Why is funding of public transit seen differently?

Home > Snellville.Talk > Archives > 2007 > August > 02 > Entry

By Susan Gast | Thursday, August 2, 2007, 04:00 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Transit officials are rolling out the big buses on the Snellville-to-Atlanta express line.

Riders on Wednesday morning hopped aboard 57-passenger coaches provided through GRTA (Georgia Regional Transit Authority) rather than the 39-seat Gwinnett Transit vehicles they had been riding. The switch is hoped to eliminate overcrowding that has caused passengers on some trips to stand up during the ride downtown.

Not all of the express runs received the bigger buses Wednesday morning but were expecting them by today, said Phil Boyd, acting director for Gwinnett County Transit. The large coaches will not necessarily cost more to operate because the main expense is labor, he said. In fact, bigger buses can be more efficient because they can take in more fares per trip, he said.

An average of 206 daily boardings were recorded on the Snellville-to-Atlanta routes - and their return trips — in June, said William Mecke of GRTA. Since the route began in April, it has grown “as fast or faster than anything else we’ve had,” Mecke said.

The bigger buses were a welcome sight to commuters Faye Rosenbaum and Mary Crenshaw, both of Snellville, who separately boarded the 7:30 a.m. bus Wednesday at Snellville First Baptist Church. Each of the women had tried riding earlier routes but switched to avoid the crowds and lack of seats.

Rosenbaum, who attended a town hall meeting with Gwinnett County Commissioner Mike Beaudreau earlier this year, wondered aloud if the popularity of the express service had affected Beaudreau’s opposition to the routes. She recalled the commissioner telling her that he was against the service and that she should consider changing jobs or moving to Atlanta if she didn’t like the commute from Gwinnett to downtown.

“I remember thinking, ‘is he telling me to leave Gwinnett and take my tax dollars and disposable income somewhere else?‘” Rosenbaum said.

As ridership grew, however, Rosenbaum thought Beaudreau may have changed his mind.

Beaudreau said Tuesday he is still reviewing the numbers and costs of the service, Though he has come to no conclusions on the Snellville line in particular, in general the commissioner still opposes such types of public transit because they are heavily subsidized by taxpayers and used by a relatively small number of riders.

The growth in ridership is “no surprise because you are subsidizing people to go to work,” Beaudreau said. “It doesn’t surprise me at all that people would want to ride.”

Beaudreau said he favors keeping jobs in Gwinnett rather than spending tax money to carry residents to work outside the county. Public transit is not one of the “core competencies” of county governments, he said, and there are other, private options available for commuting. And, the bus service is sometimes used by people who don’t live in Gwinnett, he said.

The commissioner also said personal choice plays a part in long commutes and government should be careful of spending money on needs brought on by personal choice,

“I used to live in Cobb County and work in Gwinnett,” he said. “I did the commute for a while, but then decided to move closer to where I work.”

I’ve given Beaudreau’s reasons some thought. But, so far, I haven’t been able to follow the logic.

Why is public transit — which offers the added benefits of taking cars off congested roads — so different from other government services? The costs can be high, but the philosophy of funding public transit seems similar to the philosophy of building roads or parks.

Public projects rarely serve everyone. There are areas of Gwinnett I never visit, yet the county builds and maintains parks and roads for the people who do.

Non-residents use our roads and parks. And personal choices — such as where people live — spur development of roads, parks and other infrastructure.

Similar arguments can be made about schools.

Though I don’t use all public services, I don’t begrudge my tax dollars going toward them. I feel the same toward public transit.

What do you think? Is government funding of public transit philosophically different from funding other government projects?

Permalink | Comments (47) | Post your comment | Categories: Susan Gast

Comments

By BurbHater

August 2, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

Of course. Public transit is exactly the same as public roads, only snobs like Beaudreau like to pretend cars are different. Or that Gwinnett is it’s own little fiefdom with a bubble structure that includes enough (or appropriate) jobs, shopping and services for all residents. Does he think Gwinnett sprung out of nowhere? It’s only there because it’s next to other metro counties and ultimately, Atlanta.

