Quote:
Originally Posted by Makid
The Airport is restricted by State Law from using any funds to support Transit that isn't dedicated within the Airport (underground trains/people movers). So the burden of moving Trax is on SLC and UTA unless the State wanted to step in and offer funding as well (more on this in a moment).
The savings from the Frontlines expansions were in the value of unbonded resources. This means that funds weren't realized as they weren't needed. In total it was around $400 Million in unneeded funds. These funds if bonded for over 30 years would have totaled the $500 Million in savings that is discussed frequently.
By the law that authorized the Frontlines expansion, UTA does have access to the funds provided it is used for an approved project (Green Line, Red Line, Blue Line or FrontRunner South). This means that UTA can bond for the money needed to relocate Trax. It also means that the Blue Line extension to the SL County/Utah County border could be bonded for today. Lastly, it also means that UTA could work on double tracking FrontRunner South. All of these are possible today with only an authorization vote from the UTA Board. The funds however cannot be used for something that wasn't stated such as increased bus service.
Coming back to the part above about the State possibly providing funds for Trax. I do think that the increased talk we have seen about Trax to Lehi/Utah County in the Legislature increase further. It may not be the next session but I do think that 2019 or 2020 the State will need to step in and probably force the Proposition 1 increase in Utah and SL Counties (if the counties haven't yet passed it).
The State would do this with the intention of bringing Trax to Lehi/Utah County as well as Trax extending towards the relocated prison. This will also bring Trax through the International Center as well as through the Inland Port (Probably #1 or #2 topic of the 2018 session).
I do think that the State will also directly provide funding to additional transit along the Wasatch Front soon. This is mostly due to the EPA classifying the majority of the area as a Serious Non-Containment Area. If the designation doesn't change soon, the State will lose funding for Roads and be forced to pass all laws that other states have enacted to improve air quality. This may include some of the statewide transit authorizations that some states have passed to help with air quality.
So without additional transit funding and usage, Utah will have the same air quality regulations and laws that California has as well as any additional regulations and laws that other states have passed. Dedicated Transit Funding, Stronger Limits on Emissions for all vehicles as well as Industries (MagCorp), Limits on Mining and air particles (Rio Tinto, Point of Mountain (North and South), and Limits on Coal Power emissions. These are the minimum that could be forced on the State by 2020.
So sorry about the minor tangent but real possibilities for change in Transit usage and behavior might be coming soon.
|
Very intriguing. Great info.
What would happen if the airport constructed the TRAX station for UTA, and then had UTA pay rent? Would that be legal under the state law?