Significantly Reducing Access Points To Public Transit Isn’t Fair, Just, or Equitable

In a guest piece in the St. Louis American 20th Ward Ald. Cara Spencer makes a passionate plea for expanding MetroLink light rail:

The St. Louis region needs a high-quality light rail system to connect Florissant/Ferguson and our densely populated South Side to Downtown and the Central Corridor. Now is the time to push for economic investment to help stabilize some of the city and county’s most vulnerable communities. We should be demanding that our local leaders prioritize North Side/South Side MetroLink expansion as imperative to making St. Louis a progressive and economically just metropolitan area.

Public transportation speaks volumes about a society. Lack of transportation is an indicator of economic injustice and is the number one deterrent to employment and community involvement across the country. (St. Louis American)

Would light rail be more “just”?  Those who don’t actually use public transit on a daily basis may think so, but the reality is the opposite.

The above map is from the North South MetroLink Expansion Facebook page.

Northside:

Currently to get from downtown (14th & Spruce) to Ferguson and the Florissant Valley Community College there are two options:

1. #74 (Florissant) MetroBus is the most direct option. This takes 1 hour and 1 minute with up to 68 potential stops along the way.  That’s a long time, I’ve done it many times in the last year.
2. MetroLink (Red) to Hanley Station plus #36 (Spanish Lake) MetroBus.  This option takes a total of 1 hour and 2 minutes. This route is 23 minutes on light rail with 10 stops, 10 minutes between modes, and 29 minutes on bus with up to 40 stops.  I’vc also done this a few times.

The proposed light rail line would certainly cut this down to 30-45 minutes. That’s a good thing, right? Not necessarily.

Very few ride the #74 MetroBus end to end. It’s a busy bus route but people get on/off where they need to. With 68 points of access it serves the corridor well. More frequent headways would be better though.  The proposed light rail route would most certainly mean the #74 would end at a new Jennings Station MetroLink Station at Goodfellow & W. Florissant, rather than duplicate service from that point North. From Goodfellow & W. Florissant it currently takes 24 minutes to reach the community college at the end of the #74.  The light rail map floating around would instead have just 4 stops including the start & end stops! How is that just?

Sure a light rail train may be faster and be more frequent, but that’s little consolation if you’re walking a mile further in the rain to get to a limited access point. For many current riders they’d now just end up having to walk their entire trip. Unless we ran a bus on the same route as the light rail train, which kinda defeats the point of spending tens/hundreds of millions on light rail.

Southside:

A similar situation occurs along the proposed Southside route. Currently a person downtown (14th & Spruce) seeking to get to Cherokee & Jefferson using public transit has two choices, both via MetroBus: #11 & #73

How long does it take to get from 14th & Spruce to Cherokee & Jefferson on these two MetroBus routes?

1. #73: 17 minutes, running every 30 minutes weekdays, with up to 18 points of access in that distance.
2. #11: 16 minutes, running every 20 minutes weekdays, with up to 19 access points.

Both are pretty quick. The Southside light rail being pushed follows the #11 route exactly between these points so let’s take a closer look.  Google Maps includes the start & end stops in their 19 stop count. Here are the 17 access points in between:

1. 14th St @ Papin SB
2. Chouteau Ave @ 14th Street WB
3. Chouteau Ave @ 18th Street WB
4. Chouteau Ave @ Mississippi WB
5. Chouteau Ave @ 22ND Street WB
6. Jefferson Ave @ Chouteau SB
7. Jefferson Ave @ Hickory SB
8. Jefferson Ave @ Park SB
9. Jefferson Ave @ 1605 S Jefferson SB
10. Jefferson Ave @ Layfayette SB
11. Jefferson Ave @ Russell SB
12. Jefferson Ave @ Shenandoah SB
13. Jefferson Ave @ Gravois SB
14. Jefferson Ave @ Pestalozzi SB
15. Jefferson Ave @ Arsenal SB
16. Jefferson Ave @ Wyoming SB
17. Jefferson Ave @ Utah SB

So how many stops would this “just” light rail make to serve the “densely populated South Side”? Five!

