TERRENCE COLEMAN was dressed for a funeral. The senior citizen Portlander, a daily bus rider and veteran, stood at the front of a mock funeral along the bus mall near Pioneer Courthouse Square, stepping in slow time to a jazzy New Orleans dirge.
Members of public transit advocacy group Organizing People Activating Leaders (OPAL) paraded under the hot sun on August 30, mourning the passing of “affordable transit” just before TriMet’s fare hike and bus service cuts kicked in after Labor Day weekend.
OPAL—a grassroots group that’s one of the few sharp-eyed watchdogs keeping tabs on TriMet—says the system-wide fare increase to $2.50, the tweaks to more than 20 bus lines, and the axing of the Free Rail Zone were not unfortunate-but-inevitable events. Not only could the fare hike and cuts have been much softer, the group argues, but TriMet’s changes also discriminate, in particular, against low-income riders and people of color.
“We hope this is not the new normal,” says OPAL organizer Jared Franz. “The reason they cut service and raised fares is that it’s the easy thing to do. There’s not enough resistance.”
It’s entirely likely that TriMet is unnecessarily preparing for a worst-case-scenario.
Late this spring, TriMet’s board approved $12 million in cuts and revenue-raising measures, based on a handful of assumptions: 1) Its payroll tax revenue would come in $3 million lower than needed, 2) $4 million would be lost because of anticipated cuts to federal transit funding, and 3) TriMet’s impasse with its union over lush healthcare benefits could eat up $5-10 million. But then, over the summer, the union fight was resolved in TriMet’s favor, and the feds passed a transportation bill without a $4 million cut (though the money hasn’t been distributed yet). As for the payroll tax, for the past two years TriMet underestimated the amount of money that would come in from the tax—low-balling the number by $7.7 million in 2011 and an additional $15.8 million in 2012.
TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch says TriMet is sticking with its budget cuts for the time being, in part because that $4 million from the feds probably won’t come down the pipeline until spring at the earliest. “As we see the economy bounce up and down, we are closely monitoring the revenues,” Fetsch says via email.
If the agency winds up with extra cash, it will go to meeting ongoing obligations like fuel costs, and rising benefit and retirement costs. “Then when there are sustainable funds available, we would look to restore service,” notes Fetsch.
But even if TriMet was right in tightening its belt to the extreme, OPAL drew up an “alternative budget” that would have closed the $12 million budget gap without cutting services so deeply. Among OPAL’s suggestions are that TriMet scrap a $3 million donation to the Portland Streetcar, start charging for parking at Park & Ride lots, and increase its rainy day fund only by $5 million, rather than the $10 million it has planned to set aside
Meanwhile, the Mercury has learned that OPAL is looking into whether the service cuts and fare increase violate federal civil rights law. Under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, public transit agencies are banned from discriminating against low-income and minority groups.
The issue here is who’s hurt the most by the hike to a $2.50 flat fare.
According to TriMet’s demographic data, low-income and minority riders were more likely to purchase two-zone tickets than more expensive all-zone tickets. Last week, the cost of two-zone fares went up 19 percent (from $2.10 to $2.50), whereas the jump to $2.50 was only a 4.2 percent increase for riders who paid cash for all-zone tickets—a group less likely to be low-income and more likely to be white.
TriMet’s federally required report on the impact of its fare increase found the increase of cash fares would have a “possible” disparate impact on low-income and minority riders.
The report also repeatedly notes that the steepest increase—a 23.5 percent fare jump—hits people who buy two-zone monthly passes (not people who pay with cash), a group that’s wealthier and whiter than the usual cash ticket buyers.
In response, TriMet says it took several steps to soften the blow of controversial moves like ending the Free Rail Zone, including distributing $1 million in discount tickets to Portland nonprofits, not increasing the cost of fares for senior citizens, and nixing its initial plan to make transit tickets good only one-way. The result is that the reduced service and increased fares likely don’t violate civil rights law. But that distinction might not make a big difference to squeezed riders like Coleman, the funeral-leader.
Said Coleman, high-stepping down the bus mall: “We’re going to have to schedule everything tighter. Shopping, entertainment, everything.”
Thank god for OPAL, without them THERE WOULD BE ZERO RESISTANCE!
