Proposed reduction in KCATA service

[KCgridlock]

Another 25 percent would kill whats left of the Metro. They should just shut it down and hopfully people will fund a bigger, more widespread and user friendly system. This many cuts would put daily ridership under 30k, flat out embarissing.

Posted on Wed, Jun. 18, 2003

ATA board will meet today to discuss cutbacks in bus service
By JOHN SHULTZ
The Kansas City Star

Facing a projected $12 million budget deficit in 2004, the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority will float plans for deep service cuts at the group's board meeting today.

ATA officials have warned since last year that bus service and staffing could be slashed as much as 25 percent because of plunging sales tax revenue if other funding sources were not found.

Last year, ATA general manager Mark Huffner said the agency was counting on the success of the $511 million statewide transportation package. After voters rejected the measure, Huffner said the agency might look to local, state and federal governments for additional funding.

Earlier this year, the ATA announced that bus ridership was down.

Huffner could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

On the chopping block would be some Kansas City bus routes and service on other Metro routes. Specifics on the cuts to be announced today were unavailable Tuesday night.

Agency board members have been pushing for a bistate-style tax or similar effort to shoulder the load of regional transit.

Last week, the group announced its desire to build a broad $158 million public transportation web featuring shuttles, vans and fast-moving buses to link the metropolitan area. Among planners' possible funding mechanisms is a quarter-cent sales tax for the seven-county area.

The ATA also announced that it was pursuing an additional $10 million in federal funds to go toward a proposed $25 million bus rapid transit system. Other funding for the system already is earmarked.

The system, which planners hope to have in place by 2005, would run from the River Market to 75th Street.

To reach John Shultz, call (816) 234-4427 or send e-mail to jshultz@kcstar.com.

Coming up

The board of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority will meet at 2 p.m. today in the Breen Building, 1200 E. 18th St.

[ignatius]

They've got to find other sources of income. How are other city transportation systems funded, particularly those our size?

Another case for why sprawl is bad. City services have to be spread too thin to be functional.

[KCPowercat]

It's not just here...I just read somewhere where Pittsburgh transit is thinking about no buses after 9pm....

I heard on 980 that the cuts included many weekend routes and express service to the stadiums.....weekend routes could probably be cut if needed but not that stadium service....there are a LOT of Chiefs fans that use the bus then.....

I wouldn't mind the ATA going away with a new region wide organization in place...as long as we don't lose the BRT line possibility.

[ignatius]

It doesn't look like BRT will be affected. That funding appears to be in place. But as a daily bus rider, I do hope that urban core lines are not reduced. These lines are busy all day long, sometimes standing room only. I hope the ATA just cuts the suburban lines, which have severely low ridership.

I think the ATA should entirely kill suburban lines, until they learn how to build pedestrian friendly neighborhoods, and use those resources to improve a functional urban system.

I forgot... on funding, we (MO) have the second lowest gas tax in the country and we have the worst roads and transit to prove it. Gas tax increase is what must be pushed.

[KCgridlock]

I think it will have to hit bottom before people realize kc needs a new much larger and better funded system.

Cutting the midtown routes will show the city dwellers we are in trouble

Cutting the stadium routes would show the suburban dwellers. Over two hundred buses run to chiefs games giving those who never use transit any other time a reason to support transit issues.

[KCPowercat]

I agree, I would have no problem with a couple more cents gas tax.......

I would seriously hope they wouldn't cut their busy lines at all, but build upon them.....I know the suburban line Gridlock rides sometimes is pretty busy but there are probably plenty they could cut w/o many being too upset.

[KCgridlock]

I agree, I would have no problem with a couple more cents gas tax.......

I would seriously hope they wouldn't cut their busy lines at all, but build upon them.....I know the suburban line Gridlock rides sometimes is pretty busy but there are probably plenty they could cut w/o many being too upset.

They can replace all the JO buses with ford escorts. . The only time those get used is for Chiefs games.

[dangerboy]

The current problem is with the sales tax in KCMO not keeping up, so it will likely be KCMO routes that get cut, not suburban routes. In 2002 the KCMO sales tax receipts actually declined by 5%, even with all of the retail development on the Plaza and in the Northland, and increases in most suburbs. The retail TIFS aren't paying for themselves and aren't making up for declines at Blue Ridge, Antioch, and Bannister Malls as well as other lagging retail areas.

