... I wonder, also, about cutting the Waterfront Line to rush hour/a few events, also.  I admit, there are times when trains are empty; I admit that.  But it seems, lately, this has occurred less and less.  How much MORE, in $ and cents does RTA really save by cutting a half-hourly, 2.2 mile rail run that uses electricity and not expensive gas? I mean, after all, those drivers who aren't on WFL runs will probably often waste a lot of time sitting around Tower City for their outbound runs anyway -- so where's the huge savings?... granted, I realize w/o WFL trains, there will be fewer runs and maybe a crew-or 2 can be dropped, but it still seems to me, w/ all the bus/rail duplication (like the 55s runing down the W Shoreway, rather than terminating at nearby W.Blvd/Cudell), the money can be cut elsewhere...  Also, might a better solution (than cutting the WFL) be to time/terminate some of the 39s (Lakeshore Blvd/Euclid) lines at the Muni lot to connect w/ WFL trains?  Wouldn't that save more? 

 

Also, I really wonder what message it sends to the public to cut Waterfront Line service only 2 years before the critical Flats East Bank project opens?  Wouldn't it be SMART to promote Clevelanders using WFL trains to go down and check out demo/construction progress to get the public into the habit of using transit to this very excellent TOD in the making?  Let's face it (sorry Jerry) but we know Joe C does not like rail -- let's just call it like it is, besides the (very admirable) station rehab programs he's had on the Red Line, Shaker Square (partial/update ADA) and the projected (Lee/Van Aken), he's been cool or in objection to the WFL and any other rail expansion project -- even commuter rail...

 

... But if he's true to his desire for more TOD, like FEB, it sure seems to me that shutting down the downtown/2.2 mile Waterfront Line.

This is a thoughtful comment by a friend of mine who once worked in a top management position at RTA in the 1980s...

_________________

 

The voters of Cuyahoga County imposed a 1 percent sales tax on themselves in 1975 in exchange for lower public transit fares, coordinated and improved frequencies and an expanded service area coverage.  The voters expected the transit authority to live within the revenue stream it produces.  RTA has done so until now because of extraordinary issues regarding fuel costs and declines in sales tax receipts.

 

Unfortunately, declining sales tax revenue in Cuyahoga County caused by out migration, the relocation of retail to collar counties to serve the migration of people from Cuyahoga to Lorain, Lake, Portage, Geauga and Summit counties; a declining economy and resulting declining automobile sales has led to a decline in sales tax revenue flowing into RTA.  When this loss of revenue is coupled with dwindling state support for transit and historic generous acquiescence to union demands for higher wages, better (more expensive) fringe benefits and changes in operating rules, drastic action is required.  RTA is responding quickly to the structural changes it is confronting.  Demanding more money from the federal or state government is certainly part of the solution, but from a policy standpoint, self-help is the first step.

 

Increasing fares is part of the overall solution.  The fare increases being suggested are reasonable and in line with other major transit system fares around the country.  The 1975 CTS express/rapid fare of $0.75 adjusted for inflation is about $3.50 in 2008 dollars.  So, a $2.50 cash fare is still a bargain when considering what we used to pay for express/rapid fares in 1975 in relative terms.  Eliminating redundant or underutilized services, poor performing routes is another part of the solution.  After 33 years, some routes just don't make sense anymore.  Even with expensive gasoline there are some routes that are just uneconomical to operate despite the existence of a sales tax.  Another place to look is to lower operating costs without reducing bus/train miles on the remaining routes. 

 

Pittsburgh is demanding givebacks from its unions similar to the restructuring of the airline industry to help reduce its operating costs, which is another part of the solution I am sad to say. 

The Amalgamated Transit Union must brace itself for givebacks.  We only need to look at the airline industry for an example of the menu of solutions that must be studied. 

 

We need more service, more frequency, more rail if we are to build a decent transit system that serves 21st century Ohio cities.  We need a way to finance this.  And we need to look beyond Cuyahoga County borders.  We need to follow the population migration for the lost sales tax revenue.

