I am writing this from the persective of the highway-minded ODOT leadership to answer Keith's question:

 

Because we at ODOT want to know if we should create a dedicated transit fund within ODOT, rather than just get $7 million per year from the general fund which we use to leverage some flexible federal funds for transit (about $35 million total). And should this fund be larger than $35 million? If so, why? What's the need? Are there actually funding needs (operating and capital) out there that aren't getting met? If so, where and for what? So if we (ODOT) provide more funding for transit, will it actually be tapped? If so, will it be spent for things that are actually necessary? Or will it be spent to just move a bunch of empty, unwanted buses and trains around our cities where no one lives or at least where no one wants to live anymore.

The League of Women Voters will sponsor a panel discussion on Public Transportation in Ohio's 2nd most populous county without a dedicated funding source for transit. Details....

 

Public Transportation: A Panel Discussion

Thursday, April 3, 7:00 p.m.

Oberlin Public Library Community Room

65 South Main Street

 

Presenting will be:

William Lind, Director, American Conservative Center for Public Transportation

Ken Prendergast, Executive Director, All Aboard Ohio

Deborah Nebel, Director of Public Policy, LEAP (Linking Employment, Abilities and Potential)

John Pesuit, (retired) Supervisor of Technical Services, Cleveland RTA.

 

Event information: http://lwvoberlinarea.org/

MAP: http://tinyurl.com/khcnakm

^Did Butler county get a dedicated funding source for transit?  Because it's the first red county on the list above. 

^Did Butler county get a dedicated funding source for transit?  Because it's the first red county on the list above. 

 

You are correct! Info adjusted accordingly.

^Got it.  (I was actually hoping that ButCo had passed something in the interim but I didn't think they had.  :( )  Have fun at the panel. 

The League of Women Voters will sponsor a panel discussion on Public Transportation in Ohio's 2nd most populous county without a dedicated funding source for transit. Details....

 

Public Transportation: A Panel Discussion

Thursday, April 3, 7:00 p.m.

Oberlin Public Library Community Room

65 South Main Street

 

Presenting will be:

William Lind, Director, American Conservative Center for Public Transportation

Ken Prendergast, Executive Director, All Aboard Ohio

Deborah Nebel, Director of Public Policy, LEAP (Linking Employment, Abilities and Potential)

John Pesuit, (retired) Supervisor of Technical Services, Cleveland RTA.

 

Event information: http://lwvoberlinarea.org/

MAP: http://tinyurl.com/khcnakm

 

Would love to attend, but can't... Will there be any video or podcast of this event?

Would love to attend, but can't... Will there be any video or podcast of this event?

 

Not sure. I'll let you know tonight or tomorrow.

BTW, here is the presentation I gave at the above event, and which I was invited back earlier this week to give it again to another audience.

 

Feel free to share this....

 

http://freepdfhosting.com/7095493b19.pdf

^Great, thanks.

As far as funding goes, I am wondering what people on this forum think about the future of state funding for transit. I know that our current state government in Ohio has been unfriendly to transit, but with the rising cost of health care costs which the state has had to pay in Medicaid, there is an opening for more funding for transit and walkable communities as a health issue.  With the Medicaid expansion, the federal government is picking up most of the tab for Medicaid. Still health care costs are rising and obesity linked to sedentary lifestyle drives up health care costs. So, there may be an opening for transit funding and pedestrian pathways to schools just to offset the government's expenditure towards health care.

 

It's possible that state funding may increase slightly. But the current policy of the state toward transit is that the metros can and should take care of themselves when it comes to transit funding. State officials are, however, more willing to help fund small-town or rural transit.

 

Of course a lot of that is due to where the political constituencies are of the ruling party of state government. That's why I'm in favor of metros joining forces to serve their own transportation and development needs which the state and now the feds neglect. Who knows -- maybe we revert to the ancient Greek concept of City-States....

It's possible that state funding may increase slightly. But the current policy of the state toward transit is that the metros can and should take care of themselves when it comes to transit funding. State officials are, however, more willing to help fund small-town or rural transit.

 

Of course a lot of that is due to where the political constituencies are of the ruling party of state government. That's why I'm in favor of metros joining forces to serve their own transportation and development needs which the state and now the feds neglect. Who knows -- maybe we revert to the ancient Greek concept of City-States....

 

With the current state of politics in this State, it seems regression is the order of the day.

