Print
EmailIn the world of transportation policy analysis, there is a lot of anticipation for the first quarter ridership reports on public transit. Most agencies ended 2008 with large increases in transit use. The larger demand placed pressure on budgets and had policymakers calling for higher taxes to expand service. The larger demand also had some suggesting that society had fundamentally shifted behavior away from the personal automobile, which has federal officials calling for massive spending increases in traditional transit and high speed rail with the next reauthorization bill.
In her weekly update,Joni Earl gave us a preview of Sound Transit's first quarter results: Despite the shaky economy, ridership on Sound Transit buses and trains was up the first three months of this year. Through March, Sound Transit trains and buses carried an average of about 55,500 every weekday, an increase of 10 percent from a year earlier. The average weekday boardings for ST Express buses increased 10 percent, Sounder commuter trains 5 percent, and Tacoma Link light rail 5 percent. In the month of March alone, ridership was up 6 percent from the same month a year earlier.
When compared to the same quarter last year, ridership is higher, but what Sound Transit does not say is overall transit demand is down. Sound Transit ended 2008 with an average use of 57,700 trips per day. During the first quarter of 2009, Earl says the agency now serves about 55,000 trips per day. Comparatively, that is nearly a 4 percent drop.
Given current fuel prices and high unemployment rates, transit demand should continue to fall throughout the rest of the year. This should relieve most of the pressure on transit budgets but I'm skeptical that policymakers will slow their call for higher taxes. The Legislature just passed SB 5433 , a measure that gives transit agencies the ability to raise car tabs by $20 per vehicle, subject to voter approval. The same bill also gives King County the authority to raise property taxes by 7.5 cents per $1,000 of assessed value, without asking voters, to increase transit service.
Just like honey bees in a spring garden, these new taxes just might be too much sweetener for lawmakers to resist.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Mon, May 18, 5:04 p.m. Inappropriate
So what you're saying is, the spike in ridership we saw last year when gas was really expensive is going away, but ridership is still climbing on the same path it has been for the last decade or so?
You don't say. It's almost as if the system is maturing, slowly bringing more passengers, regardless of fluctuations in outside factors.
By the way, when you say "what Sound Transit does not say" - you must not be reading the same ridership reports I am. Oh, wait, you are, because you cite them. Don't contradict yourself too much, or people will notice and start treating you like some kind of crazy anti-transit kook!
Posted Tue, May 19, 12:14 a.m. Inappropriate
The point of the post seemed to be first, you get a different perspective about growth depending on what time period you compare. Sound Transit is comparing year to year in the comments. But the data shows that month to month, in recent months, gives a different perspective. It is often the case that the best data in support of one's organization gets the focus in the press releases.
A related point seems to be: even if there's reduced pressure on transit budgets, there will still be a call for tax increases. I'm not sure reduced ridership is going to reduce the fixed costs associated with providing transit service. eg, if buses that were 100% full become 95% full, there's less farebox recovery, and unless the fixed costs of operating the bus go down, the total revenue picture actually gets worse.
The impact of fuel prices on the transit budgets will depend in part on what type of hedging the bus operator has in place. Gas prices do seem to be going up, but maybe the bus providers are not as exposed to these increases right now.
If there's any increase in car tabs or in property taxes to pay for transportation, it probably won't be voted on or considered by the council before the Nov election.
Posted Tue, May 19, 9:57 a.m. Inappropriate
Ben, you only make yourself look infantile when you resort to personal attacks. If your position is in reality supported by the facts then you shouldn't have to stoop so low as your closing remarks. Take the lead from sjenner and offer constructive points.
Posted Tue, May 19, 10:04 a.m. Inappropriate
No, bthornton, this piece is simply asinine. Ridership fluctuates annually for several reasons, so the simple concept that ridership has gone down relative to a month ago is not really a relevant point - that's cyclic.
Ennis could have made a useful commentary on fuel prices affecting transit ridership and congestion, but he didn't. He simply doesn't understand the statistic he's quoting.
Posted Tue, May 19, 10:52 a.m. Inappropriate
Ben, please don't try to steer the conversation off point (a habit you're rather fond of, it seems). My point was that your last paragraph was below the belt and unbecoming of a "Crosscut Writer." Snarky-ness doesn't accomplish anything. When you do that you're coming across as the real "kook," and in all honesty you're much less likely to convince anyone of anything with that sort of attitude. Maybe that's appropriate for the Seattle Transit Blog, but not Crosscut.
Posted Tue, May 19, 12:06 p.m. Inappropriate
ok, now I'm really curious. What have been past fluctuations from month to month, for example, was there some sort of a drop in 2007 or 2008 the way there has been in 2009? I tried to find some stats on the Metro web site of month by month reports and could not find it.
Obviously weather events, like in Dec 2008, can have a major impact on any one particular month. So we would expect to see a big increase in Jan 2009 compared to Dec 2008 because Dec numbers would be so low.
If we see that in years past, the ridership has been trending upwards month to month, and then we see a downward trend in the first few months of 2009, I do think that is interesting to point out. It would also be interesting to see on which routes did the ridership drop most: longer distance ones at commute hours, or shorter distance ones within a shorter geographic area at any and all hours of the day?
Also interesting to compare: any changes in paratransit ridership or vanpools.
Posted Tue, May 19, 2:47 p.m. Inappropriate
My new driver on the Metro 72 in the morning drives like a nut, so a lot fewer people make it to the stop before the bus gets there than before. I bet they just go home and give up on trying to get on the bus. I bet the same thing is happening all across the region's bus systems.
Posted Tue, May 19, 4:29 p.m. Inappropriate
A better data set to track is the total ridership (boardings) for all the transit agencies - Metro, Pierce, Snohomish, Everett, along with Sound Transit - that serve roughly the same area as ST. This would take into account ST's regional service changes that over time tend to eat into local ridership.
Posted Tue, May 19, 5:30 p.m. Inappropriate
Yes, and another point to consider when looking at month to month data is the number of regular work days, holidays, and weekend days. A challenge is backing out transfers from one agency to another, for example, if a person takes Kitsap transit to the ferry dock, walks on, then catches a bus in Seattle, that could be counted as 1, 2 or 3 uses of transit.