I do think there is some level of improved fare enforcement where the increased revenue would offset the increased cost of enforcement.

The cost of enforcement would likely go down over time as people get the message that fare jumping is no longer tolerated.

FWIW I thought SPD provided a much more visible presence on the buses when they were providing transit police services in Seattle.

To be clear: Many drivers would love to enforce fares. We see the lost revenue and the fact that many of the fare evaders are also the passengers who cause trouble and vandalize the busses. However, Metro policy states that we are only to inform the customer of the proper fare ONCE – and only when we feel safe doing so. If they refuse to pay we can either write up frequent offenders or call for police assistance. Transit police are also rarely available just for fare enforcement. We are not allowed to refuse rides for non-payment of fare.

If you think traffic is bad in downtown Seattle now head out to any park & ride and watch a 60 foot bus full of passengers unload with each passenger paying their fare. Now, picture all of those buses back in Downtown Seattle loading those passengers while paying their fare. Quite simply, it won’t work.

Now, if we switch to a proof of payment system with random fare inspections, I’m with you…

Another idea: Charge a higher fare for cash than you would for ORCAor ticket fares. People fumbling for change and/or bills really add a delay. (I’d also charge an fare for people who forget to pull out their pass, but that would be impractical ;)

Here in another idea I have. I was not sure if this is the right forun but, here goes. It is time to split up King County. Let Seattle by one county, the eastside another, the south end another, the rural area its own county and Vashon Island can be its own county or join the south end. This would put local transit services in the hands of the local counties. with cross county transit in SOund Transit or another multi-county transit agency. This way there is no disputing about fund.

The proposed post-Link South King County service changes.

Still having to absorb 62% of the cuts is going to hurt and is going to mean even fuller buses in Seattle while there are still largely empty buses running in the suburban and rural areas of the county.

For the most part the high-frequency suburban routes that operate into the evening also serve Seattle. This means Seattle is getting “charged” for part of a lot of the better quality transit service in the suburbs.

I think increasing HOV thresholds is a great and overdue idea, but likely to be stonewalled by the State DOT.

However, if you get any traction on this let us know and we’ll be behind you.

Metro Operating Cuts

The assumptions I made were one that the change would be only where and when the HOV lane would still be full with 3 person occupancy. Two, that the baseline is 2 person occupancy with cars occupying a 20 foot space and traveling 15-20mph. Three that a change would be a 3 person occupancy would be 50-60 mph with each car occupying a 40 foot space. I’m not trying to account for buses and the numbers are just a guess.

In the case of the 150 I know it is quite well used well into the evening in both directions. The 255 (which I used to take all of the time when I lived on Finn Hill) has a similar usage pattern.

I’m just pointing out there are routes people may think of as suburban routes where 50% of their service hours are allocated to the North King/Seattle total.

According to metro policy at the moment the service hour cuts are going to have to come from each sub-area in proportion to the existing service hours. This means 60% of the eliminated service hours have to come from Seattle. While the suburban cuts can largely be made up of “routes that are not being used” you can’t cut 20% of the service hours in Seattle without cutting into some meat.

This means empty buses out in the suburbs while routes with heavy ridership in Seattle see service reductions.

Unfortunately Access pretty much has to take whatever medical documentation of disability they get at face value. If you can get a medical professional to claim you can’t ride standard Metro service you can ride Access.

Metro also can’t cut Access service below the standards set by the Federal government or it risks losing Federal funding.

In other words all of those downtown commuter express buses like the 229 have the service hours split evenly between Seattle and the Eastside or South County.

This applies to all day trunk routes with frequent service primarily serving suburban areas like the 255 or 150 as well. Seattle is carrying a whole lot of suburban service in that “60% of Metro’s service hours”.