Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 05:07:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Spaulding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Mpls] Transit budget non-solution
Raise fares?
Been there. Done that. Rush hour fares went up 25 to 50 cents last
year. Basically, its a tax on bus riders, courtesy Tim "no-tax" Pawlenty.
Higher fares have helped stall MetroTransit's ridership numbers.
- - -
Now, if you are looking for revenue to raise, the gas tax hasn't
been raised in something like fifteen years. If memory serves me
correctly, it cost 60 or 75 cents to ride a bus back when we last raised
the gas tax in the late 1980s; bus fares have shot up since then. But the
gas tax sits and sits.
REPLY:
The gas tax is a state wide tax. It is unlikely that we could get it
increased to benefit just the Twin Cities. We could do a Cook County
Illinois approach and boost the tax 30 cents a gallon in the seven county
metro region. If that or a lower tax passed, and it is unlikely, and if
people took mass transit instead of driving, the funding source would
drop as the need for mass transit increased.
I do agree that we need a additional dedicated source of revenue for
transit. I would think that a one percent increase in the seven county
area sales tax would be more appropriate. It provides a stable base that
should balance with the need.
Also someone mentioned that certain transit funds are now being
dropped into the state general revenue pot. That would be a practice to
stop.
Thanks.
John O'Neal
Holland
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 07:33:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Bruce Gaarder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Mpls] Re: bus strike
- - - Let's be frank, if some competing transit operation wanted to run
along a Metro Transit route and skim the cream, what does that mean? MT
still loses money on that cream route. If some company wanted to step in
and run unsubsidized buses or mini-vans or limos on the Woodbury route,
it would be saving the taxpayers money. - - -
REPLY:
I know that the above excerpt is out of context and not your main
point but it addresses several other comments that have been made on the
list. This approach saves space.
Passenger services must be regulated as a matter of public safety
policy. No private firm will step in unless, like other private
utilities, they have both a monopoly and a guaranteed profit. That is the
only was they can reasonable justify the capital expenses and operating
costs to their investors. We will really be dropping money into mass
transit if all those overheads are added.
Suburban bus companies, not MTCO subsidized, may well be getting
federal transportation funds to help with costs as well as property tax
or other local subsidies. They have higher fare box fees. I am sure that
they are not operating at a "profit" without help. Do they buy their own
buses? Do they maintain them?
Thanks.
John O'Neal
Holland
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