More?  where did you get that information? $2.25 is on par with other cities.  Again, why are you protesting RTA?  You should be upset with and contacting your Govenor [sic], Federal and State elected officials!!

 

I AM upset with federal & state officials.  My question was HOW such protests are being organized.  Because my experience is that organized protests are more effective than when people contact officials in a disorganized way.  As far as I can tell, we're on the same side here.

 

And the information about the proposed RTA fares being above those of other cities--as KJP provided in a handy list--was correct.  Considering the amounts involved,  25 to 50 cents above other cities is a significant percentage.  I also wonder if there is a reason that a lot of other cities have clustered around $2--it may well be that going above this is a significant psychological threshold for public transport riders.  It may be justified, but it is undoubtedly more money. 

 

One problem is that Cleveland has a public transport system that is just dense enough in some areas and it is precisely in many of those areas that the cuts will affect most--so that some areas will go from being just dense enough to be doable (both in terms of #s of routes and frequency of service) and being not dense enough to make sense for many people. 

 

I'd love to see Cuyahoga county work with other counties to create a truly regional system.  From experience, I can say that LCT (Lorain County Transit) sucks beyond words, but maybe a partnership would help through economies of scale and possible leadership reshuffles.  All of the dithering about the commuter rail on the west side, though, makes me wonder how much other counties will be willing to do such a partnership.  I hope that this is just unwarranted pessimism and that they will realize that public transportation is key to the future of the region.  Here is another place where organized and creative lobbying could be of use.  How good is All Aboard Ohio? 

More?  where did you get that information? $2.25 is on par with other cities.  Again, why are you protesting RTA?  You should be upset with and contacting your Govenor [sic], Federal and State elected officials!!

 

I AM upset with federal & state officials.  My question was HOW such protests are being organized.  Because my experience is that organized protests are more effective than when people contact officials in a disorganized way.  As far as I can tell, we're on the same side here.

 

And the information about the proposed RTA fares being above those of other cities--as KJP provided in a handy list--was correct.  Considering the amounts involved,  25 to 50 cents above other cities is a significant percentage.  I also wonder if there is a reason that a lot of other cities have clustered around $2--it may well be that going above this is a significant psychological threshold for public transport riders.  It may be justified, but it is undoubtedly more money. 

 

One problem is that Cleveland has a public transport system that is just dense enough in some areas and it is precisely in many of those areas that the cuts will affect most--so that some areas will go from being just dense enough to be doable (both in terms of #s of routes and frequency of service) and being not dense enough to make sense for many people. 

 

I'd love to see Cuyahoga county work with other counties to create a truly regional system.  From experience, I can say that LCT (Lorain County Transit) sucks beyond words, but maybe a partnership would help through economies of scale and possible leadership reshuffles.  All of the dithering about the commuter rail on the west side, though, makes me wonder how much other counties will be willing to do such a partnership.  I hope that this is just unwarranted pessimism and that they will realize that public transportation is key to the future of the region.  Here is another place where organized and creative lobbying could be of use.  How good is All Aboard Ohio? 

 

Maybe you missed my point.  RTA is not solely to blame.  Funding in Ohio for transit has been cut to next to nothing.  So organize a protest at the state capital, not RTA's doorstep.

I don't think that's what he's saying MTS. Give him a break.

 

As for the effectiveness of All Aboard Ohio, it is primarily a rail-based organization, but does advocate for general pro-transit policies at the state level. All Aboard Ohio is directly involved in framing the transit and rail policy discussion for the Ohio 21st Century Transportation Task Force. But most of the pro-transit activities are being run by Joe Calabrese (he is chairing the task force's multi-modal steering committee) and the Ohio Public Transportation Association, which Joe chairs.