The timing of this announcement is interesting, with the Smart Moves unveiling set for later in the month. I don't doubt the realit of the budget situation, but I wonder if the timing of the announcement is partly planned to get more attention focused on transit in advance of the Smart Moves push.

[carfreekc]

I forgot... on funding, we (MO) have the second lowest gas tax in the country and we have the worst roads and transit to prove it. Gas tax increase is what must be pushed.

I think that both KS and MO prohibit state gas tax money from being used on transit. I'd have to go look that up to verify 100%, but I've been told that previously, and I think a lot of states have that restriction. The federal gas tax goes toward some transit, but most federal $$ can't be used for operating expenses, which is the problem the ATA is facing for 2004.

At the ATA board meeting, they said the cuts would affect KCMO routes. All the #s they gave for route eliminations were KCMO only.

No Sunday service at all. No Saturday evening service. Drastic reductions on the rest of the week. Basically it would be a M-F 8-5 get-to-work service, not much the rest of the time. More specifics will come out in the next couple of weeks when they announce public meetings.

I don't think Smart Moves will save it since from what I've heard of the plan, it's based with the existing system as a lot of the local routes with some current express buses slated for rapid service in the plan. If the existing service shrinks a lot, that will make it harder to do something like Smart Moves.

It will be completely pathetic if Kansas City allows these service cuts to happen.

[dangerboy]

This morning the Star reports that the ATA wants to ask KCMO voters for another 1/2 cent in sales tax money to preserve the existing system and possible expand it a little. While I am a big supporter of transit, I really have a problem voting for something that isn't part of a regional system. Besides, with the sales tax revenue declining, the new funding would continue shrinking going foward. It would be a hard sell for most voters that never use the system, unless they propose an expansion that more people could see themselves using.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 119179.htm

[carfreekc]

I've thought the same thing, dangerboy, about the sales tax decrease. If it keeps decreasing, then won't more of the same thing still have the same problem in the end? Problem is, if not a sales tax, then what, realistically?

Regional is ideal, too. But this will become a chicken-and-the-egg issue. If we continue to gut the system we do have, even fewer people will be able to see themselves using it, and building a regional system will be that much more expensive and harder to get support for.

Last year KCMO moved some federal money from projects that weren't on schedule to the ATA to use for maintenance costs. (http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 567723.htm, "The budget includes a one-time infusion from Kansas City of about $1.6 million, which the city will generate by postponing intersection improvements.") I wonder if the city is on schedule on all its projects or if there's more federal money that could be shifted.

The bottom line is that KC looooves to talk about becoming a world-class city. World-class cities have transit service on Sundays, to say the least. Whether we get there by a local sales tax or a regional sales tax or some other means, these harsh of service cuts cannot happen.

[KCgridlock]

I don’t want to see cuts either, but another half cent won’t help. KCMO already pays a ½ center for transit. With another ½ cent, KCMO will be paying 1 full cent for a bare bones bus system. Then KCMO along with the suburbs will be asked again to pay another ½ or so for SmartMoves. KCMO will vote down SmartMoves because they are already paying a full cent for transit. Eventually, in a few years, KCATA will be right back where it is today needing more money or else.

They have got to come up with a better plan, region wide and get some more fed money which KC has been getting very little because we invest so little locally, feds like to match local money. Missouri also needs start funding transit. Missouri is one of the only states without dedicated transit funding and the only state with two major metro areas with no funding.

The who system needs to be redesigned, everything. Unless you are traveling from Downtown to the Plaza (and even that is pretty infrequent and slow) it sucks.

Start over. There are cities like Springfield that have higher ridership numbers than KC. A city our size should have about 800 buses not 250. We have no system now, paying a full cent sales tax for 30,000 riders is ridiculous.

[tat2kc]

The ATA is regional (or mostly) but funded primarily by KCMO taxpayers. The board is comprised of representatives of areas that do not contribute any money to the operation of the transit. Both the funding and the board makeup needs to be completely revamped, sot that it is a regional system, with regional funding, with a board that reflects those areas that actually fund anb recieve services.

A bi-state, regional gas tax, or a small additional fee on vehicle licenses makes the most sense. Tack on a couple bucks on vehicles licensed in the affected area, or adding a small gas tax could provide better service and more stable funding.

[mean]

I wouldn't be opposed to a gas tax, but I can just hear the masses..."but gas is already so expensive!"

Yep, burn it down and start over. We've spent too many years and dollars on repeated failures. People aren't stupid, they know that no pittance of a tax will get them on the bus. The ATA needs to be shut down. Lay everyone off, I guess. Sucks, but that's what happens when companies fail. I don't think being a mysterious, quasi-governmental corporation should grant them special treatment.

