Ugly SamTrans cuts ahead

After a series of public meetings, SamTrans will present a revised bus cut plan for board approval next week.

The revised proposal would maintain late night and overnight service, as well as some of local service like line 295. However, the proposal would eliminate all express bus service to San Francisco except line KX, which would be reduced to hourly service. SamTrans also plans to eliminate a lightly used local route in Millbrae. The total service to be reduced is 7.5%, which is comparable to VTA's proposed bus cut, and half of what AC Transit is planning to cut.

Because SamTrans no longer proposes to reduce service span, paratransit service would largely be maintained.

SamTrans believes its primary role is to serve the transit dependent, “We have a responsibility to those for whom we are their only means of mobility – people who depend on us to get them to their jobs, to school, to the doctor’s office and to the grocery store,” said Deputy CEO Chuck Harvey in the SamTrans' press release.

However, the proposed elimination of express service is a bad news for long time commuters. Although SamTrans argues that these riders generally have higher income and could afford to ride BART or Caltrain to San Francisco, many of these riders stuck to SamTrans because of its one-seat service. While riders in Burlingame, Millbrae and San Bruno have a relatively easy access to BART or Caltrain, riders in Foster City do not have such easy access. In its proposal, SamTrans plans to provide express service from Foster City to Millbrae, where riders can connect either BART or Caltrain. However, having to transfer to either line would mean longer travel time and expense (especially with BART).

KX:

- Reduce headways from 30 minutes to 60 minutes.

- Eliminate the segment south of Palo Alto Caltrain. KX passengers can ride VTA anywhere in Palo Alto with SamTrans monthly pass.

280:

- Reduce headways from 30 minutes to 60 minutes.

14:

- Operate service in one direction before 7 a.m. and after 4 p.m.

141:

- Reduce headways from 30 minutes to 60 minutes, except during school hours.

390 and 391:

- On weekends only, reduce headways from 30 minutes to 40 minutes. (Make the combined service from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes.) Service between Redwood City and Palo Alto would be even lower because of reduction on KX to hourly. The further cut in service between Redwood City and Palo Alto would make connection with VTA more difficult.

Route eliminations:

342, DX, FX, MX, NX, PX, RX

Included in the plan is another fare increase in February 2010, which SamTrans would join Muni, AC Transit, County Connection and VTA in the two dollar club.

HSRA unprofessionalism for all to see

Yesterday was a significant day for the HSRA. First, a judge ruled in favor of the petitioners who sued HSRA for the inadequate evaluation in the program EIR for the SF-SJ segment. Second, top HSRA staffer got grilled by Congresswoman Anno Eshoo at a Town Hall meeting held in Menlo Park.

Lawsuit

It is hard to win environmental lawsuits. Generally, judges generally give deference to government agencies that produced these documents as if they were police officers in a traffic or criminal trial. Ordinary citizens generally do not have the financial resources to hire consultants to counter the government's claim on technical basis, and generally do not have the kind of credibility, even though history shows that government agencies and consultants can literally lie to achieve their politically-predetermined results.

Essentially, HSRA lost the suit on the fact that it does not have the access to the Union Pacific owned right of way (UP clearly told the agency NO prior to the adoption of the program level EIR), which HSRA says it is necessary to travel from San Jose to Gilroy under the Pacheco option. Also, the judge found that the agency's evaluation of vibration impacts to be inadequate.

Last month, the petitioners offered a reasonable settlement that would have prevented possible delays. However, the inept boardmembers at HSRA rejected it and decided to stick with their political-predetermined position. Now the judge has agreed with the petitioners and HSRA will have to pay a higher price for their arrogence.

HSR Town Hall

Last night, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo hosted a Town Hall meeting on High Speed Rail. On the Peninsula, the high speed rail project is a contentious issue. Also like any recent town halls throughout the country, it has attracted anti-health care reform protesters. However, the Town Hall went smoothly as anti-health care reform protesters stayed outside and Eshoo refused to answer any questions on health care.

During the Town Hall meeting, Eshoo took a commanding role and read questions verbatim from her constituents. Executive directors and chief project managers from Caltrain and HSRA were on a panel answering the questions. Her constituents raised concerns about the community impact of the line, possible loss in property value, and potential need to eminent domain. Eshoo agreed with her constituents that HSRA needs to do much more in communicating with the public.

The meeting clearly showed incompetence from Mehdi Morshed, HSRA's executive director. At the meeting, Morshed was not able to anwser some of the questions directly and clearly. On a question about how HSRA came to the conclusion to support the Pacheco corridor, Morshed told Eshoo and the audience that the reasons are in the program EIR. The anwser was clearly not satisfactory. Eshoo later told the panel that she expects anwsers that are to be real anwsers.