1. Chouteau & Truman Parkway
2. Jefferson & Park
3. Jefferson & Russell
4. Jefferson & Gravois
5. Jefferson & Arsenal

The density isn’t concentrated at just 5 points! Only a person who doesn’t understand transit can ague that spending millions while reducing 17 access points to 5 is “fair, just and equitable.” For example, everyone who works & shops at Jefferson Commons would now have to walk further. Sorry folks, remember this is “just” as your grocery trips are longer.

Back to Ald. Spencer’s op-ed:

On the one hand, it is exciting to see renewed interest in light rail in St. Louis County. Yet on the other hand, it is alarming that the expansions mentioned did not include a north/south route, but instead focused on the Clayton-Westport, Lambert-Florissant and Shrewsbury-Butler Hill lines. These three lines fail to provide service to the region’s most densely populated areas and many communities that have the highest need. 

Northside/Southside light rail also fails to address actual needs — it would provide service for whites who are uncomfortable riding the bus with non-whites, see Race, Class, and the Stigma of Riding the Bus in America. You can have a free train running every 5 minutes 24/7 but if a person must walk a mile to reach a point of access they’re not going to use it. Stop pretending it benefits them.

Related prior post: Northside-Southside Light Rail Wouldn’t Be Good For St. Louis Neighborhoods

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: Should St. Louis tax payers get to vote on funding a new NFL stadium?

The subject of today’s poll may ultimately be decided by a court, from April:

The public body that owns and operates the Edward Jones Dome filed suit Friday against the city of St. Louis. They are trying to avoid a public vote on the use of taxpayer money for a new downtown football stadium. The St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Authority would ultimately be responsible for building the proposed stadium on the riverfront. The RSA is suing St. Louis city claiming the city ordinance requiring a citywide vote before public funds are spent on a stadium is, “Overly broad, vague and ambiguous.” The city says the ordinance is legal. (Fox 2)

The lawsuit makes sense, the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Authority wants legal clarity:

At the center of the St. Louis lawsuit is a 2002 city ordinance that says a vote is required to decide whether public funds can be used to help pay for a sports venue. (LA Times)

Then last month a third of the aldermen weighed in:

Nine of the city’s 28 aldermen are calling for a public vote on the use of city tax dollars for a new riverfront football stadium — regardless of the outcome of a lawsuit seeking to escape just such an election.

On Friday, Alderman Scott Ogilvie sent a letter signed by him and eight colleagues asking the public board of the Edward Jones Dome to drop its lawsuit against the city and “embrace a conversation with St. Louisans” about the funding of a $985 million downtown arena. (Post-Dispatch)

Ordinance 65609/66509 called for a public referendum, becoming Chapter 3.91 Professional Sports Facility of the city code after approval by voters. City election results aren’t available online before 2005 so I asked Election director Gary Stoff about the results:

“Proposition S appeared on the Nov. 5, 2002 ballot.  The results were 48,872 (55.37%) in favor of the proposition and 34,552 (44.63%) opposed.”

The Post-Dispatch in January:

St. Louis residents passed the ordinance in 2002 by nearly 10 percentage points, 55 percent to 45 percent. St. Louis County voters approved a similar measure in 2004 by even more, 72 percent to 28 percent. (Post-Dispatch)

So there you have it. Today’s poll question asks “Should St. Louis tax payers get to vote on funding a new NFL stadium?” The poll is in the right sidebar (desktop layout) and will close at 8pm tonight.

— Steve Patterson

Readers Opposed To Open/Concealed Carry In Public — Including At The STL Zoo

Not only are readers not having guns at the St. Louis Zoo, they really don’t like guns, concealed or openly carried, in public. Period.

Because the Zoo obtained a temporary restraining order, Jeffrey Smith, of Ohio, held his protest outside the Zoo.

He says that since the zoo is taxpayer funded he should have the right to carry his firearm on zoo property. But, the zoo says its ban is within Missouri law because it qualifies as a child care facility and educational institution. The zoo has a child care facility on site and hosts educational camps and field trips throughout the year.