Well, I'm really shocked at the news but we have to work on this constructively.  I take the 96F and cutting that out means I'd have to walk seven blocks to the 75X morning and night in all seasons.  My wife would really be set back getting a job because she relies on the Circulator to connect with other buses to get downtown.  We need to tell our state and federal representatives that RTA needs funding desperately in order to get cars off the road and save citizens money the way gas prices are going.  It seems this tragedy would have the opposite effect.  Nobody should resist higher fares instead of service cuts it that'll save most of the rush hour routes at least because we'll be paying big time in the end not only in gas but in car maintenance.

Good post, chevalier. Welcome to UrbanOhio!

I'm glad to see everyone uniting around this.  Up until this announcement, which seems to affect a lot more people (including several old/new UOers), when I complained about the bus service where I live, I was simply told to move closer to the city.  Now that it's affecting others, everyone is looking for ways to actively effect change together and are uniting in contacting their representatives.  Good!

I do the best I can to keep up with this thread, so I am sure someone has suggested rate increases by zones/rings farther from the city.

 

obviously someone coming in from Bay villiage to Downtown used more energy labor costs etc than someone going from one side of the city to the other. Also the poor, who use the bus more, but for generally shorter distances, will bear the brunt of increases. It does not seem fair that they will largely subsidize the suburbinites who are now crying foul about bus service.

Generally encouraged by the level of debate on this thread.

I'm watching Al Gore on Meet the Press right now. One day all our vehicles, public and private, will be green. Right now, I take it most RTA rubber-tire buses are diesel, correct? Well, it's my understanding that any diesel engine can, perhaps with minimal conversion process, run on biodiesel. My understanding is RTA would be willing to switch buses to biodiesel if enough fuel supply were available, but they've had trouble identifying a sufficient supply. Does anyone know anything about this? Surely biodiesel is cheaper that petrodiesel and if a supply were found this would save RTA money right away - as I said conversion of the vehicle to run on bio-d is minimal and inexpensive. Would improve air quality problems that are causing childhood asthma as so on. Perhaps one day the vehicles will all run on fuel cells or whatever, but we need solution for *now*. Anybody have comment?

All good points gilgi, and good observations about other cities fares (you were right on, regardless of MTS false statements).

Oh and I think everyone else got your point fine.   

One point I'd like to make is that the RTA situation is not unique. This happening all over the country as underfunded transit operators try to cope with high fuel costs and other issues.

 

One thing that keeps coming up is the notion that transit is a local issue and that operating funds should come from local taxpayers. Nonsense. It is plainly in the national interest to promote wise energy use by providing an alternative to driving. It's also in the national interest to promote access to jobs and local attractions.

 

It's this double standard which has hamstrung transit and intercity rail for decades. The only legitimate mode of transportation as far as the government (all levels) is concerned is the highway. Everything else is just an unwanted stepchild, even as transit and rail ridership breaks records.

 

KJP posted a great message with links to legislators. PLEASE write!! It amazes me that we are even having this discussion. Good public transportation should be viewed as an obligation to be met by all levels of government without question.

 

Questions for legislators: "What are YOU doing to make sure we have good public transportation?"

 

What we have now is a Stalinist one-size-fits-all "system" that does not address today's needs. Instead we are locked into permanent auto dependency with no alternatives in sight. We continue our oil junkie ways, by buying from people who don't like us. We are not helping ourselves.

 

Where is that good old American "can-do" spirit?

 

One other thing. As diesel bus fleets wear out, they must be replaced. Next time RTA (or any other operator) decides to do this, they should convert key routes to trolleybus operation. Voila! No diesel fuel costs, no pollution, quieter buses!!

 

Oh, and make the overhead suitable for use by streetcars for the day when they might go into widespread use!

 

The smartest thing Dayton ever did was to keep their trolleybuses. Bet they are doing high fives right now.

no one has commented on joethejalapeno's suggestion and I admit i like it. why shouldn't we get it? (nice monniker, Joe lol)

 

I have been riding the bus (#22) since May and it's curious that up until last week when all fares were counted, at least two out of my normal six days of commuting saw fare machines broken or bus drivers just waving us by without paying or swiping our fare cards.  How are they supposed to get an accurate count like that? One week they are talking about getting longer buses due to increased ridership and now I'm thinking they got them so they can plan the cuts.

