King County Executive's warning: Big bus cuts if no extra $

jedifarfy June 20, 2011 (11:26 am)

Levy the $20 and increase bus fare another $0.25, $0.50, but please don’t cut any more routes and times. There must be some sort of balance financially and with transportation options or everything will just fall apart.

CandrewB June 20, 2011 (11:38 am)

Delete the 54 and 55? They’re high.

One More Opinion June 20, 2011 (11:45 am)

I’m just gonna say it…STATE INCOME TAX. I’ve never paid so much in taxes as I have since I moved to Seattle and I’ve lived in Boston and DC prior. I sincerely hope Mr. Gates Sr. tries again.

Genesee Hill June 20, 2011 (11:57 am)

Up the car tab, please. Thanks!

clark5080 June 20, 2011 (12:09 pm)

Metro Prove to me that there is no waste of money going on in your budget, talk to your unions about concessions and then go after tax money. I wonder if the Auditors office has gotten to Metro yet? Metro does not have a good track record in handling their money very well.

WSB June 20, 2011 (12:12 pm)

They have already made some cuts as the result of an audit, according to another document from the package. I’ll add the link.

eileen June 20, 2011 (12:10 pm)

Did I read that right – delete 54, 55 and 22? Are we supposed to swim downtown? Are they nuts?

M June 20, 2011 (12:12 pm)

CandrewB,

In the proposal, with the 128 being extended to the 55 terminal and Rapid Ride C replacing the 54, there is no reason to keep those routes.

austin June 20, 2011 (12:20 pm)

More for car tabs, please.

HP June 20, 2011 (12:30 pm)

With Metro buying busses at $500,000.00 each and spending money to replace 54 and 55 routes with Rapid Transit, I’d say they have plenty of money. Why they are looking at all to make lane changes needed for Rapid Transit to shave 30-40 seconds off a 30 minute commute is beyond me. Sounds like they contracted way too high (please explain how a bus can cost a half million each) and should look at their spending, rather than the lack of income. Are many of their drivers still averaging close to $100,000.00 a year? That needs to stop as well. I’m tired of paying taxes to a bus system that is broken and needs a serious overhaul. Fix the problems instead of asking for more money.

eileen June 20, 2011 (12:31 pm)

I would disagree about Rapid ride C completely replacing the 54 – you have significantly fewer stops and those relying on the bus from north of the Junction (55 riders) now don’t have a direct service down town – will they actaully work to create proper timing between 128 and the rapid line C? Not likely from current experience.

JayDee June 20, 2011 (12:33 pm)

Also, delete the 57. That should make the 56 cozy.

CandrewB June 20, 2011 (12:41 pm)

Just curious One More, just for comparison to Massachusetts:
Seattle prop tax rate $9.04 per $1000
Boston prop tax rate $12.79 per $1000
Seattle sales tax rate 9.5%
Boston sales tax rate 6.25%
Washington income tax rate 0%
Massachusetts income tax rate 5.3%
Seattle car tabs $60 (on average)
Massachusetts car tabs $50
Washington gas tax $0.37 per gallon
Massachusetts gas tax $0.23 per gallon

What other taxes are you paying?

clark5080 June 20, 2011 (12:47 pm)

So if this tab fee gets passed is it permanent? If and when the economy picks back up and the taxes are rolling in like normal will this extra fee for Metro go Bye Bye? I doubt it

jedifarfy June 20, 2011 (12:55 pm)

Wow, delete the 54 and the 22, then move the 125. Time for me to get a car! Those are all my main routes to downtown and sodo. Stopping at Westwood is ok I suppose, for the 125, but wow. This is really bad.

WSB June 20, 2011 (1:10 pm)

Clark5080 – it’s a two-year authorization, as noted in the linked county news relesae.
.
http://www.kingcounty.gov/exec/news/release/2011/June/20Metro.aspx
.
Legislative authority is required for this to even be proposed, so for a renewal, extension, whatever, different legislation would be needed. – TR

Colleen June 20, 2011 (1:13 pm)

Question – what’s the timing of these propsed cuts, since its over a year till Rapidride starts to roll out?

