"F*** THE BUS. WE WANT TRAINS:" Charlotteans shut down bus rapid transit plans
The results are in: Charlotte doesn't want bus rapid transit (BRT).
Why it matters: City leaders are trying to draft a transit plan desirable enough to persuade voters to pass a 1-cent sales tax increase to fund the projects.
But based on public feedback, it seems engaged residents overwhelmingly view any plan that prioritizes bus rapid transit as a waste of money.
Context: Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) leaders have promoted the advantages of BRT for months, describing it as an enhanced version of the city bus with faster boarding, signal priority and, in some cases, dedicated lanes to bypass traffic.
It's also cheaper than rail, by about 30-50%, according to CATS. So Charlotte could build more transit infrastructure, faster, while reaching more corners of the city.
Yes, but: There are no "gold-standard" examples of BRT in the U.S. Even Cleveland's system, once known as the best BRT line in North America, is struggling with efficiency and has seen ridership fall accordingly.
Many are skeptical that Charlotte would be the first American city to do it well.
Zoom out: Raleigh is also pursuing BRT, but when it last solicited bids, it got no responses.
Driving the news: Based on public survey responses, CATS staff has advised that the local transit board move forward with a rail-focused plan and scrap all bus rapid transit proposals.
Catch up quick: The board, the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC), has been looking at four potential scenarios for spending an estimated $19.4 billion from the potential sales tax revenue, plus $5.9 billion more in matching federal grants.
Two scenarios pitch building the entire Silver Line, from I-485 to Matthews, as bus rapid transit instead of rail.
The most favored option, based on the survey, builds the most rail: the Red Line commuter rail built in full, the Gold Line streetcar extended, the Silver Line built as light rail from the airport station to Bojangles Coliseum, and the Blue Line extended as light rail to Pineville.
All four scenarios include $3.8 billion to improve the existing bus system, from upping frequencies to installing new benches.
What they're saying: Axios reviewed 1,065 responses to CATS' survey prompt: "Tell us what you think about the alternative program scenarios for the Transit System Plan." Below are some of the hottest takes about BRT versus rail. Quotes are edited slightly for grammar and clarity.
Any scenario that relies on "Bus Rapid Transit" is making the choice to keep Charlotte area transportation in the 1950s.
The average American will not ride a bus as an alternative to their car. We need to get cars off the road and to do that we need rail. RBT is a waste of money.
In general, I'm not sure you're going to get South Charlotteans to ride buses. Even if it is BRT. It's a perception thing.
Bus routes can change and that discourages real development along the route.
I am worried that a BRT line to Matthews would lock us out of a future light rail extension to Monroe and Union County as a whole, which is rapidly developing.
(Scenario 1) would make Charlotte a destination city that can be taken seriously because of the ability to ride rail systems...Amazing examples of true rail systems are Washington, D.C., Boston, etc. We can join this echelon of cities only by choosing rail first.
Don't be held hostage by bad decisions from the GOP. Grow a pair, Charlotte, you're the largest city between Atlanta and DC- it's time to act like it.
If Silver Line will terminate at Bojangles, there needs to be strong investment in bike/ped and bus infrastructure to make that area accessible and easy to use
The most important thing is to actually build something and not just talk about it forever.
Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's Bus Rapid Transit. Too, too often that is a term bandied about to inflate the perceived significance of inferior service.
I've been to good BRT systems (i.e. Ottawa for example) and they can work well if done right. But that includes the ability to convert to rail over time. People in Charlotte have no idea what a BRT is, so would require a huge education effort. And BRT would have to be done right, which I don't trust CATS to do.
Scenarios 2 and 4 are atrocious. Having a "single" line be a combination of light rail and bus is such a dumb idea that only Charlotte could consider it feasible.
Bus Rapid Transit is the poorest choice due to skyrocketing capacity and labor cost issues if the system grows.
Wasting time and money on bus rapid transit lanes will only slow CLT's progress to become a great city designed for people vs roads and cars.
F*** THE BUS. WE WANT TRAINS TO THE AIRPORT, TRAINS TO GASTONIA WOULD BE NICE, TRAINS TO MATTHEWS TOO. NO BUS, NO CARS. WE WANT AND NEED TRAINS, ARE YOU GUYS OUT DRIVING AND SEEING THIS MESS TOO?
