Monday, February 25, 2013
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Turning the Tide on Tolls?
Those surveyed face a daily commute of at least 30 minutes each way. The study found strong support for expanding rapid transit to suburban communities.
While well over half of the drivers surveyed were willing to pay a road toll, sales tax or parking fee, 69 per cent said they would be more supportive if they knew the funds would go directly to expanding rapid transit.
The survey also found that drivers would choose rapid transit or working from home if those options existed.
The respondents also said they would leave the car at home if they could purchase car insurance on a pay-as-you-drive basis.
The study was conducted for the Pembina Institute by Environics.
"For many drivers in the Toronto area, there is no reasonable alternative to commuting to work by car," said Cherise Burda, the report's author and director of the institute's transportation program.
"This survey shows there is very strong support among drivers for road tolls and other user fees, as long as those funds are used to build or expand rapid transit options in areas where people currently have no choice but to drive."
The survey was part of a larger Pembina report that examines best practices from other urban regions.
Monday, March 12, 2012
On the Bus: Transit Budget
On the Bus: Transit Budget
Saturday, January 15, 2011
design the b-line
- Give your view on the ongoing development of a Rapid Transit network for Hamilton
- Review details of the proposed Light Rail Transit (LRT) scheme for the B-Line corridor between McMaster and Eastgate
- Discuss and contribute to land use planning issues and opportunities along both the A-Line (Waterfront to Airport) and B-Line (McMaster to Eastgate) corridors
Friday, January 07, 2011
King and Main from Eastgate to Mac up for discussion
Details below….
B-Line Corridor - Public Visioning Workshop - All are Welcome!
Help shape the future of the B-Line Corridor along Queenston, King and Main Streets from Eastgate to McMaster.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011 - Open House 6pm - 7pm, Presentation and Workshop 7pm - 9pm
Hamilton Convention Centre, Albion Rooms, 1 Summers Lane in Downtown Hamilton
Throughout the fall, the City has been hosting a series of focus group meetings to help establish a land use vision for the B-Line Corridor. We have been hearing about how neighbourhoods along the corridor envision the land use and future development. Come out to hear what neighbourhoods are saying about the corridor and participate by adding YOUR vision for the B-Line Corridor.
Let us know if you are planning to attend the event - please RSVP by January 10, 2011.
E-mail: nodesandcorridors@hamilton.ca
Phone: Christine Newbold (905) 546-2424 ext 1279 or Ken Coit (905) 546-2424 ext 1220
www.hamilton.ca/nodesandcorridors
Monday, December 20, 2010
Hamilton Transit in Crisis
Monday, November 22, 2010
Starving Transit?
Bus improvements and fare hikes on agenda
The new council will grapple with possible bus fare hikes and route changes before the end of the year. Fares were raised last January, but not as much as recommended by staff, and a provision of more monies to the HSR for service improvements is also up for debate.
The new council takes office on December 1 in a strictly ceremonial inaugural meeting, but will be asked to make several key decisions before Christmas – including raising water and sewer rates and other fees, and finalizing the transit budget before discussing other aspects of next year’s budget. The rush to raise fees is intended to ensure these can be collected as early as possible in 2011.
The transit budget is scheduled for debate on the morning of Tuesday, December 14, but actual proposals from staff won’t be made public before December 10. Ridership this year was higher than expected and bus repair costs were lower, but those revenue gains have already been shifted to reserves – leaving the overall 2010 budget at “a net zero position”.
HSR cash fares have climbed more than 20 percent since June 2007, while the price of adult monthly passes has jumped by a third and school-age passes have gone up 40 percent (see table below). But rising fuel prices and regular wage increases of transit employees could be used to argue for another fare hike for 2011.
Last year’s recommended increase was 20 cents a ride, but some councillors wanted less and a 15 cent increase was eventually adopted by a narrow 9-7 vote. Three of those who voted in favour aren’t part of the new council – Fred Eisenberger, Margaret McCarthy and Dave Mitchell – all of whom supported the 20 cent hike.
The seniors’ annual pass was left at the $205 level it’s been fixed at since 2003, but adult and student passes each climbed $8 a month to $87 and $71 respectively. That translated into $96 more per year for each regular rider – and much more for those with several family members using the transit system.
