The MT Position

Post by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

This week Esquire magazine released a column entitled, “The 75 Skills Every Man Should Master.” For the record, I am a list junkie. I will watch those Top 100 Whatevers of All Time shows that are always on — or at the very least try to catch the Top 10.

Esquire’s list is pretty good, — it includes things like knowing how to take a photo, write a letter, buy a suit — but as with most of these sorts of lists, it’s bound by the law of diminishing returns. Once you get past a certain point the items on the list become increasingly silly and useless.

Case in point, the author suggests finding your way out of the woods if you’re lost — a useful skill perhaps, but how about knowing how to find your way around a strange city using transit?

Most people know their transit systems like the back of their hand. In fact, many people I know who live in large metropolitan areas love to know the little secrets about their transit system. For some people this is as much a badge of honor as any other, knowing which bus routes are regularly on-time, which drivers are the nicest, how you can go down one entrance into a station and get around most of the crowd during rush hour.

I think in today’s day and age knowing how to properly use transit no matter where you are (especially in a foreign country) is an essential skill for anyone. So here are my “Five Essential Transit Skills Everyone Should Master”:

1. Read a System Map – Every transit authority has a system map. Some of them can be so intricate that it seems you need to be a cartographer to really figure out how to get from Point A to Point B. Being able to flip open any transit map and locating your place on it is the first step in being able to use transit effectively

2. Use a Timetable – Knowing how to use a system map will show you where to be and where you can get to, but using the timetable will let you know when to be where and what time you will arrive at your destination. Many systems are beginning to do away with timetables in favor of predictable headways (the bus arrives every 15 minutes, etc.), but it is still an essential skill.

3. Find a Bus Stop – Ever been to a big city and tried to find a bus stop? Sure, some are easily located next to a shelter, but in case it’s just another road sign on a post next to the highway, you need to be able to not only find where to stand, but make sure you are in the right place for your bus

4. Find the Right Train at a Station – Much like finding a bus stop, locating the right train in a station full of them can be difficult. Unlike bus stops, though, larger train stations will have conductors to help you find your way should you get lost.

5. Use a Ticket Vending Machine – Having tried to figure out how to get from one city in Spain to another while reading the instructions on the vending machine in Spanish, I can attest to how essential this skill is. If in doubt, look around for help. Other passengers will often help you out of altruism, if not to just get you out of their way and keep traffic flowing.

My list skims the surface, but you should get the point. Effective use of transit in itself is an essential skill anyone today should master. It ranks right up there with being able to drive a car. In fact, more people in the world probably have mastered transit use than know how to drive a car.

If only we required everyone to learn how to use transit when they were 16.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Christopher L. Rissetto, Marc A. Goldich and Michael C. Falk, Attorneys with Reed Smith, LLP, and Steven a. Diaz, Esquire.

The Indianapolis 500. The Kentucky Derby. The US Olympic Track & Field Trials. The Bucky Bus used for football Sunday’s in Madison, Wisconsin. State Fairs. These are just a few of the hundreds of events that have used public transit buses to ferry people to and from event sites. To comply with the Federal Transit Administration’s new Rule on Charter Service that went into effect April 30, these services must now be opened to private charter bus companies for competitive bidding.

The new FTA Charter Service Rule was created to protect private charter bus companies from competition with federally-subsidized public transit systems. And the competition is steep: Up to 80 percent of public transit agencies’ eligible program costs are subsidized by the federal government.

Below are some observations regarding the impact of the new Rule:

Public Service Providers Can Ask for Exceptions to the Rule: If you are a public operator, there are opportunities for you to continue providing buses to public events, but you must ask the FTA for an exception under the new rule. Many public operators are already seeking advisory opinions and petitions for exceptions. In fact, there were close to a dozen requests for advisory opinions before the rule even went into effect. To date, the FTA Chief Counsel has issued five advisory opinions and one supplemental advisory opinion. We anticipate a significant increase in this activity now that the rule has gone into effect.

