Open Letter to TriMet regarding proposed fair increases

I sympathize with your plight... but wanted to add that regardless of whether the fare increases, the TriMet system will not be able to continue as it has for much longer due to fuel scarcity. I've lived in Portland for about fifteen years, and this frequency of price increases / service cuts is unprecedented in that time. The fuel is going to get ever more expensive as more fuel-producing countries reach their production limit, while demand keeps increasing.

I would suggest if at all possible restructuring your life so that you don't have to rely on motorized transportation, and can use your own two feet and/or pedal-power to do all the travelling that is essential to your livelihood.

Well I have talked to several drivers about Peak Oil and how TriMet should be switching to biodiesel. Several have gone to management with no success. Oil will be the eventual issue, but right now its greed and mismanagement for some really stupid decision at the top levels. And to think last year and before some of us were pushing for a "free mass transit system"

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/312330.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/312324.shtml

Trust me we could have had that, but the Amerikan Corporatist system would not allow it to even be pondered. Its all about greed and control. Cost of living is another reason someone poor like me leaves the US if they get the chance.

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/05/63741.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/315757.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/316639.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/315532.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/315667.shtml
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/315619.shtml

Bus service would be faster since the drivers would not have to deal with fares and transfers. Passengers could get on and off faster thus saving a good deal of time and making our system more efficient.

The system could expect the following financial savings:

Elimination of fare box expense including purchase, collection, repair
Reduction in banking and accounting fees
Elimination of printed transfers
Elimination of fare inspectors
Elimination of ticket dispensing machines at MAX stations

Taxes would have to go up somewhere else in the tax system but I think supporting public transportation with general taxes rather than user fees would be a smart move.

MAX ridership has steadily increased, but we still see fares going up to offset fuel costs. What about places like Seattle? The last time I was there, fares were the same as they had been for years ($1.25 for "peak hour", discounted off-peak hours, and super-low student, senior and disabled fares). And what happened to the hype about the new hybrid buses? I call shenanigans on Tri-Met.

Whereas employee tproductivity has skyrocketed over the past decades, the employee-roll head tax at Tri-Met has remained fairly static. Area businesses depend on Tri-Met to deliver employees and customers. Their assessment should be tripled, and the fares eliminated entirely.

Portland is sitting on enough geothermal to power all the buses, and everything else besides. Money to develop that power should be wrested from the Federal government, and from the PGE/Enron scammers--and the resulting utility should be OURS.

why do you think it would be a good idea to ask Trimet to increase their policing of fare policy just so you can save 5 cents per trip? that's one of the most short sighted and selfish things I've ever heard.

a lot of people have to scam their way on public transportation and depend on that ability a lot more than you probably have to depend on that extra 5 cents.

never willingly submit to increased authority. and never ASK for more authority to monitor you. more specifically, never ASK FOR MORE AUTHORITY TO MONITOR OTHER PEOPLE.

My reply to "happy new year from tri-met" at indymedia on 10.Jan.2006 11:00
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/01/331574.shtml

I stand by my comments now, as I did then:

Tri-Met is a giant think-tank on how to spend tax money, and
guarantee their jobs.
Can't some of this nonsense be eliminated to offset the costs
of fuel, rather than put the burdens on the riders?

A few things (a very, very, very short list) that come to mind are:

Replacing plain-jane (but adequate) bus stop signs attached to power poles with
new signs on new metal poles cemented into the ground with glitzy modern graphics.
What are the design, approval, purchasing, installation costs systemwide?

Forbidding smoking at bus shelters and MAX platforms - requiring signage
to be designed, manufactured, and installed. Not to mention enforcement costs.

A dedicated Tri-Met Police force (I don't mean fare inspectors). WHY?
ALL of the areas served by TriMet are already served by local law enforcement agencies.

I saw that Tri-Met now has (at least) one bomb sniffing dog to stick it's nose
on MAX riders personal property without probable cause. I heard Tri-Met implemented
the program with 100% Tri-Met funding hoping for a federal grant in the future.
(Nevertheless federal funds are from you and me. I hate it that most people think federal
grants come from some great-uncle with deep pockets). I'm trying to remember the last
time a bomb was found or exploded on the MAX.

How about the tri-met.org website? Couldn't a plain, simple, to-the-point site do?
Has anyone a clue what designing & maintaining such an extensive site costs?
Have you ever clicked on "Tri-Met store"? They sell posters, art-guides,
and get this TRI-MET DRINK COASTERS. All of this had to be designed, approved,
printed, inventoried, etc. WASTE of $$$$.

Why does Tri-Met cross the interstate bridge to serve Vancouver, WASHINGTON?
Does Tri-Met collect the payroll tax from Clark County businesses?
It would seem to me that Tri-Met and C-Tran duplicate services. WHY?
The burden for public transportation to Portland of Washington residents
should be solely via their own system and expense.

Given time, I could come up with many more wastes of OUR transportation dollars.

"Replacing plain-jane (but adequate) bus stop signs attached to power poles with
new signs on new metal poles cemented into the ground with glitzy modern graphics."

The old signs were difficult to pick out from a distance, too similar to parking signs. Also, many of the new signs have schedules, making riding more convenient. Making the system more appealing attracts riders, which generates more revenue.

"Forbidding smoking at bus shelters and MAX platforms - requiring signage
to be designed, manufactured, and installed. Not to mention enforcement costs."

I take it you are a smoker? I stopped riding in large part because of all the smoking at shelters / transit centers. I doubt the cost of adding no-smoking signs is more than the additional revenue made by making the system more attractive to more riders (non-smokers who would ride and pay fares). I really doubt they have additional enforcement for non-smoking, the TriMet personnel would be making the rounds of the property regardless of the smoking policy I would think.

