A big part of the argument for mass transit in Bend has been -- everyone else has one. Everyone bigger than us, and some towns smaller than us. Ordinarily, I probably would have just gone along with the program. I have voted for each of the tax measures that have come up.
But when the mass transit in Bend was first formed, my hackles were raised a bit by the tone the whole enterprise took. There was an assertion that, "no problem" it will be easy, "won't cost much at all!" which simply didn't ring true. If that was so, why hadn't it been done before?
I suspected there was more to it.
Anyway, like a bunch of rubes, we got taken for a whole lot of money by buying 'Brooklyn Bridge' buses that continually broke down. (the same rubeness that seemed to have infected the whole Juniper Ridge idea, and ... I have to wonder... how did we end up with sidewalk ramps that didn't fit code? How do these things keep happening? Is it because we grew so fast? We weren't ready to be a real live MetroArea, in some ways....)
And, because of the way mass transit came about, I started doing some adding up on costs, and it seemed a little crazy. It seemed more like we were doing it because it was expected of us, than because it was actually an effective system. For the riders who need the bus system, it's a great good. But is it a cost effective good for the town? It literally seemed as though we could pay for taxi rides for everyone who needed one and save money.
Turns out, not so cost effective after all. Turns out that it will have to be supported by public monies -- forever. It's something we do for the sake of the people in need, and -- though again, this seems sort of less than convincing -- for the environment
Fine. But that isn't the way it was sold to us.
"Get over it," I know some of you will say. It's a public good, and it needs to be done.
So...I'll lay aside my concerns about whether it truly is an effective way to spend public monies, and address it's current problems. Assuming it's a public good. Assuming that our public is willing to support the public good just as much as all the other towns and districts.
Why hasn't that happened?
I think it's because the public has a long memory. You can't just sweep the failures under the rug. And in a sense, that's what local officials are trying to do. They're trying to present us with a fait accompli.
"See?" They want to be able to say. It works now. It's worth supporting now.
I predicted that when they sloughed off the transit to a wider district, it was to obscure its troubled beginnings and to spread the blame and the risk. The city of Bend is still paying out a large chuck of it's general fund in support, though. They really need and want a tax district and are hoping that by supporting the system just a little longer, they can present the public with the dilemma of dismantling an already existing system, or biting the bullet, and paying for it with a tax measure.
I believe they may have outsmarted themselves, however. By spreading the risk into smaller outlying areas, they may have made it impossible for a measure to get passed. Check out the votes for any county wide measure -- there is that solid core of public minded voters at the center of Bend, but the further you move out, the more NO! votes you'll get.
Growing up in Bend, I swear every school measure would fall by about the Negative Vote total in the rural districts.
So they've diluted the most solid supporters of mass transit, and brought into play voters who will almost automatically vote down ANY tax measure.
Hard to believe that our town will dismantle an existing mass transit. I wonder if that has ever happened?
But also hard to see how they're ever going to fund it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Looks like possibly a beginning of where real-world economics (versus the fantasy hope and change economics everyone pretended we had) weeds out the ineptitude and wastefulness of government.
At the end of the day, people vote with their pocket books, and funding mostly empty buses that break down all the time will be very low on the priority list, indeed.
I moved to Bend to get away from big city infrastructure like public bus systems. The speculators are being flushed down. That is the positive with the local economy. Thing are getting quiet and I see that as a very good thing.
"Turns out that it will have to be supported by public monies -- forever."
Like virtually all public transit systems.
And I hope you understand that automobile travel also is "supported by public monies" in a hundred different ways. As is air travel.
"Thing [sic] are getting quiet and I see that as a very good thing."
Quiet ... as in "quiet as the grave."
"Like virtually all public transit systems."
The willingness of some people to accept complete ineptitude, corruption and waste 'for the public good' is completely idiotic.
First of all, 'for the public good' usually encompasses a minority of the people, like public transit.
Air travel, highways, and other necessary 'supported by public monies' infrastructure is supported that way because we have no choice: it is a power grab by the government to charge more taxes and regulate at their whim.
Take the threat of withholding federal highway funds from states if they didn't raise their drinking ages to 21.
The economic fail rate of the government in all endeavors is so overwhelming it boggles the mind. And many people could care less (specifically, the shrinking percentage of people who approve of the current regime).
It is my premise that this will soon charge. It has to. The money will run out (actually, it already has, but no one wants to admit it. Yet).
It is also likely that the first areas of government to return to the private sector will be the necessary infrastructure, as most of this can be run at a profit with minimal brain cells.
"The economic fail rate of the government in all endeavors is so overwhelming it boggles the mind."
The silliness of that statement boggles the mind.
"It is also likely that the first areas of government to return to the private sector will be the necessary infrastructure, as most of this can be run at a profit with minimal brain cells."
If the Interstate highway system and the air traffic control system could be operated at a profit, believe me, somebody would be doing it.
blackdog, have you even used the bus system? I get a free pass from my workplace so I use it a few times a week but I would say 25% time it was just me on the bus, 50% 2-5 people, and the rest half full or more. I've been on a full bus one time. I supported it at first, but after one thursday afternoon(usually peak time since people are getting out of work) where I was the only person on the bus even after passing two stops I had to just had to stop making up excuses for supporting it and admit that its a waste of money. Maybe you've had a different experience
"The silliness of that statement boggles the mind."
...which is exactly why our economy is doomed to fail. At least until people wake up.
"You can take the government out of the economy, but you can't take the economy out of the government."
-yours, truly.
And for some reason, call it ignorance or just being obdurate, progressives seem to think that the government operates above the laws of economics. In spite of all the evidence to the contrary.
Post a Comment