OH: RTA can’t tax its way out of a broken transit system: The Readers Write

The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority’s suggestion that it might ask for a tax increase landed with a thud among our readers, who already feel overtaxed, underheard and unconvinced that the region’s transit system reflects how people live and work today.

I asked readers what they thought in a weekday morning text to the nearly 3,750 people who subscribe to my free From the Editor weekday text messages. I framed the issue bluntly: RTA gets roughly three-quarters of its revenue from sales taxes, not fares, meaning many people pay for a system they rarely or never use. I asked what public transit in Northeast Ohio should look like in the modern age.

Nearly 200 people responded, and while they did not agree on solutions, they were remarkably consistent in their themes: skepticism that voters would approve higher taxes, frustration with empty buses and long routes, deep concern for people who depend on transit, and a widespread belief that RTA needs reinvention before it asks for more money.

Some defended public transit as a public good worth paying for, just like schools, libraries and roads. Others said the system is fundamentally broken and should be downsized, outsourced or replaced. Many offered detailed, practical ideas. Very few believe the current approach is sustainable.

Here’s what they said.

“No one is going to vote for this”

The most common reaction was blunt disbelief that a tax increase could pass.

“There is no way in hell voters are going to approve a tax increase,” one reader wrote. “They all see the empty busses and railcars.”

Another was even shorter: “A tax increase? … DOA.”

Several readers pointed out that Cuyahoga County already has one of the highest sales-tax rates in Ohio and that inflation automatically boosts RTA revenue without a rate hike.

“What these organizations that derive their income from the sales tax won’t tell you is that income is basically inflation proof,” one reader wrote. “Every time prices go up their income goes up.”

Others argued that RTA has exhausted public goodwill.

“I don’t have a solution, but a tax increase is not the answer,” one reader said. “So many times the answer is to just raise the rates without looking for alternatives.”

Even some readers who support public transit said asking for more money without major changes would fail.

“This is really tough,” one wrote. “Perhaps if the GCRTA came to us with a plan in one hand … and a request for support in the other hand, they would be successful. But let’s face it, this request will fail.”

“Empty buses are not a perception problem”

Readers repeatedly returned to the same image: large buses and trains carrying few passengers.

“WAY too many huge buses,” one reader wrote. “Weekend transit is necessary but they should use vans or similar vehicles.”

Many said routes no longer match modern Cleveland, where jobs, shopping and daily life are spread across suburbs and multiple hubs.

“Most people don’t go downtown anymore for their shopping or work,” one reader wrote. “Why run a route all the way downtown?”

Another added, “Our region has changed drastically. Should so many routes be aimed Downtown? University Circle. Ohio City.”

Some readers suggested smaller vehicles, flexible routing and data-driven scheduling.

“Smaller buses for off hours. Feeder buses from underserved neighborhoods,” one wrote.

Another suggested, “Find out and analyze where and when it is needed. Then make strategic decisions about where to put what.”

Several raised ride-share partnerships.

“I think Uber or Lyft would be a better answer,” one reader said. “We need creative thinking in our city and this is a great place to start.”

Others proposed hybrid models.

“Offer subsidized Uber or Lyft to serve these low use routes / times,” one reader suggested. “Move to lower operating cost and smaller busses.”

“It’s a lifeline, not a luxury”

Just as forceful were readers who defended transit as essential for people without cars.

“Especially for the poor people who depend on the government to move them around to work and medical care,” one reader wrote.

Another described what riders without cars lack.

“We should have what people with cars get—freedom, spontaneity, reliability, safety,” the reader said. “Just basic common sense for mobility for the poor, disabled, chronically ill, and the seniors.”

Several readers compared transit funding to other shared civic costs.

“I paid for public schools that I never used because it’s for the good of the community,” one wrote. “I feel the same about a good public transportation system.”

Another added, “I rarely use the RTA … that being said every city needs to have reliable, safe, public transportation. I’m willing to have a portion of my sales tax to support it.”

Some worried that cuts would push people out of work.

“Public transport in the US is for getting poor folk to work,” one reader said. “Cutting available transportation won’t help.”

Others warned against treating transit like a business.

“Whittling things down to a barebones ‘for profit’ model should be a non-starter,” one wrote.

Safety, trust and the system people won’t ride

Safety concerns surfaced repeatedly, especially on rail lines.

“Trains and buses must be safe and clean,” one reader wrote. “The Red Line … has become a homeless shelter on wheels.”

Another said, “I know 2 people that were hurt waiting for the train. Both incidents were in the daytime.”

Even readers who support transit said perception matters.

“RTA should also consider changing the perception on safety,” one wrote. “I have no experience with safety problems, but I do hear about them.”

Others described unreliability as a deal-breaker.

“The bus never came,” one reader said. “I love riding the bus but I don’t know how folks who depend on it can put up with it being undependable.”

Another recalled missed buses and long waits: “The routes were direct. One bus took me all the way. … Now it’s become more difficult.”

“Redesign first. Then ask.”

Across ideological lines, readers landed on a similar conclusion: RTA needs a modern, transparent overhaul before it asks voters for more money.

“What would it mean to redesign transit for the modern age?” one reader asked.

Another answered: “Clean, frequent service on major routes, with smaller vehicles on feeder lines.”

Several called for transit-oriented development and better land use around stations.

“Cluster more housing options and businesses around Rapid stations,” one reader wrote.

Others argued the state must play a larger role.

“Ohio consistently ranks among the lowest states for per capita public transit spending,” one reader said. “We underfund transit so it’s not very good, so people don’t use it.”

One response summed up the mood:

“If RTA wants voter trust, it has to show that it’s willing to rethink the system—not just preserve it.”

©2025 Advance Local Media LLC.
Visit cleveland.com.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.