Private Charter Registration Protections – Leveling the Playing Field: If you are a private charter operator, you must register with the FTA to be eligible to receive the many protections and benefits now afforded to you under the new rule. These protections and benefits include the right to seek FTA advisory opinions and request cease-and-desist orders. Also, once you register, you will receive notice of new opportunities from public operators seeking to provide the services in your area. However, be careful: if you post incomplete or inaccurate information during the registration process you can be excluded or removed from the Web site. Removal may last as long as three years, during which time you will not receive notice of opportunities disseminated by public operators.

New Matrix Provides Guidance on Level of Sanctions for Violations of the Rule: The FTA can penalize public operators for non-compliance in several ways, including suspension and termination of grant assistance. With the substantial level of federal grant support, there is good reason for public operators to follow the rules. Under the old rule, punishment for a violation was discretionary and funding was only withheld on an “all or nothing” basis. Now, the FTA’s view appears to be that federal financial assistance must be withheld if a pattern of violations is found. The FTA has developed a matrix of sanctions it may use to determine the amount of federal funds that can be withheld, based on the severity of the violation. The FTA has also hinted that a single violation might justify a penalty. No one knows how the new rule will be implemented or the extent to which penalties will be levied to enforce it. Given this risk of grant loss, many public operators are understandably on edge.

Labor Agreements Might Conflict With Implementation of the New Rule: Compliance with labor agreements may be impacted by the new rule. For instance, in a request for an advisory opinion by the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (“KCATA”), a potential conflict with the labor protection provision of Section 13(c) of the Federal Transit Act was highlighted because services that had been previously provided under an existing labor agreement might now be barred under the new rule. The FTA’s advisory opinion responded that “KCATA cannot be forced to carry out contractual provisions that are not in accordance with the law.” Such conflicts will continue to arise and public operators must scrutinize all aspects of their operations to determine if compliance with the new rule will raise such an issue.

Public and private charter service operators must be aware of the many elements of the new rule, including a new and more formal complaint process. It is also important to realize that the anticipated reauthorization in 2010 of SAFETEA-LU (2005) could further impact charter service opportunities.

If you have questions or would like a copy of a bulletin on the FTA’s new Rule on Charter Service, please contact one of the authors: Christopher L. Rissetto, (crissetto@reedsmith.com) is a partner in the Reed Smith Washington, DC office, and heads the Firm’s Grants & Infrastructure practice. Marc A. Goldich (mgoldich@reedsmith.com) and Michael C. Falk (mfalk@reedsmith.com) are litigation attorneys in the Philadelphia office of Reed Smith, and are members of the Firm’s transit team. Steven A. Diaz (sdiaz@diazlaw.net) was formerly Chief Counsel for the FTA. Mr. Diaz has a law office in Washington, DC, and represents private and public transit operators.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

So I went to see the new Iron Man movie last night. It was a good start to the summer movie season — lots of action with plenty of things blowing up. However, spending enough time in the transit industry, has made me look past the main characters in a movie such as this and look for the important things in the background.

You know, like the bus that gets torn up in the climactic battle near the end of the movie. And I always try to figure out whose bus that is.

I’ve visited several transit agencies that were used as backdrops for movies. There was filming for a remake of The Body Snatchers while I was in Baltimore visiting the Maryland Transit Administration a few years back. While I was in Vancouver — well, Vancouver is the home to several TV series, so it goes without saying that there were signs everywhere for various film sites.

I didn’t get a chance to catch whose bus it was in Iron Man, but from the look of it and that the movie was filmed in downtown L.A., I can only assume it was a Metro bus. And I imagine the agency made a nice profit from appearing in the movie.

Movie and TV appearances can be a nice sideline for transit agencies. It is great exposure, the agency makes a nice little bit of additional revenue and it can be a lot of fun overall.

The added revenue is nice, but I think the most important thing is the added exposure. Transit is something that people either a) don’t realize is there or b) take for granted because they see it every day. Now that’s a generalization, but the point is that getting people on transit takes a little extra exposure.

