UPDATE- OCTOBER, 2019
Accountability is important to me. For that reason, I’ve kept pages from my 2017 Election website up. Below is one position paper I posted during the campaign. In this section, I’m providing an update of what has happened over the past two years.
Council and city management has put a lot of work into transit. There have been two major focuses:
Accessible Transit: The Disabled Transportation Society (DTS) was a non-profit previously providing accessible transit services. It ran into significant financial and management challenges. In response, the City brought Accessible Transit in house this September. You can get some more context from this blog post. Right now, the City is continuing to deliver accessible transit in a manner similar to DTS while it gets a good handle on how the system works. Next year, more effort will be put into improving the services offered.
Efficient Delivery of Services: Many people have noticed a lot of large, empty transit buses driving around town. This has been the most obvious of several large inefficiencies within transit services. Attention has been put into making transit more cost effective. Changes include reducing service on some routes during times when they received little use, and moving to smaller vehicles when appropriate.
A lot of work has gone into better managing existing transit service. And I’ve been proud of that work. However: now that we have a better handle on what we are already doing, I hope that we will work on improving it.
I’d like to make life easier for our residents who rely on transit. Additionally, I’d like to attract more people to using transit so that we can reduce our per-trip costs. I don’t support us increasing the overall tax subsidy put towards transit. But, I want us to pursue ways to use the money put into transit better. I’ll continue advocating for us to look for innovative approaches in transit.
You may be interested in reading this blog post. It includes my reaction to some recent transit changes, as well as a peek at an exciting technology that I think could be a great solution for Grande Prairie.
Following is what I wrote during the 2017 election campaign:
Transit is important, allowing people who are unable to drive and people who cannot afford vehicles a way to get around. Fewer vehicles on the road eases congestion, saves infrastructure costs, and is good for the environment. Effective transit can also encourage development by allowing municipal governments to reduce parking standards. It is important for any modern city to have a robust and well-organized transit network.
The system in Grande Prairie is outdated and delivers sub par service. Council is currently discussing a Master Plan to bring modernization to Grande Prairie Transit.
You can download a summary of the plan by clicking here. Following are my thoughts on it.
THE SHORT VERSION
I’ve given myself first-hand experience by spending time on our buses. The proposed Master Plan is good overall, but I have some questions and concerns. I am disappointed that it has no regional consideration. Fares are low, and if it means better service I would like to see them increased faster than the Plan calls for. Our routes and communication technology are very outdated: I am glad the Plan calls for remaking them. I also like that the Plan calls for more shelters, but I am concerned the budget may not account for their maintenance and trash removal. If we do roll out this Plan, we need to keep our eyes on revenue and expenses through its execution. We need to adjust our approach if we don’t see the projected ridership increases, and we need to explore alternate forms of transit revenue. We also need to explore more efficient ways of ramping up our operator hours. I have provided additional considerations Council needs to make when looking at the budget side of this Plan.
THE LONG VERSION
Before moving to Grande Prairie, I used transit extensively. I frequently use transit when I travel. We are a single car family, so there are times I have no vehicle available. I’m a potential customer for Grande Prairie transit. However, I have not heard good things about our system. So until recently, I chose not to gain first-hand experience riding one of our City buses.
I knew this had to change if I wanted to comment on transit intelligently. This led me to spend some time riding our buses. Below are some of my first-hand observations and my thoughts on the proposed Transit Master Plan.
If you scroll down to the bottom of this post, I let you know how you can find out more about the Transit Master Plan for yourself.
This Plan Has No Regional Focus
The first thing I noticed when I saw the Transit Master Plan: it is only talking about the City of Grande Prairie. This was very disappointing to me. A focus of Council needs to be Working as a Region (see www.voteBressey.ca/strategic). Due to upcoming provincial changes in how municipalities interact, I believe that City-County relations are THE issue facing our next Council (see www.voteBressey.ca/icfs). I know the County has a strong appetite for regional transit opportunities, and the lack of them has been a point of tension. I also think that the City will benefit if we can encourage more County residents to work and spend within city limits. I was very disappointed not to see our municipal neighbours accounted for in this plan. Going forward, all Master Plans (not just for transit) need to include regional considerations.
My Kids Love Transit
My kids had never been on a City bus. At ages five and three, the idea of riding one was thrilling for them. So I took them on a trip to the library. My youngest was very fascinated by the red window escape levers, which concerned me. At one point, my oldest told me “dad, if we want, we can smoke on this bus!” I asked him why he thought we could do that. He answered “because there are no no-smoking signs.” Apparently, this was exciting to him. Although I don’t know why since no one in our family smokes...
Transit is Cheap
For all of us to take a trip, it was only $2. It is even cheaper if you take frequent rides using a pass. The average person on our system is paying $0.96/trip. Revenue from fares only covers 17% of our transit operations. The Master Plan calls for bumping this up to $1.68/trip and 23% of operational costs in ten years. I am told that GP Transit customer surveys show that riders want better service and are willing to pay more if they receive it. I’m also told that Canadian cities of our size usually recover about 30% of their transit costs from fares. We should bump fares up quicker; perhaps 23% should be our goal in year five rather than year ten. At the same time, I’d like to know more about the subsidized passes we offer. I would be open to expanding their availability. I want those who use transit to pay a reasonable share. At the same time, I want to make sure transportation is affordable to our most vulnerable citizens.