Council refused to consider the alternative of raising taxes to cover increased HSR expenditures. It also ignored commentary in the staff report that suggested that might be the best option:
“Ideally, transit program managers recommend fare increases to generate new revenue to fund service level increases stipulated in corporate strategic objectives,” stated the report. “Less desirably, in a challenged fiscal environment, fare increases are applied to meet fiscal goals for program budgets versus strategic goals. Finally, fare increases where the new revenue is used to offset increases to the general tax levy are detrimental to the sustainability of transit programs.”In its final resolution, council directed staff to come up with a policy for automatically raising fares without a council debate, but that hasn’t happened yet. A second issue facing councillors is a proposal to use federal gas tax monies for transit.
The city receives $32 million a year in these payments, but so far has used none of it for bus services. Brian McHattie has been advocating that $3 million of that money be shifted to the HSR to pay for more bus service.
In August, council decided to put off that re-allocation to the 2011 transit budget, so that proposal will also be up for decision on December 14. Some councillors suggested this amount is “pie in the sky”, but it was strongly defended by transit director Don Hull who said the system really needs ten times that amount.
“$30 million is just what it would take over the next five years to keep moving towards the Transportation Master Plan,” he explained. “The $3 million that we’re asking for in alternative to the $30 million is simply what we feel we need in the very short term to prevent the public satisfaction with this program from deteriorating.”
Hamilton is one of only two municipalities that currently use none of their federal gas tax for transit. The other is Durham Region which plans to spend its entire share on a new incinerator. Hull’s August report indicated the extra monies could fund weekend service on the King, Stone Church and the B-Line routes and weekday expansion on the Delaware, Upper Kenilworth, Rymal, Locke, York and Aberdeen lines.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Great news for student transit - Guelph/Hamilton
New bus service links Hamilton, Guelph
GUELPH — Daily bus service between Guelph and Hamilton is running again.
London-based carrier Aboutown Transportation Ltd. began providing twice-daily service between the University of Guelph and downtown Hamilton Monday
There has been no regular service between the two cities since Coach Canada cancelled its service last year.
Those brave enough to make the trip with GO or Greyhound have had to detour through Toronto, taking up to four hours and paying up to $46 to cover 52 kilometres.
There has never been rail service between the two hubs.
Ian Weir, the University of Guelph’s manager of parking and transportation says he was “delighted” at the news.
“This new service will fill a gap in our connectivity with the regions south of Guelph,” he said.
Coach Canada service expanded in 2008 to five trips daily and prompted the university to renovate its transit loop to accommodate the increase.
That’s why many were shocked when the company abruptly dropped its service in last October, one month after students, many of them from Hamilton, had returned to class.
The company said its hand was forced to act after ridership dropped to an average of 11 passengers.
“You are not even covering the cost of the fuel,” Coach Canada spokesperson Brian Morehouse said at the time.
Starting Monday, Hamilton-bound buses will leave from the south end of the University of Guelph’s transit loop at 6 a.m. and 5:45 p.m. each day, arriving at Hamilton’s GO Terminal and McMaster University about an hour later. Return buses will depart Hamilton at 7:25 a.m. and 7:15 p.m.
Tickets can be purchased online or at the University Centre on campus.
The Guelph Mercury
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
slowing transit
CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) updates use transcripts and/or public documents to highlight information about Hamilton civic affairs that is not generally available in the mass media. Detailed reports of City Hall meetings can be reviewed at www.hamiltoncatch.org. You can receive all CATCH free updates by sending an email to info@HamiltonCATCH.org.
Monday, May 31, 2010
PRESTO!
GO Transit is rolling out the Presto Card, and municipal transit systems in the area are joining in. This video shows how it works.
Friday, December 25, 2009
catching christmas ride?
Burlington transit riders beware - the city does not offer transit on Christmas Day...
Saturday, November 21, 2009
paradigm shift needed for transit
CATCH Articles:
Study says HSR should be expanded
Nov 09, 2009
A comprehensive operational review says the HSR needs to add ten to fifteen buses a year to achieve the city’s transit goals. It also suggests ways to improve Hamilton’s transit system and offers ideas on modifying existing bus routes and service frequencies.
