Comments on: RapidRide and Transit Now

By: Getting the Numbers Right - Seattle Transit Blog

Getting the Numbers Right - Seattle Transit Blog — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 11:20:42 +0000

[...] 800,000 service hours of existing service lost in 2010-11, plus forfeiture of the 139,000 hours in Transit Now additions planned through 2011. This would have been a 23% cut from current service levels. KC [...]

By: The Triplett Metro Plan (II) - Seattle Transit Blog

The Triplett Metro Plan (II) - Seattle Transit Blog — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:27:45 +0000

[...] $36m in savings comes from deferring planned Transit Now service increases. RapidRide and Service partnership programs have matching funds that the County won’t pass up, but the “high capacity corridor” and “developing area” improvements that haven’t already been introduced are on the chopping block. More information here. [...]

By: The Triplett Metro Plan (I) - Seattle Transit Blog

The Triplett Metro Plan (I) - Seattle Transit Blog — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:18:12 +0000

[...] all unimplemented Transit Now services, except for RapidRide and service [...]

By: Council Reacts to Triplett Bus Plan - Seattle Transit Blog

Council Reacts to Triplett Bus Plan - Seattle Transit Blog — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:48:28 +0000

[...] Everyone is planning to cut waste and eliminate or scale back the ferry district; there will also be large cuts to Transit Now. [...]

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:56:49 +0000

I agree with the comment about the 9% flat cut. It seems stupid to cut the service on a highly used corridor and not the night buses out in the burbs which are nearly empty. Better to move those folks with Access buses if that’s their only means of transport.

By: Mike Skehan

Mike Skehan — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 14:22:21 +0000

I thought someone would weigh in on this by now. So, even though I’ve moved out of King Co. and no longer work for Metro, I’ll throw my 2 cents in, for what its worth.
Exec Tripletts plan closes the budget gap from 500M down to 469M over the 4 years by going after the low lying fruit (deferred bus purchases, depleting the bus replacement fund, swapping the new property tax use, and reserve accounts) to the tune of 281M. I hope congress enacts a cash for ‘clunker bus’ program in the future, because the buses will continue to wear out at predicted rates, and like Mr. Good wrench says, “pay me now, or pay me later”.
Deferred expansion saves 36M, and dirty buses with fewer cops saves another 27M.
What troubles me the most is that revenue enhancements are limited to a 25 cent increase. A lot of talk takes place on STB about how Metro could earn more money through innovative ideas (RFA, fare evasion, premium service structure), yet I see no mention of that, except to just keep ratcheting up the basic fare, and even the modest 25 cent increase only generates 35M over the 4 years – nowhere close to what is needed. Where’s the brain trust when you need them the most?
The other ‘one size fits all’ solution is a flat 9% service cut. WOW. That assumes that all routes were created equal, and there are no routes that can withstand a cut more or less that any others. We all know that’s not the case. This seems to just punt on the tough call of cutting service. Isn’t this like carpet bombing instead of using a surgical strike to achieve the same result? (Sorry about the war analogy, but it seemed to fit)
Metro has some really bright and dedicated planners and schedulers. Take off the handcuffs and shackles and let them do this right!