KJP[/member], I read through presentation that you posted above, which I found to be very informative.  Thanks for sharing.  The one thing that really stuck with me was the increased transit funding that exists in Michigan and Indiana over Ohio's.  Pennsylvania didn't strike me as odd being that they have something to show for it, especially along the I 95 cooridor.  Are there some nice transit projects taking place in Michigan and Indiana due to the increased spending.  I know Indiana has the South Shore, which I assume sucks up alot of that.  But Michigan, seriously, Ohio should be ashamed of themselves.  I really don't see the transit developments there. 

If Ohio doubled its state spending on transit from $35 million (most of which is from tapping flexible federal transportation funds) to $70 million, Ohio would rank higher and compare more favorably among other states. But the affect on Ohio transit agencies -- especially those in areas with very little locally-sourced transit funding like Butler County, Lorain County or Trumbull County -- would be for them to go from zero or near-zero regular-route transit to an extremely meager level of service. States like Indiana, Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania have anywhere from meager transit to usable transit for choice riders. It's better transit in Pennsylvania in New York, which means a lot more than just a busy rail line parallel to I-95. It means that Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have big-city transit systems (but which have suffered significant cutbacks because those systems depended so heavily on the commonwealth for funding). It means that cities as small as New Castle, PA have daily transit service from 6 a.m. to midnight, plus commuter expresses to cities 50 miles away (like Pittsburgh). It means that all towns of 15,000 population or more be connected to each other by at least several daily buses per day. Those are all things Ohio lacks.

^Understood.  Thanks.  It's hard to fathom that I can't take a bus from Medina to downtown Cleveland being that Medina was at one time one of Cleveland's fastest growing suburbs.  I did recently read in our local paper however that because Medina was recentley added to the Cleveland MSA in 2013, the city may receive more transit funding from the state.  not sure if that aligns well with what you are implying above however. 

Medina has been part of the Cleveland MSA for decades, however it was reclassified as urban in terms of population density. That meant Medina County is no longer eligible to receive state/federal transit aid to rural transit agencies administered by ODOT. ODOT provides no state/federal funding for urban transit systems because it believes those areas have the financial wherewithal to support transit themselves.

 

Medina County was in a strange situation because its federal transit funding was administered by both ODOT and by NOACA. Consider....  MSA counties dictate which Metropolitan Planning Organization (NOACA) a county belongs to. If a county isn't in an MSA and/or is considered rural, then the state DOT administers its federal funding. Since Medina County was rural but in an MSA and therefore belonged to an MPO (NOACA), it could get state/federal rural transit operating funds from ODOT. And it could get federal transit capital funds by applying for them through NOACA.

 

So now that Medina County is considered urban, it can no longer get rural transit operating funds from ODOT. Instead, it must generate those funds from within Medina County, such as via a sales tax, property tax or simply have the county commissioners include a line item in their general fund for it (which is what they've done so far). But that makes transit funding extremely vulnerable to the unpredictable nature of political process and will have to compete for things like public safety, education, health, etc.

LET'S TALK TRANSIT

Five Regional Stakeholder Meetings*

 

Join the Ohio Department of Transportation at one of five regional stakeholder meetings to help shape a long term strategy for the needs of Ohio's riders today and in the future.

 

Trends show there is a definite rise in the need for convenient, affordable public transportation to jobs, medical appointments, shopping and recreational activities. Our transit agencies are struggling to fund this existing service, let alone meet the increased demand. From light rail and bus service in large cities to rural van services, the Ohio Statewide Transit Needs Study has examined existing transit needs and drafted recommendations for better addressing them. We look forward to your input, comments and ideas!

 

Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2-4 PM

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority

Board Room

1240 West 6th Street

Cleveland, OH 44113

 

Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2-4 PM

Hancock Family Center

1800 North Blanchard Street

Findlay, OH 45840

 

Thursday, Oct. 23, 2-4 PM

Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission

Scioto Room

111 Liberty Street

Columbus, OH 43215

 

Thursday, Oct. 30, 2-4 PM

Athens Community Center

701 East State Street

Athens, OH 45701

 

Friday, Oct. 31, 10 AM-12 PM

OhioMeansJobs Building

300 East Silver Street

Lebanon, OH 45036

 

*Open to the Public

 

Unable to attend? All meeting materials will be available online starting Oct. 21 at www.TransitNeedsStudy.ohio.gov. Comments accepted through Nov. 14.

 

Questions or comments? Email us at [email protected]

Nice! Of course, if I can remember this in twenty days....I should set a calendar entry to provide online comments.

Nice! Of course, if I can remember this in twenty days....I should set a calendar entry to provide online comments.

 

REMINDER! See above......

Another reminder!

