St. Louis Urban Corps
 
Picture



Christine Chadwick*
Executive Director
FOCUS St. Louis 

The contents of articles authored by guest bloggers do not necessarily reflect the views of St. Louis Urban Corps or its members.
 

In the business environment of the twenty first century, it will no longer be sufficient to compete locally or even nationally. Rather, competition is taking place at the global arena: St. Louis no longer compares itself to Wichita or even Atlanta, but rather to Frankfurt or Singapore.[1]

Global partners do not much care about our many municipalities – University City or Edwardsville or Clayton. For that matter, they do not care much about St. Louis County or St. Clair County or any of the other 16 counties in our Metropolitan Statistical Area. What global partners care about, when they look to do business, is the entire region.

There has been a lot of recent talk about a City/County merger. There are devils in the details – political and technical issues that might be difficult to overcome. For instance, should the City enter the County as another municipality? If so, what will be the relationship between the City of St. Louis and the other 91 municipalities in the County? Another alternative (even more fraught with pitfalls) is reunifying the County and the City, making for one large municipality with an estimated population of 1.6 million.[2] 

Neither method of uniting the City and County (and there are other possible mechanisms) will solve all problems. More important is that we act in a more regional manner, making decisions with an eye toward the entire region’s best interests rather than based on the parochial needs of this municipality or that county.

Government is the formal structure that makes policy decisions and allocates public resources. Governance involves the broader process of business, government and community collaboration that shapes decisions and actions in a region. Changes in government structures can lead to more and better collaboration, but that isn’t necessarily a guaranteed outcome.

In a global marketplace, the St. Louis region needs to position itself as a major player. St. Louis City has 372,000 people – smaller than Wichita KS.  In order to sell ourselves, we have to be perceived instead as a region with 2.8 million people. 

We do not necessarily need some big unified regional government in order to present ourselves as a unified region. But until we develop more cooperation, more collaboration, and above all, better governance, we well continue to cede our position as a national and international player to other metropolitan regions.


* Christine A. Chadwick is the founding Executive Director of FOCUS St. Louis®, a non-profit organization that works to strengthen the St. Louis region by developing leadership, influencing policy and promoting community connections. She was named the first Executive Director of the organization following the merger between The Leadership Center of Greater St. Louis and Confluence St. Louis in November of 1996. In addition to serving as Executive Director, she also directs the flagship Leadership St. Louis and Experience St. Louis programs.

[1] In 2009, the City of Wichita was ranked #51 by the US Census, with a population of 372,000, while the City of St. Louis was ranked #52, with a population of 357,000. By contrast, the Wichita metropolitan statistical region had only 613,000 people, compared to more than 2.8 million in the St. Louis region. 

[2] All population estimates based on 2009 US Census, and can be found at http://www.census.gov/popest/estbygeo.html

 
 
Picture
Source: www.looptrolley.org
Like most St. Louisans, I was exited to learn that the St. Louis Trolley Project would receive a $25 million grant from the federal government.  The grant takes the project one huge step closer to becoming a reality.  Once the project leaders raise the remainder of the $44 million (at least) required to put the system in place, they will begin building a trolley line to connect the Delmar Loop to Forest Park.  As somebody passionate about development in St. Louis, I have great visions for the impact that this project can have on our community, both economic and intangible.  Among the intangible potential returns are improvements in quality of life for St. Louis residents and St. Louis' reputation and how visitors to the city perceive us.  But being a business student, I am curious what the economic impact of the project might reasonably be.

The most recent Urban Corps poll asked St. Louisans whether they felt the project would yield returns for the community worthy of the $44 million price tag.  The results of that poll are available on the Polls page.  But what is the anticipated return on investment (ROI) for the Trolley Project?  The answer is anything but clear.  While I am not in a position to make such a projection, I will attempt in this article to provide a rough sense (very rough) of what would have to happen in order for the ROI to be a positive one.

To start, let us examine the feasibility study conducted for the project in 2000, paid for by Metro (formerly the Bi-State Development Agency).  The study is often cited for having deemed the project feasible and for indicating that the project would stimulate economic development. (See, e.g. The Loop Trolley website, HeritageTrolley.org, and the St. Louis Business Journal)  But it is important to keep in mind that feasibility does not necessarily translate to profitability.  Unable to find that study anywhere online, I did some good-ol'-fashioned investigative journalism and tracked down a copy, courtesy of the East West Gateway Council of Governments.  I am now making it available to you here (see below).

Looking more closely at the study, the findings do not give much guidance for those seeking an estimated ROI for the project.  The specific finding was that the project was "technically feasible," meaning that there were no obstacles that would make construction of the line impracticable.  The study did discuss the potential of the project for stimulating economic development, but it made no attempt to quantify how much development might occur.  What the study did quantify, however, was the projected operating deficit of the trolley.  I will use those numbers to get some sense of what it would take to generate a positive ROI for the project by conducting a "quick and dirty" break even analysis.