Scenario 1 is the pie in the sky and would be amazing. I think scenario 2 gives the best combo of money saving and service to the communities.
I've taken the light rail, but under no circumstances will I ever, ever take a city bus. I'd walk first.
What's next: The MTC will vote in May to adopt a transit system plan, which it will then present to voters in hopes they'll pass a penny sales tax increase to execute the vision.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
20 minutes ago
- Forbes
Taiwan's 50 Richest 2025: Strong Demand For Chips Helps Drive Double-Digit Growth In Wealth To Record High
Daniel Tsai. This story is part of Forbes' coverage of Taiwan's Richest 2025. See the full list here. Taiwan's thriving semiconductor industry continues to boost its economy, which grew at an annual rate of 4.6% in 2024, the highest in three years. Despite the jolt from U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff threats, which left the benchmark Taiex index up only slightly since we last measured fortunes, the rising New Taiwan dollar powered a 13% increase in the combined wealth of Taiwan's 50 richest to $197 billion from $174 billion last year. ss A total of 36 listees are more well-off in this round, resulting in a shuffle in the top ranks. Siblings Daniel & Richard Tsai were the biggest dollar gainers with a $3.2 billion boost, which took their wealth to $13.9 billion and earned them the No. 1 spot after a year's gap. Shares of their Fubon Financial Holding jumped 16% from last year, thanks partly to its expanding banking operations. Quanta Computer chairman Barry Lam, who was last year's richest, slipped to second place, despite an 8% uptick in his net worth to $12.6 billion. In February, the maker of laptops and AI servers teamed up with American quantum processing firm Rigetti Computing to develop superconducting quantum computing technology. Brothers Tsai Hong-tu & Cheng-ta of Cathay Financial Holdings, cousins of Daniel and Richard, climbed two places to No. 3, with $10.9 billion. In November, a wind power unit of their group's insurance arm agreed to invest $1.65 billion for a 50% stake in an offshore wind farm in Taiwan, to be constructed and run by Danish energy company Ørsted. Siblings Jeffrey Koo Jr. and Angelo Koo, who own stakes in CTBC Financial Holding and KGI Financial Holding, respectively, are the biggest gainers in percentage terms. Their separately listed fortunes more than doubled to $4.7 billion and $3.3 billion, thanks partly to new information about their holdings. There are three newcomers this year, including two minted from the red-hot sector of AI servers: Lin Tsung-Chi, founder and chairman of King Slide, a maker of rails for servers, enters the ranks with $2.9 billion; brothers Chao Chung-Hsin & Yung-Tsang join the list as their Jentech Precision Industrial, a supplier of semiconductor cooling components, reaped the benefits of the frenzied AI data center buildout. The third new entrant is Chang Chung-Hsing, founder and chairman of Apex Dynamics, which supplies gearboxes for products such as industrial robots. The net worth of footwear magnate Zhang Congyuan, who was Taiwan's richest person three years ago, shrank by $1.8 billion to $8.3 billion, registering the biggest decline in dollar terms. Shares of his Guangdong-based Huali Industrial Group fell by more than a fifth amid U.S. tariff threats. Four listees from last year dropped off. Notable among these are brothers William & Wilfred Wang, whose fortune drawn from Formosa Plastics Group was impacted by global headwinds in the chemicals sector. The minimum net worth to make the list rose to $1.3 billion from $1.1 billion last year. Full Coverage of Taiwan's Richest 2025: Editing assistance by Phisanu Phromchanya. Reporting by Shu-Ching Jean Chen, Gloria Haraito, Enyi Hu, Shanshan Kao, Chengbo Liu, Catherine Wang and Yue Wang. Methodology: The list was compiled using information from individuals, analysts, government agencies, stock exchanges, databases and other sources. Net worths were based on stock prices and exchange rates as of the close of markets on May 9 and real-time net worths on may reflect different valuations. The ranking lists both individual and family fortunes, including those shared among relatives. Private companies were valued by using financial ratios and other comparisons with similar companies that are publicly traded. The list can also include foreign citizens with business, residential or other ties to Taiwan, or citizens who don't reside in Taiwan but have significant business or other ties. The editors reserve the right to amend any information or remove any listees in light of new information. Acknowledgements: Special thanks to CBRE Taiwan, Euromonitor International, Market Intelligence & Consulting Institute, TrendForce and the other experts who helped us with our reporting and valuations, including Wei-Jiun Hung, L&C Attorneys-at-Law; Parsley Ong, J.P. Morgan; Hung Ou Yang, Brain Trust International Law Firm; and Sophie Perret, HVS.