On the other hand, Staff from Caltrain were able to provide direct answers on many of questions. Bob Doty explained the complexity of tunneling. Caltrain executive director reminded the audience about the need for an improved Caltrain system and how this project would benefit Caltrain.

The Town Hall showed the lack of confidence from Eshoo's constitutents on HSRA's ability to build this project and listen to the community's concerns, which has fueled a lot of opposition and fear mongering for the last several months.

A change in the HSRA leadership will go a long way to restore the confidence needed to take this project forward. The main question is whether there's political will to change the agency's leadership.

More around the Bay

BART labor action

Any transit strike is going to be frustrating for transit riders. The last known strike affecting South Bay transit riders is the Santa Cruz Metro strike in 2005, which interrupted the Highway 17 Express bus service operating between Santa Cruz and San Jose. That strike was supposedly averted but then began when negotiation suddenly broke down. That strike lasted about a month. During that strike, getting over the hill was difficult and the only service is the overcrowded Greyhound buses that ran a few trips a day.

While it is possible that the strike could be averted in the last minute, it is nonetheless a good idea to be prepared in case it happens.

If BART workers go in strike next Monday, VTA express buses in Fremont would stop temporarily outside the BART property, so that its drivers would not cross the picket line (since VTA drivers are represented by another chapter of the ATU). In Fremont, AC Transit bus line 99 continues north to Bay Fair and stopping at every BART station in between. At Bay Fair, AC Transit bus 1R continues to Oakland and Berkeley.

In addition, Amtrak Capitol Corridor service operates between San Jose and Sacramento via Fremont.

On the Peninsula, Caltrain would continue to provide regular service, but SamTrans service would stop outside BART property and route KX would serve Millbrae station to connect Caltrain riders with SFO.

Monterey bus fare cut

Because of an infusion from the Stimulus fund, MST plans to reduce the fares it raised in January. In January, the agency raised it fares by 25% from $2 per zone to $2.50 per zone. From September 5, the fares will go down from $2.50 to $2.25 per zone. Fares for seniors, disabled, and children will go down by 15 cents. That fare cut will last until the next Memorial Day in 2010.

VTA to hold meetings on bus cut environmental documents

Rather than declaring a fiscal emergency as what Caltrain done two months ago, VTA is proposing to adopt a "negative declaration" for the proposed 8% reduction in service. By state law, transit agency needs to produce a document that would identify environmental impacts. One of the exemptions available to transit agencies is by declaring a fiscal emergency (eminent bankruptcy). On the other hand, a "negative declaration" is a finding of no significant impacts upon an initial evaluation. If there were to be potential significant impacts, the agency would have to produce a larger environmental impact report, which is normally done for larger transit projects.

In the draft negative declaration, VTA says the service reduction would produce a ridership drop of 3.1% on buses and 0.4% on the light rail. The ridership reduction would not have a significant on traffic nor air quality.

VTA will hold a meeting on the draft negative declaration:

Tuesday, August 18, 2009, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Isaac Newton Senter Auditorium,

County Government Center

70 West Hedding Street, San Jose

Deadline for formal comment is August 31, 2009: tsrp.negdec@vta.org

VTA August Board Update and VTA's rude response to the Grand Jury report

Gillig Hybrid

VTA staff proposes to order 70 hybrid buses from Gillig using the Stimulus money. As reported last month, three companies submitted bids. Although the bid from Orion came out to be the lowest, VTA rejected the bid from Orion because VTA says Orion buses did not meet its specification for being over 40-feet long. VTA also rejected the bid from New Flyer because the bid came out to be the highest.

October fare change

VTA plans to move the scheduled fare change from January 2010 to October. This move would generate an addition $1 million in fare revenue, which VTA says would offset the service reduction needed.

Rude and unprofessional response to the Grand Jury Report

Michael Burns may have came in to VTA as a fresh face who has empathy for everyday transit riders. However over the years his relationship with Carl Guardino have tarnished his image.

These are the wordings that Burns chose in response to the Grand Jury Report. Not only these words are inaccurate, insulting, but down right rude:

"The report lacks balance, and appears to rely on the type of anti-BART, anti-public transit rhetoric that was circulated by a group that opposed three VTA measures that were on the ballot in the 2008 General Election."

"It appears that the grand jury was biased in its work, and did not seek and/or accept factual information in response to opinions and statements made by anti-VTA zealots."