It doesn’t seem to bother him that roads don’t stop at the county line, or that his fellow Gwinnetians spread out like locusts every morning commute. They’re perfectly entitled to use our roads. He invokes “personal choice” in the smarmy Republican self-serving way. Gee, it’s personal choice to live in the suburbs. Guess what, Mike. YOUR WHOLE COUNTY IS A SUBURB, YOU LEECH!

Those of us who lived here in the 80’s remember how Snellville (and the rest of Gwinnett) didn’t want MARTA because it would bring “those people” into their little enclave. Now, Gwinnett is heavily populated by hispanics you consider undesirable. How’s that karma tasting? Set in motion by people exactly like your small-minded County Commissioner.

By leah

August 2, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this

“Beaudreau said he favors keeping jobs in Gwinnett rather than spending tax money to carry residents to work outside the county.”

Exactly what jobs are they keeping in Gwinnett? Retail Sales, Restaurants, Warehousing, medical… The pool of choices is too small for many to choose to work close to home. Can’t the county commissioners do both; entice industry to move to Gwinnett and provide public transportation? If that is too difficult, maybe they should seek employment elsewhere.

By Ed

August 2, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

The only philosophical difference between transit and other projects exists in the way that Georgia�s narrowminded politicians approach the issue. Rather than seen as a public service, many local and state officials see transit as something that wastes money, breeds crime, and goes against commuter habits.

There�s no doubt it goes against local commuter habits, but given the obesity rate, lost productivity and time due to traffic snarls, and worsening problems with smog and sprawl in this state, it�s a shame that the opportunity to fix these problems is being lost.

With even other Southern cities�including Nashville and Charlotte�investing in expansions of their transit systems as an overdue recognition of the problems that car-centric transportation plans create, Georgia needs to move beyond such a provincial approach to transportation planning. But until we do…I’m glad I telecommute.

By tribalecho

August 2, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this

I hope Gwinnett County Commissioner Mike Beaudreau know’s that “his kind” is not wanted at “our” airport. I mean he doesn’t even live in South Fulton.

What’s next? Sectarian violence?

By june_baby

August 2, 2007 2:10 PM | Link to this

i don’t really understand the thought process of people like commisioner beaudreau. you would think since the entire area is gridlocked by too much traffic and too few roads, that people and pols. would realize that the entire region is affected by this negativity. not just the city.(fyi)in the late 60’s and early 70’s, there was only one bus system(the old atlanta transit authority)and it was terrible but cheap. a referendum was held in 5 counties(clayton,cobb,dekalb,fulton and gwinnett)whether to place 1 cent sales tax to go toward a regional bus/rail system. for all the wrong reason, only two counties decided to opt-in(fulton/dekalb).part of the reason for not joining was short-sighted politicians. we still have those same kind of politicians almost 40 yrs later. what a shame for the entire region.

By Atico

August 2, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

I, like Mr. Beaudreau, want to see the numbers of the Gwinnett Transit System. I see too many empty buses on the road in Gwinnett County to imagine nothing but a huge loss to the tax payer this transportion system must present. I said, “imagine”, so I will await the numbers along with Mr. Beaudreau.

By Bruce Wilcox

August 2, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

“See the numbers”, which numbers, how many riders? Or how many cars kept off the road? Maybe how many gallons of gas saved? I do not know how you could measure the reduction, small as it would be, in pollution, but it is important. Yes let’s look at all the numbers, not the self-serving narrow view.

As someone pointed out, Gwinnett missed the boat forty years, what the cost would be now compared to then is enough to make one ill.

By Kaye

August 2, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

I live in Gwinnett, and work in Gwinnett. I would love to take public transportation to work, however, I don’t have buses that run near me. By time I drive to a park & ride, I might as well drive.

Instead of public transit being seen as a burden, I think it should be seen as a public service. It would encourage more people to carpool, and encourage more physical activity since you would need to walk those last few steps to your job. I really do wish public transit would be expanded.

By BurbHater

August 2, 2007 4:01 PM | Link to this

Beaudreau has access to the numbers right now; he’s only reviewed them from the viewpoint transit is “subsidized”, while roads are natural formations that sprang up, like trees or clouds.

Just how is car commuting “private”? You build your own road to the workplace? Hang up your own traffic signs and lights? Clear wrecks off the roadways with other commuters? Repair potholes with superglue? Approve your own drivers license? (okay, some people do seem to do that last one.)

