The Christiansburg Town Council will hold a rare work session today at 2 pm to discuss a proposal for expanded public transportation.
In an overall $36 million dollar budget, the amounts involved are less than .006 percent.
The town's budgeted allocations for public transportation over the past two years were $294,900. Actual expenses were $194,387, leaving $100,513 unspent.
This year's proposed budget includes $208,500 for bus service, an increase of $59,000 from last year.
Isn't this increase covered by the $100,513 which was previously allocated but not used for public transportation? Isn't it time to revamp bus service so it better suits resident's needs? Wasn't there a survey recently completed indicating what, where and when this service was wanted?
If one looks at the town's proposed budget document, for a three-year cycle one sees a total of $503,400 allocated for public transit (exclusive of the Smart Way service). That averages $167,800 a year. Assuming there are approximately 20,000 people living in Christiansburg, that averages to less than three-cents, per person, per day.
Infrastructure -- whether broadband, roads, or amenities -- are crucial to growing and sustaining local economies. This explains why during the same three year budget cycles, council has allocated over $217,000 to the NRV Airport in Pulaski, the VT Airport, the Smart Way bus service linking Virginia Tech to downtown Roanoke and the Roanoke airport, Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facilities Authority (VFRIFA), and Trans Dominion (rail service initiative). How many town residents get any direct benefit from these items on a daily basis?
This explains why during the same three year budget cycles, council has allocated over $120,000 to support regional economic development organizations (exclusive of a regional tourism development initiative). How many town residents get any direct benefit from these items on a daily basis?
If Christiansburg citizens want to remain regionally competitive -- good jobs, reasonable cost of living and access to resources which enhance the quality of life --certain economic investments must be supported. A Roanoke Times editorial points out that over 20 years ago, long term planning was shifting "to think beyond the automobile and look for more efficient and more environmentally friendly ways to move Americans and their goods."
Ensuring this infrastructure is in place -- for today and the future -- will lead to social and cultural development, leading to a better local quality of life. Ensuring this infrastructure is in in place will support better roads, utilities and educational opportunities, leading to greater local efficiency, too.
Yes, proposed and future costs should be estimated. Goals and objectives should be articulated. Council can easily move forward on this, if it wishes, for the economic good of the community. It can then begin to focus on more complex issues (including adherence to its own charter, comprehensive plan and code and regional cooperation).