Mass transit exists as much for providing transportation as it does for making a city more green or promoting business growth.
I found it disturbing that your Feb. 16 cover
story, "Rail fight hits the gas," failed to mention a significant reason
for opposition to new light rails: In the face of yearly cuts in
service and fare increases, TriMet cannot afford to build light rails
AND offer the same level of service to its riders.
More and more people are in need of a less
expensive alternative to driving a car, and their only options are
TriMet or riding a bike.
For many people, the proposed light rails would
make it harder to get around because of the cuts in service that would
inevitably follow.
I would love it if your paper did a story on
TriMet's cuts to their cleaning budget. A few months ago, the driver of a
bus I was riding told another rider that she shouldn't let her child
chew on the back of the seat. Why? Because, in the driver's words,
TriMet no longer washes or disinfects the seats and windows of their
buses.
Anyone who rides the bus can attest to how filthy
the seats have gotten over the past year. If TriMet can't even afford to
clean its buses, what business do they have building a new light rail?
I'm happy to live in a city that is taking a lead
in environmentally conscious measures. Nonetheless, we need to find a
way to do so that doesn't put additional financial stress on the people
who can least afford it.
No comments:
Post a Comment