The post Right-of-Way Compensation for Telecom Companies appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

I live in the Central West End neighborhood of the city, and my street (to the best of my knowledge) was never plowed. For the better part of two weeks, I was not able to move my car. As of this writing, the trash in the dumpster in my alley has not been picked up since before the storm—a storm that began on January 5.

For one thing, the inability to clear the roads created much more serious problems. Some people have had to rely on friends or family just to get groceries. Mail delivery in the city has essentially ground to a halt. Most pressingly, impassable streets create difficult scenarios for emergency services. There are stories of people who need medical help and live on streets that ambulances can’t currently reach.

It is fair to point out that this was a big storm, and probably an unusually difficult storm to deal with. Freezing rain falling right before a lot of snow is a headache. But this was also not some once-in-a-century storm. We had about 10 inches of snow and some ice—Midwest cities ought to be prepared to deal with storms like that occasionally.

A KSDK story noted that $600,000 was cut from the city streets department for snow removal, but city officials have explained that this money was mostly for salt, and that the city already had stockpiles of extra salt because of recent mild winters.

This isn’t a story about resources. It’s a story about incompetence.

Predictably, we’re beginning to see finger-pointing and recriminations. The mayor blamed residents for leaving parked cars in the path of snow plows. The director of the streets department claimed she was getting “incorrect information” regarding the situation. Leaving aside the morality of throwing your staff under the bus, this claim does not pass the smell test. Figuring out street conditions is not a difficult feat of intelligence gathering—this is not like trying to gain information about a nuclear program in a rogue nation. If you step outside pretty much anywhere in the city, it’s apparent. Or you could check any of the hundreds (maybe thousands?) of posts on social media detailing the situation.

The city seems to be conceding that it screwed up, and that something needs to change. Officials have signaled that the longstanding policy of not plowing side streets might be changing. The city also resorted to hiring outside contractors to help clear the ice.

This is a great example of the wisdom in my colleague Patrick Tuohey’s pleas that Missouri cities focus on providing basic services. Instead of addressing crime or maintaining infrastructure, the City of St. Louis seems eternally fixated on shiny objects like economic development subsidies that don’t work or expanding train service that very few people use. People don’t want to live in a place that can’t provide an adequate level of essential services—and residents are voting with their feet. How long is it going to take city leaders to figure this out?

The post The Gang that Couldn’t Plow Straight appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Every English city uses this basic framework, ensuring all elements of city life are working together to benefit everyone’s well-being. [emphasis added]

If New York City and Houston do not have a comprehensive plan, then our Missouri municipalities don’t need one either. As Jane Jacobs said about urban planning, “The pseudoscience of planning seems almost neurotic in its determination to imitate empiric failure and ignore empiric success . . .”

There is general agreement that some type of infrastructure planning is required by municipalities. As cities grow or change, there need to be plans in place for the installation of sewers, gas and water pipes, electrical lines, sidewalks, and roads. But urban planners rarely maintain focus on those needs. Planners frequently and disappointingly mandate the mundane. The growing sameness of so many American communities is a direct result of municipal plans requiring a consistent look in a community. When you realize that most zoning codes were copied (the literal cut-and-paste prior to computers and copy machines) from other cities, that most cities use the same (or very similar) building codes, and that zoning codes limit the options available for many lots, nobody should be surprised by the loss of distinct urban aesthetics across the nation. As Cody Lefkowitz wrote about the depressing sameness of urban areas now:

Before the rise of zoning and consolidation of development, the country was full of special places with wonderful vernacular architecture. These were cities and towns built by many hands. Cities and towns that aged gracefully through generations of stewards iteratively building from the foundations of their predecessors. New Orleans, that much-loved city, is one of the most exceptionally beautiful places one can imagine, with an identity as unique as it is mystifying. When you’re there, you could never mistake yourself for being anywhere else.

Municipal planning commissions are empowered to establish comprehensive plans for their cities and to approve changes, amendments, and variances to the current plans or zoning codes. They are largely advisory. The city council can easily approve a change the planning commission rejects, like in Kansas City when the council unfortunately approved building height limitations for the Country Club Plaza. In Creve Coeur in 2013, the city council approved changes to allow a new grocery store that the planning commission had rejected. City councils can also reject changes the planning commission approves.