Locally commercials have begun running on TV and radio to take the bus as an alternative to the high price of gas. These same ads ran last year and they make a good message. If only a couple people a day hear that message and think about switching to transit, it’s a windfall for an agency.

And with gas prices going ever higher, transit’s time to shine is now. Take the example from the Jimmy Kimmel show, which did a complete show one night while onboard Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus. That’s a grand slam for the agency!

We are in a video world, and the more transit can take part in it, the more it will benefit from it.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

This last Tuesday was Earth Day. The MT staff did our part and all worked from home on Earth Day. I know it’s a small effort, but if everyone just turned off their cars for one day, think of the effect that would have.

In that vein, gas prices rose again like a creeping shadow following along behind you. We all know that gas prices are predicted to hit $4 a gallon this summer (well, that is everyone but the president, who seems curiously oblivious to it). Unfortunately summer may just come a lot sooner than we expected. Gas prices are already topping more than $4 a gallon in California with some nearing or topping $4.50. The national average is hovering around $3.50, but that’s little comfort.

I was talking to a coworker yesterday who said that he had heard gas prices could hit $7 a gallon by 2010. Doubling in a year in a half? I once would have said that’s not likely or even impossible, but with the recent dramatic rise in gas prices over the last few years, I no longer rule anything out.

So what is there to do about it? Well, the obvious choice is to take transit. It’s simple math: transit = less car use = less $$$ spent on gas.

Of course, for a large part of the United States this isn’t an option. Transit just isn’t an option for some people. So what do they do? Telecommuting has become popular. And it is going to become even more popular.

Spend some time perusing the tech news. Google is offering a host of services for businesses to allow you to access all of your files anywhere. It has its own suite of office programs, and now you can access them offline as well as online. Adobe is putting up a streamlined version of Photoshop online. The next generation of software looks to all be Web-based.

With this trend you’d think people would travel more. They can stay connected anywhere. Unfortunately, people are using this to stay at home. And it’s that creeping shadow that is to blame. As gas prices grow we become more and more isolated as a culture. As gas prices grow, the price of everything else grows as well. If you haven’t noticed, the price of food is creeping up. Just a little here and there, but it’s going up.

As everything gets more expensive, transit becomes more and more appealing. A couple years ago when gas prices shot up, transit ridership soared. This year with that creeping shadow getting longer, keep an eye on ridership levels, I bet they are going to go up as well.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

In the wake of the news of Delta and Northwest’s planned merger this week, I have to say despite what others might believe, the airlines have it easy when compared to public transit. If for no other reason than they don’t have to deal with arguments about America’s love with the flying car.

I took a trip to San Francisco last week. Growing up in the Midwest with a lack of public transit, it makes it even sweeter when you are in a large urban area with a well-connected transit authority. There is just something to be said for being able to walk out on the street and know there will be a bus or train (or both) at a stop within a couple blocks in a few minutes.

In San Francisco on-time performance isn’t just key, it’s pretty much the whole show. The populace has already bought into transit and its importance to the region. It’s not a matter of whether or not they want transit, it’s when will it get here.

Now let’s take a look at San Francisco. Last year San Francisco’s Municipal Railway (Muni) had an on-time performance of 71.2 percent — and the public threw a fit. See, a ballot initiative passed in 1999 demanding an 85 percent on-time performance. So Muni is being called on the carpet about this and is taking steps to hit that magic number.

Now let’s compare that to airline on-time performance. In the last year (according to the DOT) all air carriers had an on-time performance of 73.02 percent. And what was said about that … anyone hear that cricket sound?

See, this is where I think transit doesn’t get a fair shake and airline companies better be thankful there aren’t flying cars.

As I flew home my flight was delayed. Why? Weather. (Which strangely enough, while it seems like a reason often used by airlines for delays it is actually one of the lesser reasons for delays.) So I just shrugged my shoulders and settled down to wait, as did everyone else on the flight. The flight itself was oversold. That meant every single seat was filled.

