Strip’s bus success makes case against light rail

If light rail would be so great for Las Vegas, then why has mass transit ridership been flat or in decline in other major cities that have it?

Back in 1990, Denver, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas relied solely on bus service for mass transit. Denver and Salt Lake City had far greater ridership than Las Vegas, according to Randal O’Toole, who has done multiple mass transit studies for the Cato Institute.

“The percentage of people who took mass transit to work was almost twice as great in Denver and Salt Lake City,” O’Toole said. “Since then, both those cities built light rail, and the percentage of people who take mass transit has declined.”

And what’s happened in Las Vegas, which still relies entirely on buses?

“Las Vegas (ridership) has more than doubled,” O’Toole said. “Las Vegas is the only urban area in the nation that has doubled its transit share of commuting. It’s the only city doing that.”

These numbers can’t be dismissed as Las Vegas planners consider transit and infrastructure upgrades to improve mobility in the congested resort corridor.

Denver launched its light rail in 1994, and Salt Lake City’s started in 1999. Phoenix’s system, which I wrote about last week, is newer but is having the same impact — or lack thereof. Bus ridership in the Phoenix area surged from 2001 to 2009, going from 40 million to nearly 66 million riders per year. Valley Metro Rail started service in 2009, and with about 5.5 million riders, it bolstered Phoenix’s total mass transit ridership (bus and rail) to 71.2 million that year.

Yet six years later, ridership in Phoenix is stagnant at 72.1 million. And Phoenix is one of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in the country.

“With light rail, bus fares are raised and bus service is cut, so total ridership [can be] less than when light rail opened,” O’Toole said.

So what’s compelling those cities to cannibalize bus routes and spend billions of dollars on light rail? As I noted last week, capital costs are heavily subsidized by the federal government (read: taxpayers), and comparatively speaking, the operating and maintenance costs taken on by local governments seem nominal. In Phoenix, for example, O’Toole notes light rail operations and maintenance cost 32 cents per passenger mile, as opposed to 95 cents per passenger mile for bus transit.

But add in capital costs, interest and future maintenance costs — particularly 20 to 30 years down the road — and light-rail expenses explode. O’Toole said the bill has come due for Metrorail in Washington, D.C., which launched in 1976, and that when the Phoenix system hits a similar age, maintenance costs easily could match the $1.4 billion spent on construction.

Which brings us back to Las Vegas’ trend-beating bus ridership. According to the National Transit Database, the Regional Transportation Commission system ranks first in the country for highest farebox recovery and second-lowest in the country for operating costs per passenger, thanks in large part to its Las Vegas Strip service.

“The Las Vegas Strip has a very unique combination of extremely high ridership and low operating costs. In fiscal year 2015, the Deuce on the Strip and the Strip &Downtown Express combined are projected to see more than 14 million passengers and $12.3 million in profit,” said Marc Traasdahl, the RTC’s director of finance.

That’s about what Phoenix light rail collects in annual fares, leaving a $20 million hole for taxpayers just to meet annual operating and maintenance costs.

So in dealing with Strip congestion, why are some people calling for a multibillion-dollar light-rail subway project that can’t possibly recover capital costs? Instead of tunneling under the Strip (which would kill the tourist experience, by the way), why not remove the median to add a lane of traffic in each direction and make the right lane in each direction a dedicated bus lane with more buses serving that route?

To which light-rail proponents answer: Economic development.

“The big claim in Phoenix — which I dispute — is that light rail stimulated economic development,” O’Toole said. “But nobody is going to claim you need something on the Las Vegas Strip to stimulate economic development.”

Mass transit is about moving as many people as possible, as efficiently as possible, for as little cost as possible to taxpayers. Doubling down on the Strip’s already acclaimed and profitable bus service isn’t sexy, and it won’t land hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in federal subsidies. But it will be far less expensive and far more flexible for decades to come.

It should absolutely be a consideration.

Patrick Everson is an editorial writer for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Follow him on Twitter: @PatrickCEverson.