You also criticize the website, but I'm certain many of the features on it are there as the result of customer feedback.

You even criticize TriMet busses serving Vancouver... did you know there are C-Tran busses that go to downtown Portland? You would have riders endure the extra hassle of getting off the bus at the state line and waiting for another bus?

Just some examples where I don't think you're seeing the whole picture. Surely, you understand the value of spending a little money to make more money later, since you advocate additional enforcement of fares.

Have you complained yet about the surly and unprofessional drivers who by the way earn more than many computer engineers? Accepting only professionalism and good customer service on the part of drivers would by itself boost ridership substantially. At the rates they get paid, it should be easy to replace anyone who is not up to the task. Oh, yeah, the union. What to do about the difficulty of getting rid of bad drivers, now there is an interesting discussion.

...are among the worst I've seen, speeding though red lights, cutting cars off, careless around pedestrians and probably bicyclers.

[quote] why do you think it would be a good idea to ask Trimet to increase their policing of fare policy just so you can save 5 cents per trip? that's one of the most short sighted and selfish things I've ever heard. [/quote]

you're totally right and I didn't even realize it. i was actually thinking more long term when I was writing it, but my letter doesn't really convey that. thanks for the tip.

Having more affective fare inspection might help paying riders save far more than 5 cents. If more people were paying the fare, there would be more revenue for operating expenses, thereby reducing the need for the increase.

The fare zone system of establishing amount of fare to be paid has something to be desired. If you live just inside of zone 3, and you're going downtown, you wind up paying an amount of money for a fare that is still more than it costs to drive your gas burner there. Tri-met could increase its ridership amongst those who live near the max line and close to the perimeter of a fare zone if they reduced the fare on a per mileadge basis. Were fares less, there would be less need for people to avoid paying the fare.

Of course, gas prices will go up, but fares seem to keep pace.

Yes, it's annoying at times to have authority in your lives, but those who don't pay their fares are getting a free ride off those who do.

Beyond fare inspection, there seems to be a need for trimet to have more presence of some kind on the trains and buses just because growing numbers of riders seem unable, or unwilling to conduct themselves in a manner that's consistent with the kind of conduct neccessary to make public transportation more than just endurable, for everybody.

Part of the responsibility for the need to increase fares lies squarely in the lap of fare evaders and riders with unmanaged behavior. Both categories of riders are chasing away legitimate, paying riders.

80% of emergency response calls are in response to motor vehicle accidents, injuries, and fatalities. City emergency response services are paid for out of general funds, not motor vehicle fees. This is commonly one of the biggest single line items on any city's budget. And the bus riders are paying for that very expensive subsidy to private, single-occupant motorists out of their wages, even if they've never driven a car their entire lives!

So why are motorists "legitimate" somehow, but busriders are "freeloaders"?

Eliminate all fares and raise taxes a few percent on private motor vehicles. Let the rich freeloaders who have the money start financing the transportation system so all the workers can get to work at their low wage jobs -- whether in childcare (taking care of the children of the rich), public sanitation (cleaning up after them), food production (getting food from the fields and kitchens to their tables) -- and all the other vital but underappreciated and poorly paid jobs in this society.

Then raise taxes on the rich a few percent more, so that the bus system can be upgraded and improved and turned into a first class transportation option -- a la Curitiba or Bogota -- with all the amenities that first class train or airplane passengers expect. Afterall, why should the working class have to travel like second class citizens? We are first class human beings, and without our labor, there would be no country at all -- no buses, no trains, and no motor vehicles, no cities, and no civilization.

[quote] Eliminate all fares and raise taxes a few percent on private motor vehicles. Let the rich freeloaders who have the money start financing the transportation system so all the workers can get to work at their low wage jobs -- whether in childcare (taking care of the children of the rich), public sanitation (cleaning up after them), food production (getting food from the fields and kitchens to their tables) -- and all the other vital but underappreciated and poorly paid jobs in this society. Then raise taxes on the rich a few percent more, so that the bus system can be upgraded and improved and turned into a first class transportation option -- a la Curitiba or Bogota -- with all the amenities that first class train or airplane passengers expect. Afterall, why should the working class have to travel like second class citizens? We are first class human beings, and without our labor, there would be no country at all -- no buses, no trains, and no motor vehicles, no cities, and no civilization.[/quote] you make great points. i'll be sure to reference them if/when Trimet contacts me regarding the letter.

one day strike follwed by potentially a continuing strike. How much money would trimet lose? To do this I would suggest Critical Mass along with the biodiesel people and the peak oil people get involved with helping out about educating the general public about non fossel fuel transportation. A strike could be a campaign to educate the population about peak oil, bureaucratic misuse of public commons, cyclist awareness, cyclist safety, biodiesel and many other related topics.

The busses do burn fuel, and it has to be paid for somehow. I suggest taxing parking in the entire Trimet service area, in stages and starting small. Downtown businesses are run by jerks, but it isn't really fair that they have to compete against acres of free parking everywhere else. My first nominee would be the giant parking lots of the malls and big box stores, which if you actually have the nerve to think u can shop in them as a transit rider, make you walk ridiculous distances all for the convenience of motorists.

Don't support attack the drivers or their union-- would the level of skill be increased my making it a lousier job? On the other hand, fire the whole PR staff. When I visited Chicago, they give you a comprehensive schedule for free, and it's even printed large enough to read, unlike these stupid little maps Trimet is sticking us with. The real problem is an unelected board appointed by the governor, and the powerlessness of transit users because they're a minority. The only way I can see for that to change is for driving to become too expensive for most people. Of course, there are county and city elections coming up, and while TriMet is specified as a totally different jurisdiction, so are the schools, but that hasn't kept school funding from becoming an issue in the city and county elections.