Otherwise, I’ve got a hard time supporting this not reall knowing where Metro is spending their $$. And frustrating that they want to tax the drivers even more, while at the same point, making it more difficult to get around on the bus. 2 hours to go 21 miles on metro means I have to drive, but yet could get hit again with more taxes to support them.

Valerie June 20, 2011 (1:26 pm)

Wait, do I read the proposed cancellation document right?
.
– Canceling the 133, an express route which runs four times north in the morning, four times south in the evening, is always full and often standing room only, and gets to the U District from West Seattle in maybe 45 minutes on a good day, while also
– Canceling half of the routes that go directly, even express, from downtown to the U District, a trip that can already take (by taking the 120 and transferring downtown) close to 1-1/2 hours one way, thereby giving U-District riders tossed off the 133 even fewer options;
– Leaving exactly what other modes of getting to work aside from three-hour-a-day bus commute (and this is living IN the city!) or driving, and paying for fuel and parking?
.
I realize I’m drawing from my own experience, but I can’t help thinking mine would not be unique, and wondering how many thousands of others will experience something similar. The scope and breadth of these proposed cuts is astonishingly short-sighted.

rawr June 20, 2011 (1:33 pm)

raise bus fares and do away with ride free area.

this increase should impact those who utilize public transportation.

Jiggers June 20, 2011 (1:38 pm)

So I drive a car and may have to pay to cover for the people who ride the bus? Its an easy solution, jack up the bus fares two more dollars and the ferries along with it. Why do I have to subsidize Metro on top of the taxes I already pay?

charlabob June 20, 2011 (1:48 pm)

Let me echo (loudly) one more opinion’s opinion: STATE INCOME TAX. (NOT a “flat tax”.)

Foy boy June 20, 2011 (1:58 pm)

The 54 take you to the ferry dock. The 21 in the mornning between 7 & 830 seems to come through arbor hieghts about every 10 minutes. And is only half full. Sometimes they are even stack up behind each other. Now thats a waste. And these hybrid buses realy do not save what is worth to by them. It just makes peoplle feel good. With them only half full they are worth even less. Unless these hybrid bus are completly full all the time, there carbon off set is worse then if people just drove.

The Jester June 20, 2011 (2:00 pm)

If Metro has to reduce services and with gas costing nearly $4/gal, I guess the city will have to subsidize the peoples’ purchases of new bicycles. But how would that help Metro? Do you think Metro employees want competition? Don’t laugh, this cycling option could come to a route near you.

Peter on Fauntleroy June 20, 2011 (2:03 pm)

@ clark5080: How about you prove that there is waste in Metro’s butdget? Clark5080, Give me some facts, not your blind accusations. Metro unions have made concessions, Metro has been audited, there is no evidence as you claim that Metro is wasting money.
.
Metro has in fact been continually cutting and fighting for it’s very existence since the anti-tax idiots attempted to kill bus and ferry service in the state entirely with Tim Eyeman’s anti-transit I695.
.
We need to up car license tabs STATEWIDE to the pre I695 days to solve Metro’s problems, not to mention every other transit agency in the state and Washington State Ferries. A miniscule temporary fee is not a solution.

The Jester June 20, 2011 (2:09 pm)

If Metro has to reduce services and with gas costing nearly $4/gal, I guess the city will have to subsidize the peoples’ purchases of new bicycles. But how would that help Metro? Do you think Metro employees want competition? Don’t laugh, this cycling option could come to a route near you.
And, Eileen, regarding your post —
“Did I read that right – delete 54, 55 and 22? Are we supposed to swim downtown? Are they nuts?”

Comment by eileen — June 20, 11 12:10 pm #

Here’s a suggestion. The city could convert the little used weekday Armeni (sp?) boat launch site into a new West Seattle Park and Ride. Then all the former 21, 22, 54, 55, passengers could board the new $3.00 per ride water taxi. That would help ridership there, too.

The Jester June 20, 2011 (2:17 pm)

And just whose idea was it to purchase half million dollar coaches that carry fewer passengers than the older models? It seems to me that a coach with more carrying capacity is superior to the “latest and greatest” hybrid “savings” technology. Have you ever had a bus pass you by in the rain because it’s full? It happens to me all the time in the winter months. I guess that will happen more often now what with the genius acquisition of less passengers per mile hybrid coaches.