Saturday, the group ‘Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America’ showed up to support the zoo’s firearm ban.

“This is no place for firearms. There are other places where I can understand they would be necessary. But in the zoo, for such a family friendly part of our community, it’s just really not necessary,” said Becky Morgan of Moms Demand Action. (KSDK)

Here are the results from the Sunday Poll:

Q: Yesterday a Ohio man wanted to enter the St. Louis Zoo openly carrying his gun, thoughts?

1. I’m opposed to open carry & concealed carry in public — including at the STL Zoo 27 [55.1%]
2. I’m opposed to open carry, but support concealed carry — but not at the STL Zoo 9 [18.37%]
3. I’m opposed to open carry, but support concealed carry — including at the STL Zoo 5 [10.2%]
4. I support concealed & open carry — including at the STL Zoo 3 [6.12%]
5. Other: 2 [4.08%]
   1. I’m opposed to the ownership of guns at all by loony right-wing fascists
   2. what is everyone so scared of?
6. TIE 1 [2.04%]
   1. I’m opposed to concealed carry, but support open carry — but not at the STL Zoo
   2. I support concealed & open carry — but not at the STL Zoo
   3. Unsure/ no answer
7. I’m opposed to concealed carry, but support open carry — including at the STL Zoo 0 [0%]

More than half those who support concealed &/or open carry do not support it at the zoo.

Not sure about the 2nd “other” Who is that reader thinking is scared? Could apply to those who think they need to carry a gun into a zoo patronized largely by families or could apply to those of us who fear the possibility of the presence of a gun(s) presenting a very real danger. The latter is very real considering the event on the day of the poll: Five injured after gun fires accidentally during wedding at Waldorf Astoria.

I suspect we’ve not heard the last of this.

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: Yesterday a Ohio man wanted to enter the St. Louis Zoo openly carrying his gun, thoughts?

Last week a Cincinnati Ohio man announced he planned  to visit the St. Louis Zoo openly carrying a gun:

An Ohio man is planning to walk into the St. Louis Zoo with a gun Saturday.

Even though there are signs posted around the zoo stating that weapons are not allowed, Jeff Smith is planning to walk into the zoo with a gun visible to others, most likely in a holster or belt on his hip. Smith said he will demand to know what Missouri State Law he has violated if he is stopped from entering. (KMOV)

Local officials, including the police chief, looked for ways to prevent Smith’s plan:

St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson says Missouri has some of the most liberal gun laws in the country, and it may allow an open-carry protest to happen inside the zoo.

Amendment 5, was passed in August 2014, establishes the “unalienable right of citizens to keep and bear arms, ammunition and accessories associated with the normal functioning of such arms, for the purpose of defense of one’s person, family, home and property.”

Dotson says attorneys are looking to see if the amendment can allow police to keep the protest outside of the zoo. (KMOX)

Friday morning the St. Louis Zoo filed for a temporary restraining order, which was granted a few hours later:

A judge has barred a gun rights advocate from entering the St. Louis Zoo with a gun. (Post-Dispatch)

The poll today seeks to find out how regular readers feel about open carry of guns at the St. Louis Zoo. The poll answers might be a bit confusing, but they should cover all the various views. They’re presented in random oder. If you don’t like an answer you can provide your own. You can also share your thoughts in the comments below. The poll closes at 8pm — sooner if corrupted.

— Steve Patterson

Sunday Poll: Should St. Louis Gradually Raise The Minimum Wage To $15/hr By 2020?

Board bill 83 (not online yet) was introduced at the Board of Aldermen on Friday morning. If eventually signed into law, it would set up incremental raises to the minimum wage in the City of St. Louis. This seemed like a good topic for a reader poll.

Here’s the exact poll question:

A bill introduced Friday would raise the minimum wage in St. Louis to $10/hr, with annual increases of $1.25/hr until reaching $15/hr in 2020. I…

The answers range from “strongly support” to “strongly oppose.” The poll, located in the right sidebar, will close at 8pm tonight.

— Steve Patterson