The year long study by IBI Group was commissioned by the city and tracked ridership at all 2264 stops on the HSR’s 32 routes and compared the results to other communities. A summary was given verbally to councillors in a slide presentation on October 29, but the full document has not yet been made public.
The slides say that the HSR is “performing well … given financial and other constraints” but warn councillors that “there are no magic bullets to grow transit ridership without incurring increased costs”. The consultants argue strongly that more spending is what is required.
“A paradigm shift is needed in city thinking and decision making to make transit a priority,” said IBI presenter Brian Hollingsworth. “The HSR is at a crossroads. All policies and plans call for continued growth, but continued financial constraints are a barrier.”
Hollingsworth pointed to the Vision 2020 goal of 100 rides per person per annum by 2020, and the target of the city transportation master plan to reduce vehicle use by 20 percent by 2030. The provincial and federal governments are also supporting transit improvements with gas tax monies.
He noted that HSR ridership is currently at 45 rides per capita per year, down from 47 in 2008. To achieve the 100 target “would require a doubling of service hours and associated funding increases”.
“HSR should be adding 10-15 buses per year to meet this target by 2021,” says the summary, but notes that “concentrating future population and employment in existing transit corridors and other transit supportive policies can reduce the need for service expansion” in meeting city targets. These policies include promoting infill and higher density, reducing parking requirements, and “controlling sprawl of commercial (i.e. big-box) development”.
The study also contends there are good reasons to improve transit services including the “high cost of owning and operating private automobiles” and the fact that gas tax funding for the city “is tied to demonstrated progress on ridership growth.” It also notes that transit promotes economic development because “increasingly companies are seeking to locate in cities that have high levels of transit accessibility.”
While praising the overall efficiency of the HSR, IBI notes that average fares are low because of the large number of riders getting discounted or free trips. They calculate that “44 percent of all passengers have a discounted fare other than an adult monthly pass” and note that “free boardings for persons with personal mobility devices are potentially subject to abuse.”
Reducing this fare “leakage,” IBI suggests, could be an alternative to fare increases. And they urge “discounts for social programs should be treated as such and not funded entirely from the HSR budget.”
Other ideas for savings include “implementing transit priority in the King-Main corridor” which IBI calculates could significantly reduce the number of required buses – each of which costs the HSR $300,000 a year to operate.
Maps in the presentation show possible changes to bus routes and service frequencies as “for discussion”. At the request of city staff the IBI findings have been referred to the transit department for review and a future report to committee of the whole.Wednesday, November 18, 2009
autostop
The Hamilton Spectator, (Nov 18, 2009)
Next stop: automated announcements on HSR buses.
The city is about to finish installing equipment that will call out stops on all buses. The technology should be up and running by year's end, says Carol Wildeman, senior project manager in the city's transit department.
HSR drivers will log into a computer system that will communicate their route with a GPS system. This will make sure the system only calls out the stops on the driver's particular route. The stop names will also be displayed on LED signs.
The next few weeks will be spent testing the announcements to make sure everything is in place.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Flawed Transit Funding Process
Letter to Council: Flawed Transit Funding Process Needs Public Input, Accountability
In the absence of any meaningful process of engagement, and given how information is kept secret until the last minute, we have a sure recipe to breed conflict, confrontation, and poor transit decisions.
By Peter Hutton
Oct. 26, 2009
Commentary
To Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Members of Council
It is with great concern that we have followed the process that leads to the Committee of the Whole Meeting this week, which appears now to have been called simply to raise transit fares.
While we recognize the difficult financial times, it is not, we think, a situation that should surprise anyone. Little has been done to find solutions other than an increase that even your managers will tell you is in conflict with your strategic goals for building a transit system.
Our small effort has been to develop a Transit Vision survey independent from the HSR's work to get some ideas from the public about what to do. The interim results of that unscientific survey will hopefully be brought forward to council later this week.
While self-selected, it is the views of hundreds of Hamiltonians who care about transit, and represent the views of many more who are worried that our transit system, which is essential for the economic, environmental and social health of this city, is going downhill fast.
I write today to address process. Our group is deeply concerned that yet again, fares are going to be considered outside the context of the main budget.
An extra budget meeting to give Council some context has been set for Tuesday, which we noted only on the calendar this weekend. That was apparently announced after Thursday's meeting was first advertised.