These words may fit if Michael Burns were a partisan political thug like Karl Rove. However Burns is supposed to be apolitical. Calling someone anti-VTA zealots is like calling someone unpatriotic just for having a different political view. If people like Michael Burns cannot show tolerance and not willing to engage in substantive debates, is there any hope for this agency to change?

In its response, VTA basically defended its policies on advisory committees and claimed that it did not hide financial information prior to last year's election.

However, VTA's record is inconsistent. VTA says in its response to the Grand Jury that it told the VTA Board that it needs a new 1/4 cent sales tax to fulfill the 2000 Measure A promises, and that it is not inappropiate for VTA not to provide a Measure A expenditure plan before last November because of the bad economy. Despite quite appearent evidence that VTA cannot afford what it says it wants to build, Michael Burns asked the VTA board to "reaffirm" support for the light rail extension to Eastridge (which was nearly shovel-ready but got funding removed) and told reporters last year that Measure B was the only thing needed to build BART to Santa Clara.

Only until earlier this year the sales tax projection showed that VTA cannot afford to build BART beyond Berryessa, and which that projection was made before the recent steep sales tax drop that has triggered a proposed service reduction for January.

Although VTA disagrees with the Grand Jury's finding that VTA intends to collect the sales tax for the extension to Berryessa, VTA's response was evasive and said that it would begin collect the tax once the Measure B conditions are met. The fact is that Measure B tax could only start after VTA receives a funding agreement from the federal government for the project, and that VTA is applying for federal funds only for the portion to Berryessa. Given that VTA does not have the funding to build the line beyond Berryessa, and that VTA certainly would not be able to build it at the same time it is building the Berryessa portion, VTA in effect would begin collecting the tax only for a portion of what they campaigned for, whether it is for the initial years during construction for the remaining portion, or even if the other portion is never built at all.

If VTA were not able to receive federal funds, VTA could still build BART to Milpitas. While the Milpitas portion would provide a useful connection between BART and the light rail (in which the portion from Milpitas to Berryessa would add nothing to make the connection better), VTA would not be able to start the Measure B tax since there would not be any federal funds involved. To collect that money, VTA would have to go back to the voters to change the requirement, and that voters are unlikely to buy into another VTA lie again.

The past General Manager Pete Cipolla may have been rough around the edges and insensitive to the needs of riders, but the rudeness and thuggery from the VTA management has gone into a while new level with Michael Burns. Instead of a dialogue, he engages in intimidations against those whose primary interest is to improve transit service. His choice of word "anti-VTA zealots" clearly demonstrates his unprofessionalism and bias toward the construction/consulting lobby.

Cash for clunkers

The Cash for Clunker has become one of the most popular program in the Stimulus package. The program first ran out of money and the Congress scrambled to provide additional funds to extend the program.

The expansion of the program has received criticisms from the transit advocacy community since the program does not directly help transit agencies struggling for funds. There are also questions about the effectiveness on improving fuel efficiency.

The Cash for Clunker however, does provide some benefits. Since the program trades in car one for one, the old ones aren't going to be at a used-dealer lot or on the street. Also because the program stimulates car sales, the increased car sales will provide additional sales tax revenue. Since Sacramento has effectively eliminated direct state support for transit operations, sales taxes (1/4% Transit Development Act and an additional 1/2% at many counties) are the primary funding source for transit operators throughout the state. The economic crisis beginning last year has resulted in double digit percent reduction in sales tax revenue for most agencies, and car dealers are major contributors for sale taxes.

While it is unfortunate that transit funding is somewhat dependent on auto sales, and which it is not sustainable in the long run, nonetheless it is the process we have today until other fundamental changes take place in Sacramento.

Even with billions in federal subsidy, the increased tax revenue through this program may be small from a local perspective and many agencies will still have to make massive cuts. Obviously, more economic stimulus is needed by providing short term operating assistance to transit agencies, which will help keep many of the lifeline transit services needed the most by the low-income workers.

Around the Bay

No end in sight

The poor economy is hitting transit agencies in two different ways:

1. Declining tax revenue forces agencies to cut back service

2. Less service, higher fares and high unemployment kept riders away

Just a year ago most transit agencies saw record ridership as the gasoline prices continued to soar. This year, financial and economic pressures resulted in ridership decline. In June 2008, Caltrain had a ridership increase of more than 16% compared to 2007. This year, Caltrain lost 11.7% riders compared to 2008. Overall, Caltrain still gained ridership from 2007.