 

I agree, it's not RTA's fault entirely, but it's the fault of our local and state governments who do not make public transportation a top priority.  Hopefully everyone is going to attend the public hearings - if there is a huge outpouring of people they have to realize they need a different strategy besides cuts.

 

And couldn't our legislators (State, County) intervene and come up with a better method of running our public transportation?

 

Lastly, the Wash DC bus fares are low but transit fares are higher and Metro is considering raising (or maybe already has) rates again. 

 

 

Just raising fares and cutting services aren't the answers. It's suggestive that what RTA is experiencing is temporary and if we just ride things out, everything will soon return to normal. Much of what I've read here is a lot more thoughtful and constructive, yet respectful of the new world we live in. I firmly believe higher fuel costs and even shortages are likely in the coming years.

 

Yes, some services probably need to be reduced -- but not the drastic cuts proposed. Yes some fares probably need to be raised, and I agree and across-the-board increases cause the inner-city resident traveling short distances to subsidize the suburban resident traveling longer distances. A zonal fare is certainly worth investigating. Alternative sources of motive power, including biodiesel and electricity represent an even more appropriate, structural response to the structural changes in fuel supplies and costs we're seeing. And I agree everyone needs to share the burden. That includes the unions who comprise a majority of operating expenses. Give-backs need to be on the table. Union reps have two choices -- keep losing jobs or lose some pay and stop the hemorraging now.

carole, given that collected fares only account for less than 20% of their total revenue, and it's probably less than 1% of those fares that are occasionally not collected due to a broken fare box or whatever, I really don't think collecting even 100% of the fares is going to make a difference in their overall budget.

rockandroller, I believe carolecohen's comment was more directed toward obtaining accurate passenger counts. Along those lines, I will say that I have sometimes seen operators (especially at rush hour) wave past large numbers of people with monthly, 7-day, or all-day passes, which don't need to be debited, but can be visually validated.

 

However, in these circumstances, the operator MUST record the passenger manually on the farebox keypad. If this isn't happening, there's a problem, and we need to know about it.

 

BuckeyeB, you raise some interesting policy points, but I have to disagree with regard to the trolleybuses. You may just be trading out one infrastructure (diesel engines) for another (overhead catenary), and I'd have to think the retooling costs would be substantial. Also, trolleybuses are not an option for commuter/Park-N-Ride style routes that run on highways, they are best suited for in-town, neighborhood transportation. Finally, any kind of fixed-route infrastructure like that makes adapting to changing population distributions well nigh impossible, since the only thing less relocatable than overhead catenary is the combination of overhead catenary and steel rails.

 

Does anyone have any figures on how many trolleybuses Dayton currently runs, and what routes they run on? I could find no specifics on their web site.

When I took the 6 down to the clinic last week (which I'll be doing twice this week as well), I was waived on, as were the other passengers and there was a folded up transfer stuck in the top slot so you couldn't put your card into it.  There were no beep sounds of the driver counting anyone.

When I took the 6 down to the clinic last week (which I'll be doing twice this week as well), I was waived on, as were the other passengers and there was a folded up transfer stuck in the top slot so you couldn't put your card into it.  There were no beep sounds of the driver counting anyone.

Just wondering, did you make notice of the driver and ID at the time?  Did you report it to RTA, via their website?

I don't remember seeing a nameplate with a name, but I wasn't actively looking for it.  As I was on my way to an important medical appointment that was pretty stressful, was on a bus I have basically only ridden a handful of times before about 5 years ago, on a route with major construction, so not knowing where the bus would exactly be going, filled with passengers who had a less than friendly vibe towards me, I was more concerned with trying to look invisible and in looking out for where my exit would be.  I completely forgot about the fare collection immediately after I sat down until it was mentioned on the thread here.

 

But in the past, yes, I have reported it when I've witnessed it.

