With Few Funds Available, What are Transit Agencies to Do?

[marmar]

from the Transport Politic blog:




With Few Funds Available, What are Transit Agencies to Do?

Yonah Freemark
July 18th, 2011 | 15 Comments


This month’s federal budget negotiations have been incredibly disheartening for those of us who believe wholeheartedly in the advantages of popular social welfare provision in the broader sense; the ease with which members of both of America’s two major political parties have dispensed with the goal of widening the provision of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid suggests that the sense that government can do much to reduce inequalities in our society has been pushed far enough aside as to be ignored in the meeting rooms of even a president representing the so-called left.

The timing of these discussions — premised on GOP skepticism of government spending and Democratic fears of advocating raising taxes — comes not coincidentally just a week after House Republicans revealed their proposal for a six-year transportation budget. If it was not clear last week, it is now: The cuts being proposed would be devastating to the nation’s transit agencies, depriving them of much-needed funds for the purchase of new rolling stock and the maintenance and construction of necessary facilities. Even if this plan, which would diminish already too-limited transportation funds by a third, does not get implemented, the context of the debt negotiations suggests that something much better is unlikely to be had.

This leaves the nation’s transit agencies in a treacherous bind, since local and state transportation funds have seen significant declines as well. Do they hold back on capital spending, hoping for better days sometime a few years from now? Or do they attempt to divert operations funds to capital, potentially threatening their ridership and certainly reducing service quality?

There is no easy answer to this question, but one almost inevitable fact is that transit agencies have four basic choices: Reduce service, increase fares, ask for new revenues, or attempt some combination of the aforementioned three. These are all bad options: The first will make public transportation less convenient for everyone who relies on it; the second will increase its cost; and the third will demand sacrifice from either taxpayers or other public services. With a flustered economy and limited likelihood of quick growth in the near future, however, these are what is available. ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/07/18/with-few-funds-available-what-are-transit-agencies-to-do/

[txlibdem]

1. Current mass transit relies on subsidies - Can't we come up with a better solution?

In the 1970s the USA searched for the best public transit option and Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) won in the form of "Cabintaxi" -- a German/US venture that was fully developed, licensed by the German transit authorities, fully safety tested but when the US pulled out and demanded higher NATO fees from allies (including Germany) the German government dropped the project due to budget concerns. Detroit, of all places, was pushing for Cabintaxi urban transit but dropped it when the US government pulled out of the program.

A German PRT of the 1970-80s

aka "Cabinentaxi"

Was "Installation-Ready"

Victim of Cold War Budgeting

http://kinetic.seattle.wa.us/nxtlevel/prt/cabintaxi.html

Cabintaxi was designed to handle multiple vehicle sizes:

• a 4 passenger "personal" taxi
  
• both a 12 and 18 passenger vehicle
  
• to increase total riders on busy routes the 12-passenger vehicle can be linked with another 12-passenger unit
  
• likewise, the 18 passenger models could be linked with one other like-sized vehicle
  
• and finally, a version designed for standing passengers only, no seats. I get an image of the tokyo subway system when I think of this.

The track was also designed to have vehicles both on top and below (suspended) from the guideway. This makes Cabintaxi the most flexible mass transit system ever designed. Its numerous variations gave Cabintaxi far more technology adaptability than any other urban transit technology ever developed.

[spinbaby]

3. There's one in Morgantown WV

Works beautifully and replaced a lot of buses.

[txlibdem]

4. I wish I could visit there to ride on it

It also has a perfect safety record.

Compare that to the 40,000 people who die in auto accidents each year in the US.

[mwooldri]

2. There is a fourth, also problematic, solution.

Competitive Tendering - at least for bus routes.

For those routes that are profitable : how much would a private company pay the transit authority to operate a specific route with only minor modifications to fares and schedule ?

For those routes that are unprofitable: how little would the transit authority need to pay a private company to run the route?

Yes it's ugly. However if there is a profit motive to operating public transit - and some public transit systems *CAN* be profitable - then it may be a way to keep going as is without reducing services.

[WinkyDink]

6. They're called "taxis."

[WinkyDink]

5. Hurting the poorest, one evil deed at a time.