 

Yesterday was the first of five stakeholder input meetings held by ODOT and its public involvement team. The meeting held in Cleveland attracted about 130 people -- a turnout that pleasantly surprised the public involvement team. While ODOT has rightly received criticism for the times of the input meetings (2-4 p.m.), their response is that the meetings are intended to get feedback from stakeholders -- e.g. community leaders, planning professionals, the advocacy community, etc. who are familiar with the policy issues. It is not a time of day that welcomes attendance by people who work who comprise two-thirds of everyday transit riders and those who wished they had transit to use.

 

That being said, please try to attend these meetings. They are very important. Yesterday's meeting in Cleveland was terrific. Not only was the turnout great, but so was the input. It was informed, passionate and even a little bit angry without being attacking or insulting. I gave All Aboard Ohio's official input (http://freepdfhosting.com/e32d5d3984.pdf), but the oral input was more limited to brief comments, criticisms and questions. So if you attend, don't expect to read a statement or give a speech. But have some 30 second comments/questions about the study process, including what it should or shouldn't study.

 

ODOT has found there is hundreds of millions of unfunded transit needs in Ohio, and the needs are only going to grow with more demand. ODOT is trying to listen to input and, at least at the Cleveland meeting, they acknowledged the existence of rail transit. But if anything comes out of this, it will be a small increase in transit funding which may not support .

 

ODOT's motivation to conducting this study is in response to when the Ohio Transportation Coalition, including All Aboard Ohio, asked the Ohio General Assembly in 2013 to increase transit funding to at least at $75 million per year (a ten-fold increase). The legislature asked where the number came from. We gave an answer that didn't satisfy them, so they asked ODOT to measure the transit needs in Ohio. This public involvement process is the result.

 

The next meetings.....

 

Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2-4 PM

Hancock Family Center

1800 North Blanchard Street

Findlay, OH 45840

 

Thursday, Oct. 23, 2-4 PM

Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission

Scioto Room

111 Liberty Street

Columbus, OH 43215

 

Thursday, Oct. 30, 2-4 PM

Athens Community Center

701 East State Street

Athens, OH 45701

 

Friday, Oct. 31, 10 AM-12 PM

OhioMeansJobs Building

300 East Silver Street

Lebanon, OH 45036

 

*Open to the Public

 

Unable to attend? All meeting materials will be available online starting Oct. 21 at www.TransitNeedsStudy.ohio.gov. Comments accepted through Nov. 14.

 

Questions or comments? Email us at [email protected]

 

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  3m3 minutes ago

VERY IMPORTANT REPORT: How many #jobs in your metro area are accessible by #transit in 60 mins or less? Save & share! http://www.cts.umn.edu/research/featured/access

Reminder! Tomorrow is the last meeting -- in exurban, transit-inaccessible Lebanon, OH. Show up ODOT by showing up!

 

Friday, Oct. 31, 10 AM-12 PM

OhioMeansJobs Building

300 East Silver Street

Lebanon, OH 45036

Cross-posting this on a few threads

 

Cleveland Connects is hosting a panel discussion on transportation issues on Monday, Nov 24. It's free but you need to register

http://www.ideastream.org/clevelandconnects/getting-around

In this installment of Cleveland Connects, we examine Northeast Ohio’s transportation infrastructure and how it should be shaped to create more livable communities and to promote more sustainable economic growth. Cars will always be part of the mix, and the planned Opportunity Corridor should improve cross-town traffic patterns, but young people today also want to ride their bikes to work or rely more on public transportation. What is the right mix of transportation options? Should the Rapid be expanded? Is it simply a matter of building more bike lanes? Coming up with the right answers will be critical to the region’s ability to grow and prosper and to capitalize on national attention during the 2016 Republican National Convention.

A press release......

 

http://t4america.org/2014/11/14/as-funding-battles-loom-in-legislatures-transportation-for-america-launches-network-to-support-state-efforts-to-fulfill-visions-for-economic-success/

 

As funding battles loom in legislatures, Transportation for America launches network to support state efforts to fulfill visions for economic success

 

14 Nov 2014 | Under Campaign Blog, Press Releases | Posted by Transportation for America | 1 Comment | press release, state advocacy network, state funding, state legislation

For immediate release

 

DENVER, CO — With representatives from 30 states convening in Denver for a strategy conference, Transportation for America today announced the launch of a new network to support state efforts to pass legislation to raise transportation funding while improving accountability for spending it.

 

As Congress continues to postpone tough decisions on federal transportation funding, several states have responded by raising new revenues of their own for transportation. Other states are hoping to do the same in 2015. That is why T4America brought together more than 100 experts and participants for the Denver Capital Ideas conference, where they are sharing experiences and insights that can help other states take on the thorny issue of transportation funding in their state legislatures.