BuckeyeB, you raise some interesting policy points, but I have to disagree with regard to the trolleybuses. You may just be trading out one infrastructure (diesel engines) for another (overhead catenary), and I'd have to think the retooling costs would be substantial. Also, trolleybuses are not an option for commuter/Park-N-Ride style routes that run on highways, they are best suited for in-town, neighborhood transportation. Finally, any kind of fixed-route infrastructure like that makes adapting to changing population distributions well nigh impossible, since the only thing less relocatable than overhead catenary is the combination of overhead catenary and steel rails.

 

Does anyone have any figures on how many trolleybuses Dayton currently runs, and what routes they run on? I could find no specifics on their web site.

 

JeTDoG, check out my post at

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4504.msg303184.html#msg303184

 

The infrastructure need not be extensive. And really, how often does RTA change the paths of buses on its mainline routes which comprises a huge percentage of its vehicle-hours and fuel consumption?

 

For more information on Dayton's trolleybuses, see:

 

http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/Dayton/

 

The infrastructure need not be extensive. And really, how often does RTA change the paths of buses on its mainline routes which comprises a huge percentage of its vehicle-hours and fuel consumption?

 

 

This is one reason that I think the Euclid Corridor would be a prime candidate for conversion.  It's already a fixed route that goes in a straight line (mostly) every five or ten minutes, and although I don't know much about automotive engineering, it seems feasible to retrofit the RTVs to draw power from catenaries like trolley buses.

^For sure- because of all the infrastructure, there's no way that line is being rerouted in the foreseeable future.  Some of the original plans for the BRTdid call for catenary-powered vehicles, but at some point it was value engineered out I believe.  We've talked about this before on this board, but I wonder if the cost/benefit analysis would spit out a different answer with today's fuel cost than it did a few years back.

One other intangible advantage for a trolley bus operation is that the catenary (overhead wires) lend an air of permanence. Maybe not as much as a streetcar or a light rail line, but at least some.

 

Another advantage is that trolleybuses and streetcars could share the same catenary. For example, here in Columbus, the #2 High St bus line could be converted to trolleybus and share the wires with the downtown streetcar line.

 

Yes, I am aware that there are those routes which run on freeways, but I'd be willing to bet they are only a small fraction of the total bus system. Run them on biodiesel, as Joethejalepeno suggests or start to replace them with rail lines. Besides, trolley lines are relatively cheap and easy to install. Just look at the links supplied by KJP.

 

One other thing. Fit the roofs of the buses with solar panels and have them pump juice back into the system while they operate. They will still use more than they put back, but at a reduced rate. Also, plug them into the grid when they are between runs AND put solar panels on the roofs of all RTA buildings and have all that plug into the grid. Again, RTA would probably use more than they put back, but it helps reduce the cost of electricity.

 

I think trolleybuses make sense in a lot of cases. They can't do what a streetcar does, as far as capacity goes, but we are in a new age where we have to concentrate on finding ways to move the masses efficiently and cheaply. Both streetcars and trolleybuses can be put in quickly and much more cheaply than conventional light rail.

 

If the Feds were serious, they'd throw federal support behind this. The simple act of saying that if you propose put in electric trolleybuses (or Streetcars) instead of diesel buses when it's time to replace your fleet, your application goes to the head of the line, would have a tremendous impact. This would be especially true if coupled to increased federal dollars for capital AND operating costs.

 

The point is that we could be doing so much more, if we start to think creatively.

 

First thing's first, tho...we have to get on our elected officials about the current situation.

first, i dont believe that BS about people not wanting to take a train instead of a bus. i bet if you asked 10 people at RTA stops whether theyd prefer to take a bus or train for their trip 9 of them would say train.

