New Haven Independent

Posted by: J. Hart | October 19, 2007 8:21 AM

Please stop using the term "sustainable" in reference to the trolley. Just because something is electric does not make it sustainable. When you plug an appliance into the wall, that electricity comes from somewhere. It comes, most frequently, from burning coal. You're simply transferring the emissions from one location (the exhaust pipe of a vehicle) to the stacks on a power plant. Yes, it can be easier to regulate a single power plant than hundreds of vehicles, but this fact in and of itself does not make this a "sustainable" form of transportation. To give it that label is not only misleading but lends additional justification to a transit service that is terribly inefficient - quite the opposite of "sustainable."

Between the poor ridership and the high cost of operation, the trolley is anything but sustainable. Between this and our heated bus stops, I can't help but feel that there are some very questionable funding choices being made by our city. And for the record, I am a public transit advocate. But that does not mean supporting any old plan that has transit applications simply because of that fact alone. Good transit is efficient transit.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 19, 2007 9:04 AM

Some points of clarification: Mike Piscitelli doesn't really know who uses the city parking lots. They could be suburdan, they could be in-town. The claim of 80% being from suburdan users is just silly and manufactured to provide Alders with political cover. Why make this stuff up?

J.Hart is totally correct and a great irony to all the tree-huggers who embrace coal burning power plants so we can plug in the fake trolley.

As expected, the Finance Comittee as it always does, embraces a new round of tax hikes on real estate and property in New Haven to once again fund somebody else's benefit. In this case, parking lot owners who already pay excessive property taxes, AND who pay $130 - $340 per space for a license fee just to operate a parking lot; will now have to pay another $25 per space. This money will fund a program that has nothing to do with their customers, their business and that they already subsidize through property taxes and license fees.

Mike Piscitelli and company should be put on a short leash of two years - boost ridership; install fare boxes so that the people who benefit pay for the service and raise corporate support while expanding service and creating a better efficiency model - or end this layered tax - and kill the trolley that bikers and seniors embrace, and don't use and aren't willing to pay for themselves.

Posted by: WEBbloger 1 | October 19, 2007 9:55 AM

I agree with Gary Doyens.. This project amounts to another tax designed to sneek in your back pocket.

New Haven tax payers currently subsidize many of the parking lots around the city and in this proposal they are being asked to pony-up another $25.00/parking space on top of the subsidy.

That by no other word is; double taxation, with representation.

Posted by: Mark | October 19, 2007 12:58 PM

Another option would be to involve Yale. They already run a separate shuttle system, and I'm sure they would benefit greatly if the Trolley went to the train station. No small amount of Downtown parking is Yale affiliated, instead of going after the individuals, challenge the University to subsidize the system, or integrate with it somehow.

Posted by: J. Hart | October 19, 2007 2:57 PM

Gary, just FYI, it's easy enough to find out where vehicles originate. I've done plenty of "license plate surveys" wherein the plates of vehicles using parking facilities are recoded and run through the DMV database. The result is a breakdown of where your patrons are coming from. It's a pretty common practice. While the administration at large may not, Mike Piscitelli, in my experience, is deserving of the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 19, 2007 3:33 PM

Bravo!! I am so glad that the people that come to this city work here but often do not spend much here are going to have to chip in!

Posted by: DingDong | October 19, 2007 4:08 PM

The reason no rides that trolley is because it's not a trolley. If it were a streetcar, with a route and stops that were clear to all, things would be very different.

Posted by: Common Sense | October 19, 2007 5:02 PM

It nice to have at least one Alderman (Jorge Perez) on the Finance Committee who is not rubber stamping another add on tax to fund the electric trolley. I use city parking lots/garages many times during the year attending various meetings, events, shopping, paying taxes (yes,I am a city resident), etc. and pay what I consider a high fee for parking. The parking meters give you 7 minutes for .25 cents. Its always a guess as to how much time you need in order to not receive a parking violation ticket. Its obvious, at some point, the parking meter price will go up as well as the garage fees. Out of towners who work here do spend money. All the restaurants, theatre and stores in New Haven probably have more out-of-towners spending their money then city residents. The electric trolley is an excellent service for those who take advantage of it. Like many of the respondents I support it, however, we should not further penalize vehicle drivers who already pay an emission fee to the State. We must get a control on spending. Too much government, too much waste, not enough accountibility.