 

“Federal gas tax revenues are dropping and prospects of returning to robust national investment are uncertain, at best,” said T4America director, James Corless. “States that want to continue investing will have to explore new ways to raise funding for transportation on their own.”

 

Twenty states considered legislation to increase transportation funding in some form in 2013. Since 2012, 12 states have successfully raised new revenues. A handful of other state legislative leaders and governors have already indicated that transportation funding will be on the front burner in 2015.

 

“They say that states are the laboratories of democracy,” said John Robert Smith, the chair of T4America and former mayor of Meridian, MS. “And many are proving right now how to stand in the gap created by federal inaction. But to fulfill their homegrown solutions, they need help with everything from finding innovative revenue sources to crafting political strategies and legislative language. Our hope is that this new network will help replicate success across the country and empower states and regions that want to make this happen.”

 

At the same time, T4America is working with local leaders across the country to prepare for the possibility of action in the new Congress convening in January.

 

“There is still an enormous opportunity,” said Corless, “because Congress still must update the federal transportation program, MAP-21, by next May. This gives us an important chance to resuscitate and reinvigorate the program in exciting ways, so that it better suits the needs of people in the communities where they live.”

 

CAPITAL IDEAS (http://t4america.org/capital-ideas) is a two-day conference in Denver, convened by Transportation for America to support this kind of work at the state level. View the full agenda and list of speakers here: http://t4america.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/T4A-Capital-Ideas-Agenda.pdf

Interesting how public policies change over the years. Even the arrival of the automobile didn't cause private enterprise to jump at the chance to own and finance roadway construction. But it sure made sense for the private sector to do so with the railways.....

 

"masterly inactivity"- love that phrase.

^^When they speak of horse-power, they mean the real thing...

 

The country was entering a critical juncture passenger train and transit wise during this period.  America decided to allow railroads to remain free enterprises where it seems other Western countries had their railroads under state ownership, much like we treat our highways today.  As with the national defense, primary & secondary education and even the postal service (which is shaky now) America, these countries determined that their railroads were too central to the health-and well being of their economies to turn them over to the free markets as did we.

 

While we romanticize the interurban era, it was brief and one doomed to fail from the start. Interurban companies were building up in the 1890s and early 1900s but usually by lower budget companies, or companies where rail was a sideline, as with electric companies.  As in Cleveland, these interurban trains were forced to enter the CBD over crowded, slow streetcar tracks.  Those interurbans that did move freight did so with  short-haul deliveries which, of course, were no match for the railroads, which stuck with long-distant passenger travel except in only a few large cities where they developed commuter rail (and in more moderate metro areas, like Cleveland and Pittsburgh, there were only about 1 or 2 commuter rail lines run be the railroad...

 

So as we saw in Cleveland, even when urban automobile commuting was still new in the 1920s, the interurban companies, 1-by-1, folded up like a cheap suit.  So extreme that, even when the Van Sweringens were offering high-speed entry over their new Rapid Transit lines, these companies were too weak to participate -- and the Vans were really tapped out building what would become Tower City extend connections to these faltering companies (which is why only the existing Shaker Line the grade-separated downtown entry was initially designed for, got built during the interurban era. 

 

We would have a totally different, and far better, rail transit and passenger rail network, both regionally and nationally, had the US not decided to leave railroads totally to the whims of free markets where, of course, they were and are going to focus solely on freight rail which is the most profitable.  Even our admirable, though still way underfunded Amtrak, takes second fiddle over tracks where, outside of the small Northeast Corridor, are not owned by them.

America decided to allow railroads to remain free enterprises where it seems other Western countries had their railroads under state ownership, much like we treat our highways today.  As with the national defense, primary & secondary education and even the postal service (which is shaky now) America, these countries determined that their railroads were too central to the health-and well being of their economies to turn them over to the free markets as did we.

 

You know why the USA kept the railroads in the free market? Because during World War I, the federal government did nationalize them under the U.S. Railway Administration. And it was a disaster. BTW, it started with an executive order in 1917 and affirmed a year later by Congress. While some worthwhile standardization efforts were undertaken and some consolidation among passenger services and stations were embraced, train schedules distintegrated. Yards were clogged. Crews weren't assigned properly, etc. etc. Imagine the rail congestion mess that's been occurring between Cleveland and Chicago occurring nationwide -- that's what the USRA brought. So when the war ended, the USRA was wound down despite the best efforts of rail labor to continue it.

 

Had a modified form of nationalization been undertaken -- such as with the infrastructure and stations -- leaving the operations to the private sector, I think it would have worked better. Granted, railroads run on routines so when you take them out of their routines, chaos ensues. There's a new saying among passenger rail agencies: the first day will be the worst day a new passenger rail service will ever experience. A highway's first day is also the best day a new highway will ever have.