 

i think that this is just an excuse and RTA simply doesnt want rail. calabrese is anti-rail and hes at the head of the pecking order

 

second, i agree with everyone here who has said they should run an extra car if just during peek hours on the blue/green line

 

i think that RTA severely underestimates riders and potential riders with inaccurate counts. they believe there isnt demand where there is for services. i find it hard to believe the ridership levels especially compared to other cities where public transportation is worse than cleveland. but according to RTA, cleveland is at the bottom

 

onto this increased fare BS:

 

http://www.riderta.com/nu_newsroom_releases.asp?listingid=1183

 

whaaaaaaaaaaat?!?! as a person who wants to live car free this DOES NOT make me happy. it is one thing to raise fares, and another to CUT SERVICES ALSO! arent these fare increases supposed to be so services can remain without being cut? if anything cleveland needs MORE coverage from public transportation. $32 increase on a month pass? thats over a 50% increase in cost. all day pass will be 50% increase. 5-ride passes 43%. this is ridiculous. RTA will go from being one of the best bargains for public transportation (they even ADVERTISE that a lot) to being the most expensive. im very upset about all of this. if RTA does need to absolutely cut bus lines, why not start with where it operates furthest out instead of ones in the middle of the city or in the inner ring suburbs.

 

how does RTA expect to gain ridership with increased fares and cutting routes? a lot of people dont ride RTA because quote "it doesnt go anywhere"

 

im gonna have to buy about 50 5-ride cards before october to even still afford the rapid

 

now i will be forced to evade fares, buy a car, or move to somewhere where i can actually live car free

 

 

people cant even get a job let alone one that pays a living wage in this city and you want to raise a fare by 43%? lets not forget about SENIORS who cant drive and rely on public transportation to get around. many of them live on pensions and retirement savings/checks. theres also kids who have to take RTA to get to school.

 

there seems to be some serious structural management problems at RTA if they have to almost double fares in about 2 yrs to keep afloat

 

 

 

 

maybe instead of taking federal money for a glorified bus way RTA should be going to the fed with this crisis. if RTA has no choice if it wants to continue operating then this is a serious issue where calabrese should going directly to washington.

 

 

 

 

RTA needs more money and riders? dont make me pay on the WFL and then watch as a few people walk on and a couple rich white girls ask what line it is and sit down without payin. since that train was continuing onto the green line they got to ride from downtown for free.

 

i am not blaming RTA for everything as i realize they are helpless in much of the matter. in general RTA does a good job of running the service and most of the employees are very good and helpful. it makes me sick looking at figure of how much money the government gives to states like illinois in comparison with ohio. something must be done and it starts in columbus.

 

 

so much for rising gas prices making public transportation cheaper and better. maybe RTA should have busses that run on grease/vegetable oil instead of diesel fuel.

 

another thing to add.........as far as some of the bus routes that are basically bloating the budget and are not really needed, if RTA were serious about rail before and were able to expand the system through federal and state money the bus system wouldnt have to be overloaded and routes could disappear without directly affecting people as much

so much for rising gas prices making public transportation cheaper and better. maybe RTA should have busses that run on grease/vegetable oil instead of diesel fuel.

Well, biodiesel can be made from fast food fry oil, or from crops like soy. I should point out that there were stories in past months about demand for crops to make biofuels causing grain shortages for hungry developing countries, so better to try to make it from waste like fryer oil. Here was a PD story about a local biodiesel plant.

http://www.cleveland.com/green/index.ssf?/green/more/0421story.html

Generally, people run blends that are only part biodiesel, mixed with petrodiesel. That still is cleaner and cheaper than 100% petrodiesel, in proportion to how much biodiesel is in the blend.

If RTA contracted with a plant like the one in the story to fuel its fleet, the plant would have economies to scale up considerably.

how difficult would it be to convert the busses? this would help beyond the budget crisis as it would help with pollution

 

does anyone have figures of federal funding received by states for public transportation? this is why its important for RTA to get ridership figures correct and cleveland to fight the population census as the government probably isnt going to allot as much money to a shrinking region/economy where "no one rides public transportation". id be willing to bet states like arizona receive way more in public transportation funding than ohio.