In the absence of any meaningful process of engagement with riders and other Hamilton residents by the city in the past year and given how information is kept secret until the last minute, we have a sure recipe to breed conflict, confrontation, and poor, not broadly supported decisions.
TUG laments that the gas tax committee, for example, was never allowed the opportunity to morph into an ongoing advisory committee, thanks to staff inertia. It could have been a vehicle for mobilizing such public discussions.
It is our understanding that the HSR operational review, which has not yet been released, supports our view of the need for investment in transit beyond the status quo.
We see no need for delay for a staff report that further excludes the public. While the process of engagement on the review was hopelessly inadequate - two small focus groups - it was a start and we have to make a start in all of this somewhere. The status quo won't cut it for this or future budgets.
We recognize that a fare increase may be needed but it must be tied to a realistic plan to address the needs for service improvement in both quality and quantity.
We seem to be going nowhere fast. We call again on Council to develop some process of broader engagement and discussion to determine options for a consensus to move forward. Fare, taxes, service redeployment, different kinds of services, will all be a part of that community consensus.
Given that transit fares are considered to be a user fee; and given the fact that it seems Council has set aside three additional meetings to consider user fees; we call on council at a minimum to determine that no decision be made this Thursday, and that a final decision be made later in November after we take the month to have an open and honest debate around all transit issues.
http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=968Saturday, November 14, 2009
transit letter
Matthew Sweet, Hamilton
The Hamilton Spectator
(Nov 14, 2009)
Re: 'Mohawk student union turned down bus deal' (Letters, Nov. 9)
Discounted bus passes for full-time Mohawk College students has been a dead issue for 10 years. That was the last time it was put to the student body in a referendum.
Since then, Mohawk as a "commuter college" has been the refrain among student representatives. It seemed most were content to see streams of single- occupancy vehicles crowd the Fennell Campus parking lot, while students who took the bus paid regular adult fares. No wonder most choose to drive.
The cost of eight months' worth of adult fare passes is currently $632, while parking on campus is $225 per semester. If cost is the same, most will choose to drive.
Over the past month, students have collected signatures on a petition asking the student association to explore the possibility of a bus pass. The response has been overwhelming; 1,600 signatures have been collected.
Maybe the old label of "commuter college" can finally be expanded to include those who commute within Hamilton on public transit.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
transit votes
City to hike bus fares, starting Jan. 1
Emma Reilly, The Hamilton Spectator, (Nov 12, 2009)
Hamiltonians will pay 15 cents more for bus fares beginning Jan. 1.
An increase that will see fares climb from $2.40 to $2.55 passed with a narrow 9-7 vote at last night's city council meeting. Tickets will also go up 15 cents to $2 and monthly passes will climb to $86 from $79.
Yearly seniors' passes will remain the same price.
The hike is expected to bump revenue by $1.5 million, an amount that will offset the HSR's estimated $1.6-million loss this year and a predicted $3.4-million shortfall next year.
Council initially rejected both a 10-cent fare increase and a 20-cent increase at a special budget transit meeting in late October. Though most councillors supported a hike, their votes were split between a 10-cent or 20-cent increase.
The 15-cent hike was a "compromise," said Mayor Fred Eisenberger.
"In a perfect world, I would have liked to see 20 cents," he said. "Twenty cents is what's necessary, and 15 cents is a reasonable compromise."
The vote re-opened a long-running debate that "breeds an environment that's really conducive to hostility," said Councillor Sam Merulla. Councillor Brian McHattie, who voted against the increase, called it "an extremely unfortunate and wrongheaded move" and warned it will decrease ridership.
Councillors Terry Whitehead and Chad Collins both said they supported a 10-cent increase, but voted against the 15-cent hike.
"I can't support the 15 cents. I think it does go too far," Collins said.
"From my perspective, I think it's reasonable to expect an increase, and 10 cents for me works."
Still, the goal of keeping next year's property tax hike to two per cent or less ultimately convinced most council members to vote in favour of the increase.
"If we don't get it from the fare box, we certainly have to dip into the tax base," Eisenberger said. "The two per cent target is going to be a difficult one to achieve, and it will be even more difficult without this increase."
The hike comes into effect exactly two years after the last increase from $2.25 to $2.40.
Council also requested a report on automatically calculating future fare increases in time for next year's budget.