When I got to my connecting airport, I found my connecting flight was also delayed. Why? Because all of the flights coming into the airport were delayed. (Air carrier or aviation system delays are the two largest reasons for late flights.) After waiting for more than an extra hour for my flight, I was pressed again into an oversold plane and finally made it home.

As I made my way to baggage claim I was thankful I had made it home and that my luggage had made it with me. I noticed most of the other people on the plane had about the same sentiment.

Now look at this from a transit perspective. You go out to wait for your bus or train and it’s delayed … because of the weather. Many areas are now demanding to know exactly how much time before the next bus or train will arrive. The airlines simply shrug and give you a good guesstimate.

Now that the bus or train is here you get on and find you don’t have a seat because it is full to the brim with passengers. People demand more and more capacity for their transit authorities. The airlines actively oversell their flights in case someone doesn’t show up.

You go to make a transfer and find out that your connecting bus or train is more than an hour later than you thought it would be. Most people would be screaming bloody murder at a transit authority for having to wait that long.

The thing is airlines have us over a barrel. We don’t have an option and they know it. Transit has to deal with the ever-present option of people taking cars, bikes or even just walking.

So the next time you’re going to rail against transit for its ineffectiveness, think back to when you were sitting in that airport waiting for your delayed flight and how you just shrugged your shoulders and got out your book.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

A report came out this week from the Department of Transportation, Office of Inspector General (available here) entitled Amtrak’s Future Outlook and Budgetary Needs. The report is in part, to be honest, what we’ve come to expect from the current administration, a transit agency requesting funds and having the actual appropriation falling short of the request.

That said, the budget numbers aren’t the interesting part of the report. The interesting discussion is when the report discusses Amtrak’s on-time performance (OTP), or lack thereof.

“Amtrak’s OTP had been declining steadily since FY 2002, from 77 percent to 68 percent in FY 2006. However, the OTP increased in FY 2007 to 69 percent and to 72.7 percent through January 2008.”

Now, an OTP hovering around 70 is far from desirable, but it isn’t unheard of in transit agencies across the country.

“In FY 2006, average OTP across Amtrak’s long-distance routes was only 30 percent.”

What?! Now that is a shocking number. A 30 percent on-time performance explains a lot about lack of consumer faith in Amtrak. Wow.

So who is to blame for this poor performance? Pick a group and see who they are pointing fingers at.

“…there is little agreement between Amtrak and the host railroads on whose track Amtrak operates regarding the cause of this poor OTP…”

Yep, everybody is blaming everybody else. In defense of the freight railroads whose tracks Amtrak largely operates on, they barely have enough room for their own trains, let alone Amtrak’s, as the report states.

“The capacity of the freight rail network is insufficient to handle the mix of fast (passenger and inter-modal freight) and slow (bulk commodity freight) trains operating according to different business models, i.e., scheduled versus unscheduled or loosely scheduled service.”

The report points out that most of the tracks outside the Northeast Corridor are single tracks with bi-directional traffic, necessitating the use of sidings. It also states that increasing OTP outside the Northeast Corridor to 85 percent would generate a net gain of $136.6 million.

Taking a look at this report, is there any clearer indication that there needs to be a concerted effort put into designing and building a high-speed rail network in the United States. The freight rail network is strained to the point of bursting for its own trains. Amtrak’s OTP for long-distance trains is 30 percent. And neither group is willing to give an inch to help the other out, as the report found, “certain practices intentionally delay Amtrak trains.”

We have an infrastructure crisis on our hands. We need to expand not only the freight rail network, but also implement a better plan for Amtrak other than just shoe-horning it onto existing tracks. And until we do that, Amtrak will continue to operate at losses with poor OTP.

On a personal note, we’ve redesigned the e-mail blast sending out the MT Position. If you haven’t seen it recently or signed up for it, take a look. It now includes Daily News and the top five viewed and emailed stories on the Mass Transit Web site from the past week.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

For many of my marketing colleagues, this is the time they begin formulating their budget for the next fiscal year. And for as long as I can remember, it’s also the time when calls, letters and email begin to circulate, all asking the same question: “What is the right amount for a transit marketing budget?”

