It is taken for granted that transit is not supposed to provide general-purpose transportation, but rather transportation for the poor and those who can't drive. Never mind that many who are poor DO drive, and many who can't drive don't live near transit...
"Public involvement" isn't about rider concerns tho, that's my point--it's about a particularly theatrical way of getting feedback (public hearings) which can't necessarily be acted on. Successful businesses don't use public hearings to estimate customer concerns, etc...
-
-
Fares currently cover around 15% of expenses; farebox recovery refers to the share of expenses that are covered by fares
-
Frankly, I am shocked. I would have thought it to be higher. You aren't running a transit program, you are running a welfare program. Your very astute comment earlier about the taxpayer being the customer has hit home. I am a taxpayer!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You missed my point. I was looking at this as a "presentation" and obviously "butting in" by offering coaching from an outsider. I know what you meant, it is just that the wording throws people off. It did for me. e.g. call it pubic fare hearings or whatever works for you.
-
I have to stick to my guns here: I know people wouldn't like that phrasing if they heard it, but they simply don't need to hear it. The financial/operational side of running a business isn't something that needs to be presented to the public at every opportunity
-
It's awkward to back down from offering public involvement after going so long assuming it's necessary or even valuable, but it's neither...people have to get weaned off that idea eventually, and I'd rather be blunt with them than evasive
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.