The point is not that elected officials should be subservient to the planning commission members; far from it. The point is to overcome the idea that planning is some kind of urban science with a large public benefit. The planning process is wholly subject to the same political aims, interest group pressures, and regulatory capture that all of government is. Furthermore, the process institutionalizes and legislates the bias toward uniformity and present-day assumptions. Counties and municipalities should limit their use of planning to necessary infrastructure issues and refuse to engage in it otherwise.

The post The Last Thing Missouri Needs Is More Urban Planning appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Missouri’s roads are often a mixed bag. Urban areas, such as Kansas City and St. Louis, face heavy traffic loads that strain infrastructure, while rural areas contend with neglect stemming from budget limitations. Harsh weather conditions further exacerbate the wear and tear, leaving many roads riddled with potholes and cracks. Rural highways critical for agriculture and trade can quickly deteriorate without sustained investment.

A recent post by the blog Construction Physics contained a chart depicting the road quality of the top 19 cities. It depicts the percentage of non-interstate roads at different quality levels, measured by the International Roughness Index (IRI) and tabulated by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). I’ve added St. Louis and Kansas City for comparison using the same scoring system.

Missouri’s interstates, whose standards and funding largely come from the federal government,  rank 15th out of 50th according to the IRI score. But our non-interstate roads rank 32nd, behind our neighboring state of Kansas (1st) but well ahead of Illinois (37th). Kansas has earned a reputation for relatively well-maintained highways, thanks to strategic funding and regular maintenance schedules. Illinois has committed significant resources to upgrading its aging infrastructure through recent legislative initiatives.

Importantly, both Kansas and Illinois employ toll roads to fund road maintenance. Missouri should, too. Show-Me authors have written extensively on tolling and road maintenance more generally. While Missouri recently increased its gas tax, it’s too soon to know how impactful it will be.

Improving Missouri’s roads requires more than patchwork solutions. Lawmakers and transportation officials must focus on sustainable funding mechanisms, better prioritization of projects, and more efficient use of resources. Policies that balance the needs of urban centers and rural areas will be critical in ensuring that all Missourians benefit from reliable roadways.

The post Kansas City and St. Louis Road Quality appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

TDDs are often abused by private developers as a means to expand corporate welfare under the pretext of “infrastructure improvements.” Most TDDs are created simply by the signatures of the property owners (often just one developer) who want to establish them. The TDDs are then governed by a board (affiliated with the property owner) that treats the tax funds as private money rather than public tax dollars. Missouri state auditors have consistently documented problems with TDDs for the past two decades.

Kirkwood city leaders deserve credit for putting this TDD to a vote of the entire city. They also made the right choice by ensuring that city leaders will have primary control of the future funds. Kirkwood residents can be confident that the taxes raised would be properly accounted for and spent on public needs, not private wants.

The main argument against this TDD is that sales taxes are not, generally speaking, the preferred way to fund transportation projects. Kirkwood should consider a local gas tax (which is allowed, yet admittedly rare in Missouri) before it commits to a sales tax for its roads. And, while nobody wants to hear it, property taxes are a better way to fund sidewalks in a community. General sales taxes are a way to push local costs onto visitors instead of having local people pay for the public services in their own neighborhoods.

Kirkwood voters face a tough decision tomorrow, but whatever the result of the vote, residents will benefit because the most harmful aspects of TDDs have been properly addressed by the city.

The post A Fork in the Road in Kirkwood appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The federal government has spent billions on internet expansion and hasn’t connected a single new home. California has increased its high-speed rail budget from $33 billion to $135 billion and still hasn’t laid down any track fifteen years after the program began. It’s insanity.

Another huge federal program with local implications that has failed miserably is the program to install thousands of electric vehicle chargers across the nation. $7.5 billion was appropriated toward this goal in 2021 as part of the bloated stimulus package, and by the end of 2023, zero chargers had been installed.

2024 has witnessed the installation of a few new chargers. As of this summer, the program is up to eight. All of this for something the private sector could provide. But if you leave it to the private sector, they might not install chargers exactly how the federal government wants them to, and that’s (apparently) the problem. The federal rules are so unnecessarily yet intentionally complex that they are the cause of the delays. As Reason magazine writes:

Why so little progress? Alexander Laska of the center-left Third Way think tank told Autoweek’s Jim Motavalli that the federal cash “comes with dozens of rules and requirements around everything from reliability to interoperability, to where stations can be located, to what certifications the workers installing the chargers need to have.”