I’m sure glad I don’t have to depend on Metro. Sure glad I don’t pay car tab fees nor property taxes either. Waste not, want not. That’s how I get by.

Jiggers June 20, 2011 (2:19 pm)

I wonder how much money was lost due to the I-695 passing? And how many new taxes were created in the after years to help make up for its loss? The reprucussions of 695 is huge.

Paul June 20, 2011 (2:41 pm)

Bus Riders welfare ! Just pay more for your bus ride and leave my tabs alone, I think 5 bux would be a fair price

Amanda June 20, 2011 (3:02 pm)

Wow. That is really extreme. I agree with cutting the free area. I’m sure they have really thought out the changes to each route based on ridership surveys, but West Seattle needs more public transportation, not less. Seattle drivese crazy with the amount of mobey we waste. We need some citizen oversight committees to mmonitor our city council

The Jester June 20, 2011 (3:16 pm)

Paul, I think $5 would be a (grin)fare price. But, I wouldn’t ride Metro at that price. And there’s no guarantee they might just leave you standing in the rain anyway, should one have to “hop a ride.”

Too, there are some real hygeine, health and courtesy issues in riding a bus. People reek of tobacco smoke, boarding while still exhaling their last “drag.” Peoples’ urine collection bags break/overflow. Bus drivers have been known to be rude, violating the ridership rules of courtesy posted on all busses. Is it worth it? Only if one cannot afford a cab.

wsguy June 20, 2011 (3:30 pm)

This is not the only car tab fee add on being proposed. According to the Times article there is another $80/year fee for transit improvements as well.

I have taken the bus to work downtown, van pools to Everett and support the transit system.

BUT – if I remember right there was widespread opposition to car tabs fees in the past.

We may not get to vote on it – it may just be imposed.

Make Metro self sustaining. Imposing a new tax on cars strikes me as punitive for those who need to drive to work and as social engineering for the utopian vision of an auto free city which will never happen.

If per the Times article there are 350,000 riders a year then $10/month extra for each rider should give the transit system enough to operate on and target the fees to the transit users.

WSB June 20, 2011 (3:43 pm)

For clarification to “wsguy”: The possible $80 is a CITY – Metro is run by the county, not city – proposal that MIGHT go on the ballot. Unlike this COUNTY proposal, the city proposal would have to be approved by voters, as the city has already imposed a $20 fee for road/mobility improvements and that’s the limit of what it was empowered to do without voter approval. (If you haven’t renewed your car tabs lately, you’ll see the city $20 fee next time, as that just took effect in the past few months. The city fee is part of its creation of a Transportation Benefit District as explained here: http://www.seattle.gov/stbd/

Darkseid June 20, 2011 (3:32 pm)

Jack up the car tabs, starting with Paul’s. $30 tabs are just car driver welfare.

One More Opinion June 20, 2011 (3:34 pm)

@CandrewB, do you realize how much a 4% difference in sales tax means on all of the purchases you make that are subject to it over the course of a year? In the midst of a recession, how on earth does anyone think it makes sense to have essential services dependent on a revenue base that fluctuates so dramatically in a bad economy? Not only did I not worry about my public transportation costs skyrocketing because of a budget mess, I deducted my state income taxes paid from my taxable income for my federal return. You could also deduct a portion of the rent you paid if you were a renter! And it’s not apples to apples in this case anyway…the state income tax proposed in WA last ballot wouldn’t even have affected my income here…I make too little, as do so many of us!

wsguy June 20, 2011 (3:40 pm)

Here’s the link to the article to the other $80 / year car tab fee:

“The Seattle City Council may also ask voters in November for up to $80 per vehicle in extra car-tab fees to improve transit and mobility in the city.”

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015361295_cartabfees19m.html

How about if they operate within their budget?

J June 20, 2011 (3:42 pm)

For those calling for the state income tax: while I am in complete and enthusiastic support of a state income tax, we’re talking about the county budget here, not the state budget. Of course, theoretically, there could be a King County income tax–but I suspect that would require all kinds of changes to state law.

I’d also like to point out to people who assume there are too many buses on a route because they come frequently and lightly loaded (Foyboy, eg), you have to look at the whole route. Arbor Heights is the extreme end of the run. By the time those buses get downtown (or even just a way up 35th), many or most of them are likely SRO. You really can’t judge the need for a route just based on the riders at one spot.

