As noted, RTD staff recommended the hotel concept that the Union Station Alliance submitted over the competing re-use proposal from the Union Station Neighborhood Corporation.  My previous blog contains links that describe the two re-use proposals: Union Station Re-Use: How to Move Forward?  Both proposals were strong and offer substantively the same features on the first floor of Union Station; a large waiting area surrounded by amenities such as local retail stores and restaurants.

During the initial RTD Board committee vote, I stood with the minority in opposition to the staff recommendation in favor of beginning negotiations with Union Station Alliance (Team USA, as has become their popular name).  I was very clear then that my preliminary committee vote did not suggest a preference for either of the competing re-use proposals.  Instead, given the high degree of public interest from across the Denver region in the future of our iconic Union Station building, I believed it was appropriate to provide the opportunity for further public scrutiny of the two re-use options before arriving at a final decision.  This was particularly important, I felt, in light of adjustments and clarifications the two competing teams made in the their proposals during the course of initial Board deliberations.

Faced with majority Board support for moving forward on negotiations with Team USA, I ultimately joined my Board colleagues in last Tuesday’s unanimous formal decision in favor of the staff recommendation.  I took this position on the basis of a number of factors.  First, as I explained during the final Board vote, I still would have prefered additional public input prior to the negotiations phase.  However, staff has promised that they will incorporate extensive additional public input as part of the negotiations process.  Along these lines, I made clear my specific desire for open house gatherings so the public has a chance to juxtapose the proposed re-use investments against the current configuration of Union Station.

I also noted in casting my vote last Tuesday evening that I have high expectations for the remainder of the Union Station re-use RFP process.  We are now in the negotiations phase . . . and I expect rigorous negotiations.  In particular, I urged RTD staff to press hard on three specific points:  1) The first floor of the station building must provide a welcoming and comfortable environment for all citizens, particularly RTD patrons; 2) An expert analysis must confirm the Team USA financial prospectus; and, 3) The building remodel must comply with historic preservation standards.  While I will account for many other considerations in my review of any final agreement with Team USA, I believe these three criteria are of paramount importance.

All that said, I do believe the Team USA proposal and its hotel concept is the most appealing re-use option for Union Station and the regional community it serves.  The 24-hour activity that a successful hotel will generate, along with the extensive remodelling investments Team USA promises to make to the building and the attractive financial return their proposal offers RTD, hold the greatest promise for the future of Union Station.  I look forward to seeing if, through the negotiations process, we can secure all the elements that are critical to fulfilling the exciting vision for Union Station in the Team USA proposal while meeting the expectations that RTD transit patrons and our other regional stakeholders have for this important building.

The two candidate teams first pitched their proposed DUS re-use plans during a special hearing on November 3.  The following is the link to a video recording of this hearing:  http://denver.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=68.   More information on the competing re-use proposals is available here:  http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/dus_1.

In summary, both proposals call for a welcoming station environment on the building’s first floor that features retail stores, restaurants and other amenities which will serve the traveling public and other DUS occupants.  The major difference between the two proposals is the character of uses on the upper floors:  The Union Station Neighborhood Corporation team calls for offices while the Union Station Alliance team is proposing a hotel.  Both proposals are attractive and present different levels of risk and opportunity. 

It is clear that citizens throughout the Denver region feel they have a stake in the disposition of this iconic building.  This interest is reflected in the extensive input the Board has received from various stakeholders regarding the two re-use proposals.  To different perspectives in the Denver Post provide a taste of the input we are receiving:

• Editorial: An update, not a major makeover;
• Barnes-Gelt: RTD on the right track.

While all the initial input has been helpful, I still believe further public scrutiny of the two re-use proposals is appropriate before the Board selects its preferred candidate team.  There have been adjustments in each of the proposals since the first submissions, including substantive design changes.  Also, while much of the financial details for each of the re-use proposals is confidential, I am hoping to encourage more transparency on that front so the public has a better understanding of the approach each of the candidate teams is taking in this critical area.  

In general, I think the DUS project will benefit from additional reflection prior to selecting between the competing proposals.  The direction we take on DUS will dictate the character of this transit hub and its surrounding neighborhood for years to come.  Further public input also provides the two competing candidate teams with a chance to clarify their re-use proposals in response to recent public feedback.  Yes, we are on a tight time table for refurbishing Union Station, but clearly an additional month or so will not have a detrimental impact on the FasTracks implementation schedule.

Despite my advocacy for additional public outreach, my RTD Board colleagues may proceed with the scheduled vote on Tuesday evening.  Therefore, I am interested to hear which re-use proposal you believe is best.  I would most appreciate hearing your thoughts some time before the RTD Board’s Tuesday evening discussion.  Ultimately, our goal is to shape DUS in a manner the serves needs of rail passengers, provides the community and RTD with appropriate financial return, and creates a welcome and attractive environment as the hub of Denver’s transit system.  Your thoughts on how we achieve these goals is appreciated.