Who cares what certifications the workers have as long as the chargers work? And who cares where they are located as long as they are located somewhere a car can get to? The federal government cares, of course, because the complexity of the rules is exactly what gives bureaucrats their power and allows officials to reward supporters.

EV charging mandates, subsidies, and regulations, are all unnecessary. Where there is a demand for chargers, the private sector will supply them. This is no more complex than the gas stations that have been filling up cars for over a hundred years. (Did you know that the first gas station in America was in St. Louis? I didn’t.)

$7.5 billion for eight EV chargers in three years. So typical.

The post Charging Nothing and Liking It appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

We have all seen the television ad where the man walks into the sandwich shop and orders bread but nothing inside of it because that’s all he can afford. “Everything is so expensive these days,” he says.

That may well be how many Americans are feeling, but I only wish that were true for our government. The price tags for government’s infrastructure “improvements” are becoming astronomical, and at some point we have to recognize that this isn’t an unfortunate fact of life. The high cost is a choice, not a requirement.

Let’s start with the high-speed rail disaster in California, which was originally approved in 2008 for an estimated cost of $33 billion; the current estimate is $135—for a system that won’t have anything completed until the 2030s at the earliest. Actually connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco, as promised, is many more years away. All this for a system that hasn’t laid any track 15 years after it was approved.

It doesn’t have to be this way. In Spain, they built an entire 2,500-mile system of high-speed rail for $62 billion. That’s obviously a lot of money, but it got them an entire, advanced rail system for less than half of what California will spend for two routes at best.

Unlike high-speed rail, elevators have been around for a long time. There is nothing fancy about an elevator. Yet in New York City, a project to replace 70 elevators at transit stations cost taxpayers $5.5 billion, or about $80 million per elevator. Elevators for subways may indeed be more expensive than in office buildings, but in Germany they have managed to hold the cost to less than $10 million per elevator per transit station. Something is deeply wrong with how we fund government infrastructure in America.

Closer to home, St. Louis County is considering several options for its governmental complex in Clayton. The most expensive and most comprehensive plan—which includes replacing the main county administration building with an entirely new building among other projects—is estimated by the county to cost around $600 million. If that sounds preposterous, it should. The key part of that proposal—the new administration and public safety building in downtown Clayton, is estimated to cost $250 million for a 190,000-square-foot building. (This doesn’t even include the cost of demolishing the existing buildings.)

Currently, a 21-story residential tower has been approved by the city for downtown Clayton. It would have 299 units, some retail space, and over 300,000 total square feet. What is the total estimated cost of that project? $106 million. This residential tower would be significantly larger than the new county building, yet it would cost approximately $150 million less. Based on cost per square foot, the proposed county building is almost four times as expensive.

In Robert Caro’s book The Powerbroker, about Robert Moses, the autocratic boss of New York city and state infrastructure projects for four decades in the mid-20th century, Caro spent an entire chapter detailing the way Moses employed various interest groups to get his projects going, no matter the cost. Moses had support from a wide cross-section of interest groups because he made sure that they all made money from his projects. Construction companies, contractors, labor unions, consultants, banks, law firms, the list goes on. If any politicians started opposing his projects, there was an orchestrated campaign of pressure from all these groups to get it approved. The people who benefitted from these enormous expenditures benefited greatly and quickly. The taxpayers or commuters who paid more than they should have did so in small increments over time via higher taxes, tolls, or other fees, but they didn’t feel the higher costs all at once. So the taxpayer shakedown has continued on to the present day.

In simpler terms, the developer of the high-rise in Clayton is spending its own money to build it, where St. Louis County officials are not. The county is spending taxpayer money, obviously, and when you do that in Missouri’s largest and richest county you can get away with spending a lot of it. Taxpayers aren’t going to revolt over an extra $50 a year in taxes spread out over 365 days of sales tax on purchases or mixed in at the end of the year with a dozen other property taxes on their bill. This is why you end up with a proposal for a new county building that costs four times more (per square foot) than a new, private building nearby.

Addressing this overall problem is going to be extremely difficult. Every option for change involves cutting off someone else’s golden goose. For now, let’s just hope St. Louis County government doesn’t put the New York Transit Authority in charge of the new elevators. Then it’s going to really get expensive.

The post Government Infrastructure Costs Are Out of Control appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

These two deserve each other. Let’s examine the usage projections that were used to convince taxpayers to approve funding(and various extensions).

Projected passengers for MidAmerica Airport, back in 1997 when the airport was built? Two million.