SFO shuttle

Earlier this month, BART imposed a $4 surcharge on all riders entering and and exiting the SFO station, including airport employees. While the surcharge still make BART competitive to driving and parking at the airport or taking a taxi or airport shuttle, that $4 surcharge is a significant financial hit to employees at the airport, especially those who do not work for the airlines.

The SFO did one right thing in response: operate a free shuttle between the airport and Millbrae station. Although the shuttle may look silly and adds travel time for those transferring to and from BART, it helps to cut down fares as much as in half. For those who transfer to and from Caltrain, the shuttle avoids an even sillier transfer at the San Bruno station between two BART trains, which isn't worth the $4 fare, or even the old $1.50 fare.

Although the shuttle is intended for employees, there's no restriction for other riders from using this service. As long as BART refuses to waive the surcharge for SFO's employees, you can try this shuttle.

No cell phones for transit operators

Recently, yellow stickers are appearing inside VTA buses over the driver's area. These yellow stickers remind drivers not to talk on cell phones (including hands free) or text while driving. Some agencies apparently have gone much further by prohibiting drivers from possessing a phone while on duty. In Boston, a driver got a suspension by carrying a cell phone (was reported to the management by a journalist who thought the driver was talking on the cell phone but was actually talking on the bus radio). Another driver in Boston got fired by making a stop enroute, leaving his driver seat and talk on a borrowed cell phone.

The tough rules were recently implemented in Boston as an reaction to the light rail crash on the Green Line two months ago, which the operator was texting and rear ended another light rail vehicle. The agency at that time permitted operators to carry those devices as long as they don't use them, and have fired operators for cell phone violations prior to the crash.

While drivers should never use any kind of personal communicating devices while on the driver seat, the agency in Boston was overreacting to score political points. On the other hand at VTA, because it is typical for bus drivers to relieve another enroute at a bus stop, having a cell phone in those situations keep them in contact with the supervisor. Also, it is a bad policy to encourage passengers or others to snitch on drivers who are obviously not putting anyone at risk.

Painful cuts on the way

Bus cuts meeting dates:

Campbell
Monday, August 10, 2009 at 7:00 p.m.
Campbell Community Center, Roosevelt Community Room
1 West Campbell Avenue, Campbell

San Jose
Tuesday, August 11, 2009 at 3 p.m. and 7 p.m.
County Government Center, Isaac Newton Senter Auditorium
70 West Hedding Street, San Jose

Mountain View
Wednesday, August 12, 2009 at 3:00 p.m.
City of Mountain View, Council Chambers
500 Castro Street, Mountain View

San Jose
Wednesday, August 12, 2009 at 6:00 p.m.
San Jose Public Library, Almaden Branch
6445 Camden Avenue, San Jose

San Jose
Thursday, August 13, 2009 at 3:00 p.m.
Dr. Roberto Cruz - Alum Rock Branch Public Library
3090 Alum Rock Avenue, San Jose

Milpitas
Thursday, August 13, 2009 at 7:00 p.m.
Milpitas Public Library, Room A
160 N. Main Street, Milpitas

The following is the quick summary of the proposed service reductions:

Route discontinuation: 34, 43, 76, 101, River Oaks shuttle

Weekend service cut: 11, 13, 42 (Sunday only), 45, 46 (Sunday only), 81 (weekend service operate only between Cupertino Square and Santa Clara Caltrain)

Drop in frequency from 15 to 20 mins:

- Midday: 66, 68, 72, 73, 77

- Weekend: 25 (30 to 40 minutes west of Valley Med), 70

Drop in frequency from 15 to 30 mins: 10 (early morning), 13, 26 (cut midday short trips), 31, 60 (midday)

Drop in frequency from 30 mins to 40-45 mins:

- Midday: 14, 17, 18, 19, 27, 63

- Saturday: 40, 54, 82 (hourly Sunday), 180

- Sunday: 60, 47, 54, 71, 72, 73, 180

Drop in frequency from 30 mins to hourly:

- Midday: 37 (between Capitol and Winchester), 46, 48, 49

- All day: 39

- Saturday: 27, 31, 35

- Sunday: 57

Route change: 47 - combined with line 33 via Calaveras.

Light Rail: Mountain View service would end at 10:30pm. Two night bus trips would replace light rail from Tasman to Fair Oaks serving all LRT stops and run non-stop to Mountain View.

Nearly all bus lines will have some trips deleted and service hours reduced during early mornings and evenings. Line 22 would also have overnight service eliminated. Along with the proposed cut of SamTrans' overnight service, there would no longer be any overnight transit option available along the Caltrain corridor.

