STORYLINE transit choice

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

Paying to park at RT's 5 & Dime store

by John Hughes, published on February 22, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Storyline: transit choice RSS Feed

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images

Two separate money-making ideas will be on the agenda of the Sacramento Regional Transit board of directors meeting Monday evening -- charging to use RT's park-and-ride lots and charging for copies of documents.

The parking fee is a rerun of the idea shot down late last year when the board was deciding how it would fill the hole in the budget left by the state's thievery. Whether or not it will receive a better reception now is anyone's guess, but the state's theft of still more money RT had been banking on surely increases the need to do something.

Tonight's discussion on the parking fee is an informational item focused on two areas:

1. If RT charged a fee to utilize the park and ride lots will it discourage riders? If so at what fee level do we minimize ridership loss?

2. If RT implements a fee program what methods of payment are more desirable?

The tentative schedule has the board approving parking fees at the March 9 meeting. Procurement of the vending machines would happen the next day and the park-and-ride fees would take effect Sept. 1. No public hearings are required. The board just needs to give its OK.

The staff issue paper is available here.

RT paid Transit Marketing, LLC to conduct a pair of focus group polls.

"The two focus groups were presented with multiple fee options for parking at light rail park and ride lots. These included various daily rates; a single price or different prices at various stations; discount rates for longer terms; including the fee in each ticket; and other methods of charging," according to the Issue Paper accompanying agenda item No. 15. "Both of the focus groups concluded that charging a fee of $1 per day would not discourage riders from utilizing the park and ride lots."

Staff estimate that a $1 daily fee would generate an additional $1 million annually. Startup costs are estimated at $210,000.

The focus group report makes interesting, if not surprising, reading.  The draft report is available here.


The document copying fee on the agenda isn't intended to generate extra money. It is just supposed to cover the costs RT previously absorbed. According to the Issue Paper for agenda item No. 16, the district would charge 25 cents a page for agendas and agenda packages, issue papers, ordinances, resolutions, contracts, standard operating procedures and other district records.

Those charges add up. A copy of Monday's 29-page general manager's report would $7.25. The 19-page focus group poll for the parking fees would be $4.75. Another issue paper here, an ordinance there, and pretty soon you're talking serious money.

Staff propose a $25 limit for annual reports such as the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and annual budget documents.

RT would also recover the actual cost of duplicating audio and video tapes, postage and online sales processing fees, returned check charges and fees to certify documents.

The issue paper suggests that charging fees will not hinder public access.

"Public access to Regional Transit's Board or Committee agendas will not be impaired as the result of the proposed charges where in addition to reviewing these documents at the District's offices, the documents will be made available for review on-line at Regional Transit's public website in a PDF format for the period of one year from the date they are published. Likewise, the audio and video recordings of Board and most Committee meetings will also become available at no charge on-line for a period of 1 year from the date of the event."

While it is nice that the audio and video recordings will be online, the close reading of that paragraph suggests that only the agendas will be online, not the agenda packages or the issue papers or the ordinances or the resolutions or the contracts or the standard operating procedures or other district records. If so, that needs to change.

The staff report is available here.
 

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

edited on  February 23, 2009 | 10:32 AM
RT needs to make all documents available online if it intends to say that the fees will not hinder public access. Making them available online wouldn't be a huge undertaking, and if someone is doing research and has to request numerous documents, I can see that as being potentially much more of an inconvenience and in some cases a hindrance to their abilities, by charging them $25 per document. If you needed the last 8 years, that's $200! F* that.

Btw, was the focus group paper written by people who had a grasp of the English language?

"...these groups was made up of..." WERE
"...he severally underestimated the number..." SEVERELY

The focus group consisted of 20 people. I feel that it would be much more helpful and realistic to determine loss in ridership, to conduct a phone survey of 500 random people. It would give a good idea of not only how many riders would be lost, but how many have been lost in the past due to fare increases, as well as the percentage that actually ride RT.
2 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background