Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Rider Paradox: Surge in Mass, Drop in Transit
ST. LOUIS - Buses will no longer stop at some 2,300 stops in and around this city at the end of next month because, despite rising ridership, the struggling transit system plans to balance its books with layoffs and drastic service cuts.
St. Louis is girding itself for some of the most drastic service cuts in the country. (Dilip Vishwanat for The New York Times) One stop scheduled to be cut is in the western suburb of Chesterfield, Mo., just up the road from a bright, cheerful nursing home called the Garden View Care Center. Without those buses, roughly half of the center's kitchen staff and half of its housekeeping staff - people like Laura Buxton, a cook known for her fried chicken who comes in from Illinois, and Danette Nacoste, who commutes two hours each way from her home in South St. Louis to her job in the laundry - will not have any other way to get to work.
"They're going to be stranding a whole lot of people," said Val Butler, a nurses' assistant at Garden View, who said that she feared looking for work elsewhere in a tightening economy. "A lot of people are going to lose their jobs. A lot of people."
St. Louis may be girding itself for some of the most extreme transit cuts in the nation, but it is hardly alone. Transit systems across the country are raising fares and cutting service even when demand is up with record numbers of riders last year, many of whom fled $4-a-gallon gas prices and stop-and-go traffic for seats on buses and trains.
Their problem is that fare-box revenue accounts for only a fifth to a half of the operating revenue of most transit systems - and the sputtering economy has eroded the state and local tax collections that the systems depend on to keep running. "We've termed it the ‘transit paradox,' " said Clarence W. Marsella, general manager of Denver's system, which is raising fares and cutting service to make up for the steep drop in local sales tax.
The billions of dollars that Congress plans to spend on mass transit as part of the stimulus bill will also do little to help these systems with their current problems. That is because the new federal money - $12 billion was included in the version passed last week by the House, while the Senate originally proposed less - is devoted to big capital projects, like buying train cars and buses and building or repairing tracks and stations. Money that some lawmakers had proposed to help transit systems pay operating costs, and avoid layoffs and service cuts, was not included in the latest version.
The Washington Metro set a record on Inauguration Day last month when people made 1.5 million trips on it to see the swearing-in of President Obama, but its $176 million budget gap means that it is planning to cut service and eliminate 900 jobs. Chicago had its biggest gain in riders in three decades last year, but was forced to raise fares. Charlotte, N.C., whose new light-rail system is the envy of transit planners around the country, and which is enjoying its biggest ridership levels since "the days of streetcars," according to Keith Parker, the transit system's chief executive, will be running its new trains less frequently, raising fares and cutting back on bus service.
In New York City, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is considering steep fare increases and its deepest service cuts in years to help close a $1.2 billion deficit. In addition to considering a 23 percent increase in fares and tolls, the authority is weighing plans to eliminate more than two dozen city bus routes and two subway lines, reduce off-peak service and even close some subway stations at night.
The nation's transit woes threaten to deal another blow to the weak economy, keeping some workers from jobs they commute to and forcing some systems to lay off administrators, bus drivers, train operators and mechanics. And while the economic stimulus package being considered on Capitol Hill includes tax cuts intended to put more spending money in people's pockets, fare increases promise to take a big bite for many commuters.
Big systems in Boston, Atlanta and San Francisco, and smaller ones across the nation, find themselves weighing cuts or fare increases that they fear could erode the gains they have made in attracting new riders. Beverly A. Scott, general manger of Marta, the Atlanta system, said as the sales tax revenue continued to drop, she was weighing everything from fare increases to service cuts to even selling the naming rights to stations - but she still hopes for more state support.
William W. Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, an industry group, wrote to the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, last month urging her to include money for operating costs in the stimulus bill.
"Public transportation ridership is surging across the country," he wrote, "increasing 6.5 percent in the third quarter of 2008 - the largest quarterly increase in the past 25 years, but transit systems are cutting service, increasing fares and laying off employees as a result of increased transit fuel costs in the past year and declining state and local revenue sources that support transit."
So even as the federal government plans to buy new train cars and buses for some transit systems, places like St. Louis find themselves without enough money to pay the bus drivers and light-rail train operators that they have now.
"I have 165 buses that I'm going to have to put in mothballs," said Ray Friem, the chief operating officer at Metro, the St. Louis system. "There's a ton of federal money tied up in those assets."
Money is so tight that the agency is not planning to rip out the bus stop signs that dot the roads, though they will soon be misleading. Instead, at the transit system's headquarters upriver from the Gateway Arch, officials last week put the final touches on a model of a vinyl hood they plan to drape over each sign. "We regret due to a lack of funding, service to this stop is suspended," the prototype said.
St. Louis is in some respects unique. It was in the minority of transit systems that lost a ballot measure in November seeking more money; voters rejected a proposal to raise the local sales tax to help pay for more public transportation. Transit officials said they believed their efforts had been hurt by lingering public resentment over a light-rail expansion project that was delayed and went over budget, devolving into messy litigation with contractors that ended up costing the transit system even more.
