The CATA Thread

edited September 2008 in Regional
CATA seems to come up quite a bit in other threads, but I thought it was about time that it got it's very own.

Two notable items:

1. The November Millage: the agency predicts a rather doomsday-esque scenario if voters fail to approve a 0.787 mill increase for operations for the next five years (2008-12). From their site: "For a $100,000 home, that equals $39.35 per year, or less than most people pay for a tank of gasoline. All the money raised would be used to operate the CATA system."

More info here: http://cata.org/news/releases/november_millage.html

Meanwhile, #2: Record Ridership -- over 0.5 million rides just for the month of July.

Given the failed library millage, I'm concerned about CATA's chances for success. That, and I really haven't seen much PR on it, aside from direct marketing on the bus. What does everyone else think about it's chances? I'd love to see them shore up operating money so that we can start bugging them more about their five to ten year vision.
«1

Comments

  • Millages haven't done well lately. And with this millage, as I understand it, there will be no real improvements, it's simply an operating millage. That really doesn't help it's cause much. I'd say the chances of this passing are up in the air, but it will be a tough sell.
  • I hope so LMich...for Lansing's interest as well as my own selfish interests. For me, I ride the 14 to work everyday; and for Lansing, I think to have a thriving urban city with a diverse/international population which adds to the flavor of a city you need good mass transit. International residents sometimes don't have driver's licenses (I have an Indian friend living in E. Lansing who's never bothered to get one...even though he does have a U.S. pilot's license), and also international residents it seems are more comfortable with mass transit as well as many can't afford a car/insurance/etc.

    What I've heard from people around Lansing, seems to support what LMich said, that operating millages are as big of a sell, it's the large expansion millages that are trickier. And hopefully the increased ridership means there will be more people who will vote Yes because they are using it; and unlike the library, for those who use CATA on a regular basis it is more of an essential function and thus most of them would vote Yes. And if I had to guess, I would say the actual number of regular CATA customers is a much larger group than library users, in addition to the number of regular CATA customers being a much larger number than regular library users. I pick the library as a comparison only because it's a memerable and recent millage failure, although that millage was an expansion on top of being a very large expansion amount.

    In conclusion, I'm probably just trying to rationalize why CATA will pass for selfish reasons, but even if I'm in denial, I think these are pretty legit pieces of evidence.
  • I'd like to see a breakdown of where most of their funding comes from. If the majority isn't coming from fares, fares need to be raised anyways. CATA Fares are reasonable compared to many other bus systems, they are often cheaper.
  • Yeah, I would be opposed to fare increases unless absolutely necessary. Mass transit systems to my knowledge RARELY cover expenses with fare. Plus, as I already noted in my previous post, although people like myself could easily afford a $1/ride hike (and it would still be a cheaper option than buying a 2nd car), many of the customers of CATA couldn't. On a less rational note, I take pride in the fact that until this year, CATA fare was the same fare they started with when they began, and their first ever increase this year was only $0.25/ride ($5 increase for monthly passes; $30 increased to $35).

    For comparison, if I remember correctly, the "L" in Chicago is $2.5/ride? I know for sure that it was in the $2 range, so CATA is still a good price. And when I read the article LMich mentioned, it reaked of trying to scare people in voting for the millage in my mind. However, I can't say that I wasn't at least a little scared by it thinking that maybe there's a small chance it could happen.
  • The pamphlet that is distributed on CATA buses states the state has cut funding from 50% to 30%. That obviously doesn't help things...the bus driver tonight said that some routes will be cut/decreased frequency, all routes will be cut after 6pm and no weekends. That sounds pretty bad; I can't imagine it actually coming to that, I feel like some government agency needs to step in, but maybe I'm being naive.
  • If thats really their plans they may as well just scrap the whole system, cuts that deep would make CATA virtually worthless. And I fully expect that this millage will fail, people are not interested in paying more taxes at this point.
  • I agree hood. I think that if it really comes down to the millage failing, and without it they truly cannot afford not to make that deep of cuts, then they might as well raise fares to $2 or something. I think a significant fare increase would be less of a blow to people than cutting routes that much. For me personally I would still pay that, but honestly, routes reduced that much would be to the point it probably wouldn't be worth it to me to use the system, I might as well buy a 2nd car.

    I don't fully expect it to fail, but I do have to admit it doesn't look good.
  • Regardless of whether the millage fails, I think LMich is correct: the state doesn't do enough to give adequate financial backing to our transit systems. The current state funding structure for transit pits various agencies against one another to compete over funding, and transit rarely (if ever?) has gotten the full 10% share it is allowed through the Comprehensive Transportation Fund.

    There is currently some legislation floating around in state government to open up more potential sources of funding, such as local option sales taxes. We need to give transit agencies more options and improve the resources the state offers -- relying just on property taxes and farebox revenues isn't working. For example, do we know if a CATA fare increase to $2.00 would even guarantee no service cuts? I can't do the math at the moment.
  • It's an absolute must that this proposal passes. A rate increase will only hurt the riders of CATA more as everything else that is purchased for home goes up. Mass transit, with the exception of places like NYC, has historically been paid for the most by people who don't need it. I think this is fair as it gives a compelling reason to start riding it, while charging the riders more only closes the door on potential avenues of transportation for many individuals.
  • $2 was just a totally random number I through out, not based on anything so even that might not prevent cuts. I suggested a fare increase ONLY as an option if the the two choices were that or the drastic cuts. Although it would hurt the lower income, I think it would hurt them less than the drastic cuts announced (of course assuming the fare increase wasn't $5 or something).
Sign In or Register to comment.