Metro Unveils New Transit Plan

In the face of increased public scrutiny and declining tax revenues, over the weekend Metro unveiled a new transit plan that it claims will slash expenses by 83.4% and simultaneously create nearly 175,000 jobs. The new plan will scrap the proposed light rail lines, as well as most bus routes, and replace them with hand-pulled rickshaws.

At a press conference announcing the new plan, Metro CEO George Greanias said:

When I took this position I told Ma Parker that I had no preconceived notions about how we should solve the city's transportation problems. I promised to start from scratch and consider anything, no matter how antiquated and labor intensive. Sometimes the best way to move forward is to move backward and this plan accomplishes that in spades.

While federal regulations do not mandate "buy American" for purchases of rickshaws, Greanias was quick to explain that Metro had located a manufacturer in Neodesha, Kansas. A company spokesman acknowledged that the company's capacity of 250 rickshaws a year was grossly inadequate to meet Metro's requirements, but vowed that the company would ramp up production "somehow." The new plan calls for Metro to purchase 50,000 rickshaws by 2012.

Greanias admitted that transit times would increase substantially, noting that a commute that now takes 30 minutes would increase to approximately 6 hours by rickshaw. "Certainly some people won't like the idea of spending half of their life in a rickshaw," he said, "but they need to put aside their own interests and consider the good of the community."

Metro will spend $10 million to promote its new plan, including about $1 million for Google AdWords and another $500,000 for ads in The Greensheet. Its slogan for the campaign will be, "Please ride our rickshaws." Metro will also paint squiggly lines down the middle of the street along selected routes. Greanias didn't explain the purpose of the squiggly lines, but did say that they would look "pretty cool."

The Chronicle quickly endorsed the idea in a Sunday editorial:

In our fast-paced modern world, Greanias has demonstrated remarkable vision in proposing a plan that will slow commutes to a snail's pace. Instead of fighting traffic, isolated in their vehicles with only blowhards like Glenn Beck for company, commuters will be able to engage in leisurely conversations with other commuters. And they will have more time to enjoy Houston's only daily newspaper, which will be offering 20% off new subscriptions.

To serve the needs of passengers during their long, arduous journeys, Metro will build about 10,000 rest stops along its routes. Each rest stop will include a Starbucks, free WiFi, and shower facilities. Select facilities will also have recreational areas with beach volleyball and a bowling alley.

Houstonians had mixed reactions to the announcement. "That's a great idea," said one bus rider. "Two rickshaws crashing into one another isn't going to be nearly as spectacular as a train-bus collision," said another passenger. Greanias dismissed the critics as uninformed naysayers, adding, "If I cared about their opinion, I would have spent $5 million on a study. I don't, so I didn't."

Local labor officials expressed concern that Metro would try to keep costs low by hiring only illegal aliens to pull the rickshaws. "Illegals don't have the necessary training," said one labor official, "and they will take jobs from Americans who want an easy paycheck and extravagant benefits."

Metro expects ridership to decline between 6% and 97%, a fact that doesn't concern Greanias. "To be honest," he said, "Metro has never been about transportation. It has been about providing jobs. And this is going to create goo-gobs of jobs."

The first rickshaws were scheduled to be delivered in mid-October. However, production has been delayed because Metro officials can't decide what color to paint them.

More Trouble for Metro

As if Metro doesn’t have enough problems, CAF USA--the company hired to build the cars for the new light rail lines--is threatening to sue if its contract is canceled. If this actually occurs, Metro will find itself fighting a multi-million dollar law suit while simultaneously begging federal transportation bureaucrats for hundreds of millions in federal money.

No matter what happens, tax payers are going to be the big losers in this fiasco. Either we will get to throw a bunch of money at a law suit and get nothing in return, or we will get to throw a bunch of money at a light rail system that nobody will ride.

CAF is first going to ask the Federal Transit Administration to reconsider its ruling that Metro violated a "buy American" mandate and has asked Metro to consider joining in the challenge. Knowing who butters his bread, Gilbert Garcia, Metro's chairman, said:

It is still our intention to cancel the contracts. We're not going to deviate from the path that our partners at the FTA have laid out.

If one refuses to attach meaning to words, I suppose Metro could call the FTA its partner. But for the rest of us, Garcia's comment is nothing more than appeasing drivel. The FTA is setting the rules and holds the purse strings, and Metro must obey. They are partners only in the sense that each is seeking to rip off tax payers and jamb mass transit down out throats.

