In typical liberal biased journalism, The New York Times ran an article a couple of days ago called “In Phoenix, Weekend Users Make Light Rail a Success.” It was a typical puff piece, claiming that light rail has been even more successful than envisioned.

But it conveniently omitted any of the negative information about light rail since it launched in January indicating that it’s NOT a success, which our local media has helpfully been reporting. Sales tax revenues have decreased (guess light rail hasn’t helped spur the economy as predicted) and so there is no money to expand it to the planned 57-mile network. Light rail lost $235,000 in revenues in February alone. According to Phoenix Metro, the lost revenue was due to “technology provided by a German computer plus the passengers who use the ‘smart cards’ to pay their fares.” Nationwide, transit companies everywhere have been suffering economically, so it is suspect that the New York Times claims Phoenix light rail is doing well. “Transit systems all across the country are having very severe financial challenges,” said Virginia Miller, spokeswoman for the American Public Transit Association, a Washington-based lobbying group.

Without expanding light rail,  its range is fairly limited and will not reach any kind of potential or popularity. Right now it barely covers downtown to just past ASU barely to Mesa, and doesn’t go far enough north of downtown to reach anywhere like Glendale. That most important wing, to Glendale, is being put off for at least another three years.  Expansion to Paradise Valley is being put off until 2030.  Expansion into South Tempe has stopped. Scottsdale has withdrawn from participating, indicating there will be no expansion there.  Phoenix Metro admits that decreasing revenues have forced light rail to revise its original design as approved by voters, so to say it’s proven more of a success than envisioned is a flat out lie.

Light rail isn’t even the bargain it was envisioned to be. The costs of providing light rail increased way beyond estimates after it debuted, requiring significant hikes in fares. “Officials say the hike is due to a continual increase in the cost to provide service.” The fares increased dramatically soon after light rail debuted this year, on July 1, from $1.25 to $1.75 for a one-way pass and $2.50 to $3.50 for an all-day pass.  Some fares even more than doubled, with cash one-day onboard fees going from $3.50 to $7.25.

Perhaps  the most alarming news about light rail is that accidents have been increasing. Some of the reasons being looked at for the increasing number of crashes include confused motorists, improper procedures by train operators, defective safety equipment and systems, unclear intersection markings and signage, bike and pedestrian accidents including by ticketed riders, quick stops, insufficient security, and injuries suffered while loading or unloading. Trial lawyers are ready and waiting to file lawsuits, which will result in substantially increased costs.

Light rail is a big mistake for our commuter region. It is too late to try and build a comprehensive light rail system; not only is it too expensive, but there is no room to build, too many properties would need to be condemned. We are too spread out for it to be realistic. In a city where everyone lives on top of each other, like New York, mass transit was possible. But this is Arizona, and we’re becoming so spread out they refer to us as a smaller L.A. What an embarrassing legacy for Phoenix Democrat Mayor Phil Gordon – a failed mass transit system.

by Clint Bolick
Goldwater Institute
 
Whenever I describe the Goldwater Institute’s legal challenge to the Arizona Corporation Commission’s renewable energy rules, a question often arises: why are you against renewable energy?
           
The answer is easy: we’re not. Renewable energy fosters energy independence, and the government should not interfere with the rapid development of energy alternatives. Indeed, we recently argued in favor of allowing firms to facilitate installation of commercial solar panels without the Commission’s regulatory oversight.
           
But nor should it act as if technology and cost obstacles do not exist. Wind power, for instance, faces huge distribution challenges. Solar power heavily uses water, which presents a bit of a problem in the desert, and cannot yet be efficiently delivered without heavy subsidies.
           
For the Commission, cost and technology are no object. It has decreed that the state’s utilities under its jurisdiction must provide 15 percent of their energy from specified renewable sources–not including hydro or nuclear–by 2025. Its sweeping rules purport to govern almost every facet of the utilities’ business decisions regarding renewable energy.
           
The rules far exceed the Commission’s limited constitutional authority to set rates. When the Maricopa County Superior Court ruled otherwise in the opening round of our legal challenge, Commission chair Kris Mayes said the decision would “keep electricity rates as low as possible.” To the contrary, the Commission’s own staff projected the rules would cost consumers–who will pick up the entire tab–at least $2.4 billion above the cost of conventional energy. The burden falls most heavily on small businesses, which already are paying up to $118 more per month in surcharges alone. Mayes wants to increase the renewable energy requirements to 25 percent, which could end up costing small businesses more than $1,000 per month in extra utility charges.

The Commission’s misguided regulations will persist until a higher court reins it in or until the Legislature reclaims the authority over energy policy that the renegade Commission has stolen from it. Until then, ordinary Arizonans will pick up the tab for this utopian scheme.

Clint Bolick is director of the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.