Faced with a yawning shortfall, despite an 8 percent increase in ridership last year, the system reluctantly decided to cut nearly half of its bus service; lay off nearly 600 of its workers, or a quarter of its work force, and reduce service on its red, white and blue MetroLink light-rail cars - the modern successors of the clanging trolleys that Judy Garland sang about in "Meet Me in St. Louis." Absent a windfall, the cuts are scheduled to take effect at the end of March.
Some people who worked on the failed campaign to raise the sales tax said their efforts were complicated because most local voters do not regularly take public transportation. But in the leafy suburbs west of Interstate 270, which are scheduled to lose almost all of their bus service, many people will soon discover that even if they do not take buses themselves, they rely on them to bring workers to their shopping malls, office parks, hospitals and nursing homes.
The Garden View Care Center, in Chesterfield, is part of a cluster of a dozen facilities sometimes called nursing home row. Rhonda Uhlenbrock, the center's administrator, has been working with agencies that set up car pools and trying to coordinate with other businesses that will be affected to see if she can find other ways for her employees, many of whom do not have cars, to get to work.
"This place could survive without me," Ms. Uhlenbrock said in her office recently, where she was assembling a collage to honor employees who have been at the center more than 10 years. "But not without them. They are the people who do the work."
Ms. Nacoste, who rises at 3:45 a.m. for her two-hour commute to work in the housekeeping and laundry department, said employers closer to home either paid less or were not hiring. She shook her head at the thought that the weak economy was leading to cuts in bus service.
"They're going to make the economy worse if they cut the bus," Ms. Nacoste said. "There's going to be unemployment, people running out of money. What are we going to do?"
- Posted in

19 Comments so far
Show AllThis is what is expected to happen everytime the oil cartels are free to RIG the markets. Good luck in St Louis !
http://t4america.org/
Transportation for America is fielding a letter writing campaign to representatives to reject highway only funding bills and focus on highspeed and mass transit
Great site, great organization.
Unfortunately, the right-wing suburban anti-tax crowd does not make raising revenue for transit very easy. In my county a 10% (lowered to 7%) tax on poured alchololic drinks was established specifically for public transit.
I can't think of a more painless tax - and I order a lot of expensive microbrews at bars and restaurants.
Nonetheless, the bars and restaurants went into open revolt. Threatining mug-shots of the county council members who voted for it went up on the windows of a majority of the bars. In some places, waiters went table to table with ballot-referendum petitions. Billboard newspaper and and radio ad space was bought. The cash registers were programmed so the "Onorato tax" (our County Executive) was clearly displayed.
All of this campaign was funded from mysterious probably distant (National Restaurant Association, US chamber of commerce) sources. it was a model for well-oiled activism that our pro-transit organizations could only dream about.
And make no mistake about it, that it was earmarked to transit - something most suburbanites view as just a welfare program for "losers" without cars - was their biggest objection. I can't imagine what other objection they could possibly have, as the tax entailed virtually zero cost to the business, and there was no evidence of a decline in drink sales.
Thankfully, a judge ruled the ballot referendun illegal, and the issue has settled down for now.
Bus service still suffers from deep cuts, more fare increases are on the horizon, and under a plan marketed as an "improvement" the current downtown hub-based system mat be changed to feeder-to-LRT station system where multiple connections will be needed for most people just to get downtown.
Good old Pittsburgh - resolutely marching 180 degrees away from progress.
---USAn---
Yesterday, my senators,isakson & Chambliss voted against a public works bill that included money for mass transit.
There has been a lot of talk amongst the punditocracy about "shared sacrifices".
So far as usual the "sacrifices" seem to be primarily amongst public transit users, library users, hospital care, school budgets etc.
It is time for rich people and Corporations like Exxon who created this mess to
begin sacrificing via tax increases to pay for public services needed now more than ever.
It is also time to raise both federal and state gas taxes to pay for mass transit with some rebates provided to lower incomes payroll/income taxes.
Amazingly enough, increased gas taxes have been suggested by people ranging from
conservative Charles Krauthammer to neoliberal Thomas Friedman.
Yet politicians continued to be terrified to raise gas taxes even though surveys show it is supported by a majority of people (in principle at least) if it
improves transportation services.
A major reason Europe has its advanced mass transit vs the USA is because of
their high fuel taxes.
This has to be be pushed as a major issue to deal with the Economic crisis, peak oil and global warming.
Thanks old goat, as always great comments from PJD. and why are there so few postings on an issue that is so important to save the economy?
The US seriously needs to build a mass transit system, not undermine it.
Thanks Old Goat, for the link. My daughter and I have both suffered more than once because of the systematic neglect of mass transit. The 5% who have been running the country don't need it. Big Oil and Big (but shrinking) Auto don't want it.
Get out the bicycles. Fight obesity.
I have a question?