So what would replace the ATA? I agree it must be regional, but how regional? In planning for the future, should we include Lawrence, St. Joe, Warrensburg? I'd really like to see fast, cheap transit to St. Louis...heh.

[dangerboy]

The ATA has studied commuter rail to various surrounding cities. One through Eastern Jack to Odessa is their most likely route after (or if) the Joco line materializes. Then it's Lee's Summit to Pleasant Hill and Warrensburg. Other lines to St. Joseph and Lawrence/Topeka were in the study, but would be much further away.

The first priority of a new system should be running a feasible 24-hour service connecting Downtown and the Plaza with each other and to the denser residential areas in the Southland and East Side. Second would be Downtown/suburb and suburb/suburb commuter routes. Including the surrounding cities would be nice eventually, but for now we need to focus on the five county immediate metro area.

[KCPowercat]

24 hours? Damn, it's hard for cities as large as boston to run 24 hour service....I'm all for it though.

Can we just tear down the ATA and build it all up again with SmartMoves?

[kcteen]

Can we just tear down the ATA and build it all up again with SmartMoves?

Agreed. KCATA has had its chance. Its time to redo the system from the ground up.

KcTeen

[KCgridlock]

When I talk to high up people at the ATA about these issues, they seem to have very little passion about transit in KC. They act like it's just a job and do whatever they need to do to get by. Most of them can't even answer the simplest of questions about their own system and I am sure most have neven even used to system to get around town.

The ATA needs some elected people, (even Chastain) that have true vision and want to see the system built up so that KC can become the city that it could become.

If the ATA really wanted to do something they would. They need to do more than paint the buses.

I think most the people on this forum could do a better job at promoting transit and selling people on what a good quality transit system could do for KC.

[ignatius]

I've had similar experiences when talking to ATA heads. Most actually drive to work. A good transit system needs to be run by those who actually use (and depend) on their own product.

Shutting them down and starting over from scratch is the best idea I've heard yet.

[carfreekc]

Can we just tear down the ATA and build it all up again with SmartMoves?

No.

In case anyone here hasn't looked at the Smart Moves site (http://www.marc.org/smartmoves.htm), the proposal is a joint effort between the Mid-America Regional Council, the ATA, Johnson County Transit, and Unified Government (Wyco/KCK) transit. It's not planned as a wholesale replacement for the existing system and the existing agencies.

It's also based on the existing system we have today. If we don't have a system running (which would be insane), it would be that much more expensive to implement. And Smart Moves is still using the existing transit agencies; they're not talking about throwing the baby out with the bath water and shutting any agencies down.

I assume that y'all who are saying "shut down the ATA" are also going to volunteer to drive those who depend on the buses to whatever they need to do when they need to do it? You're going to volunteer to drive the blind and the old and the poor to work and the doctor and school and the grocery store and the occasional movie, right?

When I talk to high up people at the ATA about these issues, they seem to have very little passion about transit in KC. They act like it's just a job and do whatever they need to do to get by.
...
The ATA needs some elected people, (even Chastain) that have true vision and want to see the system built up so that KC can become the city that it could become.

If the ATA really wanted to do something they would.

I'm hardly saying the ATA is perfect. But it's too bad you didn't have the chance to attend the ATA board meeting last Wednesday to hear the general manager's presentation about the current situation and the proposal they're having to look at. Passion comes in many forms, not just a guy waving a clipboard around with petitions. I believe that Mark Huffer (the gm) is passionate about our transit, but he may be quieter about it than oh, say, Chastain (who I wouldn't want even running my elevator much less our transit system. He isn't interested in working *with* anyone....which would not work.). If they didn't care at all, they would have slashed the service this year instead of concocting a delicate budget balancing act to put cuts off as long as possible.

We may have a weak transit system here. The ATA may not be perfect. But the last two and a half years that I've been back in KC, they've gotten me to work and school and the doctor and movies and concerts reliably so I haven't had to own a car. Yeah, it takes some planning to set your life up that way to do that here. It would in Denver, too.

Yeah, I'd like to see some changes in some of the things the ATA does. But "shutting down" the ATA and electing officials isn't going to be a panacea. Elected officials aren't going to automatically ride the bus any more than the current nonelected ones are; most of the elected ones in Denver didn't ride much if any. Same story in Chicago with their board.