HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?

The Sun Tran bureaucrats plan to issue a report to the Mayor and Council on May 6^th that says that proposed service cuts to 12 of the Sun Tran fixed routes will not have a “disparate impact” on low income and minority riders.

To make matters worse, the majority of the services being cut are on the South and West sides.

Their own numbers tell the story.

For all the fixed routes (not the express routes) the ridership is 62% minority and 68% low income. How much higher would these numbers be for ridership in Wards 1 and 5, the Westside and the Southside?

All bus systems in the U.S. are heavily funded by the Federal government.

So the feds, as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 have a thing called Title VI, so that backwater racist places such as Alabama, Mississippi and Arizona can’t receive federal dollars and then make fare and service cuts that discriminate.

Our City of Tucson transit bureaucrats plan to make their Title VI presentation to the Council on May 6^th.

If they vote for this type of discrimination, surely they will be sued.

How stupid do they think we, the public, are?

How stupid do they think the Mayor and Council are?

Come to the Council meeting with the Bus Riders Union on May 6th.

One thought on “HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?”

Comprehensive Operational Analysis of Transit Services, Final Report January 2014
by Veolia Transportation

The report claims (p. 24-25) that Sun Tran is “well below average in garnering an appropriate level of fare revenue…” that “riders are not paying their fair share” and that their “average passenger fare is 50% lower than the system average and the lowest of the peer group” of which they have chosen 11 other cities to compare Tucson to.

However, an independent review of the actual fares does NOT show that the current bus fares in Tucson is anything close to 50% lower than the other municipalities. A quick search on Google of fares indicates:

Service Area Regular Fare

1. Tucson 1.50
2. Spokane 1.50
Rochester 1.00
4. Nashville 1.70
5. Madison 2.00
6. Louisville 1.75
7. Columbus 2.00
8. El Paso 1.50
9. San Antonio 1.20
10. Omaha 1.25
11. Kansas City 1.50
12. Fresno 1.25

How is Tucson “well below average” compared to the rest? How can Tucson fares be 50% lower than the average, when only four of the cities have greater fares (Madison and Columbus charge fifty cents more, and Louisville and Nashville charge 20 and 25 cents more), while three others (Spokane, El Paso, and Kansas City) charge the exact same as Tucson, and four of the cities chosen charge LESS than our system (Rochester is 50 cents less, San Antonio 30 cents, and Omaha and Fresno are 25 cents cheaper to ride).

The actual figures vs. what the Veola report states should make the community questions all of the assumptions of this report. If they can’t even determine the basic fares used in their analysis how can they provide an objective analysis of the system?

On the bottom of the same page (p.25) it does state that Tucson’s “Subsidy per Passenger is one of the lowest amongst the peer group and well below the system average.” This would seem to bolster the perspective that there should be no cuts in service or increases in fares, but additional support should be provided for the bus service.

The Veolia Report also discourages increasing fares when (on p. 28) they state that by raising the fare the system would experience a loss in passengers so that “a 50% fare increase would only result in a 27% revenue increase.”

So there seems little point in raising rates. Instead they are now looking at cutting service. They assert that if their plan is adopted there will be annual savings of “$2.4 and $2.6 million.”

Considering their statistics that:

“61% of all [Sun Tran] customers … do not have access to a vehicle” (as almost 12% of all Pima County residents do not have a vehicle available to them,”
the average rider has an income of less than $20,000
52% use the bus five or more times a week to get to work
67% of the riders are NOT STUDENTS
it seems clear that any changes to service will clearly hurt the poor and most vulnerable.

It is also clear in their report (p. 25 of Moore & Associates report) that “more frequent service” is the overwhelming need expressed by bus riders (35.7 %) and more weekend service (29%). Likewise, when asked how they would travel if transit service was cut, most (27%) most said they would walk (p. 30) and 17% wouldn’t even make the trip.

SUPPORT THE BUS RIDERS UNION! TELL THE CITY NOT TO BALANCE THEIR BUDGET ON THE BACKS OF THE WORKING POOR!