In light of the recent developments in the DART-member city negotiations, it is more important than ever for the transit riders to have input on the changes that have been proposed:
Thank you for this post. I appreciate its clarity. It appears that there is a general move in a good direction to address the financial constraints of the member cities while trying to keep DART 'whole'. However, I also understand the pie is only so big and a bigger piece for one means a small piece for everyone else. Let's follow the money and see how DART services will be impacted as they 'share' their pie with others. Kudos to Dallas - you are right - in this day and age, it's encouraging to see a big city act in the best interest of the entire region.
The notion of a regional rail authority has promise. Travelers between Fort Worth, Denton and Plano deserve a one-seat ride and it's idiotic they don't have one. The track is laid, the trains are running. We only need to build connecting track to link TexRail, DCTA and Cotton Belt.
I'm ride-or-die pro-DART and pro-transit. I depend on DART to get to work every day. I think you're being overly skeptical here. From where I stand, DART's priorities should be to 1) survive the exit elections and 2) alleviate the funding pressure faced by member cities so they aren't incentivized to exit. This move by the board seems to be a feasible way to do that.
While actors from cities like Plano don't deal in good faith, it is not anti-transit propaganda to say that cities are financially burdened by giving half their potential sales tax base to DART. My own city, Garland, is not currently holding an exit election (in part thanks to my efforts). But I know for a fact that their budget is stretched gossamer-thin, and they are a net beneficiary of DART. When the state hard-caps the sales tax they can collect and Texans continually vote themselves less property tax, what can they do? Let me tell you, Garland city council was tempted by the prospect of exiting.
The only permanent solution to the suburb's discontent is a state-level funding solution. This was always going to be a hard ask for Texas, but necessary. If you have a better idea for putting money back in the coffers of DART member cities, what is it?
Thank you for this post. I appreciate its clarity. It appears that there is a general move in a good direction to address the financial constraints of the member cities while trying to keep DART 'whole'. However, I also understand the pie is only so big and a bigger piece for one means a small piece for everyone else. Let's follow the money and see how DART services will be impacted as they 'share' their pie with others. Kudos to Dallas - you are right - in this day and age, it's encouraging to see a big city act in the best interest of the entire region.
The notion of a regional rail authority has promise. Travelers between Fort Worth, Denton and Plano deserve a one-seat ride and it's idiotic they don't have one. The track is laid, the trains are running. We only need to build connecting track to link TexRail, DCTA and Cotton Belt.
I'm ride-or-die pro-DART and pro-transit. I depend on DART to get to work every day. I think you're being overly skeptical here. From where I stand, DART's priorities should be to 1) survive the exit elections and 2) alleviate the funding pressure faced by member cities so they aren't incentivized to exit. This move by the board seems to be a feasible way to do that.
While actors from cities like Plano don't deal in good faith, it is not anti-transit propaganda to say that cities are financially burdened by giving half their potential sales tax base to DART. My own city, Garland, is not currently holding an exit election (in part thanks to my efforts). But I know for a fact that their budget is stretched gossamer-thin, and they are a net beneficiary of DART. When the state hard-caps the sales tax they can collect and Texans continually vote themselves less property tax, what can they do? Let me tell you, Garland city council was tempted by the prospect of exiting.
The only permanent solution to the suburb's discontent is a state-level funding solution. This was always going to be a hard ask for Texas, but necessary. If you have a better idea for putting money back in the coffers of DART member cities, what is it?