After an election, analysts like to focus on the “messages” sent by voters. Often those messages are largely a matter of interpretation.

There is little question, however, about one message Kansas City, Mo., voters sent to their city officials Tuesday: It’s time for Kansas City to get to work on a light-rail public transportation system.

The message took officials by surprise. Before Tuesday’s election, Kansas city voters had turned down light-rail initiatives six times. No one gave the ballot initiative pushed by light rail advocate Clay Chastain much thought. But, apparently, running a 27-mile light-rail line from Kansas City’s Swope Park to Kansas City International airport is an idea whose time has come – at least in the minds of 53 percent of the voters who went to the polls on Tuesday.

The broad plan proposed by Chastain and approved for voters is to extend for 25 years a 3/8-cent city sales tax that currently supports the city’s bus system. The money would be diverted to help pay for the rail line, which would make multiple stops, and for electric shuttle buses and a gondola tram linking Union Station and Liberty Memorial across Penn Valley Park.

The devil, however, is in the details, according to city officials who unanimously opposed the ballot initiative. Critics worry about the damage to Penn Valley Park and say that Chastain’s figures on how much it would cost to launch the light-rail system are way off base. Diverting the sales tax money to light rail also would damage the city’s diesel bus system, they say.

The message voters seemed to be sending to city officials is: We don’t care; figure it out. They want a light-rail option and it’s up to city officials to figure out a way to make it work.

Even though they clearly were caught off guard, some Kansas City officials are expressing a willingness to rise to the challenge. They may not see a way to fully implement the system envisioned by Chastain (who now lives in Virginia but may return to Kansas City part-time to help with the rail project), but they plan to respond to the voter mandate to explore some sort of light rail system. The positive spin is that the vote shows an optimism about the city’s future and a desire to improve city services.

Kansas City certainly isn’t the only U.S. city to have to step up its efforts to offset increasing traffic by offering additional public transportation options. It’s easy for city officials to drag their heels on such a large and expensive undertaking, but, according to the message sent by voters last Tuesday, Kansas City officials no longer have that luxury.