pursuant to the proposed community transit plan
Excerpt via Essay:
Pursuant towards the proposed community transit plan entitled, “Bus Efficiency Insurance plan (BEP), ” dated, eleven June 2011, please grant me, a humble but concerned citizen of the Santa claus Clara Valley metropolitan area to illustrate several glaring deficiencies certainly not considered and addressed in the BEP. Total the BEP is a flimsy and ill-conceived proposal that reeks of bureaucratic wish-thinking and does not factor in the most crucial variable when considering any changes and/or “improvements” in transit policy, in transit procedures, in bus equipment, and so forth, cost! I actually am certainly referring to hard costs associated with expanding “park and ride” lots, the ownership of the service box with change company, and the purchase of new cross types, eco-friendly, vehicles. The major problem with the BEP is that these kinds of suggestions every come with out a real asking price attached. As being a consumer, being a tax-paying citizen, I want to know this information just before I calamité and/or accept to the terms proposed in BEP. Therefore , it is the aim of this editorial to address the true costs associated with these types of “improvements. “
For starters the BEP offers expanding “park and ride” lots while lowering “park and ride” fees. This is all excellent and well on paper, although let’s consider the larger implications of such a measure. To expand “park and ride” lots – “park and ride” potential – would necessitate the purchase of even more real estate. And, last time I inspected, real estate won’t come low-cost in Santa claus Clara State. Trulia. com, a real estate website shows that the median list price for the home in Santa Albúmina Country may be upwards of five-hundred, 000-1. a few million dollars depending on the squat code (Trulia). Assuming that the purchase of fresh land is essential and, because evident by aforementioned revenue statistics, is costly, how exactly does the BEP propose this kind of expansion ought to be paid for? Very well, by cutting down “park and ride” charges. This is, to quote Rose bush I, “voodoo economics. inches It’s quite akin to cutting down taxes to improve government earnings – 2 weeks . ridiculous philosophy that has by no means worked (consider the nationwide debt under Reagan or perhaps Bush II). In order to purchase land to expand recreation area and trip capacity, the BEP ought to call for a raise in coach fares, not only a reduction in charges. This is simple economics, although, what is one to expect from well-heeled, near-sighted bureaucrats.
If that isn’t enough of an push to query the “solutions” depicted in the proposed BEP, one should consider the advice for applying the do box with change supplier. This is one other lunkheaded recommendation. Why? Once again, this is entirely a matter of cost. What are the costs linked to installing service boxes with change providers in every tour bus in the VTA system? Furthermore, what preparations are being made to fund getting these new fare boxes? To consider the family member costs involved one should take a look at Muni, who also didn’t order new do boxes, but just updated their old fare bins (a more affordable alternative), “Muni is investment $19 mil to repair most 1, two hundred fifity fare boxes in its navy with the hope the rehab job will increase