Often the response is simply to say, “The industry rule of thumb is that marketing should be in the range of one to three percent of operating expenses.” This is usually when I want to take out a hammer and pound on the thumb making the rule. Let me make it perfectly clear — this rule is bogus, it leads to bad budget policy and as long as it is applied, it will short change marketing efforts.

Why? Well, for starters, this perverse guidance goes back more than 20 years when transit marketing wasn’t as sophisticated as it is today. Those were also the days when marketing was undervalued and underfunded, and more often than not the first thing cut in hard budget times.

Today’s transit managers and their marketing staffs are much more market and customer driven. Their awareness of good marketing practices is better and their overall support of marketing as a key strategy to recruit and retain riders, as well as protect their revenue stream, is keener than ever.

Even so, this bogus rule of thumb is still around. But is there a better rule that can replace it and better reflect how transit marketing is done in today’s world?

The answer doesn’t lie in a rule. The answer lies using a process that takes into account the marketing functions and activities that an individual system engages in, then building a budget accordingly. Ask questions like how many materials does your agency still need to have in print? Are things like signage and on board information updated regularly? When it comes to major cost categories like Web sites, advertising, publications, etc., it may be especially helpful to compare what your peers are doing and spending. Exchanging this type of information can lead to a better budget perspective. Remember though, that size matters when it comes to costs, so make sure you use good comparisons.

Build on this idea by looking at areas where performance goals will help determine what the cost of achieving them will be. Take broadcast advertising for example. Reach to target markets and frequency of message are important in media planning, and gross rating points (GRP) are a good representation of measuring how much media you effectively need. So, if you need to achieve a certain reach and frequency level, you can estimate the average costs per GRP for your market and better budget in that area. Similarly, if you are in charge of a call center and need to achieve a certain level of calls being handled, then you’ll need to budget accordingly for staff and equipment.

Whatever method you use, bring the hammer down on a very bad and often unrealistic rule of thumb. It’ll feel so good!

Joe Caruso is Senior Consultant for Brecon Hill Consulting. He’s the former marketing director for the Milwaukee County Transit System (WI) and has over 33 years of transit marketing experience. He welcomes your comments at jcaruso@breconhill.com.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

Statistics Canada released 2006 census data this week. Not surprisingly more Canadians are using alternate means of getting to work than just taking their cars. Calgary boasted the largest increase in public transit use (three percent), but Toronto weighed in with a more than 30 percent increase in the number of bike riders.

Now how do we compare to that in the United States? We take money from public transit to increase roads while at the same time increasing gas prices seemingly exponentially.

Something just doesn’t seem to mesh here…

The problem here is the lack of investment by the U.S. government when it comes to public transit. The Canadian government is spending billions of dollars to improve its transit system and in this country transit has to fight for every penny it gets.

Now, I understand that this has been the case for some time now. But it’s amazing how we just accept this lack of forethought on the part of our government.

I was watching the Daily Show last night and they showed footage of the representatives from leading U.S. oil companies being called before Congress because of the soaring gas prices while their companies set record profit numbers.

The interesting bit was seeing the same footage from a year ago. And two years ago. And three years ago.

Two years ago gas prices surged. People were outraged. Public transit ridership swelled and discussion of more investment in public transit grew.

Last year gas prices surged. People shrugged and tightened their belts. What could they do? Interest in public transit flattened.

This year we are looking at gas prices at near $4 a gallon or greater. Again people are outraged. And yet, we don’t see the government looking toward public transit as a solution.

They look around trying to lay blame on somebody while people struggle to get by. Will next summer be another year of shrugged shoulders and belt tightening? Is this a vicious circle we’re in?

We don’t need more money for transit agencies. We don’t. We need a massive investment in public transportation. We need to make public transit the first choice for commuters and travelers instead of the second or third.

And we need the government to stop for a second and realize that the problem it is desperately trying to solve is a fire it keeps feeding with its current policies.

Let’s hope it doesn’t get beyond its control.

