Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Transit Funding – the saga continues
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 18, 2013 at 1:53 am #793932
WFMembermetro is identifying a funding shortfall, service can be cut, revenue enhanced and operating costs tamed. this time around metro needs to look internally to resolve the challenge.
July 18, 2013 at 2:25 am #793933
Genesee HillParticipantInternal cuts are WF’s opinion. I say external funding will continue to be necessary . Big time.
I could care less what WF thinks.
Why argue with WF?
Troll doll, nothing more, nothing less. Reminds me of my own pathetic self. ROFL.
July 18, 2013 at 2:54 am #793934
WFMembermetro has substantial external funding already
July 18, 2013 at 3:14 am #793935
WFMemberand the state legislature said no this time around to more external funding for transit.
July 18, 2013 at 4:06 pm #793936
WFMembergenesee hill why the attack? i have simply stated facts:
-$2.50 fare to get to downtown seattle is cheap
-metro access is obscenely expensive
-and metro operating costs are amongst the highest in the country
what is unreasonable about making the users of metro pay a bit more? looking seriously at high cost services, metro access, that come at the expense of other users? and metro operating costs that is amongst the highest in the nation.
external funding is already the primary revenue for metro; it is time for metro to look internal for solutions this time around.
July 18, 2013 at 4:20 pm #793937
justadumbguyParticipantI ran across the article below at the Atlantic Cities site this AM regarding a gentleman who made significant changes in the transit system in both Rochester, and recently Detroit. I haven’t researched enough to know exactly what I think of what he says but it made me think of this thread and I thought I’d offer it as food for thought.
How to Fund Transit Without Raising Fares or Cutting Service
July 22, 2013 at 5:37 am #793938
WFMembermetro fare-box recovery is 19.1% and Pierce Transit is even lower 13%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio
vancouver ca recovers over 50%, los angelos is at 30.6%. fare box recovery for metro needs to be greater than 19.1%.
July 22, 2013 at 6:02 am #793939
EdSaneParticipantJust up the gas tax. I choose to drive to work when I could easily take metro (convenience on my part). Charge me for it and pay it towards services. Problem solved. Sounds likes a win/win. Don’t want to pay, carpool…As far as western nations go we pay far to little tax and expect way too much.
July 22, 2013 at 10:20 am #793940
JanSParticipantEdS..we disagree at times, but on this I totally agree with you…
July 22, 2013 at 2:40 pm #793941
WFMembereds i have no issue in raising the gas tax; but by law gas taxes have to be used for highways, roads and streets!.
and why metro fare recovery is allowed to be so low is unjust to the taxpayers. i use metro frequently and $2.50 to get to downtown seattle is flat out cheap. metro fare recovery is low and metro access is only 3% that is way too low. thus raising fares is needed.
the data clearly shows metro’s fare recovery is on the low side
July 23, 2013 at 1:52 am #793942
WFMemberthe data is clear that metro’s fare recovery is low; thus raising fares is the fairest option.
July 23, 2013 at 3:37 pm #793943
WFMembermetro fare box recovery needs to be raised to a minimum of 25% (from 19.1%) with a goal of a 33% recovery rate.
raising the fare on Metro Access that is currently only a 3% recovery to 10% of the cost would go a very long way to helping metro increase it’s fare box recovery rate.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.