Fare Free RIPTA: support with conditions

RI Transit Riders supports S2015 to make RIPTA fare-free effective January 1, 2023. This is our position on this legislation:

  • Transportation is a leading source of greenhouse gases, and we must take action to reduce vehicle emissions. With the failure to enact the Transportation Climate Initiative (TCI), we must look to other programs to reduce transportation emissions.  We believe a free-fare public transit system will increase bus ridership substantially and persuade my car owners to take the bus instead.  Rhode Island needs to take a bold step like this in order to make a significant difference on climate change. 

  • The cost of a free-fare program will require an increase in RIPTA’s current operating funds. RIPTA should not be expected to cover the additional costs out of its current allocation from the state.  

  • Nevertheless, making up the lost revenue is relatively affordable. How much would RIPTA lose with a free-fare system?  Based upon the Agency’s pre-covid budgets, RIPTA would lose passenger fares, Medicaid reimbursements, student passes, Upass and Ecopass revenue, totaling about $18.4 million,  This doesn’t count any fare-free operation savings from more efficient use of buses and labor, due to the speeding up of boardings if passengers need not swipe cards or pay cash upon entering a bus.  Faster boarding translates to faster trips as well. 

  • In contrast to the amount needed in additional tax revenues to make RIPTA fare free, state spending on eliminating property taxes on cars, now set to be over $160 million, is eventually expected to be over $220 million per year.  This is an expenditure that does little or nothing to help the mostly low-income people without cars who actually pay the fares. This is not equitable!  Furthermore, eliminating the car tax only encourages car ownership and will increase greenhouse gases instead of investing in public transit, which will decrease them.

  • Increasing ridership will not require RIPTA to expand service and thus generate more expense.  RIPTA has plenty of capacity for more riders. During the pandemic, the agency is carrying about 10 million passengers/year, with its fleet  about the same size as it was in 2008 when it carried over 25 million.  There are legitimate expansion plans in the works, to satisfy real needs. These mostly entail expanding evening and weekend runs.

In closing, RI Transit Riders supports S2015 as long as we cover the full cost of the fare revenue loss and leave RIPTA still in a position to meet rider demand for expanding routes and service.

Proposed gas tax suspension: opposed

RI Transit Riders opposes H7983 and H8006, which impose a moratorium on the payment of the fuel tax until December 31, 2022, and June 30, 2023, respectively.  As written, it would cripple RI transit service since the RI Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) depends on gas tax revenue to maintain its operations, and of course RIDOT depends on that revenue to help maintain the roads that the buses and all other users depend on.

While budget adjustments could be made to keep RIPTA and RIDOT funded, the best solution to high gas prices is not to increase demand for gasoline by making driving cheaper, but to encourage alternatives to gasoline consumption by promoting alternatives such as electric cars, walking, bicycling, and use of transit.  

We note neighboring CT, though suspending part of its gas tax, also made the state buses free to passengers for the same period.  This more equitably helps low income people who do not drive but also face inflationary pressures, it also encourages those who do drive to take transit, thus helping reduce demand for gasoline and better protect the environment and the climate.  Such considerations should also be given to Rhode Islanders including transit riders. To do this we estimate adding additional $1.5 million/month to RIPTA’s budget would aid in creating a healthier climate and providing a benefit for essential workers who remain on the front lines of the pandemic.

State road sidewalk maintenance: support if amended

Also, RITR supports amending H7384.  This legislation would require that maintenance of sidewalks along state highways would be the responsibility of the state, but such maintenance would not include snow removal, sweeping and cleaning.

We urge the legislature to change the sentence “such maintenance shall not include snow removal, sweeping and cleaning” to read “such maintenance shall not include sweeping and cleaning.”  Thus snow removal would be part of the state’s responsibility.

First, we appreciate the clarification of responsibility for sidewalks on state roads to be that of the state, which, especially with the new Federal law, has the resources as well as the expertise to handle the responsibility.  Many of the major bus routes we use are on state roads, and we need good sidewalks to safely access the stops.  

However we need to be able to access the stops after snowstorms, and so do all others that need to or want to walk to various destinations including those unable to drive, school children, and those who want to walk for health reasons.  But the reality is that the existing system in which nobody is really in charge is not working for pedestrians because after snowstorms many sidewalks on state roads can remain impassable or dangerous for days.  Again, the state DOT has the resources and expertise to address this problem as they do for the roads, usually so well.  They don’t have to clear the sidewalks themselves, but they can oversee the process as they do for the state roads.  

RIPTA has established contracts about clearing snow from their bus shelters that seems to be working.  But adjacent sidewalks often remain a problem and though we have made repeated requests for addressing that issue, we have made little progress.  Thus we ask the legislature to help by amending the bill as suggested.