A big part of the argument for mass transit in Bend has been -- everyone else has one. Everyone bigger than us, and some towns smaller than us. Ordinarily, I probably would have just gone along with the program. I have voted for each of the tax measures that have come up.
But when the mass transit in Bend was first formed, my hackles were raised a bit by the tone the whole enterprise took. There was an assertion that, "no problem" it will be easy, "won't cost much at all!" which simply didn't ring true. If that was so, why hadn't it been done before?
I suspected there was more to it.
Anyway, like a bunch of rubes, we got taken for a whole lot of money by buying 'Brooklyn Bridge' buses that continually broke down. (the same rubeness that seemed to have infected the whole Juniper Ridge idea, and ... I have to wonder... how did we end up with sidewalk ramps that didn't fit code? How do these things keep happening? Is it because we grew so fast? We weren't ready to be a real live MetroArea, in some ways....)
And, because of the way mass transit came about, I started doing some adding up on costs, and it seemed a little crazy. It seemed more like we were doing it because it was expected of us, than because it was actually an effective system. For the riders who need the bus system, it's a great good. But is it a cost effective good for the town? It literally seemed as though we could pay for taxi rides for everyone who needed one and save money.
Turns out, not so cost effective after all. Turns out that it will have to be supported by public monies -- forever. It's something we do for the sake of the people in need, and -- though again, this seems sort of less than convincing -- for the environment
Fine. But that isn't the way it was sold to us.
"Get over it," I know some of you will say. It's a public good, and it needs to be done.
So...I'll lay aside my concerns about whether it truly is an effective way to spend public monies, and address it's current problems. Assuming it's a public good. Assuming that our public is willing to support the public good just as much as all the other towns and districts.
Why hasn't that happened?
I think it's because the public has a long memory. You can't just sweep the failures under the rug. And in a sense, that's what local officials are trying to do. They're trying to present us with a fait accompli.
"See?" They want to be able to say. It works now. It's worth supporting now.
I predicted that when they sloughed off the transit to a wider district, it was to obscure its troubled beginnings and to spread the blame and the risk. The city of Bend is still paying out a large chuck of it's general fund in support, though. They really need and want a tax district and are hoping that by supporting the system just a little longer, they can present the public with the dilemma of dismantling an already existing system, or biting the bullet, and paying for it with a tax measure.
I believe they may have outsmarted themselves, however. By spreading the risk into smaller outlying areas, they may have made it impossible for a measure to get passed. Check out the votes for any county wide measure -- there is that solid core of public minded voters at the center of Bend, but the further you move out, the more NO! votes you'll get.
Growing up in Bend, I swear every school measure would fall by about the Negative Vote total in the rural districts.
So they've diluted the most solid supporters of mass transit, and brought into play voters who will almost automatically vote down ANY tax measure.
Hard to believe that our town will dismantle an existing mass transit. I wonder if that has ever happened?
But also hard to see how they're ever going to fund it.
But when the mass transit in Bend was first formed, my hackles were raised a bit by the tone the whole enterprise took. There was an assertion that, "no problem" it will be easy, "won't cost much at all!" which simply didn't ring true. If that was so, why hadn't it been done before?
I suspected there was more to it.
Anyway, like a bunch of rubes, we got taken for a whole lot of money by buying 'Brooklyn Bridge' buses that continually broke down. (the same rubeness that seemed to have infected the whole Juniper Ridge idea, and ... I have to wonder... how did we end up with sidewalk ramps that didn't fit code? How do these things keep happening? Is it because we grew so fast? We weren't ready to be a real live MetroArea, in some ways....)
And, because of the way mass transit came about, I started doing some adding up on costs, and it seemed a little crazy. It seemed more like we were doing it because it was expected of us, than because it was actually an effective system. For the riders who need the bus system, it's a great good. But is it a cost effective good for the town? It literally seemed as though we could pay for taxi rides for everyone who needed one and save money.
Turns out, not so cost effective after all. Turns out that it will have to be supported by public monies -- forever. It's something we do for the sake of the people in need, and -- though again, this seems sort of less than convincing -- for the environment
Fine. But that isn't the way it was sold to us.
"Get over it," I know some of you will say. It's a public good, and it needs to be done.
So...I'll lay aside my concerns about whether it truly is an effective way to spend public monies, and address it's current problems. Assuming it's a public good. Assuming that our public is willing to support the public good just as much as all the other towns and districts.
Why hasn't that happened?
I think it's because the public has a long memory. You can't just sweep the failures under the rug. And in a sense, that's what local officials are trying to do. They're trying to present us with a fait accompli.
"See?" They want to be able to say. It works now. It's worth supporting now.
I predicted that when they sloughed off the transit to a wider district, it was to obscure its troubled beginnings and to spread the blame and the risk. The city of Bend is still paying out a large chuck of it's general fund in support, though. They really need and want a tax district and are hoping that by supporting the system just a little longer, they can present the public with the dilemma of dismantling an already existing system, or biting the bullet, and paying for it with a tax measure.
I believe they may have outsmarted themselves, however. By spreading the risk into smaller outlying areas, they may have made it impossible for a measure to get passed. Check out the votes for any county wide measure -- there is that solid core of public minded voters at the center of Bend, but the further you move out, the more NO! votes you'll get.
Growing up in Bend, I swear every school measure would fall by about the Negative Vote total in the rural districts.
So they've diluted the most solid supporters of mass transit, and brought into play voters who will almost automatically vote down ANY tax measure.
Hard to believe that our town will dismantle an existing mass transit. I wonder if that has ever happened?
But also hard to see how they're ever going to fund it.