JLS June 20, 2011 (3:46 pm)

For those of you complaining about subsidizing bus riders by paying an extra $20–look at it as paying a small yearly fee for a better commute. While traffic can be crappy at peak commute times, each one of those buses passing by in the bus lane is likely taking the place of at least 30-50 extra cars. Cars that would be sitting in front of you or competing with you for parking.

J June 20, 2011 (3:47 pm)

Also, I think it DOES make sense for automobile drivers to subsidize bus riders–imagine if they all drove. The road capacity that would be needed, the traffic that would be clogged, the pollution…. I think the car tabs to subsidize the bus are a bargain in comparison. I just wish there were a simple way to tax automobiles by miles driven times weight times emissions, instead of just a flat tab tax.

wsguy June 20, 2011 (3:50 pm)

Thanks for clarifying that.

Maybe I should have pointed out that at the end of the day we are looking at a possible jump of $100 / year for car tabs with both the city and county combined.

And the funding mechanism targets a group of people the majority of which don’t benefit from the service being funded.

And what is to stop the county from coming back next year and placing another fee on top to fund yet other projects?

buddsmom June 20, 2011 (4:11 pm)

Jester~ It’s $30(on a really good day) one way to or from Arbor Heights-downtown via taxi .Are you willing to spend four hours pay, round trip, 5 times a week for the “convenience” of a cab? I’ve been in dirty, smelly cabs in this city with very rude drivers. $2.50 vs.$30? I think the choice is simple.

Recall McGinn June 20, 2011 (4:31 pm)

Eliminate the ride free area.

Deleting the 54 is foolish. Maximizing capacity would be a better idea. Sitting in Zeek’s one recent evening I counted 5 different 54’s roll by southbound in a 45 minute period. They were all less than a quarter full.

West Seattle is one community that can not afford to lose ANY of it’s mass transit options, especially with the viaduct demolition and a reduced capacity tunnel replacing it.

Where is the leadership in this city?

Paul June 20, 2011 (4:46 pm)

Darkseid- I think I paid over 60 bux for my tabs..not sure where you came up with $30, but I will make you a deal, you fill up my tank once a month and I will make a small donation to the poor little old metro

Gurn June 20, 2011 (5:25 pm)

If we started right now, we could build a huge, mega gondola-on-steroids like the ones overseas and string that sucker from the top of Myrtle Reservoir to DT Seattle and run a PRIVATE service moving people from WS to downtown circumventing metro and the tunnel altogether…all those in favor say aye! ;)

JimmyG June 20, 2011 (5:34 pm)

1. Ditch the ride free zone.
2. Raise fares across the board.
3. Start doing fare enforcement, I’m sick to death of the deadbeats boarding and not paying and there being no consequences.
4. Stop setting aside 10% of routes that don’t carry many riders but are kept for social equity reasons.

No tab fee!

Peter on Fauntleroy June 20, 2011 (5:50 pm)

Several people have made comments about bus rider welfare, drivers paying for something that doesnt benefit them, and other nonsense along those lines. I’d just like to point out to drivers who think we should all pay as we go: 1- Road money overwhelmingly comes from Property taxes. I don’t drive, so I’m paying thousands a year to support your filthy lifestyle. If you think we should all pay as we go, then that should apply to cars, too, in which case you owe me A LOT of money back. 2-Federal tax subsidies continue to keep gas artificially cheap, and I’m paying those federal taxes. Again, all you drivers who think everyone should pay their own way all owe me A LOT of money.
.
To get to my point: transit riders pay much much more to subsidize drivers than drivers do to subsidize transit users. If you really believe we should all pay our own way, the gas tax, car tabs, and car registration fees should all be vastly higher than they are now.
.
What is clear here is that the drivers want the transit users to subsidize pollution spewing, road clogging driving, as we always have done, but the drivers aren’t willing in turn to spend a minuscule amount to fund transit that reduces car trips in Seattle by 300,000+ every day (try driving on that!). It’s pure selfishness and it’s disgusting.

