[PRCo] Re: ({[pat]})__Budget

[Joshua Dunfield]

Jim Holland wrote:
> Very Nicely State, Joshua.       This fact has not been lost on many of 
> us who feel that  ({[pat]})  was crying wolf to get what it wanted in 
> the past.       But budget woes are real and eventually something has to 
> happen    ----    your comments above Make Much Sense.       This might 
> be the year it happens.

I hope not, but we'll see.  I'm not sure that backing off Harrisburg right
now is a good strategy.  Rendell's transit commission just produced a report
that was only mildly critical of PAT (and SEPTA, for different reasons; they
thought PAT was neglecting operations for capital projects and SEPTA was doing
the opposite), which gives some cover for politicians to raise taxes.
Of course they wouldn't be caught dead calling it that, but we know what it
means.

PAT also has two fare increase proposals (yes, as usual it's both cuts and fare
increases), one to $2.50 + $.75 per additional zone, and one at $2.00 across
all zones.  With suburban service reduced I guess most riders would only be
traveling in one zone anyway, so the fare *cut* for 2- and 3-zone riders would
be outweighed by the $.25 increase for most.  They also want to go to
proof-of-payment on the T, to save money on peak-hour fare booth attendants.

The elephant in the room is SEPTA.  Soon they'll have to announce how they
"intend" to solve *their* deficit.

> How far outside Pittsburgh are you now?

I'm in Center City Philadelphia.  But I'd rather be in Squirrel Hill!

-j.