 

Yes, it's true that interurbans were horribly under-capitalized because they weren't very profitable. They couldn't get dedicated rights of way into cities, although some that did get them survived longer. When those parallel mud troughs along the tracks were paved by governments into our county and state highway system, they became useful and competitive. It wasn't the car that killed the interurban. It was the paved road. And it was the Great Depression. Some of the more stout interurbans in Northeast Ohio were 1-5 years from getting dedicated rights of way into downtown Cleveland -- including the Northern Ohio Traction & Light which was acquiring right of way through Bedford to extend its 80 mph double-track "Crittenden Cutoff" to a section where the NOT&L had built a dedicated right of way between the Pennsylvania RR and Wheeling & Lake Erie RR past Calvary Cemetery. From there, the Van Swerigens were planning a dedicated line through the South Broadway neighborhood into the Kingsbury Run. GCRTA still owns part of that right of way behind the old Garden Valley Estates.

 

And the Lake Shore Electric from was double-tracked with mostly dedicated right of way east of Lorain all the way to Edgewater Park. In the 1910s, there were plans to build an elevated right of way above Detroit Avenue and then descended into an extended subway into the Detroit-Superior Bridge, then into an interurban terminal below Public Square. Then the Vans in the 1920s proposed having the Lake Shore Electric swing south from Clifton Boulevard at about West Boulevard, then alongside the Nickel Plate RR, an idea CTS revisited in 1944 and which later became the foundation for the CTS Rapid, now called the Red Line. Except all of the streetcar lines were gone by the time the Red Line opened, which was planned as a stand-alone line anyway.

 

To bring this back to the purpose of the topic, then the State of Ohio decided to fund paved roads, had it similarly offered to take over and invest in the infrastructure of the interurban rail system in Ohio, I have no doubts that many lines would have survived the advent of the paved road and the Great Depression. But many interurban companies (and railroad companies) just wanted to be left alone to die if they couldn't survive without government support of infrastructure. Yes, they enjoyed having total control over the rights of way. But sometimes we love what really hurts us the most.

^Good stuff.  NOT&L, IIRC was the interurban line to Akron... Imagine today hopping an RTA Rapid at Tower City for, say, a 45 min sprint into downtown Akron; and to think the Vans were that close -- perhaps just 1 - 5 years away, as you note...

 

Well the good news is that Ohio transit funding has gotten so bad added to the growing desire of Millennials to live in downtown Cleveland, and transit friendly nabes like Ohio City, U. Circle/Little Italy and Shaker Sq, that officials are squealing louder about the funding crisis-- even Joe Calabrese.  The bad news is I'd feel more optimistic about getting better transit funding if Ohio voters, earlier this month, hadn't decided to double down on the anti-transit Republicans who have created and perpetuated this mess to begin with.

 

$1.25 would haul a ton 5 miles by horse power on a wagon road, 25 miles on an electric railway, and 250 miles on a steam railroad.

 

I wonder how a motor vehicle on a highway compares.

An excellent question! But on which roads? This one, that governments refused to pave (and neither did private enterprise, BTW) until liberals demanded change....

 

 

Or the ones that government later paved, kick-started with general taxpayer money before so-called user fees were collected on roads governments continued to own while rails were left to fend for themselves in the private sector? No such public sector feedback-loop funding mechanism was ever extended to support rail infrastructure (still hasn't, BTW).

 

Like I said, a car is only as efficient as the road it travels over. Or did you conveniently take that part for granted? I'm not blaming you. Far too many Americans take that all-important tidbit for granted. Everyone knows the pavement just oozed up out of the mud as a natural phenomenon.

Wanted to post these numbers here, too... From Ohio's transit agencies with ridership over 1 Million annually

 

Ridership Data from Ohio Transit Agencies (2013):

 

Cleveland (GCRTA): 45.6M

Cincinnati (SORTA): 18.78M

Columbus (COTA): 18.76M

Dayton (GDRTA): 10.2M

Akron (METRO RTA): 5M

Toledo (TARTA): 3.1M

Canton (SARTA): 2.3M

Portage County (Kent) (PARTA): 1.4M

Youngstown (WRTA): 1.3M

 

Cleveland is definitely the big dog in the state.