Yeah, this really gets to me.
The concept that poor people typically bought 2-zone instead of all-zone tickets is most defiantly true! Same goes for buying 1 or 2 week passes, as oppose to monthly passes. So YES, these dramatic cuts do affect poorer riders… especially when digging for a dime has now become digging for two quarters.
I myself (when not attending school) have always bought weekly passes – necessary if you work a regular job or otherwise, have somewhere to be most days. It also made more sense to buy the weekly passes, instead of 10-ticket books (which, if you work all week, would get used up in 5 days).
What pisses me off about Trimet’s changes is that, before i was able to buy passes at most grocery stores. So i had always been within walking distance of getting a pass. ALSO, i could validate the [then scratch-off] passes ON THE DAY I DECIDED TO USE THEM! Now Trimet’s got it all fucked up – the price of a weekly pass has gone from $21 to fucking $26!!! And what really doesn’t make any goddamned sense is that NOW all passes can only be bought at either a ticket booth or the Pioneer Square office. However, since i live no-where near within walking distance of a MAX line nor dt, that forces me to pay $2.50 just to get to a place where i can buy a pass. Either that, or chance it on a pass that’s expired by a day. Sometimes the driver notices, sometimes they don’t.
Nixing free rail zone – THAT was a stupid fucking idea. No only does that make living dt LESS appealing, but also shopping. Folks will be LESS likely to head dt and spend money now – wonder what the loss in business revenue will be like now, huh?
Last thing, Trimet’s service has IMMEDIATELY gotten shittier since the cuts. It’s now way more common to have to wait 20 fucking minutes for for a “frequent service” bus – during RUSH HOUR. And when the bus does show up, it will be 2 or 3 of them back-to-back!!! Plus, drivers seem to be blowing right by riders more often too, the fuck?!
“Hey man, it’s cheaper than a taxi! Hahahaha!”
~~~> And the FORMER bus driver responded, “hey dude, it hardly cheaper than owning junk box car! And its not cheaper than car2go! hahahahaha”
Al, it’s crazy that car2go *is* actually cheaper for many trips.
“The issue here is who’s hurt the most by the hike to a $2.50 flat fare.”
All fare increases have a disparate impact on the poor. In fact, charging a fare at all has a disparate impact on the poor. So, can someone explain to me how this fare increase violates the Civil Rights Act, but charging a fare in the first place doesn’t?
Torgo, the Civil Rights violation charges are [admittedly] debatable. However, OPAL did make its case that these dramatic fare hikes do impact poor people and people of color disproportionally. If you need it explained to you why it may be so, try reading the article again, please.
After that, if you STILL need it explained to you, then that means you’ve already made up your mind. In which case, why even ask?
DamosA, you seem to have misunderstood what I wrote. You seem to have missed the part where I wrote “all fare increases have a disparate impact on the poor.”
I will rephrase for clarity: Of course these fare hikes have a disproportionate impact on poor people. Every penny of the fare above zero has a disproportionate impact on poor people. It doesn’t matter how much they raise the fare. If they charge a fare at all, then it has a disproportionate impact on poor people. Therefore, if there is a civil rights violation, then then any non-zero fare is a violation.
Since I find it unlikely that any court will find that all bus fares in any amount violate the Civil Rights Act, I was interested in how people might distinguish between the old fare and the new fare. It seems to me that they would have to argue that the old fare did not have a disproportionate impact on the poor, but the new one does. I think that would be a very difficult argument to make, and I was interested in what people thought the argument might be.
But, again, no one is suggesting that fare increases do not have a disproportionate impact on the poor. Sometimes I think that you’re deliberately misunderstanding things.
Quit bitching at the bus drivers! They are not the ones that decide fare increases! I know someone that works for Trimet, and this person told me that Fred Hanson squandered away a few million dollars, then used the gas price increase excuse to hide his mistake, then he retired with a cushy amount of money, but no one ever said anything. Trimet hid this from the public!