Metro desperately needs the $900 million grant now being held up by the FTA. Without that money it will be unable to complete its latest boondoggle. It will then face the choice of abandoning its grand dreams of running cattle cars all over the city, or return to voters to beg for more money. Given the state of the economy and ongoing revelations of incompetence at Metro, it is unlikely that voters would approve more tax money for Metro.

I'd like to think that this could perhaps be a blessing in disguise, that perhaps Metro and its light rail minions will finally surrender. But I am doubtful. Zoning advocates have not been deterred by defeat in three referendums. Their intellectual brethren will not let something as paltry as a lost federal grant stop them either.

Metro's Train Wreck

Late last week, Ma Parker and her Metro gang announced that the completion date for new rail lines will be delayed until 2014. It seems that the previous Metro administration tried to get around the federal law requiring that equipment be purchased from American companies, and the Federal Transit Administration is holding up the money needed to complete the lines.

Calling the challenges facing Metro "steep" and "rocky", Ma was quick to cast blame on former Metro CEO Frank Wilson. But any mismanagement on Wilson's part is not really Ma's concern:

We need to see whether there are any further investigations of Mr. Wilson, and I don't want to suppose whether there are or not. We are focused on Metro moving forward, and we'll worry about Mr. Wilson tomorrow.

Even though Metro has already spent $40 million on the contract it must now tear up, Ma doesn't care about the past. She is more concerned with jamming light rail down our throats and with hundreds of millions of tax dollars up for grabs, she isn't about to let anything get in her way. Investigating Wilson at this time might reveal deeper problems at Metro, and that could further undermine support for light rail.

The Chronicle agrees that the problem should simply be swept under the rug:

It's unfortunate that Wilson's insistence on driving the agency into a contract that violated federal rules will significantly delay construction schedules on the North, East and Southeast lines. What motivated this train wreck remains an open question, but solving that mystery shouldn't be the city's or Metro's top priority.  

Both the paper and Ma imply that there is no systemic problem at Metro. The problem lies with those managing that system. And since Metro now has new management, whatever caused this "train wreck" has surely been corrected.

This is quite convenient for supporters of light rail. Simply vilify the dearly departed, anoint the new management with an aura of sainthood, and everyone can merrily skip on down the tracks. There is no need to identify the cause of broken promises or wasted tax payer money. There is no need to learn from the past because doing so might threaten the future. To supporters of light rail, nothing--especially the facts--can be allowed to derail their plans.

"Selling" the Public on Light Rail

The Chronicle tells us that new Metro chairman George Greanias faces the challenge of selling a "sometimes skeptical public" on the alleged merits of light rail. The article makes it appear that Greanias is more concerned with the troubled agency's public image than correcting its financial problems. And that isn't surprising.

Unlike a private business, Metro has an endless source of funds--taxpayers--which it can tap into. Unlike a private business, Metro does not depend on the voluntary consent of its "investors." Whether it gets its money from taxes or by begging Washington, the money is ultimately taken from taxpayers through coercive means. That is not the only difference between a private business and a government agency.

A private business must offer potential investors a reasonable return on their investment, with each investor free to decide what is reasonable and what risk he wishes to take. A private business must sell potential investors on the merits of its plan. Similarly, a private business must sell potential customers on the value it offers. Again, each consumer is free to decide for himself whether the value offered is worth the price asked. Everyone--the business, investors, and consumers--is free to act according to his own judgment. This is not the case with Metro.

Greanias does not need the unanimous consent of every participant in Metro's boondoggles. In the case of bond elections, he need only obtain the consent of a majority of voters. In the case of handouts from Washington, he need only obtain the favor of the proper authorities. Unlike a private business, Greanias does not need to convince everyone of Metro's alleged benefits--he is ultimately backed by the coercive power of government.

This is true of both the "investors" and the consumers. Taxpayers are forced to subsidize Metro's operations, and thereby pay for the transportation expenses of other citizens. And the government's monopoly on roads and highways leaves drivers no choice but to utilize these government "services"--no selling is necessary.

If Greanias really wants to do the public a service, he would try to sell it on the merits of getting government out of the transportation business. Until he does that, all he is selling is a glorified welfare scheme.

Good Intentions and Boondoggles

The Chronicle reports that the Bayport Cruise Terminal sits idle 2 years after completion. (HT: blogHouston) Like many other boondoggles, the $81 million cruise terminal was hailed as an economic stimulus. And, like many other boondoggles, its obvious failure to deliver on those promises hasn't stopped its advocates from continuing to make optimistic predictions.

