I think that as a rule the STL area should be experimenting big time with various fares and pricing schemes. We have nada to lose since Metro is widely thought of as completely mismanaged.

How about higher fares in general out in West County instead of cutting service? You want cheap fares in North County as a policy matter, that's fine, but make sure you get the money somewhere else. Do all the routes need to be served by the same sized buses? How about smaller buses but higher fares for custom routes, and larger buses and lower fares for North STL?
>>>>


I don't necessarily disagree with you. I would imagine the problem is juggling fare with desire and ability if you're talking about West County/South County. Those people will drive. They've done it before and they'll do it again if you raise the fare too high. That not only defeats the purpose and decreases ridership but leaves a bad impression, once again.

But all of this will still not support what it costs to move passengers from point A to point B.

Another "bureaucratic thing" that I heard discussed on Jaco was that what REALLY costs the big moolah is Call-A-Ride, which , by Federal mandate, has to be run concurrent with all bus routes. Many routes Metro could have kept, but not with the CAR, so the route had to go also.

^ That would satisfy X number of critics and tick off X number more. What would Tom Sullivan say if Metro was so "completely mismanaged" that the federal government sued it for not running a lawful paratransit system? Put another way, can Metro ever do anything right?

Arch, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, which is what I said from the beginning. No one said it's the best way to run anything, but the fact of the matter is: that's the way it is. It ain't changing.

That's why I brought up the thing Metro CAN do-inform interested people, such as yourself, of the realities of planning transit for a community.

^ It was probably a combination of available capital grants, and being easier to cave into cynical pressure than defend its position. The U of Maryland concluded (and this is why no light rail system on the planet uses turnstiles) that it costs $18 of capital, maintenance, and personnel to recover $1 in lost fares over the life of the turnstiles. Say what you will, but Metro is absolutely right not installing them.

^ It was probably a combination of available capital grants, and being easier to cave into cynical pressure than defend its position. The U of Maryland concluded (and this is why no light rail system on the planet uses turnstiles) that it costs $18 of capital, maintenance, and personnel to recover $1 in lost fares over the life of the turnstiles. Say what you will, but Metro is absolutely right not installing them.