 

Other Stats from OPTA:

 

Total number of Public Transit systems in Ohio

• Urban Systems –27

• Rural Systems – 35

 

Ridership (General Public) for 2011

• Total ridership 111.7 million trips

 

Ridership (Elderly & Disabled) for 2011

• Elderly & Disabled ridership 16.9 million trips

 

Public Transit Fleet for 2011

• Total Public Transit Fleet - 3,480 vehicles

• Public Transit Fleet wheelchair accessible - 95.6%

 

Administration Costs

• Costs for ODOT to administer all federal and state public transit programs have averaged 2.6% since 1998

 

State Funding Trends

• SFY 2011 budget for Transit Funding is 66% less than SFY 2000

• Current state funding for transit has been reduced to levels not seen since the early 1980s

• Additional $20 Million in Federal Flex Funds are being provided

 

Specialized Transportation Program Vehicles for 2011

• Total number of vehicles - 533

• Number of vehicles funded in 2011 - 119

• Specialized Transportation vehicle fleet wheelchair accessible - 87.9%

 

Counties served in 2011

• Rural Public Transit – 36

• Urban Public Transit – 27

• Counties unserved – 2

 

(Source: http://www.ohiopublictransit.org/PDF_files/2013-14_DIRECTORYopta.pdf)

 

ODOT research says bus, rapid transit dollars need to double to $1.8 billion to serve unmet needs

By Alison Grant, The Plain Dealer

on December 30, 2014 at 2:25 PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Ohio Department of Transportation has been criticized in recent years for not directing enough money to supporting Ohio's 61 transit systems and the 115 million bus and train rides they provide each year.

 

...

 

Now, in a new study that ODOT says is an "honest, transparent assessment of transit funding in Ohio," an ODOT-hired consultant has taken a detailed look at current spending – and what it would take to close a funding gap to meet public transit needs a decade from now.

 

The Ohio Statewide Transit Needs Study, conducted by Nelson Nygaard, a firm recognized for its work on promoting vibrant communities, is expected to be released in coming months.

 

...

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/12/odot_research_says_bus_rapid_t.html

Running out of gas

Featured editorial from the Toledo Blade

 

Toledo’s regional bus system must raise its state-lowest fares just to maintain basic services, underscoring the need to find more reliable and sustainable ways to pay for public transportation here and throughout Ohio. The state, which ranks near the bottom in transit support, must also do much more if it hopes to redevelop its cities and keep talented young people in Ohio...

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/Featured-Editorial-Home/2015/03/21/Running-out-of-gas-1.html

More....

 

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  39s39 seconds ago

Moving forward: Balancing needs. Ohio’s vital public transit systems needed dedicated, adequate and reliable funding. http://www.toledoblade.com/Featured-Editorial-Home/2015/03/23/Moving-forward-Balancing-needs.html …

StreetsblogOhio ‏@StreetsblogOhio  Apr 23

Cleveland Dems John Barnes, Bill Patmon & Martin Sweeney all supported House budget provision that would slash transit

 

http://timkovach.com/wp/2015/04/23/ohio-house-budget-slashes-additional-funding-for-public-transit/

A press release from the ATU http://www.atu.org/

 

In Historic Statewide Partnership, Ohio Transit Agencies & Labor Unions

Unite to Demand Funding for Public Transit

Tuesday, April 28, 2015 2:27 PM

Ohio Media Contacts: Troy Miller, (513) 721-2133 or Carly Allen, (419) 255-5372

National Media Contact: Regina Eberhart, (202) 412-5582

 

Columbus, OH – In an unprecedented joint letter sent Monday to members of both chambers of the state legislature, sixteen public transit agency heads and labor union leaders demanded lawmakers “take bold and needed leadership” to increase transit funding or risk deepening Ohio’s economic crisis.

 

“A greater investment in public transit means greater access to jobs, education, and health care,” they wrote. “What can be more important to the future of Ohio?”

 

The joint effort, spurred by an Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) report that concluded more than $560 million was needed just to adequately meet the needs of 2015, marks the first time in memory that labor and management have joined together to push for funding. The signatories represent more than 3,000 Ohio public transit workers and an estimated 300,000 transit passengers across nine metro areas:

 

Cincinnati: SORTA’s Dwight Ferrell and Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 627 President Troy Miller

Toledo: TARTA’s James Gee and ATU Local 697 Financial Secretary Carly Allen

Cleveland: RTA’s Joseph Calabrese and ATU Local 268 President Ronald Jackson

Dayton: RTA’s Mark Donaghy and ATU Local 1385 President Glenn Salyer

Youngstown: WRTA’s James Ferraro and ATU Local 272 President John Remias

Steubenville: SVRTA’s Susan Hogue and ATU Local 285 President Mark Sanders

Columbus: COTA’s Curtis Stitt and Transport Workers Union (TWU) Local 208 President Ronald Dreyfus

Akron: METRO’s Richard Enty and TWU Local 1 President Rick Speelman

ATU Ohio State Council President and Local 627 (Cincinnati) President Troy Miller says the situation should alarm any Ohioan, whether they live in urban or rural areas. “Every single day, more Ohioans are relying on a bus or train operator to safely bring them to work or school or the doctor, yet every day the state is investing less in transit,” Miller says. “Riders are going to make an additional 35 million trips this year according ODOT’s report, yet the Ohio House just voted to reduce funding. If that doesn’t outrage you, check your pulse.”

