Federal Transit chief 'Rogue' Rogoff says buses usually better than rail COMMENT

Reading USDOT's 'strategic plan' and listening to the chatter of US Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood about the wonders of bicycles and other 'non-motorized transportation'  is enough to persuade most people that the monkeys have taken control of the National Zoo. Monkeys after all can learn to ride bicycles, but not cars.

Perhaps that's an unfair slur on our fellow primates?

Only some species of extraordinarily low intelligence could sign off on a paper like USDOT's 'strategic plan' declaring upfront "unprecedented fiscal challenges with current dedicated revenue sources no longer adequate to sustain current federal spending levels" and then spend the next 70 or so pages laying out new things for USDOT to spend money on without once mentioning the words toll, road use fee or vehicle-miles charge, or farebox or otherwise suggesting where the money might come from to pay for all the supposedly "sustainable" and "livable" rail schemes.

The good news out of Washington DC however is that the hike/bike/rail idiocy of the USDOT strategic plan has been challenged by no less than the USDOT's own transit administration chief, Peter Rogoff. Speaking at a May 18 'National Summit on the Future of Transit' no less, the Rogue we'll call him, spoke some great good sense about transit.

First and foremost, he said, transit systems "have to attract and keep riders."

Because, he said, transit riders with options "will only put up with so much."

"There is a point where dirty stations, unreliable service, slowed train speeds,    inoperable escalators, and worries about safety push riders back on the highway. And for those who can’t afford other options, they are forced to live every day with grim conditions, missed appointments, and a poor quality of life. That's not what equal opportunity and fairness are all about. So our transit systems must be safe, reliable, and efficient."

And "sustainable."

So are we there yet?

The Rogue answered: "No, we aren't even close."

He outlined the findings of study that shows the seven largest passenger rail operators in the country have a backlog of deferred maintenance of $50b, and other transit operators around the country another $28b.

For the purposes of the study, assets that are in a 'state of good repair' are those that are in the 'marginal' range - a score of 2.5 with a score of 1 reflecting assets in 'poor' condition and a score of 5 reflecting assets in excellent condition. 29 percent of all transit assets are in poor or marginal condition.

Need honesty & guts to say No

Rogoff said he has become convinced that the solutions to these problems are not about engineering or just about economics, "as important as dollars are."

"Instead they are about honesty, they are about political guts: in particular the guts to say 'no' when everyone around the table wants you to say 'yes.' They are about telling truth to power."

"Let's start with honesty," said the Rogue. "Supporters of public transit must be willing to share some simple truths that folks don't want to hear.  One is this - paint is cheap, rails systems are extremely expensive. Yes, transit riders often want to go by rail.  But it turns out you can entice even diehard rail riders onto a bus, if you call it a 'special' bus and just paint it a different color than the rest of the fleet."

Once you've got special buses, it turns out, Rogoff said, that busways are cheap. 

"Take that paint can and paint a designated bus lane on the street system.  Throw in signal preemption, and you can move a lot of people at very little cost compared to rail."

More honesty needed about rail costs

More transit trips are bus trips than rail, Rogoff noted, yet three-quarters of the deferred maintenance bill is rail.

"A little honesty about the differences between bus and rail can have some profound effects."

Bus Rapid Transit would be better than rail "for a lot more communities than are seriously considering it," Rogoff said. " Some communities might be tempted to pay the extra cost for shiny new rails now. But they need to be mindful of the costs they are teeing up for future generations."

Just piling up debt for children and grandchildren

"At times like these, it's more important than ever to have the courage to ask a hard question: if you can't afford to operate the system you have, why does it make sense for us to partner in your expansion?

"If you can't afford your current footprint, does expanding that underfunded footprint really advance the President's goals for cutting oil use and greenhouse gases?  Does it really advance our economic goals in any sustainable way?

"Are we at risk of just helping communities dig a deeper hole for our children and our grandchildren? Might it make more sense for us to put down the glossy brochures, roll up our sleeves, and target our resources on repairing the system we have?"

Moral choices

Concluding he said: "I believe that ultimately the choices we face are moral choices.

"That is we must remember that decisions we make now will be a choice between one set of values and another, between one kind of future and another for our children and grandchildren.

"One choice is to use just enough scarce funds to let the public transportation sputter along for another year. 

"That’s tempting to some political leaders. Unfortunately, that choice will leave our children and grandchildren with a system that can’t attract riders and is burdened by a sea of debt.

"The other choice is to take a cold look at the facts.  That might mean spending money on the unglamorous but absolutely vital work of repairing and improving our current systems."

He said there is always a big press event with lots of cameras, microphones and political leaders, when they open a new light rail line.

"We need to think about how we generate the same attention and excitement when we repair the retaining wall, replace rail ties, or refurbish a bridge so that more passengers are able to travel by rail more quickly."

"We need more rational ways to fund transit"

He ended saying: "At the same time, we must find more rational, reliable ways to fund our great transit systems."

Like restructuring them so cease being leeches living off taxpayers at large and so they pay their way entirely out of fares?

So they are tailored to what their users will pay by way of fares to support them - that being an objective measure of the value of service they provide.

The Rogue didn't go that far, but his thinking points in that direction.

Rogoff's speech notes:

http://www.fta.dot.gov/news/speeches/news_events_11682.html

Earlier commentary on USDOT 'strategic plan:

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4751

TOLLROADSnews 2010-05-22