Darkseid June 20, 2011 (5:57 pm)

The tab fee is a flat $30. The additional is comprised of state subsidies/taxes and transaction fees not part of 695. Also, if you own a large truck, I believe there is a gross weight fee. You are not paying $60 for ‘tabs’.

austin June 20, 2011 (6:44 pm)

I’ll pay more for the bus once drivers start paying a realistic amount for gasoline. $30/gallon for private individuals while keeping the current rate for transit, emergency services and freight seems about right.

Jeremiah June 20, 2011 (7:02 pm)

Peter on Fauntleroy, please run for public office.

Amanda June 20, 2011 (7:09 pm)

The problem is that we keep voting to, raising our property taxes, gas taxes, sales taxes and paying a higher fare. It just never seems to be enough to make the system run. I think we need to stop throwing money at the problem and break it down. I am sure that Metro is not seeing a big picture here. I really wish they would.

wsguy June 20, 2011 (7:24 pm)

Peter on Fauntleroy

While I respect your opinion, I do disagree.

According to Metro’s website transit rider fares cover 23.6% of the cost of transit services. 64.8% is covered by sales tax and property tax.

At least in my household we cover 100% of the cost of a car, maintenance, fuel and insurance. And yes there is a benefit with some reduction of traffic with people taking buses.

I would be interested in how you calculated that transit riders contribute more to non – riders than the other way around.

I would be also be interested if Traci or anyone knows to what extent other major cities subsidize Bus service.

Transit must use the roads that property taxes pay for as well. As do the entire business infrastructure which also benefits from the Federal tax subsidies you mentioned above. The majority of our produce & grocery products arrive via our road system, the supply chain for manufacturing must have a working road system (whether Puget Sound is or not is a topic for another post) as do the books and other consumables we order on Amazon.

So whether you realize it or not you are benefitting from the transportation infrastructure your tax $$ pay for.

The group of people requesting a government service are always going to try to get another group to subsidize them it seems rather than foot the bill themselves.

The fact that you can get by without a car is great for you. You save a ton of money on a car, maintenance and gas mainly on the benefit of a heavily tax subsidized government service.

There is a point that people are making which I believe has validity in that during tight economic times Metro may have to scale back services. If the beneficiaries of those services wish to preserve them then I don’t believe anyone on this blog feels that the people consuming those services shouldn’t be able to pay more (higher fares) to maintain them.

There is also a valid point that people who do not use the service should not be required to further subsidize those services. Others such as yourself who rely on those government services would obviously not share that view and have a different perspective. I do not think that people who do not want to pay more than they already do to increase the tax subsides for a service they do not use is selfish.

Let’s put it to a vote and let voters decide if they want to pony up more money for Metro or not. It just may be Metro may have to operate within the funding model they currently have and make some hard choices.

We have been fighting the car tab battle since 1999 that I can remember and it’s a tax politicians just can’t leave alone.

I think both sides have some valid points, let’s vote on it!

Cascadianone June 20, 2011 (7:43 pm)

NO to this rediculous, ham-handed sin tax, where even if it “worked” it would stop paying money into Metro even as ridership increased- WTF? YES to a *dedicated* property-tax funding for a grade-separated electric rail mass transit system. DON’T let the robber barons pushing the idiotic deep-bore tunnel weasel out of paying the new tax, either! Stop letting the robber barons pit us against each other. We should all pay, because we will all benefit. Bus riders, admit that this city would collapse if you or one of your friends didn’t own a car. Drivers, remember that bus riders also help pay for your roads whether or not there is a bus route on them. Tim Eyman-ites, admit that public infractrucure spending is beneficial to the economy/taxpayers and won’t actually turn us into Soviets. Thanks.

JN June 20, 2011 (7:44 pm)

I used to take the bus until it became a better option, personally, to ride my bicycle. I just got sick of the bad timing of the schedules, and the overall inefficiency of the service for West Seattle. It seemed like when I was a minute late, I always missed it, but if I got there 10 minutes early, it was late! Ridiculous. That said, the transit system is essential, and it definitely needs a good does of capital.

cj June 20, 2011 (8:06 pm)

This sounds so familiar. I just don’t know where in current politics I have heard this kind of talk before. We live in the age of political blackmail, we don’t see where all the money goes but no matter how much we give its never enough.