While it might seem logical that biodiesel is cheaper than petrodiesel, that doesn't seem to be the case, partially because the price of crops like soybeans from which biodiesel is often made, has also been rising.  Also, biodiesel is better than diesel pollution-wise on some fronts and not on others according the comments at the end of this article:

http://registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.cms.support.viewStory.cls?cid=124509&sid=4&fid=1

 

Also, re:using solar panels.  While they will return energy to the grid, my undersanding is that they typically cost more in capital than they save in electricity at this point.  They are cleaner, but not an answer to reducing costs until they become cheaper to make and buy.

 

Also, re:using solar panels.  While they will return energy to the grid, my undersanding is that they typically cost more in capital than they save in electricity at this point.  They are cleaner, but not an answer to reducing costs until they become cheaper to make and buy.

 

or the government "grows some" and decides to subsidize them

I realize Cleveland's economic downturn (declining sales tax revs) and fuel prices are a large part of this, beyond RTA.  Still, the proposals seem like a meat-cleaver approach.  And if diesel fuel is the major, debilitating expense, why not shift riders, as much possible, from bus to rail... I just don't think a lot of thought or creativity has gone into these cuts/reductions.

first, i dont believe that BS about people not wanting to take a train instead of a bus. i bet if you asked 10 people at RTA stops whether theyd prefer to take a bus or train for their trip 9 of them would say train.

 

JMasek has at least twice referred an actual survey they did where the results did not match up with your "I bet" conjecture.

doubt it. what was this supposed survey on?

 

if people actually want to take a bus that has to sit in traffic over rail that doesnt and stops less frequently then they are idiots

 

maybe these people "prefer" to take the bus because the rapid lines dont go where they want to go. afterall, you cant hop on a train from downtown to glenville.

 

go poll people along the blue line and ask them if theyd rather take a bus down van aken and shaker blvd. doubt theyd say yes

The keyboard warrior strikes again.

Hello. Sorry to miss so much great conversation.

 

There was no actual survey on bus vs. rail -- just feedback we got from customers. They viewed bus as more "warm and fuzzy" or "social" -- and trains as somewhat colder "cattle cars." Their reaction was more emotional than logical. It happened, and whether you believe it or not won't change anything.

 

Yes, RTA is planning to end more bus routes at rail stations.

 

Someone said the cuts lacked "creativity." If you have specific ideas, send them to [email protected] or come to a public hearing. Nothing is written in stone. You may have a better workable idea. We are open to new ideas, as long as it will help us balance our budget.

 

Re: use of alternative fuel. Few suppliers can give RTA the quanitities we need to operate.

 

Re: shift money from capital to operating. Bad idea. Review your history, City of Cleveland, late 1970s. The police were being paid (operating budget), but the police cars were falling apart (capital budget). Transit is very capital-intensive. If you do not keep up with it, you will be playing catch up for a long, long, time.

 

Re: state funding. Only 1 state has a worse record than Ohio. The average state gives its transit systems 23 percent of their operating budget. Ohio gives 3 percent. This year, state funding to all 60 transit agencies in Ohio totaled $16 million, yet their fuel costs rose $18 million.

 

Thanks for caring.

The day that RTA switched to BRT and took the overhead wires out of the system, the budget was reduced $33 million, and lots of overhead visual issues were resolved.

Yes, RTA is planning to end more bus routes at rail stations.

 

Yes!  Welcome back!

The Waterfront Line will be fully restored when the development warrants it, to be sure. A lot of development that was on the books when it was built never materialized, so it's great to see it coming back now.

 

Joe Calabrese is not anti-rail. Financially speaking, he is just realistic.

When I took the 6 down to the clinic last week (which I'll be doing twice this week as well), I was waived on, as were the other passengers and there was a folded up transfer stuck in the top slot so you couldn't put your card into it.  There were no beep sounds of the driver counting anyone.

 

We believe that some fare cards are folded up by riders in their attempt to ride for free. We are working on that now.

The day that RTA switched to BRT and took the overhead wires out of the system, the budget was reduced $33 million, and lots of overhead visual issues were resolved.