 

The situation is so dire that ODOT estimates at least one third of the state’s operational public transit buses are so old that they shouldn’t be on the road anymore.

 

Ohio, with a population of 11.6 million, contributes less to public transit than South Dakota, with a population of just 853,000. Despite this jarring statistic, state funding has plummeted from $43 million in 2000 to just $7.3 million in 2014.

 

About ATU

The Amalgamated Transit Union is the largest labor organization representing transit workers in the United States and Canada. Founded in 1892, the ATU today is comprised of over 190,000 members in 253 local unions spread across 47 states and nine provinces, including 3,000 workers at Greyhound Lines, Inc. Composed of bus drivers, light rail operators, maintenance and clerical personnel and other transit and municipal employees, the ATU works to promote transit issues and fights for the interests of its hard-working members.

Of course they did.

 

Ohio House nixes spending more on buses, trains

 

By Alison Grant, The Plain Dealer

May 27, 2015 at 5:02 PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- House Republicans oppose increasing the state's contribution to public transit in Ohio, where annual transit spending by the state of 63 cents per person is among the lowest rates in the nation.

 

The determination by the House members to keep the state's public transit budget unchanged at $7.3 million a year comes despite an Ohio Department of Transportation-commissioned transit-needs study that called for a $2.5 million increase in each of the next two budget years.

 

Gov. John Kasich recommended a hike as well, but it was a smaller $1 million in each of the two years.

 

The House removed the Republican governor's $1 million proposal when it passed the budget bill and sent it to the Senate.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/05/ohio_house_nixes_public_transi.html#incart_river

Unbelievable. Yet not surprising :(

It's time for metro areas to fund their own transit needs given the malpractice of Congress and of some states, namely Ohio, to address urban needs in general and infrastructure/transportation in particular. Greater Cleveland has the economic output of Hungary. We can do it.

Seems everybody wants to be nicey-nicey.  No one wants to be too political and state the obvious ... so I will... It's Republicans who are causing this mess and Republicans need to pay a price at the polls... This refusal to call them out on the carpet allows them to maintain a stranglehold on our politics, and as they do we're simply going to get more of this...  :whip: :whip:

... crickets... Are people really afraid of Republicans as it seems?  Just curious. 

... crickets... Are people really afraid of Republicans as it seems?  Just curious. 

 

Do you mean Republican voters or Republican politicians? Or both?

 

I'm pretty dissatisfied with both parties on the transit front. However, I think once the streetcar shows itself to be successful in the Republican bastion that is Cincy, you're going to hopefully see more public support for similar investment in the other C's. 

^I'm talking about the pols.  The first 3 words in the previous article about transit cuts are "House Republicans oppose ..." There has been consistent, and justified, concern and complaint about Ohio's pitifully small transit funding by the state.  And with Republicans in control, the situation is not only NOT getting better, it's getting worse...  John Kasich, who now is trying to repackage himself as a moderate per his presidential aspirations, killed the job-creating, economy/people movement-enhancing Amtrak 3-Cs rail project shortly after taking office in 2010.  The now sadly gravely ill ex Cong. Steve LaTourette, a moderate Republican, favored Amtrak and gave up fighting the right-wing Ohio Republican onslaught on, among other things, urban issues and transit.  LaTourette grew frustrated and opted out.

 

It's pretty clear its a partisan issue.  Republicans are transit oppose-rs/destroyers all around the nation, but particularly in Ohio.... But for folks to say it's both parties, is a cop-out and it only serves to keep Republican regressive ideals on these issues, firmly entrenched.  -- have Democrats not been as strong in opposition?  Yes, but that's exactly what I'm talking about... Somebody's got to take a stand.

Redirected from another thread.....

 

Cool. Then you also support a better balance between road and transit spending, as well as a greater balance between quality urban and suburban housing choices because the polls show that's what the people want. Elected officials don't listen to the sheep, only the shepherds.

 

How true. Check out this quote from a Cincinnati Enquirer article on Ohio legislators ignoring an ODOT study's call for more transit funding. The legislator basically admits that he listens to lobbyists rather see public needs for himself.