No, all those things are paid for by the government so you can sit in your big fat SUV on your big fat hindquarters, while sniffing down your nose at the first bus you see not packed like a sardine can.

By timecruncher

August 3, 2007 7:44 AM | Link to this

Is it possible that the good county commissioner doesn’t think about the “reverse-commute” riders who come out to his beloved Gwinett County from DeKalb and Fulton to work (and pay taxes) every day? Many of the jobs that spring from suburban growth — and make no mistake — Gwinett growth is nothing but Greater Atlanta growth — are lower-paying jobs that attract the kind of people elitists like Mr. Beaudreau don’t want to see walking the streets in HIS neighborhood.

Good article. It makes people think a bit and shows how shallow many of our elected leaders are.

By Route418Commuter

August 3, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this

Personally, my experience using the new Snellville to Downtown Atl Rte. 418 has been all good and getting better. My company pays my fare and my gasoline bill has gone from over $300 a month to practically nothing.

I know people who tried the service, but found it too crowded, will be coming back because of the greater seating capacity.

However you wish to fudge and spin the numbers to your liking Mr. Beaudreau, don’t mess with Route 418 or you might just find yourself having to take a job outside Gwinnett when election time comes along.

By Michael H. Smith

August 3, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

The subject may be transit but the underlying context is what function should government serve? You�ll get a great deal of arguments on this one, from the two polar extremes and everything in between. Liberal philosophy would have government confiscating every cent and spending the money to do everything conceivable, essentially being all things to all people. Conservative philosophy would have government’s taxing or confiscating powers restricted and demand that every penny be invested with a return of dividends to the public in mind to do a limited amount of things, essentially being a promoter more so than a provider.

Mass transit or taxpayer subsides transportation, is stigmatized � rightly so in my mind � with the welfare label. Should it be? In most cases yes, in spite of a few good arguments that would prove that this welfare transportation does provide traffic congestion relief to a degree, lessens the needs for more asphalt and gives cost efficiency in moving the most people for the least amount of money. With all that expressed good in mind, I�m still not a big supporter of mass transit and neither is America.

In most cases yes? What about the cases of �no�? Well, in Gwinnett - if not the entire Metro area � a dilemma, which has already occurred, makes for a very unpleasant conundrum. No mass transit means a need exist for a massive network of roads. Normally this would be good news for a capitalists waiting to seize opportunity. Unfortunately a massive road network is beyond the financial means of most individual investors, if not groups of investor as well to provide. However, money alone may not be the greatest obstacle, to building massive road networks - as in our area - where massive amounts of permanent structures now exist that have taken all the necessary land to sensibly under take the construction of additional roadways. Uh, you might say, we�re kind of stuck. In spite of all the bad planning over the years � haggle over that as we may � somehow the railroads managed to create a near prefect answer in their existing right-of-ways to our money and land starved conundrum.

Enter the cases of no: The Brain Train (toot, toot)

The public may not be all aboard presently, where the public�s opposition is now greater than the public�s reasoning; but in time coupled with the growing frustration over traffic congestion and our growing inability to get hither and yon, even die-hards who oppose in general all government subsides will be convinced at the very least to accept the cold hard reality: We�ll need integrated mobility solutions to resolve our mobility needs.

The more our solutions can be made public-private enterprise, rather than majority-dependent solely on government subsidies the better.

By Bruce Wilcox

August 3, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Today is a Code Orange Smog Day, that does not come from Mass Transit, it is from the lack of it. I wonder what the numbers would be on breathing cleaner air?

Between the cities of New York and Chicago, Mass Transit moves more than five Million commuters every weekday. Think about it, that is the size of metro Atlanta everyday. The difference is they planned ahead, not like Gwinnett with a surprised expression asking where did all these people come from and when did they get here?

By Michael H. Smith

August 3, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this

All the people got here because of the economy and immigration. The economy is not always a predictable certainty. The results of uncontrolled and illegal immigrations are certainly very predictable.

Meanwhile back on the subject of moving people around with beneficial results that are controllable and legal, the American psyche will have to make a profound change, especially among the Liberal members to accept en mass some very massive resolutions on the issues: Mass energy, mass transit, mass finance and mass immigration.

