have any involvement in light rail of any kind.

I've lived in Folsom for nearly 18 years and consider myself to be somewhat active in trying to maintain our quality of life. I generally speak up when I feel there is a better way to do things or something is just plain wrong. Its easy to sit back and complain, I try and get involved to make a difference.

I ran for the city council 3 years ago and at that time suggested we need to rezone land around the light rail stations and apply for the grant money the Feds were giving out and build the affordable housing as close as possible to these stations. Instead the city cut a deal with a developer, sold ( GAVE AWAY) the land around the HS to build the affordable housing there.

Some may remember that discussion about the city supposedly getting a RFP for bids regarding this land. Some on this forum have even tried to help "paper over" what happened, yet no one can produce where the RFP was published or can explain why some bidders weren't allowed to bid offering more money?

I spoke up when the former city manager announced they were leaving and the city offered them an exteremely lucrative, nobid, consulting contract for the new bridge project, when they never had any experience in doing this before and we already had TWO (2) existing consultants/lobbyists working on the project.

I spoke up when we hired the former city manager who had NO EXPEIRENCE as a city manager and made them the highest paid city manager in the region.

Last year the city was negotiating with Aerojet with revising the 2036 water agreement. I was the only person in the community to speak when the city did this. Without a doubt this was the worst deal ever for the City. Since then people have looked into this agreement and realize the council gave away the farm.

I've questioned how we managed to get ourselves into a position of having a water deficit at buildout, when we've been told all along we had plenty of water. Still no answer on that one.

I've been very vocal about concerns in developing S50. Some on here are helping the propaganda machine at City Hall with their timely comments. Every citizen needs to be paying attention to what is being proposed there as the impacts will forever change our community.

I've been accused of having an issue against the city, having an isssue against the former city manager, saying things because my motivation was I was running for the city council ( then didn't run), doing things for political gain and now because I have something to gain with the expansion of light rail.

My motives are rather simple, I just want Folsom to be the best place to live it can be, because this is my home. It only takes a few to get involved locally to make a difference, so I choose to get involved!

[Bill Z]

They want to expand to the airport... and it may help ridership a bit... but probably not enough to re-coup the costs to build it there.

I would seriously consider riding it to the airport once a month when I go on business trips back east. It would save a lot on parking fees. So if it does go to the airport, the ridership may increase significantly.

[Warren G]

I asked my wife about the trains today. Unlike all of the detractors posting here she has actually ridden on the trains many, many times-roughly 3 times a week since they first started running from Folsom, and 2 days a week from Sunrise before that, down to 65th Street.

In the last 4 months they are checking tickets much more than they used to.

When she has to work a bit late and get on a train after dark there is at least one security guard on board each train. Each car has a camera and if there's a problem the driver radios ahead to the next station and a guard will get on. There are often one or two guards posted at each station after dark.

Any problems she's encountered with other train riders is far less than what she encounters from other drivers on the freeways. She feels much more safe on the trains than on the freeways during commute hours.

Frequent riders get to know each other, meet in certain train cars each day and chat among themselves during the rides. They don't have to worry about being in an accident on the freeway nor do they get slowed down by accidents and bad weather. The train takes a few minutes longer than driving but the train makes stops. The train maintains a constant speed except at stations and this is more relaxing than on the freeways.

How does the cost to this area for each train rider compare to the cost to this area for each person who goes to Arco Arena and the Kings games?

[rockstargary]

As a daily commuter for the last 2 years on Light Rail, I feel that I must voice my opinion.

1. Having ridden public transportation for years in cities such as New York, Chicago, and Atlanta I find public transportation to be efficient and affordable as opposed to driving. Monthly passes for the light rail cost $85 per month. Commuting from Folsom to downtown Sacramento would cost my vehicle 250 miles per week or roughly $25-30 worth of gas.

2. There are caveats on public transportation. Everyone (who pays) is entitled to use it; therefore, you get a variety of folks with a variety of income levels. Sometimes drama can occur in public places whether on land or on train so learn to block it out if you're not involved. Alert the train operator if a problem arises.

3. I moved to Folsom for a job IN Folsom. That job is no longer there thanks to elements of history and economics, so I work downtown now. Does that mean I give up my lovely home in Folsom? Heck no! I love Folsom and will continue to use light rail.

The state of California will make a way for light rail expansion eventually. Government funding is like the weather. If you don't like it now, just wait a little bit and it will change.

[harrmill]

I think we need to adjust our expectations about the profitability of public transportation in this country.

I was discussing Light Rail with a friend over the weekend. He has lived in Germany and said their efficient train systems are heavily subsidized, maybe not quite as much as ours, but it is as much a priority for them as our freeways are for us (funding-wise) and is not expected to turn a profit. I think the same can be said for any rail system in the world (no cite - sorry, just IMHO). They are not there to make money - just to move people.

I have ridden the one in Germany and many others in Europe, including Light rail. What we have is pathetic by comparison (Germany has better freeways as well - we could learn a few things).

I think our system here in Sac country is flawed by design as well. It was planned with grandiose visions that are based on fantasy and not reality. One of the previous posters lamented the lack of connection to the airport, another complaint about the missing link to popular shopping areas (Arden/Roseville Galleria), or to busy employment centers. But our visionary planners made sure that it ran down K street as some sort of re-vitalization - how's that working for ya?

I think there are a few wins where the rails com close to big employment centers downtown, but by and large - the system has failed riders and taxpayers alike.

IMHO, again, is that we need to have a regional perspective on the rail system, fund it not based on profiting but as a "public works" project, and for gosh-sakes, get some brain power behind the planning (make the planners travel to a few other cities where things work well). In this case it seems the Europeans have the whole thing better thought out than us from funding to planning, and expect the best.

[Steve Heard]

I agree. We don't expect our libraries, parks, police, schools, fire departments, or streets to turn a profit, so why do we expect light rail to?

It gets people from place to place in a relatively efficient manner. Why isn't that enough?

[DrKoz23]

I agree. We don't expect our libraries, parks, police, schools, fire departments, or streets to turn a profit, so why do we expect light rail to?

It gets people from place to place in a relatively efficient manner. Why isn't that enough?

I don't have an issue with mass transit... or it not even turning a profit (even though buses would be more economical than light rail).

However... it is not the SINGLE answer to congestion. The city of Sacramento thinks so... to the point that they are now opposing HOV lanes on Highway 50 from Sunrise to downtown. This is the type of mentality that turns people off to mass transit funding. It gets shoved down our throats as the ONLY answer to congestion... not a piece to the ENTIRE answer.

Measure A was passed as a .5% sales tax that would go toward ALL types of transportation projects. One of the promised projects was HOV lanes from Sunrise to downtown on Highway 50. Now the city of Sacramento wants to spend all the money on mass transit and beautification projects. Luckily the city of Folsom saw an actual benefit to this tax and put it toward the new bridge.

If I could take back my vote on Measure A... I would... because of the promises the city of Sacramento is going back on.

[Victorita9]

Whether or not its self sustainable, with the rising prise of gas it's going to become self sufficient. When people use it more instead of taking their cars. Because gas is getting too expensive! And the train looks like a better transit if you are going to Sacramento during the day.

[oldschoolskater]

I think people need to start taking public transportation period. Save gas and save the environment. You can use the time to read or take a nap. Yes, at times you get unsavory characters but...u just ignore them. It's definitely worth it. I save close to $300.00 in gas/month taking light rail. It pisses me off when I do drive (I carpool) to see people in their Suburbans driving on their own.


Let's walk, ride our bikes, and take public transportation!