This budget busting proposal is so full of political propaganda and rhetoric it is unreal. Increasing the debt limit and/or expanding urban renewal districts that siphon away dollars from schools and government services all to dump the additional tax increment revenues into one politically motivated money pit project is an unwise debt risk, especially given the economic uncertainty in the National economy due to mortgages failing and the downturn in new housing starts. Historically, Oregon‘s economy usually dips after the national trend and is one of the last to recover. The elephant is not in the room yet, but the beast is traveling in this direction. Suggesting the streetcar is projected to generate a net positive amount in tax increment proceeds is a stereotype flawed response to the facts. Historically development along the existing streetcar route has come at an expanded price tag not occurring without the City Council handing out property tax abatements to developers like free candy along with other generous tax breaks from both the City and PDC. New development will occur with or without the trolley, and probably occur faster on its own if more roadway and freeway improvements were built.

In addition to the construction costs is the reoccurring debt of operation and maintenance costs that is expected to be tapped from and placed on the backs of future generations of Portlanders. Installing parking meters on the Eastside to subsidize operations will only have a negative impact on businesses in the project area, particularly small family owned businesses. Any revenue from parking meters should be paying for motorist infrastructure and roadway improvements, not for operating a full sized Lionel train layout. The proposed one dollar streetcar fare that is not even equal to TriMet’s regular fare only demonstrates that projected ridership numbers do not support or out weight the excessive costs of the building project. If the streetcar was proposed as a private sector financed investment opportunity, any profitable business person would run away as fast as they could. At the very least, a streetcar project should financially self-sustainable paid for by users through the farebox. Any bicycle facilities should also be user paid by implementing a tax on bicycling. Replacing bus service with snail rail not only slows down transit service through the corridor, but also creates more traffic congestion and impedes freight mobility by gumming up traffic on the high traffic volume streets the snail rail route traverses.

The only positive note in this whole proposal was Fred Hansen’s call for a reevaluation of Fareless Square. That too however has its pitfalls in that the expectation from TriMet’s farebox revenues would still undoubtedly be set too low. Farebox revenues should be covering a far greater amount of the costs of providing transit service than just the current pitiful 21 percent of operation costs.

Furthermore, the problem with a proposal like this is that once enough people are conned into supporting the concept, the momentum becomes a landslide wiping out everything in its path including all forms of reason, user financial responsibility and reality checks. Everybody that owns property within the City of Portland that is assessed their full share on property taxes has a line item charge on their tax bills for Urban Renewal. Therefore all property owners within the city limits have a financial stake in this folly of a trolley plan. This duct taped together proposal should go out for a vote of the people of Portland to decide its outcome, and not just be railroaded through by a body of social engineers and a stacked deck hand selected citizens group.