Following up on what Martin wrote about Metro service cuts, I want to point out that the long-term impact of Metro’s expansion and contraction policies will likely reduce the cost-effectiveness of their service.
An hour of new service when the economy improves will result in lower ridership than an hour they cut now. In the graphs bgtothen made of ridership per annual service hour, there are 86 Metro routes. In the top half (43), only seven are shared with the south or east Metro subareas – thirty-seven are city routes alone. Metro’s most cost effective routes are all in Seattle.
If Metro wants to keep its costs from expanding further, these policies need to change. While there is, of course, a political reason for the 20-40-40 rule, it will only serve to cost the agency money in the future. I hope our King County Executive candidates take a stance on reducing this wasteful policy.