Plog Research Inc., one of the consultants for the MidAmerica project, estimates 2 million air passengers will be served by the Downstate airport.

Actual passengers in 2022? 163,000. (And trust me, they celebrated that wildly.)

Projected MetroLink ridership after the construction of the cross-county MetroLink extension? 80,000 daily boardings in Missouri alone by 2025.

Actual daily boardings in Missouri in 2023? 16,700.

Public agencies habitually overstate ridership and understate costs to justify these massive projects of all types. High-speed rail, anyone? 

It is worth noting that the current five-mile MetroLink extension to the airport in Illinois cost $98 million, while the proposed MetroLink extension in St. Louis, which is also five miles long, is estimated to cost $1.1 billion. A billion-dollar difference for the same length of route. To paraphrase Everett Dirksen—himself a son of Illinois—a billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.

It is great that we can finally connect two massive transportation boondoggles that don’t take anyone for a ride but taxpayers.

The post MidAmerica Airport and MetroLink Deserve Each Other appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

There are two different questions on the ballot. One is whether to issue $750 million in bonds for sewer system improvements. The other is whether or not to increase property taxes on residential property and approve a charge on commercial properties based on the amount of impervious area a property has—for example, how much of the land is a parking lot.

MSD is going to spend the money. It has to according to a lawsuit settlement with the EPA from years ago. If the bonds are approved, monthly prices for property owners will go up less rapidly in the short term, but more in the long run as the cost of bond financing will be added to the total cost. If the bonds are rejected, monthly prices will go up dramatically in the short run but will come down somewhat over time. The total cost will be lower due to no bond financing charges, but the immediate sticker shock will be substantial.

The impervious area charge for commercial property is the most interesting change. MSD tried to do something similar several years ago for more types of properties, but had to change after fierce resistance and lawsuits. I think basing part of your stormwater charges on how much of your property is grass and how much is asphalt (or other substances) is a great idea. Properties with more impervious areas like asphalt or concrete absorb less stormwater and create more stress on the overall stormwater management system. In a sense, this is a user fee. I would like to see MSD do that, in part, for residential property too.

The most troubling part of the proposal is how MSD intends to spend the money if the tax increase and impervious land fee are approved. Instead of spending the revenues based entirely on need, ten percent of the money will be used to create an “environmental justice fund.” It seems fair to wonder if money in an “environmental justice fund” will be spent based on engineering and science instead of social justice priorities. The justice fund is enough to make me hope the whole proposal fails. Another ten percent of the money will be spent based on decisions from a “regional advisory committee.”  Given that these sorts of committees are often based on political power and influence trading instead of engineering needs, you could wonder if this is another example of other priorities superseding engineering needs.

As Homer wrote and The Police sang, voters’ choices here are caught between Scylla and Charybdis. Sewer and stormwater rates are increasing no matter what. The vote feels like you are voting for General Secretary of the Politburo and there is only one choice on the ballot. Either way, your best hope is that the new pick dies quickly.

The post Caught Between a Rock and a Wet Place appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The question: how much over the $34.9 million budgeted for the project could 0.7 miles of rail cost taxpayers? The answer: another $10 million, and possibly more:

“We determined that both of the (contractors) were qualified, the technical proposals were sound, but their costs were above the estimate, and both of their costs were above the budget, significantly so,” KCATA Deputy CEO Dick Jarrold said during a Tuesday presentation to the agency’s Finance Committee. The KCATA is one of four groups heading the riverfront streetcar project, alongside Kansas City, the Kansas City Streetcar Authority and Port Authority of Kansas City. . . .

The Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) has authorized about $9.6 million in additional federal dollars for the riverfront streetcar through the Surface Transportation Block Grant program, and a MARC committee has recommended an additional $1 million in federal Carbon Reduction program grant funds. The programs require local matching funds, which Jarrold said are anticipated from Port KC and the Streetcar Authority in an as-yet undetermined amount. [emphasis mine]

Keep in mind that the estimate for the original plan to extend the streetcar to the riverfront was $22.2 million, meaning the apparent final (?) cost of the line is on course to double that estimate, with or without the local match considered.

Yet, that’s been the track record for this toy train for over a decade now. I wrote here in 2011, 2012 and 2013 and for Forbes in 2014 that the Kansas City streetcar was a profligate and bad idea. And yet, despite the many opportunities to prove naysayers wrong, the streetcar remains a remarkably poor fiscal and policy decision to this day.