For those who read my recent newsletter (which you can access through the following link:  April FasTracks Newsletter), I felt there were a number of good reasons for going to the voters this year.  Additional financial support for FasTracks would help us take advantage of low construction costs and would be an immediate catalyst for new job growth.  Further, and most important to me, additional tax financing would accelerate the completion of FasTracks, bringing bus-rapid-transit and commuter rail service to Boulder County much sooner than we can with existing resources.

Of course, we would achieve none of the above benefits if voters rejected a sales tax increase for FasTracks in 2011 . . . and that is what the political consultants, financial supporters and the public were telling us would happen.  Staff did a wonderful job summarizing the case against a FasTracks vote in 2011, as you can see here: RTD Staff Recommendation – 2011 Ballot Initiative.  In the end, the vast majority of my Board colleagues agreed with the staff recommendation and decided this was not the year to seek additional funding.

I note that the RTD Board took the unusual step of passing a resolution explaining its decision regarding a 2011 FasTracks ballot initiative.  The full text is available here:  Resolution Concerning a 2011 FasTracks Election.  In a key closing line, the resolution states, “The Board has adopted a financial plan which assumes a 2012 election and the Board will make every effort to comply with that plan.”  In other words . . . watch for us in 2012!

The main reason for the delay was some disappointing polling data we recently received.  As has been reported by the Denver Post, http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_17669390, only 43 percent of the participants in a survey of likely voters said they would support a sales tax increase of 0.4% for FasTracks.   These numbers were surprising in light of earlier poll results that indicated 58 percent support for such a measure.  The new poll results also had a chilling effect on the perspective of some important stakeholders.  For example, we recently received a letter from John Huggins, the Executive Director for an organization that calls itself the Coalition for Smart Transit, stating, “[W]e do not believe that 2011 is the year to ask for any tax increase.” 

These recent polling numbers and the opinions of stakeholders are good arguments to hesitate on moving forward in 2011.  However, along with my fellow RTD Board colleagues, I believe we owe it to the public to give this matter more thorough consideration.  As the Denver Post also reported, http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_17569950, we intend to further review all the polling data and to consider other “triggers” before making a final decision on a 2011 ballot initiative. 

Stay tuned (and feel free to continue sharing your input) . . .

In the meantime, others already have weighed-in on this matter.  According to those who responded to initial polling, 58 percent of the public would approve a 0.4% sales tax increase that completes the entire FasTracks system by 2018 (it actually won’t be complete until 2019 under that tax increase scenario).  Most interestingly, public support drops for a lower tax increase rate which takes longer to complete the full FasTracks system.  In the words of David Kenney, the person responsible for the most recent poll, “For most people, the value of time is as or more important than the amount of the tax increase.”

Regardless of what the polling appears to be telling us, the Denver Post is urging RTD to show some restraint.  In their editorial, “Don’t overreach on FasTracks tax,” the Post editors argue that RTD should not double the FasTracks tax in light of other competing public needs.  They even make light of those who are concerned that a lower tax increase will leave folks along the Northwest Rail Line waiting far too long for their promised FasTracks benefits.  “[I]s seven years really such an intolerable delay for a project that was first approved by voters in 2004 and wouldn’t be finished even in the best of circumstances for at least seven more years?”

More opinions on this matter are sure to come from all corners of the Denver region in the next few weeks, but I particularly hope to hear from my District O constituents.   So please feel free to drop me a line or post a response to this blog message.

This Monday, Sean Maher wrote an excellent piece in the Daily Camera, “FasTracks needs more fuel“.  While Sean wants to make sure that RTD is accountable for its commitments, he argues for a vote on the full 0.4% sales tax increase in order to finish the FasTracks buildout by 2018.  “2042 is just too long to wait,” he concludes, which is the time it will take to complete the FasTracks program without additional resources.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of mayors from around the region expressed similar support for the 0.4% sales tax increase.  They were responding to polling results that indicate higher public approval of a tax that will complete the FasTracks system in a reasonable time period.  According to a story in the Denver Post, which you can access here, pollster David Kenney found that voters just want to be told “what it costs to get it done while I’m alive.”

Finally, today I had the opportunity to sit on a panel during a meeting of the US36 Commuting Solutions organization with Louisville Mayor Chuck Sisk and Broomfield Mayor Pat Quinn, along with RTD Board Chair Lee Kemp, for a discussion regarding the potential FasTracks ballot initiative.  As the Broomfield Enterprise well captured in a story that you can read here, Mayors Quinn and Sisk did not shy away from their clear advocacy for a 0.4% increase.  In the words of Mayor Sisk, “Four-tenths is what we support . . . I will be critical of the (RTD) board if they don’t step forward and get this done.”

All of this is great input for me and my RTD Board colleagues as we weigh our desire to complete the full FasTracks system as soon as possible against the public’s appetite for a sales tax increase.  Getting that balance right is critical because, in the words of RTD Board Chair Lee Kemp, “We only get one shot at this.”

In summary, their initial recommendation is a modest increase in the FasTracks sales tax of 0.2%.  With public support of this tax in 2011, RTD staff anticipates that it could complete the full FasTracks program by 2027.  Unfortunately, due to operations costs associated with the Northwest Rail line, Boulder County’s rail system would bring up the rear under staff’s recommendation.  

