Recently, a friend asked me why I thought public transit has become yet another partisan policy divide. I didn’t have a ready answer, despite a quarter-century of involvement in Colorado’s transit wars. Somehow, bus and rail options have gradually been regarded as a socialist plot designed to deny personal liberties, herding the public into cattle cars while stripping us of the pleasures of the open road. Of course, this freedom has been radically constricted by growing congestion as more and more vehicles clog available lanes. At some level, both Republicans and Democrats know additional asphalt solves little or nothing. Despite this understanding, widening roadways has been the “go-to” default strategy for expanding travel capacity.

We only need examine the history of the T-REX widening of Interstate 25 through Denver to understand the failure of this approach. Despite being supplemented with a parallel light-rail line, drivers only enjoyed a “high-speed high” for a decade before traffic began to choke the corridor once again. This congestion emerged before the bonds which financed its widening had been retired. Today, travelers are likely to encounter creeping traffic between downtown and the Tech Center at any time of day or night. Discussions are underway proposing a further widening of the choke zone between 6th Avenue and the Mousetrap. That won’t be cheap, if it is even feasible. Still, transit proposals are viewed by many as part and parcel of Green New Deal plans to eliminate the thrills of internal combustion engines. Similar skepticism extends to enthusiasm for expensive electric vehicles and their required network of charging stations.

Therefore, it’s surprising a pair of major transit projects are gradually seeping their way into public awareness. The older of these initiatives, but the frailer of the proposals, is an Advanced Guideway System (AGS) serving the Interstate 70 central Mountain corridor resorts, ideally connecting DIA with the Eagle County Airport west of Avon. The more recent, yet more likely in the near term, at least in part because it will be far cheaper, is Front Range Passenger Rail (FRPR). This Front Range rail service will connect Cheyenne to Pueblo and has support from Amtrak.

It would enable cross-country passengers to transfer between Amtrak’s two major east-west routes with a brief, two-hour trip along Colorado’s Front Range. Furthermore, the Biden administration has funded a large pot of federal dollars for rail expansion. The challenge is there will be competing projects sticking their hands into the honeypot in 2024.

Gov. Jared Polis likely would have done more to accelerate the Front Range Rail program during his first term if he had not found himself contending with the COVID epidemic and the social ripples it delivered to the state budget. Now he finds himself having to proceed at a dead-run to qualify Colorado’s funding application next year. At least three problems confront FRPR. It must submit a detailed service plan to the Federal Rail Administration for approval. This demanding exercise is underway at CDOT. Meanwhile, because of TABOR, the Commission must formulate a funding plan and submit that to voters in the special transportation district. The governor would like to see this plan ready for the 2024 ballot. Although polling discovered a readiness to support a modest sales tax, past experience indicates this is the option that always earns the most support but rarely translates into voter approval.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

The outcome of Question HH, and its impact on property taxes this November, could also limit fiscal options for financing the project. Politically, there is a possibility of significant opposition in both Boulder and El Paso counties due to parochial resentments. Boulder residents remain angry they have paid taxes into RTD for a quarter-century dependent on the promise they would receive a light-rail line in exchange. They make the case, with considerable merit, the FRPR should provide this connection. It drives up the total costs by several hundred million dollars, however. El Paso County has a burr under its saddle because they had to create a special district and then tax themselves to 6-lane the I-25 “gap” from Castle Rock to Monument. They harbor a sense they “contributed at the office.” Both these objections are probably resolvable, but something will have to be offered in exchange.

Term-limited former Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers is a Republican supporter who both could and should play a prominent role in reaching agreement. Both the I-70 AGS and the FRPR are felt to be dubious economic propositions as “stand-alone” transit systems, but there is evidence they would perform symbiotically with one another. The Biden White House is expected to continue funding federal infrastructure projects for another five years. The mountain counties need to move swiftly to create their own transportation district and elbow their way into line for these future grant programs. A larger vision just might generate a larger majority next year.

Miller Hudson is a public affairs consultant and a former Colorado legislator.