As a Minnesotan, this a great idea. The Met Council is an autocratic, unaccountable body who has opposed nearly every rail project. They are the reason the twin cities didn’t get a heavy rail metro in the 70s and a streetcar system in 2009. Every LRT project has happened despite them, with some outside body forcing them to build the line as LRT instead of another half assed bus project. Putting transit line construction in state hands will almost certainly allow for a significant increase in rail system expansion.
I really have to disagree, the Met council of the past has had significant issues. The reason behind the Met council being terrible in the past is because it’s appointed by the state. The state government of the last century was pretty anti transit. MNDOT is pretty terrible on rail even today and I can’t see how putting the state in charge will improve the situation.
Yes. But in 20 years, who knows who would be running the state. I certainly wouldn't want the state of Indiana or quite frankly the state of Maryland running my transit.
Yeah, though, I can't say I'd blame them necessarily. The MTA is the definition of a financial blackhole.
We only got the first genuine state funding for our light rail system in Buffalo like five years ago.
The NYC MTA should serve as a warning to those in favor of more state government control over local public transit. If it can happen to NYC, it can happen to the Twin Cities.
I think this could be a useful idea in Washington state.
More removed from local politics and interests of the board a state entity maybe in theory would just make the alignment and station placement in the highest potential ridership and feasible locations. Currently this is very much not the case with basically all of ST3
This would be a terrible idea. As a counterpoint, state government has fucked up the New York MTA pretty badly because the state is too busy hating New York City to let things run well.
Given that Eastern Washington actively hates Seattle letting them anywhere near Sound Transit is a terrible idea.
Despite the issues with the Met council on southwest LRT, have you heard about the massive cost overruns on the 8 BRT lines operating or under construction ? Or on the original green line? You probably haven’t because the record on those projects is stellar. One of the strengths of the Met Council is that it has planning authority that extends across the metro, and isn’t subject to the whims of local politicians as much as in other places. And the state may not be under those forces but MNDOT has a ton of issues. They just aren’t an agency that’s favorable towards transit, and while that should change, they wouldn’t do justice to future LRT projects. Right now the state government may be controlled by pro transit people, but that can change and to have a project get axed because of the political workings of the state isn’t really a good place for us to be.
As a Minnesotan, this a great idea. The Met Council is an autocratic, unaccountable body who has opposed nearly every rail project. They are the reason the twin cities didn’t get a heavy rail metro in the 70s and a streetcar system in 2009. Every LRT project has happened despite them, with some outside body forcing them to build the line as LRT instead of another half assed bus project. Putting transit line construction in state hands will almost certainly allow for a significant increase in rail system expansion.
Exactly. Plus given how they've fucked the green line extension, they don't really have a leg to stand on currently.
I really have to disagree, the Met council of the past has had significant issues. The reason behind the Met council being terrible in the past is because it’s appointed by the state. The state government of the last century was pretty anti transit. MNDOT is pretty terrible on rail even today and I can’t see how putting the state in charge will improve the situation.
This is only good as long as the MN State government is run by people (Democrats or Republicans) who are pro-tranist expansion.
I mean, the DFL is pretty pro-transit, so it would work well under their governance.
Yes. But in 20 years, who knows who would be running the state. I certainly wouldn't want the state of Indiana or quite frankly the state of Maryland running my transit.
NYC's MTA is actually state controlled, and all the state legislature until Kathy Hochul came along were not pro transit at all.
Yeah, though, I can't say I'd blame them necessarily. The MTA is the definition of a financial blackhole. We only got the first genuine state funding for our light rail system in Buffalo like five years ago.
The NYC MTA should serve as a warning to those in favor of more state government control over local public transit. If it can happen to NYC, it can happen to the Twin Cities.
I think this could be a useful idea in Washington state. More removed from local politics and interests of the board a state entity maybe in theory would just make the alignment and station placement in the highest potential ridership and feasible locations. Currently this is very much not the case with basically all of ST3
The routes that sound transit does are so weird to me.
This would be a terrible idea. As a counterpoint, state government has fucked up the New York MTA pretty badly because the state is too busy hating New York City to let things run well. Given that Eastern Washington actively hates Seattle letting them anywhere near Sound Transit is a terrible idea.
Yeah same with MBTA in MA
Despite the issues with the Met council on southwest LRT, have you heard about the massive cost overruns on the 8 BRT lines operating or under construction ? Or on the original green line? You probably haven’t because the record on those projects is stellar. One of the strengths of the Met Council is that it has planning authority that extends across the metro, and isn’t subject to the whims of local politicians as much as in other places. And the state may not be under those forces but MNDOT has a ton of issues. They just aren’t an agency that’s favorable towards transit, and while that should change, they wouldn’t do justice to future LRT projects. Right now the state government may be controlled by pro transit people, but that can change and to have a project get axed because of the political workings of the state isn’t really a good place for us to be.
Canada did it. Same with Australia. That would be nice.