Thomas MacMillan Photo
The second time was not the charm, as a plan to look into installing a streetcar system went “down in flames.”
Those were the words of East Rock alderman and streetcar champion Justin Elicker (pictured), whose prediction of failure before Monday night’s meeting of the Board of Aldermen proved to be true.
But Elicker scored a partial victory for “transparency” by forcing his colleagues to debate about the plan in public.
The board voted 22 – 4 to grant “leave to withdraw” to a measure that would have allowed the city to accept a $780,000 federal grant to study the feasibility of putting in a streetcar system in New Haven.
It was the second time a similar plan had been scuttled despite the fervid support of streetcar fans in town and in the administration.
The plan called for $90,000 in matching money from the city, a condition to which aldermen took exception. They also said they wouldn’t support a plan that didn’t call for a more widespread route and a study that wouldn’t analyze city transportation more broadly.
Elicker and other supporters said streetcars have been shown to have a very high rate of investment, bringing economic development into cities for years after installation. The study is just the starting point, said Elicker, who agreed that routes to neighborhoods beyond downtown should be added.
Democratic Majority Leader Alderman Al Paolillo moved the item Monday night as a “leave to withdraw.” He did so at the written request of Mike Piscitelli, the deputy director of the economic development department, which had originally proposed the matter.
“After hearing from members of the Board, it is clear that we have not reached consensus on this item and we recognize the Board’s focus on youth, job creation and public safety,” Piscitelli wrote in a Friday letter to Board President Alderman Jorge Perez.
When the maker of a proposal requests that aldermen drop it, it’s usually done without much comment. But Elicker was not about to let the matter go quietly.
He stood to “strongly oppose” the leave to withdraw and spoke out for having a public discussion about the merits of the project, rather than letting it die quietly because the administration had determined it doesn’t have the aldermanic votes to pass it.
“I guess I’m frustrated,” he said. Aldermen had just debated the matter for 30 to 45 minutes in a private party caucus, a discussion the public would never hear, he said.
Board President Perez permitted a discussion to ensue.
Westville Alderman Adam Marchand (pictured), a member of the City Services and Environmental Policy Committee, which had approved the measure initially, said he’d changed his stance on the plan. He said he had initially thought there would be more flexibility to the study to make the whole project “more in line with the priorities we set forward as a board.”
Marchand said he’s a big proponent of public transportation. He said he rides the bus every day and encouraged more members of “the white community” to do so.
He said later that he had hoped that the study could look at city transportation in general, not just streetcars. “It felt very much like a predetermined outcome.”
Elicker responded to the charge that streetcars would not address the board’s priorities of youth, safety, and jobs: “Streetcars equal money, period.”
Elicker said other cities have seen phenomenal returns on their streetcar investments: 920 percent in Little Rock; 7,500 percent in Portland, Oregon; 1,900 percent in Tampa. All that money could pay for much more youth services, public safety, and jobs in the future, he said.
Elicker later explained that streetcar systems are about much more than public transportation. They’re about economic development. The permanence of installed rails gives developers and tenants confidence that public transportation will always be available to their buildings, which increases their investment in an area, Elicker said.
He encouraged his colleagues to look long term, not just at the next year or two.
Fair Haven Alderwoman Migdalia Castro criticized the streetcar proposal for not extending out to the Bella Vista elderly housing complex or to the Hill.
Marchand said the city would need to put in $30,000 plus more money that’s already been budgeted towards the study.
The budget is full of items like this, Elicker said. If aldermen really care only about youth, jobs, and public safety, maybe they should remove all money for sidewalks and rolling stock, he suggested facetiously.
He again called for aldermen to look at the long-term return. “If we do these things today we we’ll have support for what we want to do in the future.”
Elicker later said that the full cost of installing the streetcar system is yet to be determined. It would be paid in large part through federal grants, he said. But those grants will be unavailable without the study.
In the end, Elicker was joined only by Aldermen Doug Hausladen, Jessica Holmes, and Alfreda Edwards in opposing the leave to withdraw. All other aldermen present voted to nix the streetcar plan.
Elicker said he doesn’t stand against giving leave to withdraw to items generally, but in this case it was an attempt to avoid public discussion. The mayor and the Board of Aldermen have a tendency to avoid allowing public disagreement to be aired, he said. And that’s a disservice to New Haveners.
Elicker said he doesn’t think the proposal will rise a third time.
Although I have issues with the CURRENT streetcar proposal, I strongly support an investment in light rail in New Haven, and I do wish that the conversation came back to the specific proposal and ways to improve it.
As Alderman Elicker points out, there is serious long-term value in building this type of infrastructure, and I am grateful that he pushed for a public discussion.
It is the nature of politics that decisions and discussions are often made and held behind closed doors. These types of discussions are important and incredibly helpful to citizens, because they let us see what actually happens in our municipal government.
Thank you to the alders who joined in the discussion and shared your views: it is appreciated.