Mark June 20, 2011 (8:13 pm)

Tax the bicycle riders! I already pay to license my car and I pay the gas tax that goes toward building the roads and bike lanes.

Jiggers June 20, 2011 (8:25 pm)

I wish the monorail was built..:(

seattlecris June 20, 2011 (8:28 pm)

Time to secede to Burien.. it would make more sense than trying to be a part of Seattle.

Not a rider June 20, 2011 (8:32 pm)

I don’t ever ride the bus and I don’t commute. I dont want to pay for you to ride the bus. You ride, you pay, or be prepared to get cozy.

dapuffin June 20, 2011 (8:57 pm)

21 Bus: “Eliminate service to Arbor Heights and end at Westwood Village.” Geez. I can see “reduce” but eliminate??

avid bus rider June 20, 2011 (9:14 pm)

Raise the fares, get rid of the free ride zone, and pay as you enter. You have already given someone a ride and you have a much harder time enforcing payment of fare as they are running off the bus than climbing on. Way too many free rides. Pun intended. I would rather pay $20 directly to Metro for using their services than $20 to the DOL for the car I hardly drive. Seems quite inefficient to funnel the additional funds through the government works program known as the DOL.

John D. June 20, 2011 (9:28 pm)

There has to be a point where we stop asking for more money instead of finding alternatives to the costs of operation. These are government services, which aren’t supposed to be – by function – priced higher than what the private sector could do. How have prior civilizations done it? While technology is ever present, the prime motor to the process is still people, isn’t it? Public service used to be about people that wanting to help stave off the costs of high priced operations. Now it’s the most desired type of position because it typically pays more than the private sector. It has lost the sense of helpful and selfless sacrifice and some level of voluntary participation whether in service or cost of service.

The only solution for us all can’t always be “raise the price” – whether in market or taxes. Because all that does if force other prices up and continue to inflate the problem. Doesn’t it?

eileen June 20, 2011 (9:40 pm)

Jester – I do take the water taxi although it’s not very convenient to get there. They considered a park and ride in the area of Jack Block park, but it never went anywhere.

Metro’s site shows property taxes only support 3.4% of metro. 61.4% comes from sales tax.

http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/budget/revenue.html

This is why we’ve got troubles since sales tax is not stable. In 2008 when the budget problems started metro sold off some assets and used the “rainy day fund” putting the problem off until now.

http://ronsims.wordpress.com/2008/08/25/let%E2%80%99s-keep-our-buses-running/

Many of the same ideas were put on the table to cut costs, but it comes down to the idea if we are going to invest in public transit fund it the a stable revenue stream.

The task force report is a bit confusing:
http://www.atu587.com/RTTF_Final_Report.pdf.pdf

They are looking at a new performance based system to decide where to keep transit and reduce it. They want to concentrate it only where jobs/residential is the most dense – elsewhere gets larger cuts. From my understanding of the report west seattle gets greater cuts. Do you get the same message or am I not understanding it correctly?

They should increase costs of “partnership agreements” they they negotiate with areas to increase service, charge for park and ride lots or sell some off (why aren’t there any park and ride lots in west seattle?) and what about the south lake union street car? metro pays for that too.

Bruce June 20, 2011 (10:35 pm)

Why can’t Metro spend the cost of one new bus to commission a study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and efficiency? I’ve only lived here over nine years, but I feel the routes date back along time before that and don’t reflect the routes that people want to travel nowadays. It seems like there are over 50 different routes that travel north and south through downtown duplicating the new light rail tunnel route. As a layperson, it would appear that a hub and spoke network like the airlines, Amtrak and the intercity buslines use would be more cost-effective and efficient (using less of the costly buses and drivers). If you divided all those north-south innercity routes in half, cut out the middle and spliced those ends to the light rail you could also eliminate the pay when you board/pay when you depart confusion caused by all those buses traveling through the free ride area…

Bruce June 20, 2011 (10:38 pm)

Another money saver: merge King County Metro with Sound Transit, the Ferry District, the Monorail, and the SDOT Trolley service to reduce duplicate overhead.

Maybe the Governor could merge in the other Puget Sound county transit systems and the Ferry system to create one giant regional public transit system a bit like Vancouver, BC.

