I highly doubt that they would be able increase it to $3.50 anyways. There are way to many social service and community organizations that would speak out strongly against it. If one social service (Asian Counseling and Referral Service) was able to save a whole bus route, a large group of organizations should be able to successfully stop a fare increase.

Eliminating transfers undermines the value of the network concept and the use of transit centers.

It recommends an all-day pass priced at the cost of three trips. An all day pass would be attractive and should be enough to mitigate the elimination of transfers.

However, they say that the all-day pass would be King County transit only. I don’t quite understand what that means – does that mean Metro only, or does it include Sound Transit service within King County? I think the distinction is a deal breaker because many trips require a combination of MT & ST, or certain corridors are served by both MT & ST, and riders should be able to make the most convenient connection – and the elimination of transfers issue is not solved by the day pass if ST buses are excluded from the day pass.

There really should be a regional approach to fares.

Actually a lot do – but many who work evenings and weekends do so not because it’s their preferred choice, but because they lack seniority to pick daylighters with weekends off. It can take 10 or more years to get the the point where a driver has enough seniority to pick what amounts to a regular “9-5″ type job.

At any rate – overtime is coveted among full-timers in particular, as it pays out at about $40.00 an hour. It isn’t a question of being “overtime junkies”, but drivers who can earn more with overtime are as self-interested as the rest of us. One doesn’t have to be a “junkie” to want to pay for a better lifestyle working a few extra hours a week. I don’t know of any driver (at least I’ve never talked to one) who complained about working overtime. Most complaints are more about the LACK of overtime, or the way that the seniority system allows more senior drivers to get more of it.

And the issue isn’t regularly scheduled work so much as relief work. When a driver calls in sick or takes a vacation day that falls on a Saturday, Sunday or evening – that work has to be given to a full-time driver at a rate of $40.00 an hour. Give that same work to a part-time driver (particularly a junior one) and it pays significantly less – from $19.00 an hour (bottom of the pay scale, drivers with 2 years or less seniority) to $27.00 an hour (drivers at the top of the pay scale). Much less than paying overtime.

Also absent from discussion is Triplett and Desmond’s statements (not well reported) that Metro management would not face cuts. Metro is extremely top-heavy with six-figure Chiefs and Administrators (5 chiefs for the Facilities maintenance division that supervises the janitors alone at a cost of half a million dollars a year)

You’d think an “independent” performance audit would compare this with say contract services or at least public and private peers? $1/2M isn’t large in the big scheme of things but if it’s the “tip of the iceberg” it sure could add up. I understand that the auditor isn’t a transit expert and has to rely on the expertise of the agency it’s auditing but there certainly do seem to be issues that were carefully steered.

I can understand that there will always be a few OT junkies but I find it hard to believe that most full timers really want to work after 8PM or on weekends. Those are typically the hours folks trying to break into a profession are asked to work. And if those hours are your thing then don’t full timers have first crack at the schedule anyway?

I also wonder if it would be in their control to tighten the restrictions on who can ride.

Yeah, I don’t think any of the people in Bridle Trails that are using Access as their $1 cab ride would feel the pinch of paying $3.50 and there’s already a process in place to get a reduced fare permit. For that matter the only Metro route within the required distance is the “school bus” that goes to Sammamish High School. I’m not sure that even qualifies as a regular service route and even if it does then service is only mandate when it’s running. Which it isn’t all summer or on weekends although Access certainly has been. There should also be a large subside from the general fund because this is health and human services as much or more than it’s transit and federal grants since in was Congress that mandated it. Net cost per boarding to Metro shouldn’t be out of line with the rest of the system. At $30 a ride it would be cheaper in many cases to call a cab. I know that’s not always an option depending on the medical condition. Training health agencies to drive their own vans is a cost savings and I would think a more coordinated service. That training should be a contract to Metro, not a cost born by Metro.

Come to think of it, I’d pay a $3.50 fare if the regular bus deviated 3/4 of a mile and gave me curb to curb service. Seriously, if a couple of peak hour buses from Houghton P&R to downtown Seattle went down 132nd/134th and provided curb side pick-up they might generate 10-20 riders per trip. It would add almost no extra distance and only five minutes to the route and net $35-$70 in revenue. Seems like pretty good work if you can get it.

Currently Metro pays out a substantial amount of money in overtime when part-timers are willing and available to work the hours – mainly because the contract is structured to protect a certain amount of overtime for full-time drivers.

Also absent from discussion is Triplett and Desmond’s statements (not well reported) that Metro management would not face cuts. Metro is extremely top-heavy with six-figure Chiefs and Administrators (5 chiefs for the Facilities maintenance division that supervises the janitors alone at a cost of half a million dollars a year), and yet the County is considering service cuts and even driver layoffs before taking a serious look at its own management structure.

Even though these things aren’t itemized in the report (probably for simplicity’s sake) – assuming that labor is the only cost doesn’t make much sense.

I have been riding access for the past month since a rather serious accident that has left me paralyzed. Unfortunately due to hills near my house I cannot make it to the bus stop and have to rely on access. At $3.50 a trip, I could easily spend near $20 a day since there are no transfers and every stop you make results in having to pay the fare again.

One thing that they could do is actually enforce the fare. It seems like at least %50 of the time the driver doesn’t even ask for my dollar. I also wonder if it would be in their control to tighten the restrictions on who can ride. It seems like their are quite a few folks that have no problem walking up the stairs on the van and probably should just be riding the regular bus.

http://king.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=4&clip_id=1931&meta_id=65401

- 33:28 ETB replacement audit result findings

- 34:47 Statement that “we’re not recommending that trolleys or hybrids be selected as a replacement for the trolley fleet. Our audit only analyzed life-cycle costs; there are social and environmental factors to consider when making your replacement decision. For example: tailpipe emissions, noise, overhead wires. All of these factors, including costs, will need to be taken into account when making the replacement decision.”

- 35:18 Further discussion and clarification initiated by Regan Dunn, including clarification of “social and environmental factors”. Dunn says he will flag that sheet and thanks Kimber for the analysis.

- 55:17 Metro GM Kevin Desmond discusses grant proposal for fast-recharge batteries that would extend the distance that ETBs could be operated while off the wire followed by questions by Councilmember Phillips about the grant. Dunn continues with questions about fleet replacement timeline and Desomnd mentions other issues such as noise and emissions, estimates decision making around 2011. Additional discussion considers the longer service life (18 years) of ETBs.

In any event, there seems to be lots of supporting evidence by the discussion that no decision has been made. Desmond seems to support the idea of ETBs, but if anyone is interested they can watch for themselves.