This will prove very important in the coming days ahead to the national security interests of the country.

By Akagi

August 3, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

The Atlanta region runs from Alabama to the suburbs of Athens and from the mountains to the suburbs of Macon.

How many buses will it take to service this area, how much will it cost to build light rail. You plan having a bus route from Cartersville to Winder? Or light rail from Ball Ground to Barnesville?

It is no longer simply people living in the outlaying areas and then coming into the central core of Atlanta to work and then return that evening, but people working in one outlaying area say Canton and working in another such as Lawrenceville as well.

You can hate the burbs all you want, but people have voted with the feet and their checkbooks. Look at the growth rate in places like Paulding, Henry, Forsyth and even further out in places like Carroll, Pike and Lamar, Jackson, etc.

So unless you want to fund a system that covers an area larger than many states, mass transit is only a tiny portion of the solution.

By Akagi

August 3, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

Beaudreau is also correct that if you don’t like the commute from Gwinnett to Atlanta, you should consider either finding a job near where you live or living near where you work.

I remember when Purdue first got into office he had a call-in show on WSB Radio and some fool called in and complained about the lack of mass transit between his home in Cartersville and his work in Decatur. The governor was too kind to him. My response would have been that no one asked you to live in Cartersville and no one asked you to work in Decatur—if you don’t like the commute move closer to Decatur or find a job closer to Cartersville.

By Ray

August 3, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

First of all, its good to finally see transit service in Snellville. And its good to see that people are useing it. Highway 78 is packed every morning and evening with cars going toward and coming from Atlanta from Snellville and beyond and its getting worse. Where is all these jobs in Snellville that would keep us from going to Atlanta or some other county to work that Beaudreau is talking about. Beaudreau said public transit is subsidizing peoples way to work. I’d say so is road,bridges,stop lights,airports,arenas,civic centers and the list goes on. People that ride buses pay taxes too so don’t go thanking they are getting a free ride. We all pay taxes for the good of all not just the few.

By BurbHater

August 3, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

I’m all for moving closer to one’s job, and increasing density, (thus my name) but to expect everyone living in Gwinnett to work, shop and essentially live within such small confines is insane. What if you live a mile inside Gwinnett and commute three miles to DeKalb? You should move a mile just so you aren’t inconveniencing Beaudreu’s freakish interpretation of the world? Counties are arbitrary boundaries.

Having said that, the dummy who wants mass transit from Cartersville to Decatur is an idiot. No doubt, one of those “housing is cheaper” drones who is constantly flipping people off on his 1+ hour commute.

Commissioner Beaudreau only sees people as tax production units who are betraying him by not increasing his economic base and self-importance. There’s no force-field at the county line just because you’re leaving the reach of his money-grubbing fists.

By Michael H. Smith

August 3, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this

A few things to consider Akagi: If existing rail lines are brought into the transportation picture it would remedy the costs of having to build a separate a light rail system. By example via the so-called Brain Train, all the rail needed and right-of-way is already in place to service many cities from Atlanta to Athens (actually much more but that�s for latter). And by the way: Before someone says Norfolk Southern Railway is not receptive to that idea, well, that is not rightly the case. At least not anymore.

And Mr. Beaudreau respectfully is not correct. America is all about the individual’s freedom and liberty. That means we go, live and work wherever we so choose freely and that really should never change, though, how we get about achieving that ideal truly should.

By Akagi

August 3, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this

People who favor high density should try living in such places for a few years—and I have—Kaohsiung, Taiwan. I notice that mass transit and high density hasn’t greatly improved the traffic in Taipei nor do I expect the mass transit system in Kaohsiung to greatly improve traffic there either.

I don’t expect people to live, shop and work in the same county—I live in one county, work in another and shop a great deal in still another. But if you are going to be living miles from your work don’t expect me to shed any tears for you. If you live 37 miles out, don’t complain about the commute or expect the taxpayers to provide you with rail or bus service.

