Last December, TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen used his
hour in front of the City Club’s weekly luncheon to make a big
announcement: He had Fareless Square, an iconic symbol of Portland’s
green and transit-friendly ways, in his crosshairs.
As part of a several-step plan to “deal with issues of fare evasion,
loud and intimidating behavior, and criminal activity on the system,”
Hansen said, he would propose cutting back Fareless Square’s hours to 7
am to 7 pm in early 2008, and follow up with a more comprehensive look
at whether Fareless Square should be retained at all. Currently,
Fareless Square operates without time constrictions.
But after two public hearings last week—where Fareless Square
fans were out in force to protest the proposal—Hansen dropped his
idea.
“After evaluating more than 700 emails, letters, and comments from
two public hearings held earlier this week, one thing is clear: There
is a lot of passion and strongly held views about Fareless Square,”
Hansen said in a statement on January 18. “Taking quick action on
changing Fareless Square is obviously easier said than done. Over the
next several months, as I announced in early December, we will
establish a public process on how best to evaluate the future of
Fareless Square, and address security issues in Fareless. It will be an
open, thorough process that involves and engages the public.”
If Hansen wants to re-evaluate Fareless Square, however, there are
two big lessons to be learned from the short, failed process to curtail
the fareless zone. For starters, attendees at two public hearings on
January 16 were irate that no one from TriMet was at the front of the
room, listening to public testimony. And the majority of those who
testified were skeptical that Fareless Square had anything to do with
safety and security on TriMet—especially since the recent
high-profile incidents that prompted TriMet’s new focus on security
occurred in Gresham and Hillsboro.
At both a morning meeting in the Lloyd District, and an evening
meeting in the Portland Building downtown, a stenographer took notes
while a contracted facilitator called names of those who wanted to
testify. One TriMet official welcomed the crowd at both meetings, but
took a seat in the back during the testimony. Hansen and the TriMet
board of directors—who will ultimately make the decision on what
to do about Fareless Square—were absent.
“I’m embarrassed that there are no members of TriMet’s governing
body here listening to citizens,” says city council candidate and
transit activist Chris Smith at the evening session. Another man added:
“Do [TriMet officials] plan on listening to audio tapes, or are we just
here to talk to each other?”
Others who testified questioned Hansen’s assertion that Fareless
Square’s hours had an impact on safety and security, and demanded that
TriMet produce data showing the correlation.
“I would like to know, where are the preponderance of the incidents
that are such a problem? Where are the crimes occurring? When are they
happening?” asked Liam Zuk, testifying at the morning session. “And how
would changing Fareless Square actually improve that? So far, TriMet
hasn’t offered any information on that.”
But TriMet doesn’t have any evidence beyond what they’ve heard.
“You’re right, we don’t have statistics on that,” TriMet
spokesperson Mary Fetsch says. “This is what we have heard complaints
about from our riders. And the police have made comments, that the
undesirable behavior happens later in the evening in Fareless
Square.”