The post To Nobody’s Surprise, Riverfront Extension of Kansas City Streetcar Going over Budget appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

On Thursday, contractors began to dig into the rail bed on the I-670 bridge to fix a piece of steel track that emerged from the pavement earlier this week.

A streetcar driver noticed the problem on July 4, when the rail popped out of the ground as a train was approaching the bridge. Donna Mandelbaum, a spokesperson for the Streetcar Authority, said the driver was able to stop in time to avoid further damage or injury.

Since then the Streetcar Authority and its partners have been examining the bridge and rails to find out what caused the problem. Mandelbaum said the rail had likely bent because of thermal expansion.

Since then and in the meantime, service along the streetcar will be provided by buses which, if you’re familiar with what Show-Me Institute analysts have said about the city’s streetcar projects over the last decade, is fitting. Buses are faster, cheaper to set up, easier to reroute, and easier to keep in operation. Simply put, they’re better. That for a decade Kansas City pushed to build the line and later expand it despite its obvious drawbacks is a testament to the city’s commitment to dubious transit schemes in service to questionable economic development objectives.

Kansas City may not be alone among municipalities in the misguided effort to resurrect old-timey transit—hello St. Louis!—but the absurdity of using rails like this in Kansas City is accentuated by this tale, where four feet of broken track has shut down four miles of transit service for, likely, four weeks. For shame.

The post More than a Metaphor: The Kansas City Streetcar Nearly Goes Off the Rails appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

These privatization deals are a wonderful thing that should be encouraged and expanded in Missouri, including for our largest cities and their water divisions. More stringent health, environmental, and other regulations (both necessary and not) are making it harder for local communities to operate their water and sewer systems properly. The Post-Dispatch article mentions right at the start how bad the water in Eureka is currently: “It’s the worst water I’ve ever tasted in my life,’ said Eureka resident Thomas Ferrari.”

The main complaint about privatization is that rates will increase. Yes, they often do, and that is typically a necessary thing. Municipal utilities frequently underprice water, electric, and gas rates because those pricing decisions are made by politicians who want to keep voters happy. That may help with re-election, but it makes necessary system investments more difficult. From the Post-Dispatch story:

Arnold sold its sewer system to Missouri American in 2015 for $21 million. “The system was not in good shape. It was not well maintained,” said City Administrator Bryan Richison. “And city council members were running on not raising rates, so it put us in a bad position.”

The water in the City of St. Louis may taste great (it does), but the city water division there has done a poor job of reinvesting in its system and incorporating new technology into service. As astounding as it may be, the City of St. Louis water division has still never installed water meters in most homes to measure water usage and bill accordingly. You get charged for water based on a variety of physical factors, so if you want to water your lawn for 12 hours a day you pay no more than your neighbors. That’s terrible public policy and results in inefficient, wasteful use of water.

Water and wastewater privatization is very good public policy that we need more of in Missouri. Private utilities adopt technology more quickly, expand the tax base, invest in their systems more reliably, and are regulated by the state’s public service commission on their rates. More municipalities with their own water, electric, and gas utilities should follow Eureka and Arnold’s lead and privatize for everyone’s benefit.

The post Eureka Water Privatization Is a Very Good Thing appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The proposed route received some tweaks earlier this month, and now is set to run from Natural Bridge Road at Grand Boulevard in north city down Jefferson Avenue past the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) headquarters and the site of the new MLS stadium. This new plan has an estimated price tag of between $600 and $800 million and would be financed primarily through federal funds. However, like the ill-advised KC Streetcar expansion, expanding MetroLink would be a waste.

The first and most obvious problem with the proposal is ridership. The project is touting the ability to connect impoverished areas of North Saint Louis with centers of commerce in places such as downtown and the Central West End. However, project leaders have yet to put out research supporting this claim. Considering that fewer and fewer people are commuting downtown for work, there are reasons to be skeptical of this assertion.

As a longtime Saint Louis sports fan, I understand that MetroLink can be a convenient way to get downtown and avoid the stress and costs of parking. However, building an additional stop and line to service the new MLS stadium is completely unnecessary, considering its proximity to Union Station­­­–it is only 0.2 miles away, or a five-minute walk. Instead of changing lines to access the dedicated stadium stop, soccer fans taking the train downtown would be better off exiting at Union Station and making the short walk over.

