Comment By Bob L.
Here is a good example of Government greed, keep paying them the same amount of money for the service to your City, but we are going to cut your service in half.
How about cutting the amount of money to 50%, equal to the amount of service they want to cut. Why should you pay for something you are not getting, and make the Taxpayer pay for it.
That money saved could be better used for road and side-walk maintenance, or how about police to enforce traffic laws like speeders, instead of speed bumps that don’t work but slow Emergency response.
What would they say if I as a rider said I was only going to pay you half fare, because I only ride once a month, how fast do you think they would tell you to get off.
And to think, they want more money to widen I5 from Olympia to Lakewood to put more traffic into Pierce and King County to at the cost of more Air Pollution to THESE Counties that have to pay E Check to get their License Tabs or Plates. They tell Pierce and King County Residents NO TICKEE NO WASHEE, same goes for subsidizing a second Transit System that is operated by Pierce Transit, is this a double Tax.
- Pierce Transit wins grant to increase service between Parkland, downtown Tacoma (thenewstribune.com)
Puyallup considers public transportation alternatives
When Pierce Transit distributed 622,000 service hours within the Public Transportation Benefit Area in 2010, the city was paying about $9.6 million from the six-tenths of 1 percent sales tax and was receiving about $5.6 million in actual value, according to data collected by Puyallup City Council member Steve Vermillion, who sits on the Pierce Transit Board of Directors.
In September, the benefit area will be reduced to 300,000 service hours, about a 51 percent reduction, and city Finance Director Cliff Craig estimates Puyallup is paying between $8 million and $9 million on a continual basis to Pierce Transit.
“We’re probably subsidizing the entire system to the tune of about $4 million,” Vermillion said. “If we can do it better for cheaper, it’s possible we can lower that sales tax down to some number that sustains the transportation.”
Vermillion said one option on the table might be to contract with a private vendor or with Pierce Transit for tailored services.
“We would be paying for our own system, and we wouldn’t be paying for the large overhead of Pierce Transit,” Vermillion said.
The city council discussed alternative transit options at its meeting April 23. City Attorney Kevin Yamamoto explained the process for leaving the Public Transportation Benefit Area, if that were to be an option.
“There is a wide range of options on how you provide those services,” Yamamoto said.
They could include contracting with a private vendor, or establishing either a Metropolitan Municipal Corporation or Public Transportation Systems in Municipalities. By state law, only one public transportation benefit area may be created in any county.
City council members wanted to first define the level of service needed by the population and then continue discussions with Pierce Transit to tailor a program that would fit the city’s needs.
City Manager Bill McDonald suggested bringing in a private vendor to show options to the city council, and Mayor Rick Hansen encouraged the idea.
“Our service is cut, but we’re paying the same,” Hansen said. “What needs to happen is we need to evaluate the best services for our city, and then ask Pierce Transit what it costs for that service. We need to look at all avenues, including what it would cost with Pierce Transit or a private carrier, or partnering with another city like Sumner. We should never exclude anybody.”
Reporter Andrew Fickes can be reached at 253-552-7001 or by email at firstname.lastname@example.org. Follow him on Twitter, @herald_andrew