 

I hear ya.  I was just doing some back of the envelope estimates of ECP fuel consumption and unless my math is way off (which is possible), I agree it's tough to justify $33M in additional capital costs for the operating savings.  Though there may be some skepticism on this board about the $33M number and the visual clutter concern given that new light poles were being erected for the entire length of the project with or without catenary.

Jerry, since you're reading this thread, I'll just go ahead and ask my Euclid question over here.  Is there still only going to be one lane each direction for car traffic from UC to East Cleveland?

Is there still only going to be one lane each direction for car traffic from UC to East Cleveland?

I will check for you. Because Euclid Avenue within East Cleveland was rehabbed just a few years ago, we did not want to rip up new pavement. The RTVs will be in the curb lane, but I am not sure if it is a transit-only lane.

Mr Masek, is it true that Community Circulators, at least as long as they continue to run, can be waved down at any point along the route? That was always our understanding, but a driver this evening did not seem to agree.

Transit is very capital-intensive. If you do not keep up with it, you will be playing catch up for a long, long, time.

 

A-freakin-men.  cta has been playing that game for years, and now I am on about 1 bus per week that breaks down.  On one trip a few weeks ago, 2 buses broke down and the 3rd one I got on got stuck on Mich Ave behind another broken down bus and couldn't back up to go around.  You can only fix a 20 year old bus so many times before it just won't work anymore, and if the new ones aren't ordered years ahead, you are screwed. 

FYI. Even the big boys aren't immune.....

 

http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml#Feature7-7-23

 

July 22, 2008

New York MTA ponders 8% fare hike

 

Throughout the year, numerous U.S. transit agencies have struggled to balance budgets as rising fuel prices and/or falling revenue strained operating capabilities. Now New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the nation's largest public transit operator, faces a budget shortfall of $900 million, prompting the MTA board to ponder an average 8% increase in fares at its scheduled meeting Wednesday.

 

........

Yeah It all over the paper, I was going to post in the "what other cities......" thread. 

 

Since i've been here the fare has goine from $1.50.  The unlimited ride "blue" metrocard started out at $53

If the proposed cuts in service occur, I will probably have to cancel my monthly bus pass and start driving again. RTA simply won't meet my needs.

 

And this is from someone who REALLY wants to use public transit, and currently uses it almost exclusively.

 

If someone like me is considering leaving, this does not bode well for RTA. I understand that you need to balance your budget. I hope you'll understand why riders won't use you anymore. Which will cause you to need to make cuts to balance your budget. Which will make more people not use your service.

 

Joe Calabrese should be camping in front of the statehouse on a hunger strike. The current lobbying efforts are obviously not enough.

 

FIND THE MONEY.

^At the same point, you should be expressing that very same level of frustration at your elected officials for slashing funding for transit. I'm not saying don't be frustrated with/at RTA, but be fair and be sure to make your voice heard, to people who are in power to do something about it (aka find the money)

Good news, from the source of good news, Metro!

 

http://ny.metro.us/metro/national/ap/Gas_Declining_Deaths.html

 

AP IMPACT: Traffic deaths fall as gas prices climb

JUL 22, 2008 4:30 PM EDT

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Rising prices at the gas pump appear to be having at least one positive effect: Traffic deaths around the country are plummeting, just as they did during the Arab oil embargo three decades ago.

 

.........

Is there still only going to be one lane each direction for car traffic from UC to East Cleveland?

 

From E. 79th to E. 105th, there is one traffic lane, one transit and at some intersections, there is a left-turn lane.  From E. 105th to Windermere, RTVs will operate in the curb lane. There are 1-2 lanes of mixed traffic, depending on what stretch of the road you are on.

I think there are a lot of people who will go back to driving, or perhaps try carpooling as a new/different options if the monthly pass really goes as high as 80% more than it is now.  What I was wondering as my train pulled in this morning is how close are we to the entire system being shut down and there being NO buses or trains?  I mean, costs are going to continue to climb, there's only so many places they can cut and how long before the debts outweigh the income, especially with significantly decreased ridership, and they just close RTA completely?  Is this a real possibility?