That formula could prevent the transit debate from resurfacing each year, Eisenberger said.
HOW THEY VOTED:
Yes: Brad Clark, Fred Eisenberger, Lloyd Ferguson, Tom Jackson, Margaret McCarthy, Dave Mitchell, Robert Pasuta, Maria Pearson, Russ Powers
No: Bob Bratina, Chad Collins, Scott Duvall, Brian McHattie, Sam Merulla, Bernie Morelli, Terry Whitehead
Sunday, November 08, 2009
fare taxes
and effect of avoiding a proposed 20 cent per ride fare hike
| Area affected | Current HSR taxes per household | 4.2% increase to avoid a fare hike | 2% increase with fare hike | Total HSR tax increase with no fare hike |
| Ancaster | $58 | $2.44 | $1.16 | $3.60 |
| Dundas | $63 | $2.65 | $1.26 | $3.91 |
| Glanbrook | $114 | $4.79 | $2.28 | $7.07 |
| Hamilton | $266 | $11.17 | $5.32 | $16.49 |
| Stoney Creek | $85 | $3.57 | $1.70 | $5.27 |
| Waterdown | $60 | $2.52 | $1.20 | $3.72 |
| Rural areas | $00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
fare debate
Howard Elliott
The Hamilton Spectator
(Oct 28, 2009)
Pass the Tylenol Extra Strength -- an HSR fare increase is back on the table.
Pretty much every year we go through this painful dance in which HSR staff recommends to city council that a fare increase is necessary to offset the rising cost of operations and to improve and expand service. If there's no increase, the system won't grow, will exhaust reserves, defer capital spending and possibly reduce service, the argument goes. And HSR fares are 10 to 15 per cent lower than other big city fares across Canada, so we're underpaying for the service.
And every year, transit, environmental and social justice advocates yell loud and long against fare increases. Fare hikes are guaranteed to reduce ridership, so higher fares are offset by fewer riders, and there's no real gain, they argue. Shrinking ridership also contradicts the city's sustainability master plan, Vision 2020. Because HSR ridership is largely students and people on limited or low income, fare hikes penalize the most vulnerable, and may be a disincentive for people to work rather than rely on social assistance, poverty activists add.
The thing is, all of this is true. There is convincing evidence on both sides. Little wonder the matter ended with a tie council vote last year, which resulted in a proposal for a 10 cent fare increase dying on the table.
Some other salient points:
This time around, the debate is likely to be even more contentious than last year. The city was staring at the prospect of a $15-million deficit, brought about in large part by the recession. Given the bleak state of provincial finances, there's a worry the province may not deliver entirely on its uploading commitment of about $15 million, which could make the shortfall as much as $31.5m. This may not be the year to put extra burden on the overall tax base by deferring any fare increase for a second consecutive year.
The recession has also made poverty an even bigger problem in the city, with many more families unemployed, using food banks, applying for social assistance, and, yes, using public transit because it's what they can afford. The price of a monthly pass has already increased 22 per cent since 2007. This may not be the year to put extra burden on the people living in poverty, including the working poor.
In the wake of last year's split decision on a fare increase, a disappointed Mayor Fred Eisenberger said: "These are tough times. It's a question of balance." That's as true this year as it was then.
Council needs to strike a balanced approach to the pressures on the overall city budget and all taxpayers and the pressures on the HSR and passengers. There needs to be more collaboration and communication with transit users than there has been to date. The results of an operational review of HSR need to be released and understood before a decision is taken on a fare increase. Council needs to hear from and listen to social justice and taxpayer advocates. That process begins at a Committee of the Whole meeting tomorrow. A transit fare increase may ultimately be necessary, but not before a great deal of sincere collaboration and creative thinking rule out other alternatives.
http://thespec.com/Opinions/article/661727
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
let me take you higher!
City staff are calling for a 20 cent fare hike for the HSR and DARTS, and switching bus purchases to 40-foot diesel vehicles instead of a mix of 40 and 60 foot articulated hybrids. The proposals were released on Friday and go before councillors as part of the ‘transit day’ budget deliberations on October 29.
The 9:30 am meeting at the Sheraton Hotel was also expected to consider changes to HSR routes proposed by consultants. A presentation on those changes (not yet made public) is on the agenda, but transit staff want no action taken by councillors until staff have an opportunity to respond.