For the latest industry news, check out MassTransitMag.com’s Daily News section.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

It’s interesting the power of words, especially in this digital age we’ve moved into as a culture. As I tell my kids, sometimes it’s not the words, but how you say them. Of course, with an e-mail, or even a blog, you can’t hear the inflection or tone the writer intended as he or she wrote them. Right now, can you tell if I am writing this slowly and meditatively or quickly and flared with emotion?

They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but sometimes we need to remember that each one of those words can evocate an image in the mind of the reader — and often times, not the ones we intended.

Take for example the LIRR derailment that happened Thursday morning. Just pulling up the story on our newsfeed service I came up with three headlines for the same story:

• 2 LIRR Trains Bump in Queens; Eastbound Service Delayed
• 2 LIRR Trains Collide in Queens; Eastbound Service Delayed
• 2 LIRR Trains Collide in Queens; Eastbound Service Suspended

While all three of these headlines look the same, they couldn’t be more different. The first headline says the trains bumped into each other. The second and third headlines say the trains collided. That is a significant difference in most people’s minds. If you have ever backed into something with your car, you know what I am talking about.

A bump is when you can get out, look at what you hit, shrug your shoulders at the negligible mark (if any) and go about your business. A collision is when you put your head down on the steering wheel, cringing, while you psyche yourself up to get out and look at what happened.

Also take a look at the last word in those headlines. The first two say service is delayed, while the last one says suspended. OK, I don’t know about you, but delayed is vastly different in my mind than suspended. Delayed means I have to wait a little longer for my train. Suspended means I better find a different way home.

Comments with one of the stories I found online were already calling LIRR to task for describing a derailment and collision as two trains that had bumped into each other. Now, mind you, I don’t know if it was LIRR who actually used the term “bump,” but respondents were all over them about it.

This all comes back to the words we choose to use. While every picture evokes a litany of words, every word in turn evokes a myriad of images. We need to be aware of this and wary of how we describe anything that happens in the transit industry.

For the latest industry news, check out MassTransitMag.com’s Daily News section.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

I read a couple good stories on privatization this week. The first was by the Washington Post on the privatization of our highways and the other was about Disney and how its transit system was a model for public agencies.

I don’t know how I feel about privatization when it comes to roads and transit. On one hand, I can definitely see the benefits. Our infrastructure is crumbling and this may be the best option to forestall an almost inevitable crisis. And with public transit agencies across the country struggling for funding just to operate, any expansion may be more likely if it was done with help from the private industry.

But at what cost? The Disney piece mentions how the average transit system only covers 40 percent of costs from the farebox and holds that up as a reason for privatization — to get these agencies back on budget. But what other public agency is being held to private industry standards? If your local parks department was to cover 40 percent of its costs through sales of ticketed parking lots, would people be calling for the parks to be privatized? To get the parks back on budget?

The problem going forward as I see it with privatization of any kind is a public view that America is being sold off piece by piece. Instead of I-80, you can drive down the [Insert Big Company Name Here] Tollway. We already have this with most of the major ballparks and stadiums in the country and there is grumbling about that. How about a bus system owned by large company?

The problem with any widespread ideal of privatization is the temptation for misuse. Hey, if the system isn’t hitting the bottom line things have to be cut, or changing routes to serve the needs of a company’s employees. Already major companies like Microsoft and Google are running their own public transit for their employees. I am not sure I want them in charge of all the buses, though.

The overall situation is that money for roads and transit is going away — fast. So is it a matter of adding more or taking better care of what we already have? When I spoke with Fred Gilliam (who has worked for both public and private transit providers) at Capital Metro in Austin recently, he said you need a balance between hitting the bottom line and providing a quality service. It’s that balance that will be the key to the future.

In the end, there are plenty of companies with the funds, knowledge and experience to help the country’s infrastructure come back to where it should have been all along. We just need to make sure that we don’t lose our path along the way and wind up in a bigger mess than we started with.

For the latest industry news, check out MassTransitMag.com’s Daily News section.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com