Transit funding crisis: Maybe we should treat city services the same way

Transit services across the country are facing painful questions regarding service cuts vs. fare hikes, as shown by this interactive feature at Transportation for America. Which is worse?

Fare hikes often hit the poor and transit-dependent* very hard. A fare hike from $1.50 to $2.00 might as well be a change in gas prices from $3.00 to $4.00, plus a hike in registration, insurance, and parking. Each represents a 33% hike in transportation costs.

But service cuts also hit these groups as well. They may need to ride the bus at odd hours or access locations that are not on core routes+. Transit dependent people may not be able to get to work, the doctor, shopping, or to visit family and friends unless there is service when and where they need to go. If the bus isn't running, they often have no alternative.

So when faced with limited funds, do you put them into service that benefits the greatest number of riders? That would likely be the core routes during commuter hours: Buses that run into downtown in the morning and out of downtown in the evening. Or do you continue to provide what is known in the industry as "lifeline service?" That would be buses that run to areas of the city with no other transit service, but also may have low-income populations, jobs, and services that people need. If you cut that off, those areas are then off limits to anyone without a car, or a sturdy set of legs to bike or walk.

An article today outlined that debate going on in Boston, but the article could have been written about almost any city in the country.

So I started thinking about how we decide who gets transit service. In Madison, there are plenty of areas of the city that do not have transit service, usually on the edge of town where there aren't many people (yet.) Metro doesn't have the money to extend transit service to these areas, so everyone that lives, works, or shops there generally has to travel in and out of the neighborhood by car.

I believe that transit is a core city service, and maybe we shouldn't be building in areas where we can't provide transit service. We pick up trash and leaves, even though there are very few people there. I can assure you that people would scream bloody murder if their streets weren't plowed. It's expensive to provide services in areas where there isn't much density. you have to drive all those city vehicles up and down the street for only a handful of people, instead of serving hundreds of people that live along the same length of street in my neighborhood.

And then I head people complaining that they see buses with almost no one on them. Yeah? Well, I see lots of streets with almost no one on them as well. Those streets get plowed, fixed, serviced by the city.

Maybe we can save some money by just not providing services to those areas of the city with a population density of less than X units per acre. Pick a number. Or a traffic volume. "We don't really need to plow that street, there aren't that many people living there anyway, and money is tight." Or maybe, "I'm sorry folks, you will have to carry your trash, recycling, brush and leaves to a main street, because it's just not efficient to have the truck come down your street for so few people." After all, they all have cars anyway, they can put all that stuff in the back of the car for a few blocks to save all the taxpayers of the city some money.


* Transit dependent is a term for those without any other way to get around - the elderly, children, people with disabilities, and those who simply can't afford a car. The opposite group would be "choice riders," who can chose to use transit or some other option, such as driving.

+ Core routes are those that serve the downtown, major destinations, major corridors, etc. They often run evenings, weekends, holidays, and have frequent service.

An entrepreneurial idea: We need a coffee shop without the coffee

No, not really. And I love all our local coffee shops, each with their own, slightly different feel, clientele, music, snacks, and vibe. But often I go to the coffee shop just to use the internet and the chairs, and buy the beverages or snacks to justify using the facilities. What I really want is a place to work besides my house.

So I'm going to again do something that people hate, and say, "Someone should...." It's true, I'm not going to do it myself, for a multitude of reasons, but I think it's a great business idea waiting to happen. And I'm not the only one.

Madison has tons of people that work from home, or more precisely work from the coffee shop, library, or anywhere else they can get an internet connection. Until recently, I was one of them. (I now have a real office, but that's another story.) Like many people, I have trouble getting work done at my house. I'm distracted by housework, cooking, bills, or something else in easy reach. Besides, I get a little squirrelly working at my house with no other humans around.

Other people can't work at home because there are too many people around: roommates, kids, spouses or neighbors.

Having a little separation between home and work - literal and figurative - is necessary for many people.

The problem with working in a coffee shop is that you have to carry your stuff around in a bag or backpack. You have to pack it all up if you need to use the bathroom, make a phone call, or run an errand. And maybe you aren't in the mood for anything to eat or drink. Maybe the music just doesn't suit you, a bunch of people just came in an started talking loudly just when you needed to concentrate, or all the good chairs are taken.

What many of us really need is a place to work that isn't home, and doesn't require a separate purchase each time you come in (or every hour or two, depending on the location.) And it would be nice to be able to leave a few things there, so you don't have to drag it around all day, every day. I could do just fine with one drawer, or even a little cube locker. But we don't really need, and can't afford, a full-on office. We just want a place to work.

My ideal would be a shared office with tables/desks, some comfortable chairs (I prefer to type sitting in a chair, with my laptop on my knees), and some locking file cabinets or small lockers. Maybe a small conference room and/or a separate room where you can take a phone call without bothering other people. Internet service would be provided, but no mail or phone service. The conference room would be available on a sign-up basis, and any other meetings would have to take place off-site. A fridge and microwave would be useful, if only to save a few bucks - now that we are paying rent, don't need to buy that sandwich at the coffee shop to justify sitting there, and in case we are hungry but want to keep working.

As to cost, maybe $100 or less per month. I have no idea what office space goes for, but there has to be some underutilized offices around. Hell, even a big loft/warehouse area could be fixed up to make it usable. Many people are probably spending $100/month at coffee shops as the price they pay for sitting there.

Somewhere in the downtown/campus area would seem the best location, because that seems to be where people are already working. Besides, a successful shared office would need to be close to other businesses, food, coffee shops, bars, etc.

There would need to be some sort of agreement among those using the office as to noise, acceptable uses of the internet - so no one hogs the bandwidth, food/beverage rules, and cleaning. Ideally, each renter would be given a key fob that would open a door to the office, so there would be no set hours. You could rent access monthly or yearly, and when your rental period or membership was over, the owner/manager would simply deactivate your access.

I just mentioned this idea to an acquaintance, who also works from home. This person is very well connected and successful, but said he would definitely utilize something like that. And he told me that another person had just expressed an interest in the same type of facility.

Apparently, these arrangements are pretty common in larger cities. Someone should open one in Madison. Not me, but "someone."