"I'm optimistic that we'll end up with a cruise line," Port of Houston Chairman James Edmonds said.

How is this to happen? Edmonds wants to spend more of your money to develop 40 acres around the terminal. In other words, rather than admit that he wasted your money, Edmonds wants to throw more money at the problem. 

This is what happens when a "visionary" has the coercive power of government at his disposal. He can propose virtually anything, make outlandishly optimistic predictions, and then take your money to create his vision. Undeterred by the actual facts, he can then dream up an even more preposterous scheme. After all, that is what "visionaries" do.

Sometimes Edmonds asks himself why the port got into the cruising business, and his answer is job creation. A weekly vessel departing from Houston would mean vendors could sell flowers, food, drink and other items to the cruise, he said.

"From that standpoint, I think there's a lot of justification for us to be in that kind of business," Edmonds said.

As Dr. Phil likes to say, "How is that working for you?" The fact that vendors are not selling flowers, food, and trinkets doesn't matter. The fact that the only jobs "created" were for the construction workers who built the terminal is irrelevant. Edmonds intention was to create jobs, and that is the important thing. His intention justifies the boondoggle. 

Armed with good intentions in one hand and the government's taxing authority in the other, Edmonds and his ilk can "justify" nearly anything. Keep that in mind the next time you hear some Metro official tell us how great light rail will be.

Metro's Got a Gun

The Mighty Wizard posts an informative summary of 2 recent events involving Metro board members. (HT: blogHouston) A couple of his comments are worth elaboration.

The issue of parking also came up with the Airport Express buses. Sedlak [John Sedlak, Metro VP] told the audience that Metro "loses a ton of money" running the Airport Express, but was looking at expanding the service to stop by nearby downtown hotels in an effort to pick up ridership. [removed a parenthetical comment]

Only a government agency could think that the way to correct a money-losing service is by expanding it. So long as Metro can continue to force citizens to subsidize its operations the agency has no incentive to do anything that makes financial sense. It can simply grab a gun, go back to the public trough, and demand that taxpayers fork over another billion dollars or so. And that is what it is doing.

Garcia [Metro chairman Gilbert Garcia,] stated that agency leadership was eating, sleeping, going all out to get the $900 million in federal grant money. 

Apparently Metro isn't content to steal only from the citizens of Houston. It wants to pony up to the federal trough as well, and force the citizens of other cities to pay for our light rail.

For years we have been told that Houston needs light rail or myriad ills will befall our city. Just like Houstonians have been told--on 3 separate occasions--that without zoning the city would lose jobs to more "progressive" locales. The statists were wrong about zoning, and they are wrong about light rail.

Our so-called city leaders insist that we must be more like the other major cities in the nation, while ignoring the fact that those cities are losing jobs and citizens. Our "leaders" want us to follow the same failed policies that is crippling other major American cities. If we continue to follow their advice, we will soon be just like those other cities, and that won't be a good thing.

Metro and the Magic Bus

Last week I received a door hanger from Metro advertising its "magic bus" service. The door hanger did not tell me what is so magic about the service, but I suspect it has something to do with Metro's ability to make money disappear.

A business advertises in order to attract customers. A government subsidized monopoly, such as Metro, should have no problem attracting customers. After all, they charge rates well below what they are really worth and they have no competition as a matter of government policy. The former provides riders with a bargain, and the latter means nobody can drive them out of business by offering superior service. So why does Metro have such difficulty attracting riders?

The answer is quite simple: They are offering something that most people don't want. However, that won't stop them and all of their other mass-transit buddies from trying to force light rail down our throats. As is typical of government interventions, when one doesn't work we are quickly told that we need more. When bus ridership falls, we are told that we need light rail. When a light rail line is built, and fails to attract the predicted riders, we are told that it is because we don't have enough light rail!?!

If a private business used this "reasoning" it wouldn't be a business for long. But Metro has no concerns about using our money wisely, because it obtains that money by coercion, rather than our consent. Unlike a private business, which must produce a return for its investors--investors who may voluntarily withdraw their investment--Metro has no incentive to provide a return on investment or even a service that is desired.

Metro--like all such government boondoggles--is merely a means for those with political connections to legally rob productive citizens. And if you think otherwise, you are being taken for a ride.