Andrew
Subject: <No subject>
Sent: 12/11/98 19:50
Received: 12/19/98 17:52
From: Ron Kilcoyne, RKilcoyne@santa-clarita.com
To: transit@rescuemuni.org, transit@rescuemuni.org
transit@lerami.lerctr.org, transit@lerami.lerctr.org
bill.hill@sierraclub.org, bill.hill@sierraclub.org
john.holtzclaw@sfsierra.sierraclub.org,
john.holtzclaw@sfsierra.sie
kenneth.ryan@sierraclub.org, kenneth.ryan@sierraclub.org
I am seeking individuals who either use Samtrans buses or live in San
Mateo
County and who are interested enough in the fate of bus transit service
to do
something about it. After reading below, please send me e-mail and/or
snail
mail addresses of any individuals that you know (including yourself if
you are
interested) who would be willing to do one or more of the action items
described
below.
In September the Samtrans Board approved a multi-year service
restructuring plan
that will result in a net reduction of bus service equaling $7 million
per year.
This is a significant reduction of bus service. These changes will be
implemented in phases, with the first phase to be implemented in June.
Unfortunately the first phase is the most harmful, in terms of eliminating
service to many neighborhoods.
Despite board approval and extensive outreach by Samtrans prior to board
action,
it does not appear that Samtrans was straightforward with the public.
For this
reason the issue is worth revisiting. (It would be fruitless to try to
get the
Samtrans board to reverse their decision simply because one disagrees
with the
proposed changes or has a better idea.) It appears that the main reason
for
implementing these changes is to redirect funds to BART. Why else would
Samtrans need to reduce bus hours by the equivalent of $7 million per
year when
all of Samtrans revenue sources are growing? However no where in any
articles
I have read about the changes did I see this mentioned.
Samtrans claims the service reductions are based on lack of demand.
However low
usage on many routes is not due lack of demand but inadequate or poor
service
design. All poorly performing Samtrans routes have one or usually more
of the
following characteristics - infrequent service, short service spans (e.g.
start
too late or end too early for workers to use), are giant one way loops or
are
indirect resulting in long trip times. Samtrans does little to coordinate
connections and has no transfers which also discourages transit use.
Samtrans claims that the changes will bring increased frequency to
heavily used
routes. This is misleading also. Very few streets will receive more
service.
In many cases a route will run more frequently but the street it runs on
won't
see more service because instead of two routes providing half hour
service, one
route will operate every 15 minutes. (Actually these recommendations are
the
best part of the plan, but it is misleading to say that service will
increase.)
Since I do not reside in San Mateo County and since I am a transit
manager and
it would be unprofessional for me to attack another transit agency, I
must be on
the sidelines. However as a native of San Mateo County with family still
residing there, and as a transit missionary who hates to see transit
potential
destroyed, I can't simply let this pass.
On the basis of misleading the public, activists could engage in one or
more
activities during January and February, with the goal of getting the
Samtrans
Board to put on hold phase one in March (three months before it will
actually be
implemented) and direct staff to rethink the delivery of transit service.
Work with the Samtrans union to provide resources to (people or
money) to
Organize riders to attend a Samtrans board meeting, write letters or
sign a
petition.
Obtain resolutions form City councils urging Samtrans to revisit the
issue.
Write letters to the Editor
Encourage the union to take the lead on pursuing new ideas.
When Orange County Transit faced a major deficit due the County
bankruptcy and
subsequent raid on transit funds to bail out the County it used
imagination to
close the gap while improving service and increasing ridership. If
Samtrans
needs money to fund the BART extension - fine. But is it should use the
same
imagination to make sure bus service doesn't suffer as a result and to
increase
ridership on unproductive lines.
I have some specific ideas how that can be done, which I will share with
anyone
who is interested (this e-mail is way to long to include now).
So please let me know if you know anyone who wants to save bus service in
San
Mateo County.
Andrew Sullivan
andrew@sulli.org - www.sulli.org
s u l l i . o r g
1668 Grove, SF CA 94117
415 673 0626