Transportation Alternatives in Austin

Austin has been a rapidly growing metro area for the last couple of decades. The population has increased 43.8 % from 1997 to 2007. However, the transportation system has not kept pace with the increasing growth. For sustainable long-term growth of a city, good infrastructure is very important. In the case of Austin, the transportation infrastructure has hardly been able to meet the existing demands. Transportation network could be considered the framework for the urban built environment. And for the city to function effectively, alternative modes of transportation are essential.

Population Growth 1997-2007

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census and The Austin Chamber of Commerce.

In the last few months, when the gas prices were at an all time high, residents of Austin had very little choice but to drive their car. The reason for this is the inefficiency of the current transit system in Austin. Capital Metro has several buses running on several routes, but the frequency and routing are probably insufficient to serve the needs of a majority of the residents. Sometimes one has to transfer two to three times to reach a destination which is just a few miles away. And not surprisingly, the total travel time by bus becomes more than walking. And high gas prices are only one reason for someone looking for alternative transportation. The congestion on Austin’s highways is pretty bad during commute hours, and people looking for transit alternative at that time also have little option. One may argue that with the developing technology, there might be fewer reasons to physically travel for work or other chores. But statistics have not provided too high percentage for people working from home. In contrast, the average distance traveled by a person and the average time spent to travel to work has been on an increase.

Capital MetroRail Plan

Source: Capital Metro

One may find relief from the fact that Capital Metro is expected to open the MetroRail line in a few months now (earlier plan was to open the rail line in Fall 2008). However, if the bus service and connections and transfer remain the same, the commuter rail is not going to help as much. Ideally, the integration of the rail and bus service would provide reliable and efficient transportation alternative to the residents of the greater Austin metro area.

Austin ISD Property Tax Rate Increase - Could the timing be any worse?

What is everyone's chief concern these days? Isn't it the economy and jobs, and elections and taxes? The editorial section of the Austin American Statesman has a related article titled "Austin school district tax increase: Voters should approve pay raises for teachers."

Though the title includes the part of raising teachers' compensation, the "Austin Independent School District Tax Ratification Election Proposition No. 1" does not include any language related to the pay raises that will be given to teachers provided that voters approve it. The article is targeted towards citizens of Austin who will be voting this November (or probably earlier, during the early voting period). The editor recommends to the voters to approve this proposition, and provides a number of reasons for doing so.

Firstly, the teacher pay in Austin has not kept pace with inflation. All the surrounding school districts have been more effective in hiring the best teachers by giving them better pay packages. Second, the school district has limited their spending to bare necessities due to lack of funding. Even then, this year’s budget drew $21.8 million from the $128 million fund balance to minimize burden on tax payers. If this continues for a few more years, the fund balance will soon deplete.

In addition to the above two arguments, the editor also notes that not all property tax revenue goes directly to the school district. The editor provides the example where more than 86% of the property tax revenue would directly go to the state under Texas’ school financing law. Therefore, even with the additional monies coming in, very little would directly go to Austin ISD. However, the editor does not provide any facts on whether the revenue collected by the state is redistributed to the school districts or not.

The editor puts forward several important factors in advocating in favor of the proposition. But with the current economic slowdown and job losses, it might not have as good a chance to be passed. Also, voters would be concerned whether the tax rate increase would directly help teachers’ pay raises or not?

Preparing for the Worst, OR, Advocating for the Rich

A very interesting article on post-hurricane Ike redevelopment of Galveston is published in the editorial column of The Dallas Morning News. The editor acknowledges the destruction brought to the Houston-Galveston area by Ike, and the condition of the people directly affected by it. However, the focus of the article is not those people whose “primary concerns are whether you still have a house and when they'll ever get to sleep in it.” The article is directed towards the residents of Texas.

In the article, the editor is mainly concerned about two issues. The first issue is that if state monies are involved in rebuilding Galveston, all of state’s budget surplus would be used up. In that case, should we just stop caring about what happens to Galveston? Don’t we know what happened to New Orleans after hurricane Katrina? Has it really been able to gain all the economic development that once flourished in New Orleans? If the Feds are willing to bail out banks that are in bad shape due to their greedy lending strategies, the people of Galveston should not be penalized for the wrath of nature. That said, the suggestion by the editor to recapitalize the insurance wind pool should also be considered.

The editor talks about the second issue about building more refineries. The editor mentions that this time, many refineries largely survived because of Ike, but that may not be the case if another hurricane hits the gulf coast. While considering the environmental consequences, the editor suggests that more refineries should be built so that if such a storm comes again, there will still be adequate supply of oil. The editor fails to see the other side of the argument. If another hurricane hits the gulf coast, there is potential for damage to more refineries if they are over there. Again, if they are damaged, they will need to be rebuilt. Also, the environmental consequences should be given appropriate consideration.

In short, the article does not look at all aspects of an issue. In the first issue, the editor would not like to spend tax-payer’s money to rebuild Galveston, but in the second issue, the editor talks about extending incentives and giving tax breaks to oil refineries. One may be led to believe that the article is written an advocate for oil and gas companies.