Wall Street Journal
26 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Medicaid Is Overdue for a Big Beautiful Overhaul
National health-insurance coverage has been a top priority for the American left for decades. Medicaid has been the main vehicle for reaching this goal since 1965. The program now accounts for more than half of the 150 million Americans covered by government health insurance. President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' presents the Senate with a choice: Continue on the path toward national health insurance by locking in recent Medicaid expansions, or reform Medicaid and reverse course. After the defeat of President Harry Truman's national health-insurance plan in 1949, Democrats began an incremental journey. Medicare for seniors and Medicaid mainly for state welfare recipients were their first major steps. After Medicare was extended to the disabled in 1972, Democrats turned their attention to expanding Medicaid.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The 'Big Beautiful Bill' Will Add $2.4 Trillion to the Deficit
In March, President Donald Trump stood before a joint session of Congress and vowed to "do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget." The first major legislative package of Trump's second term, however, will throw the federal budget farther out of balance, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded in an updated assessment of the bill. The CBO estimates that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cleared the House late last month and is awaiting a vote in the Senate, will increase deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years. The bill will reduce tax collections by an estimated $3.75 trillion over that period, while reducing government spending by an estimated $1.3 trillion. The budget deficit is the gap between how much the federal government spends and how much tax revenue it collects in a single year. If spending is higher than revenue—as has been the case in every single year since 2001—then the government must borrow to fill in the gap. The "Big Beautiful Bill" will, in effect, force the federal government to borrow more heavily in the future. And all that extra borrowing comes with more costs, since interest must be paid. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonprofit that advocates for reducing the deficit, estimates that the bill will add about $3 trillion to the deficit once interest costs are included in the calculation. The bill would also double the federal government's interest payments from nearly $900 billion in 2024 to $1.8 trillion by 2034, the group estimates. The bill's actual impact on the deficit is likely to be even larger than what the CBO estimates, due to several provisions that are meant to game the number-crunching agency's scoring process. Several of the tax breaks in the bill—such as the higher standard deduction, an expanded child tax credit, and tax exemptions for tips and overtime pay—are temporary and will expire by 2029. But those policies are clearly not meant to be temporary, and if extended, they would further widen the deficit in 2030 and beyond. The extension of the 2017 income tax cuts is essential to avoid a massive tax hike that would hit nearly all American households. And many of the spending cuts included in the bill—such as new work requirements for Medicaid and food stamps—are worthwhile efforts. But the problem with the bill, as the CBO's report outlines in stark terms, is that the spending cuts and tax cuts do not offset one another. That would be an imprudent decision even if the federal government was not deep in debt and already on course to see borrowing increase in future years. Given its current fiscal situation, piling more borrowing costs on future American taxpayers seems utterly foolish. Could revenue from tariffs help to offset the budgetary impact of the tax bill? The CBO released an assessment of Trump's tariffs on Wednesday showing that those higher taxes on imports would reduce the budget deficit by about $2.8 trillion over the next decade. In a statement, the White House touted that report as proving that Trump's policies, as a whole, would reduce rather than expand the budget deficit. The first problem with that is that those tariffs might not remain in place long enough to matter. They have been in constant flux for months as Trump has raised, lowered, paused, and altered them on a nearly weekly basis. Two federal courts have also ruled that the tariffs were unlawfully imposed—and if those decisions are affirmed on appeal, then the tariff revenue could vanish entirely. (The CBO's assessment did not take into account the court rulings or any changes made to the tariffs since May 13.) The other problem is that the White House is effectively admitting that its tariff policies will offset the economic benefits of the tax cuts it is trying to pass through Congress—which the White House is also arguing will boost economic growth. In short, the Trump administration is trying to have its tax cuts and eat them too. Here's a better plan: Draft a tax bill that doesn't add to the deficit, so that the tariffs don't need to be a part of the picture at all. The post The 'Big Beautiful Bill' Will Add $2.4 Trillion to the Deficit appeared first on