As with the KC Streetcar expansion I wrote about in a recent blog post, spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a questionable MetroLink expansion comes at the expense of bus systems.  Saint Louis Metro has been forced to cut lines amid staffing shortages, an issue which is predicted to persist into next year. Metro Bus is the primary means of transportation for roughly 22,000 St. Louis commuters, compared to only 4,000 commuters who primarily use MetroLink.

If St. Louis wishes to use federal money to improve public transit, it should improve the bus system and invest in more efficient types of public transportation, like Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Unfortunately, policymakers’ tendency to chase shiny objects will likely leave Saint Louis with a defunct trolley, an oversized light rail system, and thousands of unhappy bus riders.

The post Even with an Updated Route, MetroLink Expansion is a Waste appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Using Missouri’s Fiscal Relief and Infrastructure Funds to Grow the Economy, Not Government appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Public Comments Regarding the Funding of High-priority Transportation Needs appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The usual problems with water in St. Joseph, Missouri relate to having too much of it all at once. But properly getting rid of the water you have used—through your sewer system—is also a complex issue. More stringent water quality requirements from state and federal regulators have made it more difficult for many municipal utilities to operate. Often, they simply do not have the resources to meet the higher water-quality and sewage-control standards. Even large cities have had trouble dealing with revised Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sewage guidelines. For instance, Kansas City reached an agreement with the EPA in 2010 to upgrade its sewer system at a cost of $2.5 billion over 25 years, and cities like Kansas City have more resources to deal with sewer infrastructure than communities like St. Joseph.

Sewer rates in St. Joseph are already a matter of complaint. A June 2019 article in the News-Press detailed concerns among the area’s business community that high municipal sewer rates were harming the region’s economic environment. Whatever the price, St. Joseph’s sewer issues aren’t going away anytime soon. The city reached an agreement with the EPA to improve the sewer system years ago. During the Trump administration, the EPA gave St. Joseph additional time and flexibility to complete those required system improvements. Under that revised agreement, the city will be upgrading the system until at least 2036, and during that period will continue to periodically release untreated sewage into the Missouri River during major storm events. While the agreement and time extension with the EPA may be justified, the fact is that St. Joseph has another option to consider: privatization. Water in St. Joseph has long been provided by private utilities, and the city should once again—as it has previously—carefully consider privatizing its sewer system.

Indianapolis outsourced its sewer systems to private operators in 1994, and the cost savings were even greater than had been estimated. The city saved $72 million over the first five years of the contract, and those savings allowed the region to invest in major repairs to its aging sewer system. On a smaller scale, communities across Missouri have realized that the best thing for their residents is to privatize their water and sewer systems. Within just the past two years, voters in Bolivar, Eureka, Taos, Trimble, Purcell, Hallsville, and Garden City have approved privatization of their municipal water and/or sewer systems to either Missouri-American Water or Liberty Utilities. Those communities—mostly small towns spread around the state—realized that maintaining these systems was going to be an enormous burden on city governments not properly equipped to manage them. Privatizing them—for amounts ranging from $200,000 to $28 million—was a way for each city to guarantee proper operation of their water and sewer services by a regulated, privately-operated utility. The cities can use (and have used) the money to pay down debts, invest in other municipal needs, or do whatever the city wants to prioritize.

Arnold, Missouri, is probably the best guide for St. Joseph. Arnold, a suburb of St. Louis with approximately 21,000 residents, was having trouble keeping up its sewer system as it grew in population. In 2015, city voters approved a plan to sell its sewer system to Missouri-American Water for $13.2 million. Since that sale, Missouri-American has completed several promised system upgrades, while Arnold used the money to pay down municipal debt and expand its park system. As a larger city than Arnold, St. Joseph could expect substantially more money in any privatization effort.

Private utilities in Missouri are regulated. Just as Missouri-American Water cannot raise water rates in St. Joseph without approval from the public service commission, no private company could take over the sewers and raise rates further without going through the same approval process. The fact is that running a sewer system under current rules and regulations is expensive and beyond the capacity of many communities. However, it is well within the capacity of larger, private utilities like Missouri-American Water, Veolia, and Liberty Utilities. As the Indianapolis public works director said about the private contractors they hired to operate the sewer system, “It’s just a different league. These guys have resources our guys could only dream of.”

St. Joseph should take advantage of that expertise and seek bids from several private utilities to either outsource the management and operations of their sewer system or—better yet—purchase and operate it. That is the best way that city officials can address the sewer system needs of St. Joseph for the benefit of everyone in the community.