One of the many reasons why I moved out of downtown Portland; no more fareless on the trains. Just not worth paying $2.50 to ride 12 blocks. Walking around in downtown is very shitty anyways; far too many yuppie’s with axe cologne running around. It’s fucking disgusting. Save some of your money and buy the better stuff; like Joop. Also use fucking deodorant along with your perfume/cologne; unless you like smelling like BO mixed in with your shitty ass taste in cologne/perfume.
I hardly ever go downtown if I can help it now; it just looks and smells like a shithole.
It would be nice if Tri-Met brought back fareless square only for Portland residents; all others have to pay. =)
And Torgo, it’s likely YOU misunderstood what I wrote. I said that the Civil Rights violation charges were debatable. And it does seem that Trimet did an adequate job [legally] of covering their asses. Afterall, we all know just how difficult it is to PROVE allegations of racial bias. Basically, unless someone were brazen or dumb enough to commit it to policy or get caught on camera, it’s nearly impossible.
But still, this does not mean that it has NOT taken place… even inadvertently. So i still say that OPAL has made it’s case that Trimet’s dramatic fare hikes may indeed affect people of color disproportionately (though i suppose one could see how the average White Portlander might have a difficult time understanding this, so i digress).
Anyways, such allegations don’t even concern me so much as what IS a current fact: that these fare hikes DO affect poor people and that Trimet (either thoughtlessly or maliciously) took measures that affect poorer riders (not charging a modest fee for ‘park and rides’ for example).
Seriously Torgo, not trying to be a jerk here. We might disagree on the racial impact here. But i think we’re both at least on the same page as far as how people with little money (and no car) are impacted.
“Quit bitching at the bus drivers! They are not the ones that decide fare increases! I know someone that works for Trimet, and this person told me that Fred Hanson squandered away a few million dollars, then used the gas price increase excuse to hide his mistake, then he retired with a cushy amount of money, but no one ever said anything. Trimet hid this from the public!”
If this is indeed true, then someone ought to make this public!
And i don’t know about other folks, but i certainly don’t blame the drivers for fare hikes! However, when people are standing at a stop [along a frequent route, during rush hours] for 20+ minutes – only for 2 or 3 buses to show up back-to-back, and when a driver blows right past someone in plain view, it’s easy to get frustrated. Fault can get misdirected. It’s a common human trait.
DamosA, we also do not disagree on the potential racial impact. Though, I think I see now where you and I have misunderstood each other. The reason that I referred to “poor People” rather than “people of color” is that relative income is the root of the discrimination. In other words, the fare hike disproportionately impacts the poor, and only because most poor people are people of color, the fare hike disproportionately impacts people of color. If all poor people were white, then a fare hike would not disproportionately disadvantage people of color. I chose to use a term that described people by relative income because relative income is the most relevant factor. The racial implications are real, but they are indirect. Most importantly, you and I agree on this point. The fare hike does, without doubt, disproportionately disadvantage the poor, and any groups that is disproportionately represented in “the poor” (including people of color).
And yet, my question is still a valid one, and I would love for you to take a crack at it. I will rephrase it again, in the hope that it makes sense this time: $1 fare = not discriminatory, $1.5 fare = not discriminatory, $2 fare = not discriminatory, $2.5 fare = discriminatory; What is unique about that last 50 cents that makes the difference between discriminatory and not discriminatory?
My point is, again, this: every penny of the fare is exactly as discriminatory as every other penny of the fare. So, if any part of the fare violates the CRA, then all of it must. Right? If not, then why not? What is the line between a discriminatory fare and a non-discriminatory fare? How are the people who set the fares supposed to know?
What pisses me off is the double taxation that is going on! These rides have been subsidized by Federal taxpayer money and then charged a high rate for entry? I would think TM would be saving money from the million extra credits given to them by the taxpayer. Greed at it’s best!!!
How about instead of cutting services cut employee pay the rest of us have to take a pay cut why can’t they? I read an article that talks about how much some of the bus drivers get paid
It’s ironic that occupy doesn’t protest trimet’s laziness but they protest wall street (I hate wall street but atleast they work hard being lazy is worse than being greedy) here is that article http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting/2010/11/trimet_salary_database_shows_h.html
People say bus drivers have it yeah so do people in grocerey stores and get paid minimum wage or a little more on average so if you make $14.00 an hour or more shut the fuck up. They are union and their union is strong as hell