Much to digest from the big Uptown paper of record package on CATS’ bus system yesterday. But the “take away” is that the Observer either totally buys the city’s argument that if the half-cent transit tax is repealed the bus system will be gutted or the paper is totally willing to pimp that line despite its blatant falsehood.
The tipoff was Rick Thames editorializing that, “If you believe in buses, that’s a pretty compelling argument for voting against eliminating the tax.”
That’s an amazing head-in-the-sand response because reporter Steve Harrison spun out plenty of reasons why CATS’ is not running an efficient bus system with the half-cent in place. More importantly, the official story on per household cost of the half-cent took another hit as no one has yet explained the city’s revenue numbers.
First, the big picture Thames and cohorts refuse to see. The biggest threat to buses is not repeal. It is the current $9 billion, five-train corridor plan adopted by the MTC last fall. We cannot afford that plan. To pay for it we can either raise taxes or — as other cities have done — we can cut back on bus service. This will happen 2010 or 2012 or sometime in the future when we will have no other choice, what with another $1 billion in trains underway, in-ground, sunk cost.
To get off that track, right now before it is too late, we need to repeal the half-cent and use the next seven months that we will still collect it to devise a new transit plan we can afford. Were Thames remotely serious about this process the paper would stop telling people the bus system is on the line and set about trying to find ways to afford the trains.
But that would involve questioning city officials on very basic levels and the Observer is fundamentally unwilling to do that.
Case in point? Try the absurd claim the half-cent only costs the median household in Charlotte $40 a year. We’ve tried to point out that the math does not work, that you cannot get to the $50 million a year that the tax manifestly raises from local residents with only $40 a year per household. Yet that disconnect was never explained in the paper’s package despite one of those transit “Q&As” from an astute local resident.
However, due to federal reporting requirements, CATS cannot massage the numbers with regard to its cost of service. Thankfully, Harrison turned to Steven Polzine, of the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida, for some perspective on CATS’ cost:
In 1998 the bus system paid, on average, $2.12 for each passenger trip. That doubled to $4.31 in 2007 and is projected to reach $4.60 next year.
That cost-per-trip is more than other major N.C. cities and has risen faster than the national average.
Polzine said a bus system is no longer cost effective when its cost reaches $5 per passenger trip.
Another indicator to watch, Polzine said, is the average number of riders a CATS bus carries one mile.
Before the tax, CATS had roughly 10 passengers per mile, just under the national average of 11. The nationwide average has since declined to 10.3. In Charlotte, that average is estimated now to be between 7 and 7.5, according to an analysis of federal transit data.
Dropping below 7 is a problem, Polzine said, a sign that some buses may be burning more fuel and creating more traffic congestion than passengers would if they drove.
Harrison could’ve added that CATS’ push into the burbs has not reduced the percentage of car-less riders among its customers. It still is at 40 percent or so compared to car-less population county-wide of 8 percent. But the basic trend is clear. Since the half-cent CATS has spent a ton of money on a bus system that is not terribly efficient or in great demand.
Are there less efficient bus systems out there? Yes. Are there more efficient ones? Yes. That in and of itself tells you very little — if anything — about how to vote come November. Sorry, Rick.
I do believe there would be positive cost-control pressures on CATS as a result of repeal, ones that would result in an overall more efficient system. But even assuming you squeeze $10 or $20 million in fluff out of the bus system, that would be a small benefit compared to getting out from under a $9 billion plan we cannot afford.
Bonus Observation: There was a very good reason to vote for repeal in Thames’ big package that he either missed or assumed you would.
Those suburban choice riders are getting a subsidy of at least $3 per trip under CATS’ current plan and its costs. Moreover, those heading Uptown are saving what? — $8, 10 12, — a day in parking and helping their employers avoid the need to provide employee parking.
That’s a big subsidy to many white collar workers who could otherwise afford to pay more. Why? It does not seem fair or financially prudent, you are leaving money on the table. You do it for precisely moments like these.
The choice riders are supposed to come out to vote to save their subsidy. Both in November and — this is important — in the future when the great bus cut vs. tax hike choice will come down.
When it becomes clear that CATS cannot afford the train-building without a tax hike, guess who is supposed to help make the case for the tax hike?
Your bus system “choice riders” who have received the subsidy. CATS is not running a transportation program, it is running a propaganda campaign. Always has — always will.