My Bus Was Late. Routes Need Updating.
On the trip I took with my kids, the first bus was late. This made me worried about making a transfer on time. But everything was ok, because there was a puddle to splash in and our second bus was late too. I have yet to get on a bus that arrived on time. I’m told that late buses are a frequent reality of our current system. Apparently this is due to our routes being ten years old--they’ve been stretched but not revamped as our City has grown significantly. The Plan calls for a complete overhaul of our bus routes. I want to learn more about whether the routes selected will work well. But I certainly support their re-making. Sometimes you need to start all over with a system, and this is certainly one of those times.
Mobile Tech a Miss
I tried to plan my routes using a printed “Rider’s Guide” from the City. It was confusing. I ended up using Google Maps instead. But this app only seems to have scheduled bus times in it, not real-time bus updates. To find real-times, I used GP Transit’s website. This told me where the bus was, but required me to constantly refresh the page for updates. We can do better with our technology. I am glad the Plan calls for updating this experience.
Having No Shelter Is No Fun
It was raining on the day I had planned to take my kids on the bus. I thought about delaying our trip, but realized many don’t have that option. So we took it anyway. The stop near our house has no shelter. Neither kid wanted to share an umbrella, which meant I got soaked. And the bench was wet too. My kids got tired and wanted to sit down, but couldn’t. Right now, 6% of our stops have shelters. The plan calls for an increase to 30%. I support this increase. However, I want to be sure we are building maintenance and trash removal for these shelters into our operations budget. Often this detail gets missed when the City builds small facilities.
Accessibility
The Plan calls on the City to "prepare an overall 'accessibility plan' for transit." I fully support this, and would like to see it accomplished soon. Our Disabled Transportation Society (DTS) does important work, but it has limitations. Riders need to book days in advance, and it is not available for late evenings. It also prioritizes work and medical commitments. This is wise, but it means that people needing transportation for errands or social events are left without. We need to look at how we can better improve and resource DTS. We also need to keep accessibility in mind when purchasing buses and selecting stop locations.
Concerns About Ridership
The buses I rode felt empty. Our ridership is low: 1.3% of the population uses transit. The Plan hopes to address this. It assumes that we will see 1.7% annual growth in usership due to population increase and 5% annual growth due to customers attracted by improved service. The Plan assumes that if we improve service, more people will use it. I don’t know if that is necessarily the case but am willing to give it a try. If this Plan is implemented, we need to monitor usage increase carefully. I don’t want us to be paying for trips that are not happening. If we are not seeing the increase in ridership that is projected, we may need to scale back or delay capital acquisitions and increases to service frequencies.
Ads Are Sparse
The most ads I saw inside a bus: two. The space created for more was empty. This seems like a lost revenue opportunity. I assume that increasing ridership will increase the marketability of this space. We should capitalize on that. I want us to make sure we are looking at every opportunity to recover costs on Transit operations.
Drivers Are Awesome. But Are We Using Them Efficiently?
I’m told that customer surveys always give high marks to our drivers. And I can see why. All the ones I talked to were cheerful and helpful. One told me with a big smile “I love this job,” and it showed. Another instantly noticed when my five-year-old stood up in the back of the bus. She was about to pull out from a stop, but delayed departure until he was seated again. I like our drivers. But one mentioned to me that they are all employed part-time with good benefits. He wished for full-time hours. I want to learn more about this situation, because if true it seems like an expensive way to employ people. The Plan calls for hiring 37 additional operators over 10 years. That represents a lot of money in salary and benefits. Can we save money by giving fewer operators more hours? If so, we should do that.
Operating Cost is A Concern
This Plan is expensive. This year, the net cost of Transit is $3.7 million. By year 10, the Plan increases this cost to $8.2 million. Is it worth it? If we see the projected increase in ridership, maybe. But Council needs to monitor budget increases carefully. Council needs to make sure that fares are remaining appropriate and other sources of revenue (eg: marketing) are being explored. It needs to ensure that Transit is delivering its service efficiently. Council also needs to explore possibilities of sharing costs with regional partners. And of course, it needs to consider Transit costs holistically within the rest of the City budget. To read more about what Council should consider when examining budgets, checkout www.voteBressey.ca/taxes.
Capital Cost Is Unclear
This Plan calls for $26,000,000 in Capital Costs. I know a lot of this will be accounted for in grants from senior levels of government. For example, it is my understanding that the Province has committed $3.2 million through its Green TRIP grant. However, exactly how much the City anticipates receiving in grants and how much it will pay on its own is hard to find. This is a common problem with capital projects. I would love to see this data made more easily available to taxpayers.
Get In on The Conversation
Transit is an important part of our community. It is also a big item in the City budget. Whether we ride it or not, transit impacts all of us. So I would love to hear your opinions on the new Transit Master Plan.
Here are some ways that you can learn more:
I attended the initial presentation of the Transit Master Plan. I made a post which included key information from this meeting. You can read it by clicking here.
To download an Executive Summary of the Plan for yourself, click here.
The best place to discuss what is happening in Grande Prairie is the GP Round Table. This includes a very active Facebook group and a series of live events. More information is at www.gpRoundTable.ca
I look forward to hearing your thoughts! Thanks for talking about how to make Grande Prairie more sustainable, livable, and connected.
-Dylan