Scott June 20, 2011 (11:15 pm)

Why should I pay an extra $20 car tab to help the King County Metro. I’m not using it so why should I pay. They should pass the buck onto the people using the freaking Metro. Not me.

Mike June 20, 2011 (11:50 pm)

King Co. Metro Bus service has never been efficient, it’s never been able to hold it’s own, it should never have been run by King County. King County needs to get out of the bus service buisiness or allow private companies to run the bus system, have them compete for pricing while Metro continues to exist. I’d bet people who don’t like sitting in bum pee would be willing to pay extra for a nicer cleaner ride.

dapuffin June 21, 2011 (5:10 am)

I wonder how carefully restructuring of routes is being considered. For example, I live in Arbor Heights and commute both ways via the 21 and then a 15 or 18 (also endangered) to get to my job in Lower Queen Anne. For the record, my bus starts out fairly empty but DOES fill up just about every day.

I do not drive, nor am I a candidate to bicycle to work. Walking to and from Westwood Village each day is not really an option for me. So, upshot is that I’d probably lose my ability to work downtown or beyond.

I’ve never seen a transit system so willing to just abandon its riders, and I’ve been a rider of several systems over the years.

Westie June 21, 2011 (8:29 am)

Question for Bus Riders:
Would you pay more to ride the bus vs dumping routes?

DWHJ June 21, 2011 (8:47 am)

stop funding buses and ferry’s with tax dollars if they cant turn a profit from fares phase them out just like all the street trolleys from the early 1900’s tax money only allows the failing to keep fail I’m sure someone whom likes money will figure something out there is profit in transportation ask a cab driver

JD June 21, 2011 (9:21 am)

Raise the cost to ride. Problem fixed

buddsmom June 21, 2011 (9:51 am)

Dapuffin~ I could have written your post word for word. The water taxi is not an option either….catch a bus to get a shuttle, to get the boat, to get another bus to get to Belltown. Doesn’t make sense to me.

One More Opinion June 21, 2011 (10:50 am)

I’m not sure if anyone remembers this but there are many MANY people that ride the bus not just for saving the planet and staying out of traffic but because there are no other options to get around. If you keep raising the cost, it limits employment options, access to medical care…all kinds of things. $5.50 round trip might not seem like much to many of you but it’s pretty hefty to someone unemployed or not making a decent wage.

Cascadianone June 21, 2011 (11:38 am)

One More Opinion,

You know, actual oil prices have risen. To act like some disadvantaged group shouldn’t feel that pain also is deeply unfair to us and them. Life got crappier for everyone, now we will all have to deal. That is part of being a responsible adult.

Let some charity group or welfare program deal with those who will be unable to ride, but Metro’s duty is to the majority- They must correct their budget fairly. If that correction puts a dent in the budget of some other agency or department because they are giving out higher bus fares to old people or something, we will address it later.

michael ford June 21, 2011 (11:59 am)

My wife was telling me last night when I got home from Work that Metro Transit is looking at cutting West Seattle off from Seattle by cutting out ms service to West Seattle. Is this true and how are those of us that are disABLEd to get to and from work?

michael ford June 21, 2011 (12:05 pm)

I feel that this is just one more way that both Sound Transit and Metro Transit trying to punish us for the Monorail being voted down. I truely think that the Monorail should of been built as it would of put transit riders above the traffic and not have to deal with any problems on the West Seattle bridge at peak hours of traffic. Yet it seems most people here have not seen 3 or 4 hour oneway trips to and from work. Southern California has for many years and Seattle is heading towards that if we don’t pull our heads out of the hole in the ground thinking if we do nothing it will all be ok. it isn’t going to it only becomes more of a problem then cost way more money to try and fix.

CandrewB June 21, 2011 (12:44 pm)

Sound Transit wasn’t building the Monorail. The Monorail project was competition for Sound and Metro. They both secretly had MVET envy. WS (and Ballard) were never in Sound’s plans because of the Monorail. Rapid Ride is a weak consolation prize. Sound will continue on without us. Rail to downtown will have to be a Seattle thing (like the SLUT), not a County thing.

BusesBuses June 21, 2011 (6:37 pm)

Increase the fares for those that ride the frgging buses. If there was a bus every five minutes I would STILL NOT ride the stinking things. I would train or light rail but not a crappy bus!!