The fare hikes, on the other hand, are recommended for finalization by November 30 so they can be imposed at the start of next year.
“Foregone revenue from a delay in a fare increase beyond January 1, 2010 would be in the order of $100,000 per month,” warns the report.
Staff say their proposals respond to a council directive that limits spending increases to 2 percent for 2010 – equal to a little over $850,000 for transit. Staff say the division is facing $2.1 million in additional costs next year plus a $1.3 million drop in revenue because of fewer riders, and that the combined effect would be amount to an 8 percent hike in spending.
The report doesn’t specify the precise effect on ticket or pass prices, instead only referring to “a fare increase of an average of 20 cents per trip”. Applied across the board, the hike would translate into approximately $10 extra per month on the adult and student passes that currently sell for $79 and $63 respectively.
As recently as June 2007, these passes were $65 for adults and $50 for students. Cash fares are currently $2.40 with adult tickets costing $1.85. The seniors pass is now $205 a year. Any fare hikes approved will also apply to DARTS tickets.
The report says fare hikes “ideally” should be for the purpose of improving transit services, and not to keep down taxes.
“Less desirably, in a challenged fiscal environment, fare increases are applied to meet fiscal goals for program budgets versus strategic goals,” explains the report. “Fare increases where the new revenue is used to offset increases to the general tax levy are detrimental to the sustainability of transit programs.”
Transit taxes are area-rated and only apply to portions of the city that receive HSR service with the vast majority collected from residents of the former city of Hamilton. A $300,000 home there pays $266 a year on their tax bill, while similar valued homes in Ancaster pay $58, in Waterdown $60, Dundas $63 and Stoney Creek $85.
Other recommended measures include purchasing only low-floor ramp vehicles for DARTS rather than the lift-equipped high floor design. Staff are also calling for a delay to increases in the Taxi Scrip program that have been recommended by council’s Advisory Committee for Persons with Disabilities.
Dropping the policy of buying hybrid buses, including some large articulated vehicles, will save $200,000 explains the report, while abandoning the purchase of lift-equipped DARTS buses will conserve an additional $100,000. There is no discussion in the report on the implications of these moves for either air quality or transit services.
Changes to DARTS to meet new provincial human rights rules are to be discussed in a separate report that staff promises for “the near future” but say won’t affect next year’s transit budget.
“However, there will be substantive financial impacts on future budget years beyond 2010 to achieve compliance with the pending AODA legislation as it is currently contemplated,” the report warns.
At this point, no formal opportunities are being provided to allow transit users to comment on the proposed changes, although council committees usually accept individual requests to speak if made by noon on the day prior to the scheduled meeting.
CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) updates use transcripts and/or public documents to highlight information about Hamilton civic affairs that is not generally available in the mass media. Detailed reports of City Hall meetings can be reviewed at www.hamiltoncatch.org. You can receive all CATCH free updates by sending an email to info@HamiltonCATCH.org.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
ridership down
Hamilton feels transit pinch2 per cent ridership drop costs $600,000
Nicole MacIntyre, Hamilton Spectator
Hamilton’s job losses are also hurting the city’s transit system.
Ridership is down 2 per cent — a $600,000 budget hit.
“There’s no doubt in my mind that it’s connected to the economy,” said transit director Don Hull.
Increased unemployment means fewer people travelling in general, he said, noting other cities with high job losses have also seen a ridership dip.
If cities haven’t seen a drop, it’s likely because they’ve had new service come on line, noted Hull.
Toronto’s ridership, for example, is up nearly 3 per cent. Observers point to service enhancements that started in the last year.
Across the country, it appears transit ridership is holding steady, a welcome surprise given the poor economy, said Michael Roschlau, president of the Canadian Urban Transit Association.
He also credits service improvements and suspects the figures would be much worse without recent investments.
The association is still waiting for firm numbers, but has heard anecdotally from many communities, he said.
Roschlau cautions against cities slashing services to make up for the budget shortfalls. Cuts now will only leads to further ridership losses and mean a longer recovery, he said.
“You start to get in a downward spiral.”
Hull said the city has no plans for cuts, but hopes savings from lower gas prices will offset the lost fare revenue.