Let us assume the feasibility study projection for the operating deficit is correct.* With trolley fares of $2.00, the study anticipates an annual operating deficit ranging from $438,600 to $629,000.  That operating deficit thus represents the annual investment required to sustain the trolley system.  Going forward, I will use the study's "Medium Forecast" of a $534,600 deficit.  In other words, the annual returns on investment in the form of economic growth would have to be greater than $534,600 per annum in order to eventually yield a positive ROI.

Assume further that the operating deficit holds steady for the life of the trolley's operation (i.e. ignore inflation).  One study prepared for the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) has shown that every billion dollars of annual investment in public transportation can yield $3.5 billion of GDP.  (The report is provided below.)  Let's make another assumption that the Trolley Project can achieve those 3.5 to 1 average annual returns.  If it can, then the trolley would generate $1,336,500 of economic productivity per annum (= [3.5 * 534,600] - 534,600).  At that rate, the Trolley Project would break even on a $44 million capital investment in roughly 33 years (not taking into account the time value of money).  Only after that breakeven point would the project yield a positive ROI.

This approach to the analysis is paradoxical.  It would suggest that the higher the operating expenses, the greater the potential economic impact.  That notion is, of course, absurd.  Greater efficiency would yield greater returns, not less efficiency.  Operating expenses are not exactly the kind of annual investments the APTA report envisions in its calculations.  But I use the ratio only as a supposition.

So, if one accepts all the underlying assumptions of this analysis, the question then becomes how likely is it that the trolley will bring more than $1 million of yearly economic productivity.  How much development would have to occur east of the Delmar Loop in order to generate that economic activity?  Would we need to double the size of the Loop?  More?  Less?  Joe Edwards would be in a better position to answer that question than I.

But to provide the simple answer to the question posed at the outset of this article, the trolley project can yield a positive ROI if it generates economic productivity in excess of its operating deficit and if it operates long enough to pay off the initial capital investment (factoring in the time value of money).  That answer sort of states the obvious.  But the analysis I have conducted here sheds some light on an even more profound question.  Even if the trolley project does yield a positive ROI, how strong will those returns be compared to the potential returns of other projects to which the $44 million could be applied?

Whether the ROI of this project will be positive, I cannot say.  Whether there are other projects that would have a higher ROI, I cannot say.  And again, economic returns are only one aspect of the impact the trolley can have on our city.  Whether the investment is a good one needs to take into account all the potential returns.  Many of those returns will, no doubt, be valued very differently depending on the audience.  But projections aside, we have placed our bets that the Trolley Project is a wise investment of limited resources.  With its $25 million grant, so too has the federal government.  I remain hopeful, optimistic even, that those bets will pay off.  I look forward to finding out whether they do.

Evan Weiss
Executive Director
St. Louis Urban Corps


* This is a significant assumption, in part because it depends on their projections for ridership also being correct.  Moreover, the estimated capital expense of the project at the time of the study was only about $20 million - in year 2000 dollars - as opposed to the $44 million plus that the project is expected to run now.  If the necessary capital investment has gone up more than 100% in ten years, operating expenses likewise have most certainly gone up.

2000_trolly_project_feasibility_study.zip
File Size: 3627 kb
File Type: zip
Download File

economic_impact_of_public_transportation_investment.pdf
File Size: 528 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

 
 
We are pleased to announce that both St. Louis Public Radio (90.7 KWMU-FM) and KETC-TV Channel 9 will be partnering sponsors with Urban Corps in the St. Louis Great Debates.  Both organizations plan to link the debates to programming they already have planned for the Fall.  The precise role that each broadcaster will play in the debates is being developed.  We will announce details as plans evolve.

Also collaborating with Urban Corps is the St. Louis Urban Debate League, which organizes events and supports debate teams at eleven high schools in the St. Louis Public School District. The St. Louis Urban Debate League is a part of a the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues (NAUDL).

We are thrilled to have these new partners and look forward to creating an exciting series of events for our entire community.  More information about the St. Louis Great Debates can be found on the "Our Innitiatives" page by clicking here.  Also join the Great Debates group on Facebook.
 
 
Today Urban Corps launches its website.  We have been so busy as active members of the community that it took nearly two years to do it.  But at long last, our site is here.

This site is just one more way we are reaching out to the public to encourage civic engagmenet.  We hope that you will join Urban Corps in our efforts to make St. Louis the kind of city and region we would all like it to become.  Your city needs you.  Enlist in Urban Corps today by joining a current initiative or forming your own.  We look forward to having you with us.