As RTD’s representative for the Boulder County area, I find the timing for completion of the Northwest Rail under a 0.2% sales tax increase scenario quite troubling.  That is why I have been pushing staff for a full evaluation of the 0.3% percent scenario, which they failed to do in their initial analysis, and I also continue to consider the option of seeking a 0.4% increase.  I note that the FasTracks Committee of the Metro Mayors Caucus has expressed similar sentiments:  Metro Mayors Task Force Recommendation. 

The RTD Board is expected to make a final decision regarding allocation of the remaining FasTracks dollars and a potential future sales tax hike at the end of this month.  These are pivotal matters for the fate of the FasTracks program, so now is the time when I need to hear from you.  Please let me know where you stand on these issues so I can have the benefit of your opinion when I cast my Board vote.

I want you to be aware that RTD staff has offered their recommendations for distribution of the $305 million in remaining FasTracks dollars.  The full recommendation is available at the following link:  2011 Annual Program Evaluation.  The gist of the staff proposal is to allocate a majority of the funding in $90 million chunks, toward the Us 36 BRT system, the North Line and I-225.  The Northwest Rail Line would receive an infusion of $15 million to complete station improvements in Longmont that also will accommodate bus service.

The 2011 Annual Program Evaluation also features three sales tax increase options, each with different implications for the completion of all transit lines in the original FasTracks program.  An increase of 0.4%, for example, will complete the full program by 2019, whereas we will have to wait until 2035 to see the full system build-out if we only get a 0.1% increase.  Staff will offer a more detailed explanation of these packages at a Board meeting on January 25 along with their preferred alternative.  Obviously, though, the voters will have the final say on this matter, assuming the Board decides to pursue one of the proposed sales tax increase options.  

So, the initial recommendations and options are on the table.  Please continue to offer your input.  In the meantime, I will leave you with one other interesting item which is driving some of my thinking on future FasTracks planning . . . a map that the US 36 Mayors and Commissioners Coalition prepared that highlights the severe inequity between transit infrastructure investments in the southern part of the Denver region as opposed to the north, including Boulder County: Funded and Unfunded Transit Corridors.  Have a look at this yourself and you can probably understand why I will be fighting even harder to secure financial support for the BRT System and the Northwest Rail Line.

First, the Board needs to allocate an anticipated $305 million in remaining funds from the innovative public-private financing, construction and operations arrangement for the two new rail lines that will serve Arvada, Wheat Ridge and Denver International Airport.  One scenario involves completing the U.S. 36 high occupancy vehicle lanes which will build out the bus rapid transit (BRT) system between Denver and Boulder. I urge you to review the table of possible investment options that you can access here, FasTracks – Completing the Vision, and let me know your thoughts on the best use of the remaining FasTracks dollars. 

Another decision the RTD Board will again wrestle with is whether to ask voters to approve additional financial support to overcome the roughly $2 billion funding gap to complete the full FasTracks system within a reasonable time period. The various options under consideration, which are included in the document I posted above, include sales tax increases ranging from .1% to .4% (10 cents to 40 cents on a $100 purchase). Each tax increment has a significant impact on the speed of our future build-out plans, so it is important for me to hear how aggressive you want RTD to be in its pursuit of additional tax dollars to accelerate FasTracks construction.

RTD staff will present its recommendations in early January and will be seeking final action at the RTD Board meeting in February.  I will update this blog as new information becomes available.  But, again, please make sure to share your thoughts with me throughout the course of deliberations during this critical phase in the FasTracks program.

This was not a simple vote for the RTD Board, as there is some risk that committing $30 million now will threaten the ability to complete the final design work on the remaining unfunded FasTracks corridors.  However, as RTD staff and most of my RTD Board colleagues agreed, there are many countervailing reasons for taking that risk:

1)  The $30 million from RTD will leverage about $130 million in funding from a variety of other sources toward a total investment in the US BRT system of $160 million;

2)  The communities along the US 36 corridor have been a model of cooperation in RTD’s efforts to secure additional funding sources, culminating in their successful advocacy for additional federal and state support; and,

3)  The investment in US 36 will initiate concrete progress on an element of the FasTracks system, with immediate construction activity that will achieve significant transit benefits.

There are still some elements of the full $160 million financing package that need clarification before we get the final green light to proceed toward construction on this next phase in the US 36 BRT project.  This includes insuring that the private contractor bids for the Eagle P3 project, which will outline the extent of RTD’s financial commit to construction of the East and Gold rail lines, are within budget expectations.  I am confident that all of these pieces will fall into place and we will begin digging dirt in 2011.

In the meantime, I want to extend my thanks to the coalition of local governments along the US 36 corridor that has worked so hard to bring this exciting opportunity to our doorstep.  I also applaud my RTD Board colleagues, particularly Lee Kemp and Bill Christopher who joined me in advocating strongly for the $30 million commitment, that voted to seize this financially responsible opportunity to advance another element of the FasTracks plan.