Why not raise fares to reflect costs and continue the service????
Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see that anyone had answered your question. Let me try by explaining how I see it.
If the fares collected only cover about 20% of the actual costs, then you would need to increase fares by 500% to cover the full cost. But most people who now use public transportation couldn't afford to use it if you did that, which would mean you would need to raise fares even higher to cover your costs from the few remaining riders. Take, for example, Portland Oregon, where the shortest one-way fare is now $2. http://trimet.org If you raised that fare by 5 times, then your one-way fare would be $10. Most people who use the bus to go to work really couldn't afford a $20/day bus ride.
If public transportation is of value to the society at large, by helping cut down on pollution, getting workers to their jobs, lessening impact and congestion on roads, etc., then allowing costs to be covered solely by fares would effectively shut down most if not all public transportation systems in the country. This is not the generally approved outcome for a good business decision.
Raising fares to cover costs would also severely increase the unemployment rate, thereby furthering the already depressed economy creating a situation in which recovery would be made much more difficult. This important infrastructure for a functioning economy would then need to be reconstituted with a subsidy once more.
Best to just make it work now in ways that most benefit the passengers and the general public. Think of it as a concrete example of "promoting the general welfare."
I hope this answers your question.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Take the carbon saved by the mass transit and fund the mass transit system. If you need a lot of funding assume they all took aircraft to work instead.
Money will be saved by the entire economy if people use mass transit. Cutting service at this time is stupid.
Ignorant people talk of subsidies only when it comes to public transportation. They do not realize the extent and enormity of subsidies enjoyed by big oil, big auto, developers who pushed suburban growth and a host of others that have contributed to the present situation. A lot of the military spending is directly related to ensuring oil supply - not for defending the country against any potential enemies. (There are enough missiles and nuclear warheads to smoke the whole planet many times over). Any other importer has to pay for his own insurance, and passes on the cost to the consumer. If there is an honest and objective analysis of the military expenditure, a lot of it will come down to ensuring oil supplies from overseas - it is an integral part of empire-building - the state is there essentially to serve the corporations, which in turn prop up the empire. (Of course, another aspect of imperialistic thinking is that, if we don't grab those resources, someone else will). So why not pull back the military that is primarily there to protect 'oil interests' in the Middle East, Central Asia and so on - and have the oil companies pay for their own protection, and pass on the costs to the consumers? Then we will know the real cost of oil, and then the relative merits of public transportation, the kind of cars that are built, the type of urban development that takes place, even the type of foods we eat, will all become clear - and I guarantee that they will look vastly different.
Highintel: Can we do better?
And the question of the hour is:
Why not raise fares to cover the cost of the service?
Exactly what I was thinking about your street. Why should the rest of us have to plow and sand it in the winter? Do you have any idea how much it costs to repave your street every time we want to lay a sewer pipe? I have no problems walking around all those potholes. You're the whiner who wants a flat street.
Then there's that state highway that needs widening, and that urban 10 lane freeway that is killing all the asthmatic kids. Are you offering to pay for the hospital for all those kids to go to?
We'll just put a toll booth at each end of your street. If that's too slow for you, for a slight extra charge you can upgrade to an EZPass transponder. Then you can pay toll after toll on your way to work.
Go PaulK. Government has little good purpose unless it is intelligently organizing our resources for the common good. Public transportation is a sensible use of money to protect the environment and to provide mobility, which is a type of freedom. Getting to and from school and work should not require a family to support multiple cars, each of which is driven by one person for an hour a day. And as PaulK says, we all pay to support the automobile culture.
Joe
Now for my pet peeve entitled Voter Paradox: Surge in Transit Popularity, Drop in Transit Innovation.
Free market theorists will tell you that if someone pays inventors in their garages to work on successful transit innovations, then the supply of inventors will slowly rise to meet demand. If, on the other hand, no one will pay transit innovators squat until the earth is completely cooked like a Thanksgiving turkey, then the free market will lower the number of inventors to approximately squat.
I believe that transit by rights should become as available as an elevator, as fast as an elevator and about as cheap as an elevator ride. An elevator is the future of transit. Ding!
I'm in Pittsburgh like PJD, and I see more and more people, especially younger people riding the bus.
The term "loser cruiser" always irks me. As if you're a "winner" because you've got a car payment every month. I have no idea how most people can afford to drive anymore. Those people in the 'burbs must all be in debt up to their eyes.
We're a nation of people who are still stuck in high school.
Oh, 'Burgers looove their booze. They'll pay a little more for it.
They should tax UPMC also. "Non profit" my ass.
"Why not raise fares to reflect costs and continue the service????"
They do that all the time around here, making it more expensive for most of the people who rely on public transit.
I guess the suburbanites don't want people with less money than them being able to get around. Or older people, or disabled people, or young people. These same anti-PAT people will complain about poor people not working. If they're poor, they can't afford a car, and if they don't have a car, how will they get to work if there are no buses?