I live 30 miles outside 285 in the exurbs. Most of the noises I hear at night are owls, whip-poor-wills and tree frogs and I’ll trade the one-hour drive in for the good schools and quality of life issues my location provides. If you don’t like suburbs and exurbs, fine, don’t move there. I don’t like cities—especially American cities which tend to be dirty, corrupt, crime ridden with terrible schools, with high taxes and poor services—and thus I choose not to live in them.

By Akagi

August 3, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this

I am all for freedom. If people want to live in Gwinnett and work in Atlanta, I say good for them. My point is don’t expect people to pay for your own choices. If you don’t like the commute—either accept it or change your commute (moving, telecommuting, etc).

The “brain train” may indeed work to connect Atlanta and the communities of Dekalb, Gwinnett, Barrow and Oconee and Clarke, but it—nor bus service—is going to be a solution for people living in say Ball Ground who commute to Lilburn.

How much ridership would be required to satisfy the costs of such a rail network. Most rail I know of in the US only survives because of taxpayer support. Would rail be any different in Georgia? And if not, why should I have to support something that simply brings people to watch football games of a school I don’t support or people to work who live in Statham but work in Atlanta. No one asked them to live in Statham or to take employment in Atlanta. Why should I have to help support a train I’ll never use?

Now if you can build and operate a train that is 100% supported by rider fees. Good, but I doubt that is possible.

By BurbHater

August 3, 2007 5:07 PM | Link to this

Akagi, why should I pay extra taxes to support the 30+ miles of roads that you use? Why should I be paying extra so you can listen to hoot owls?

When you design a road network that is 100% paid by user fees, let me know. Otherwise your assumption that rail should be run 100% on user fees lacks any serious credibility, except with commissioner Beaudreau.

At least the subsidized train riders wouldn’t be polluting the air so badly ER’s get overrun by people with respiratory problems.

By Michael H. Smith

August 4, 2007 1:13 AM | Link to this

I couldn�t agree more with your point about forcing one person to pay for another person�s ride. Where the parting of ways starts, is this either or proposition - either accept it or change your commute (moving, telecommuting, etc). There are alternatives. One of them is change the means of commuting. With that in mind let us lay waste to this thought that anything mobility is 100% supported by rider fees. Neither mass transit in any form nor personal transportation accomplishes that 100% requirement in this country. Even toll roads might fall short of such a 100% demand.

Now on my previous as for latter: Ball Ground (as it will prove the same for many other destinations), just so happens, has railroad service running right smack-dab through the center of that little town. Railroads have done a marvelous job of connecting cities and town in this country. Sad government had to, in its� infinite lack of wisdom, become a provider in lieu of acting constitutionally correct as the promoter of commuter rail transportation. In doing so government only masked the true costs of service. That of course, would likely be just as true said of roads as well, where the actual cost of personal transportation is again masked by government.

So the question is not as much, would commuter rail be viable without taxpayer support; as it begs an answer, could commuter rail transportation operate profitably if done as a public-private venture with the true cost of service used, charged to the end users. Keep in mind that for every user of commuter rail, government would have to transfer a certain amount of funds that the now commuter rail user has paid in taxes for asphalt roads, since someone else will be using their share of that asphalt roadway, that the now commuter rail user will no longer occupy and use.

See what happens when the grand masquerader, government, is unmasked!

All the sudden reality sinks in, where in very fact we�re all paying (at least in part) for someone else�s ride. The same principle of compounding efforts that government has used to provide the roads of this country, if were used by the private transportation sector, then the same results in cost reductions � probably greater cost reductions - would be realized by the same taxpaying/consumers. The only difference is, government can legally steal our money by calling it a tax and bury or otherwise mask, the true costs we all are really paying for mobility, where the private sector cannot.

Departing from the either government, or the private sector proposition in opting for the neither, nor, and saying no to a ruling totality of both for the alternative of using the public private entity. Some things government does very well, some things the private sector does even better. The ideal would be to take the best from each of them and reject the worst that is in both. The government�s role in this should be promoter more so than provider by skillfully using the convincing big stick and the persuasive carrot while walking softly in goading consumer acceptance of mass transit. The private sector�s role in this is to provide maximum service at the lowest possible costs profitably, which will take several modes of transport and probably several companies working in unison to achieve a very flexible complex transportation system. But a lot of new jobs and peripheral business opportunities would be created. Energy consumption, commute times, air pollution, and foreign debt could all be reduced, which should result in tax reduction.