Posted by: J.Hart | October 19, 2007 5:02 PM

License tag surveys may have been done by others using reverse look up at DMV in other circumstances - if it had been done, Mr. Piscatelli certainly would have said so. He did not. Further, nobody, not even Mr. Piscatelli should be given the benefit of any doubt whatsoever, when once again, the first choice of paying for a service, is to levy yet another tax, on already overtaxed people. Creative thinking; creative solutions and re-ordering the priorities of the department to fund new initiatives and new priorities should be where the solution is found. Instead, the solution by City Hall and all its employees, is how to creatively manipulate the licenses, fees, taxes and phase-ins of monster sized property tax increases on an unsuspecting public. It's past time to end this practice of picking our pockets of every nickle and giving that money to some special interest group.

Posted by: J. Hart | October 19, 2007 7:35 PM

Why is Gary posting comments and attributing them to me? I am referring to the post that begins "License tag surveys may have been done by others using reverse look up at DMV in other circumstances - if it had been done, Mr. Piscatelli certainly would have said so."

This is NOT MY POST.

Posted by: Whatsername | October 19, 2007 9:17 PM

So the idea is to encourage public transportation, which is clearly a greener option than single-commuters in cars. So, by taxing the parking garage spots there is a two-fold benefit: this tax can fund the greener trolley and make cars pay for their polluting ways (excusing the hybrids, of course, but don't they park for free anyway?). But if the tax deters people driving and opting for the cheaper and more environmentally sound public transportation, who will fund the eco-friendly transportation? So why cheer for a system that basically bites itself in the rear?

And as far as car drivers only paying for 60% of the cost of driving--with the municipality covering things like paving roads--why wasn't the absurd Connecticut annual car tax even mentioned? Hate to say it, but I kinda thought that all that tax I pay on my vehicle twice a year might maybe go to keeping our roads up.

Argh...this makes no sense. I love the idea of a sustainable system, but this isn't it. I agree: creative solutions and better ideas are an order here.

Posted by: Confused? | October 20, 2007 9:31 PM

Are there two J. Harts or are we dealing with some mild schizophrenia? I think you may have a typo or an impersonator NHI.

That Trolley should be running to and from other commercial/residential districts such as State ST, Westville and Grand Ave towards downtown and then you would see both efficiency and ridership.

What about a trolley that ran up and down streets like State Street or Grand Ave from downtown during the lunch and dinner hours?

What if I could get dinner at Modern, hop on the trolley to Libby's for desert, then hop on again to go downtown to the criterion and then come back to my East Rock, Westville, Fair Haven etc. Home without driving?

Sounds pretty good.

Posted by: fairhavener | October 20, 2007 11:08 PM

This is ridiculous. Another tax so the city's elected officials can spend more money on their crappy ideas (let me guess, alderman saw how many posts the trolley article got, so now we have to pay for a trolley). We already have a car tax. In the 5 or so years that I have lived here I still cannot figure out how people let this happen. Didn't you pay the tax on your cars when you bought them? Do you think we should pay a pants and tee-shirt tax every year? Or an underwear tax? Come on.

Wasn't there an NHI article in the last few weeks that was regarding spending more to improve the bus system? Remember, the supposed "wobbly tripod" theory? Why not use that money for this? Just because it is not a gigantic diesel bus doesn't mean it is not a form of bus transportation.

And, it doesn't matter whether it is 20%, 50%, or 80% of out-of-towners who drive in to downtown. The people who drive downtown are supporting downtown. If the concern is that all they do is come downtown, work, then leave, then why not use the MUNICIPAL ID card as a way to waive this ridiculous parking tax for New Haven residents. At least then the ID card would have some worth.

Last but not least, if you want to start proposing NEW TAXES, (sorry for the caps) THEN HOW ABOUT A TAX ON QUALITY OF LIFE OFFENSES! Oh, I forgot, the goal of the New Haven ruling class is to drive out all of the intelligent people because if too many smart people were around they just might rise up and slay them.

Posted by: J. Hart | October 22, 2007 1:40 PM

The comments that read "Posted by: J.Hart | October 19, 2007 5:02 PM" are not mine.

I do not know if this was an error on the part of the poster or a deliberate act. You can verify that these are not my comments by looking at the email address associated. Since I have used my real name and am a professional working in the field of transportation planning, it is important that you correct this as soon as possible. Thanks!

Posted by: Gary Doyens | October 22, 2007 4:52 PM

This is a mistake. I don't post under the names of others and I certainly wouldn't do so maliciously. The post in question is mine and only mine.

Posted by: Esbe | October 22, 2007 6:42 PM

To (the real, I think), J. Hart -- we don't have many coal-burning electricity plants in the Northeast and we do have a lot of relatively clean natural gas plants. So, the trolley would be a relatively "sustainable" transport option if it was frequently pretty full. Of course, at the moment it is most frequently pretty empty, but maybe running it from the train station will change that. Worth a try.