Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bono Says's avatar

Full disclaimer I worked for VIA for a short time and I am a big believer in public transit. VIA’s own rider survey shows that 71.6% of passengers are employed full- or part-time, and another 8.1% are actively looking for work. Two-thirds of VIA riders report household incomes below $25,000, and 66.6% ride at least five days a week. These are not hypothetical “future demand” riders. They are workers, students, caregivers, patients, grocery shoppers, and people trying to keep their lives moving in a city that has made car ownership feel almost mandatory. 

So yes, San Antonio should absolutely scrutinize an $800 million transit investment. Big public dollars deserve public accountability. But comparing bus rapid transit to an arena misses the whole point. An arena is a discretionary entertainment investment - that based on our experience in San Antonio has never translated in significant gains for working families. Transit on the other hand is how people get to work, school, medical appointments, child care, and public life.

It also leaves out a major fiscal fact: the local investment is what allowed San Antonio to compete for and secure hundreds of millions in federal transit dollars. VIA has already locked down a $267.8 million Federal Transit Administration construction grant for the Green Line, the largest federal investment in VIA’s history. VIA’s own announcement says the voter-approved 1/8-cent sales tax provides the necessary local match and operating funds for the Green Line. 

The same is true for the Silver Line. The Bexar County/VIA funding agreement helped close the local funding gap so VIA could seek federal matching funds; VIA has said that step puts the region closer to attracting $146.7 million in federal dollars for the Silver Line. In other words, the local commitment is not simply an $800 million local spend. It is the match that has already brought in $267.8 million for the Green Line and positions San Antonio to attract another $146.7 million for the Silver Line — $414.5 million in federal transit funding total if the Silver Line award is finalized. 

That is how infrastructure funding works. Cities that put up local match draw down federal dollars. Cities that do not leave money on the table for other communities to claim.

And these are not “just two bus lines.” VIA’s Green Line is designed to run every 10 minutes on weekdays, with dedicated lanes, traffic-signal priority, new stations, sidewalks, drainage improvements, and pedestrian crossings. The $481 million Green Line is fully funded, includes 25 new stations and 17 articulated buses, and is intended to connect the airport, downtown, and the South Side. The Silver Line would add an east-west rapid corridor from the West Side through downtown to the East Side, also designed for frequent service. 

The robotaxi comparison is not the best for your argument. A driverless car service covering part of the city does not replace a public transit system. It does not move the same number of people. It does not guarantee affordability. And it definitely does not solve the daily transportation needs of workers who need to be able to rely on predictable, low-cost service. Robotaxis are a technology product. Transit is public infrastructure. I don’t think we should confuse the two.

we already decided that San Antonio should spend public money on transit - in 2020, when voters approved the Keep SA Moving funding plan by more than 68%. It makes sense to finally build a system worthy of the people who already rely on it. Because God knows we’re not keeping up with growth and there’s no place to build more roads.

Calling this an $800 million bet on “two bus lines” makes it sound like the city is buying a very expensive hobby. I see this as an investment in time, access, reliability, and dignity for people whose commutes have been treated as invisible for too long. The CEO and board chair did a recent podcast episode on Beyond the Bite - I highly recommend listening to it to learn more.

San Antonio can and should demand strong oversight, clear performance measures, and honest cost controls. But this piece comes off like contempt, which is frustrating. A city that can spend decades subsidizing roads, garages, interchanges, ballparks, arenas, convention facilities, and private development can afford to build serious transit for the people who keep the city running.

Mark's avatar

Seems to me that more and better park and ride lots should be a part of the city’s mass transit plan.

6 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?