These proposed cuts are a strong reminiscent of the bus cuts VTA made in 2002 and 2003. During that time, VTA reduced service on many routes from 15-30 minute headways into odd headways of 20-45 minutes. Only during the COA process when service was added back on some routes by diverting resources from elsewhere in the system. This time, the same service is getting threatened again.

Some of the frequency cuts may look minor, but the odd headways proposed for many routes make transfers difficult. For example, lines 68 and light rail operate on the same headway and passengers have timed transfers at the Santa Teresa Station 4 times an hour. Under this proposal, timed transfer would only be available once an hour midday.

The more important question is whether VTA would restore the service once the economy recovers. After the cuts in 2002 and 2003, VTA did not significantly increase service levels and failed to meet the 2000 Measure A promise to increase bus service over the year 2000 level. Last fall, Michael Burns claimed that Measure B was necessary because bus service could not be decimated to fund the BART project. Right now, bus service is being decimated. If Burns does not agree to restore service to at least January 2008 level as soon as funding becomes available, then he is breaking his promise and therefore should not deserve any federal funds for a rail line to the Flea Market.

Tomorrow, VTA Riders' Union will hold a protest and a press conference ast 6:00pm at the San Jose Diridon Station over the proposed fare hikes and service cuts by not only VTA, but also by Caltrain and other transit agencies. Earlier in the day, Transform will hold an event in Downtown Oakland urging federal lawmakers to provide more assistance to transit agencies for operations.

Finally, the so-call no tax-hike state budget is nothing but a Republican scam to protect the rich and deceive the middle class. Through some budget manuvers to shift money from one pot to another, many local governments would be ending up with a larger budget shortfall, forcing them to cut service and raise taxes and fees beyond what they have already done. Under this settlement, AC Transit would lose an additional $6 million with their local taxes being "borrowed" by the state. AC Transit is already losing $26 million through the cuts in State Transit Assistance alone, which was diverted to cover the general fund shortfall.

East Bay taxpayers have been generous to AC Transit by overwhelmingly approving tax increases to protect bus operations and hold fares stable. At the end, it appears that their generosity have been exploited by Sacramento politicians.

---

Update: Click here for details of the bus cut proposal

Rounds of bus cuts meetings

VTA has scheduled 7 public meetings from August 10 to August 13 on bus cuts. The times and locations have yet to be finalized.

SamTrans has scheduled 4 bus cuts meetings starting next week:

• * July 27 - Municipal Building
  33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco
• * July 28 - SamTrans headquarters
  1250 San Carlos Ave., San Carlos
• * July 29 - City Council Chambers
  701 Laurel St. , Menlo Park
• * Aug. 6 - Cunha Intermediate School
  600 Church St., Half Moon Bay

Besides bus service reduction, SamTrans also puts another fare increase on the table, which if implemented, SamTrans will join Muni and AC Transit on the $2 club. SamTrans also proposes to raise paratransit fares and reduce service.

VTA July update

The VTA Board will meet today at noon. Here's some of the items on the agenda:

Hybrid bus procurement

The item would authorize the agency to purchase 107 low floor hybrid buses to replace the older buses on the current fleet. Three manufacturers have submitted proposals: Gillig, Orion, and New Flyer. Funding for this purchase is provided by the Stimulus funds and 2006's Prop 1B. The staff will come back to the board once a vendor has been selected.

October fare change

As reported earlier, the VTA board will likely approve the scheduled fare change from January to October. The staff report also says that they're planning a service reduction for October. VTA is experiencing a 21% drop in sales tax revenue, which VTA earlier anticipated for a 8% decrease. Even if the board gives approval for a service reduction, it is unlikely that the staff will be able to conduct proper public outreach required for an October service cut.

Labor agreements

VTA has settled with three of its unions (TAEA, SEIU, AFSCME). The new agreement would not provide wage increases and would impose mandatory furloughs, but would not result in any employee layoffs unless the economic condition goes dramatically worse. VTA has yet to reach an agreement with ATU. Without an amended agreement, it is likely that VTA will have to further reduce service and layoff ATU employees to cut costs.

Hamilton station settlement

The Hamilton light rail station was built on top of a berm connecting to an overpass. After service started in 2005, the station area has experienced earth settlement and require frequent maintenance on the track to make sure the track is properly aligned. The VTA Board is expected to approve a contract to fix the settlement issue. In the meantime, VTA has reduced powerwashing on the platform to cut the amount of water seeping into the berm, which is causing the settlement.

The repair will require two weekend light rail shutdown in that area.

UPDATE: VTA has confirmed an 8% service cut for January as reported here earlier in the comment section.