 

Simply put, public transportation isn't a priority at the statehouse, lawmakers and transit advocates say. Operating money for bus and passenger rail is not even in the transportation budget. And one lawmaker turns the argument back on public transportation advocates, citing what he calls the lack of a strong and unified lobbying effort.

 

"There are causes that build a story and lay the groundwork to try to get money – higher education, school lunch programs, scholarship assistance," said Rep. Tom Brinkman, the Mount Lookout Republican. "Public transportation is nowhere to be found."

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/05/23/ohio-ignored-bus-rail-study/27867629/?fb_ref=Default

 

 

He's got a point.  Can't win if you don't play the game.

 

The Ohio Public Transit Association has kept the same lobbyist for 15 years -- even as transit funding has been slashed from $42 million per year to only $7 million. He must have some truly compromising photographs of OPTA's board.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  18m18 minutes ago

Ohio's per-capita transit $$ isn't enough to buy a 70-cent taco on Taco Mondays at El Ranchero's. You can help today! http://allaboardohio.org/2015/06/01/help-boost-ohio-transit-funding-today/

^^I don't know how anyone can take anything these Republicans say seriously... Lobby shmobby.  Fact is, Republicans have an anti-urban/anti-transit agenda, both locally and nationally, and for them to say it has anything to lobbying is akin to them urinating in your face and telling you it's raining.

Great opinion piece by a suburban township trustee who asks, where would many Ohioans be without public transportation?

 

Public transportation key to our future

Christine Matacic 3:36 p.m. EDT June 3, 2015

 

Christine Matacic is a Liberty Township trustee and OKI board member.

 

Reading the article "Why Ohio ignored its own $1M public transit study" (May 24) by Jason Williams brought back some fond memories of riding a bus to the Friars Club in Clifton for swimming lessons; shopping in Cincinnati with our grandmother at Pogue's, Saturday mornings at Findlay Market, and visiting the Cincinnati Zoo.

 

Needless to say, I was disappointed to read that our state legislators may not look at public transit as a quality-of-life issue for many in our state. It is not a luxury, but a necessity for some.

 

The article mentions Hamilton resident Deborah Cook as one example of many in our communities who cannot afford to own a car. She's working on her GED and hopes to obtain a better job, purchase groceries and provide for her family. Without public transportation, where would she be? Given all that she is striving to do, public transportation plays a major role in the education system, jobs/economic development, shopping/business sustainability, and health care. So why do our legislators not see the positive impact public transit has on people's lives?

 

MORE:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/06/03/public-transportation-key-future/28422889/

There's good reading in today's PD about the sorry state of transit funding in Ohio.

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/07/to_boost_ohio_transit_think_ou.html

Wow....

 

Laketran fleshes out state transit funding proposal

By Simon Husted, The News-Herald

POSTED: 07/27/15, 11:42 PM EDT | UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO 0

 

Leaders of Laketran are introducing a legislative proposal that, if adopted, could increase the state’s tax funding for mass transit a little more than 12-fold without levying a new tax or shuffling the funds of existing line items.

 

Since March, Laketran Executive Director Ray Jurkowski has championed an effort to urge state lawmakers to preemptively direct tax revenue from online and catalog purchases to fill a multi-billion-dollar hole that is estimated across the state’s 62 transit agencies — his included. At Laketran’s latest committee of the whole trustee meeting July 27, details and funding projections of that proposal were fleshed out in a report and presentation by analysts of a national finance advisory firm tapped to help this effort.

 

“I personally don’t believe there is another revenue source, or combination of revenue sources that have the potential punch that this proposal would have,” Jurkowski said at the meeting. “I can’t see them raising motor vehicle registration fees, rental (car) fees, license fees, property tax fees high enough to produce the kind of revenue that this tax could potentially produce.”

 

MORE:

http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20150727/laketran-fleshes-out-state-transit-funding-proposal

Nothing that we all don't already know, but glad to see the press:

 

RTA needs to find $254 million to bring entire network to state of good repair

 

 

Given GCRTA's huge, $500+ million state-of-good-repair needs and the lack of funding for them, and despite the excellent cost-effective rating of a Red Line extension from East Cleveland to Euclid, there's no way GCRTA can afford to come up with half of the $1 billion cost of extending the Red Line -- or even pursuing an interim extension to a proposed "Noble District" of advanced manufacturing. Or reroute the Blue Line to University Circle. Or any other meaningful expansion. So many wasted opportunities.

 

If we increased the county sales tax by a half-cent OR a county payroll tax of 1 percent, AND the state embraced Laketran's plan to use taxes from online and catalog sales for transit, then we would have funding for transit expansion.