The post St. Joseph Should Privatize Its Sewer System appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

There are ways to fund local road maintenance other than sales taxes. As the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission has noted, paying for road maintenance with taxes largely unrelated to road usage creates problems. If people aren’t charged for using roads directly, people will drive more, which in turn leads to higher road maintenance costs.

A local fuel tax is a good solution to the problem of paying for road maintenance—a fuel tax is directly related to driving. Additionally, local fuel tax revenue is constitutionally required to be spent on local road maintenance, decreasing the risk of financial misuse.

Seven Missouri cities already have local fuel taxes; none are higher than 2 cents per gallon. According to my calculations, Kirkwood could raise over $266,000 per year from a 2 cent per gallon local fuel tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. A downside of a local fuel tax is that you don’t collect any revenue from large trucks that may not stop to buy gas in Kirkwood, but still damage the roads when passing through.

No matter how Kirkwood residents and officials decide to raise money for local road maintenance, the city should carefully manage the money raised and ensure that all proper reporting, transparency, and auditing rules are observed. The proposed TDD has redeeming qualities and could be a viable option for funding needs. Nontheless, Kirkwood officials and residents should also consider other transportation policy options.

The post Kirkwood Should Consider the Pros and Cons of All Transportation Funding Options appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Last month, I wrote about the many complicated questions surrounding the gas tax bill. The primary question is whether the bill runs afoul of the state’s Hancock Amendment, which is a constitutional amendment that requires tax increases above a certain threshold to be subject to a public vote. Several legislators expressed their concerns with the bill and urged the Governor to veto the legislation. In the end, Governor Parson signed the gas tax into law, indicating he’s not too concerned about the potential constitutionality issues.

Perhaps that’s why the bill’s fiscal note was changed before it was signed into law. Originally, the fiscal note stated, “the net increase in state revenues by this proposal exceeds the limit to revenue growth set forth by Article X, Section 18(e)” (meaning the bill’s tax hike is expected to bring in more revenue than the Hancock Amendment allows). But the updated fiscal note added an important caveat:

However, the calculation under Article X, Section 18(e) is based on the fully implemented impacts of all legislation passed during a session. Therefore, it is unknown at this time whether the cumulative impact of all legislation passed during the 2021 session will be greater than the limit allowed.

What this means is that Missouri will be implementing a gas tax hike on October 1 without knowing whether the law violates the state’s constitution. And if it’s later determined the tax hike doesn’t comply with the Hancock Amendment, the issue will be sent to voters for approval before collections can continue.

It’s an unfortunate situation that state taxpayers will soon be facing, and it’s made worse by the fact that it all could have been avoided if the legislature had simply sent the gas tax hike question to voters as it’s done in the past. My colleague Jakob Puckett has written repeatedly about the inadequacy of Missouri’s current gas tax to maintain our state’s deteriorating roads. But is raising taxes on Missourians without their input, and without knowing whether the way it’s being done is constitutional, the right answer? I, for one, don’t think so.

The post Missouri’s Gas Tax Hike is Coming appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Improving Missouri’s Transportation System through Tolling appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Every toll road I drove on was tolled 100 percent electronically—there was no option to pay with cash. My rental car was equipped with a transponder that registered with overhead sensors when driving through a checkpoint. Cars that didn’t have a transponder would have their license plate photographed and a bill sent to them in the mail. Drivers without transponders paid higher rates to reflect the higher administrative costs of physically mailing bills rather than deducting money from an online account.

Toll rates vary by vehicle type and number of axles. The more axles on your vehicle, the higher the toll. Rates also vary by the location of the road. The higher the cost of maintaining the road, the more drivers pay for its use. And while I did not use it on my trip, the Florida Turnpike’s website has an online map that lets drivers calculate the cost of tolls on their trip based on the exact route they plan to take.

Florida’s all-electronic toll roads are the future of tolling. Drivers don’t need to stop and start at every checkpoint, nor do they need to constantly remember to carry cash. Missouri has heavily traveled highways that need rebuilding (page 18), and tolling is a responsible way to raise the money needed to get them back in good shape. It wouldn’t be easy to establish toll roads in Missouri. There are a number of legal hurdles that would make implementing tolling in Missouri a challenge, and voters have been reluctant to accept their use.

But if Missourians knew how easy it is to drive on modern toll roads, they might be willing to give tolling a shot.

The post Missouri Can Take a Lesson From Florida’s Toll Roads appeared first on Show-Me Institute.