So in retrospect: Why should you or I have to help support roads and �Bridges to Nowhere� that neither of us will ever use?

If you built and operated roads as 100% supported by rider/driver fees that most of us now use, then that really would be good but I doubt that we or anyone else reading this could �independently� afford to use them on such a continuing cash and carry bases.

By mwb

August 4, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

Susan, again, thanks for raising issues that affect people everyday! When I heard the commish’s initial negative comments about the express bus, I realized that he’s not often visited many constituents on Highway 78 at 7:30 A.M. or 6:00 P.M. I realized that he’s not driven east on 78 into Walton and other counties and seen the development for miles on both the north and south sides of the road.

But most of all I realized that he’s not looked seriously, studiously at where Gwinnett residents really live, really work, and realistically can work. While I respect the citizen-legislator concept, there is a responsibility these folks have for leadership, and that involves delving beyond the obvious, beyond the lobby, and beyond the party line - any party line.

By BobG

August 4, 2007 10:55 PM | Link to this

If you believe that government is the solution to every problem, or if you believe that you shouldn’t have to be responsible for your own decisions, then you won’t be able to follow Beaudreau’s logic.

Mass transit is not profitable. Otherwise, private enterprise would provide the service.

Mass transit is not effective. In most communities, you will never have enough people going in the same direction at the same time to reduce the number of cars on the road by any meaningful amount. Sure, a 200 riders a day one way means that there are (arguably) 200 less cars on the road, but could you tell a difference on Hwy 78 in June, when these folks were on the bus?

Mass transit doesn’t even pay for itself. If bus fare was a true user fee and covered the cost of the service, the price would be so high that nobody would ride. So people who don’t use the service are forced to pay for it through their property taxes. What would your response be if the Commission was forced to raise your property taxes to pay for buses?

In fact, if you knew how much of your current tax bill was going to pay for the buses, you might not be as excited about them.

Again, that is unless you don’t care that someone else is footing the bill.

By Michael H. Smith

August 5, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Following Beaudreau�s logic, not that it is fundamentally wrong in disagreement with government as being the solution, for in that he is right. Government, in most cases as it has become so dysfunctional and so disoriented in performing its� constitutional duties is the problem, not the answer. Beaudreau�s logic in his adamant live, work and play approach is definitely flawed constitutionally and for that very reason Roy Barnes never attempted to pass into law the unconstitutional live, work and play community concept. It is not the role of government to tell any citizen you must live here or there, you must work here for you cannot work over there. The government�s utmost duty is to protect the rights of the individual to live, work and play wherever they so desire, provided they have the financial means to do so.

Roads are not profitable in the context of personal transportation and they are 100% government and taxpayer/consumer supported. So roads do not pay for themselves either. We do!

Roads are becoming less and less effective having reached overcapacity now and there exist less, and less, land to sensibly build any more roads. On that, let Beaudreau�s logic show where both the necessary money and land can be found to build more roads without lawsuits, massive delays, major disruptions and the need to use eminent domain etc.

Further let Beaudreau�s logic show where all the county residents, now working outside of Gwinnett, can find jobs in the county that are acceptable to them: In pay, working conditions and benefits.

What Beaudreau�s logic and that of many others does not address is the alternatives to the lack of mobility that exists and making those alternatives more acceptable to, we the lovers of personal freedom and our attachment to the beloved cars that give it to us.

Now, what would your response be if the Commission, the State and Federal governments were forced to raise your taxes, fees and property taxes to pay for more roads?

What would your response be if the Commission, the State and Federal governments by force of law took all the needed land for those roads?

Anyone care to re-tally the costs?

Again, next time your foot steps onto that asphalt road, know that you and someone else have footed the bill for the black-top beneath your foot.

Beaudreau�s logic and that of many others will have to change and look for the available alternatives where there are no easy answers or no one answer. Public-private ventures like the Brain Train is certainly one of the answers, some buses will always be in the mix and �flex cars� will continue to play a role. But let no one have any doubt that in all things mobility, just who it is paying the bills. We all do, as taxpaying-consumers.