By Lynn Buske
Funds seem scarce these days; many local programs that serve the community are being cut and will need further cuts. This creates many feelings in people, particularly those affected. Getting the information needed to understand and have the correct facts is hard. Transparency to the public doesn’t seem to happen and easy to find data is a challenge, add a rising difficulty for folks to trust what people tell you (or contradictions of what you hear and what you see) and it’s easy to see why division can happen.
For almost eight years, in this position, I have attended an average of 15 meetings a week of various kinds of formats and groups, typically with the intent for collaboration. In most of these meetings I have found that a bridge is needed for “both” “sides” to hear each other, that typically folks involved have the same goals, just for different reasons and with different skill sets and perspectives. This is exactly why JONAH exists – we can be more successful if we have someone to bridge our differences and if we combine and truly consider a variety of skill sets and perspectives – especially, ESPECIALLY, those directly affected by whatever change is being discussed.
I went to the Eau Claire Transit Commission Meeting this week. My transit leaders’ concerns have been rising more and more the past few months. The urgency came to a high last week when they heard that micro-transit service was being considered by our city to continue in the future against the wishes of transit drivers and riders, and without inclusion of the transit commission. A proposed plan was being presented at the transit commission meeting this week and I was asked to come and speak.
I feel like I ultimately experienced what I saw in other meetings – people perceiving not being heard, perhaps not every perspective being truly considered, decisions made by a few without input from many others, and lived experience being valued more than it ever has (but still not enough in my opinion). SO close to the same place, so much potential, and not quite there yet.
I am no expert on transit. I rely on my transit leaders – who are experts in many ways but most of all as riders and drivers – to steer my understanding of things. They are deep in transit every day. I have ridden a lot of buses in various cities in my life. I should ride the bus more often here but am grateful it exists for those who need it more than me.
The thread throughout the EC Transit Commission meeting was a unified goal to provide the best quality transit service affordable to the City and to increase ridership. While there seemed to be some perceived disagreement on how to do that, there also was a lot of the same reasoning for some good ideas and not-so-good ideas. Different decisions were made about these though and raised opinions were not as clear perhaps as people later reported to me they felt it was. As an outsider it felt like talking around and talking at rather than talking through. (This is why JONAH’s Effective Meetings training is so important! It ensures our meetings, and anyone who takes the training, are inclusive and productive for all)
Future transit plans were presented by Katrina Runing, transit manager, and Stephanie Hirsch, city manager, which included: combining three existing fixed routes (regular predictable bus routes), utilizing micro-transit in the evenings, combining paratransit and micro-transit (I learned it is crucial that ADA compliances NEED to be followed in order to make this happen!). It was discussed that micro-transit would continue to be run by an outside agency (not the only option possible), that it currently cost $200 per person and was too expensive to experiment with an all-day service like Sundays, yet presented as a way to save money. The original pilot program was possible with ARPA dollars, which have run out. It seems those dollars may be found in the future by 1. Making other cuts – combining and shortening routes, including paratransit combining, and 2. The success of K-12 free ridership!
It was presented that data showed that since free ridership for K-12 was announced, ridership in that age group jumped considerably! I didn’t get the numbers down, but the more people that ride the bus (regardless of the cost of their ticket) the more federal money we get as a city for transit. If that’s not a plea to ride the bus – I don’t know what is!
Here were some comments from those present (I advocated to listening to those closest to the problem and being people first over numbers and dollars):
Jeremy (bus rider) – “I have concerns about the pilot [micro-transit] program, seems like an incredible waste of money, with the cost per ride over $200. We could have designed a pilot that gave us better information to work with. I am not aware of useful information that came from it except that [riders] prefer the fixed route over micro-transit on the north side.”
Phil (transit commission chair) – “Micro-transit is great to build capacity for a fixed route but not to keep micro-transit is the goal. Can help justify the need for new fixed routes, which are cheaper. Success can be measured for expanding bus service – and of course knows it takes funding. We need new sources of revenue like free K-12 ridership is.”
Adam (local transit union president) – “I would like to see instead of getting rid of [bus] drivers to get better research [on micro-transit] and keep it in house. I have seen many instances of bad service.”
Katrina – Transit Director, “We heard that non-transit users like to see the vans, they are full of people. The city gets comments about empty buses.”
My takeaway regarding our pilot micro-transit program was that while it was more versatile it was expensive, had less ridership than expected, can give paratransit riders quicker access, and wasn’t used in a way that micro-transit could be beneficial. I heard a lot of great things that told me a future could be found, but that the drivers and riders seem to not want micro-transit to be a permanent solution to transportation needs. I think everyone was closer than they think to an agreement on what is best for the city of Eau Claire, but further inclusive discussion is needed.
Overall, zero decisions were made at this time about this because it was information gathering. There are several next steps, including some public input, and it will go to City Council during budget season for final vote. The role of the Transit Commission is unclear. The City of Eau Claire seems to have made decisions about transit services before the commission knew anything about them and without nearly enough driver/rider input. Whether or not these decisions are good decisions didn’t seem to be attainable while several people felt left out and unheard.
There seemed to be GREAT collaboration and discussion, however, around a local transportation problem that IS advocating for the said needs of those directly affected – transportation to and from Sojourners House and the Day Resource Center. Shuttling 40 to up to as many as 80 people a day, and navigating their specific timing and ability needs. Everyone worked to discuss real problems and solutions. It was a great moment to see!
Our transit leaders in JONAH and members of Chippewa Valley Transit Alliance and the Amalgamated Transit Union and our Affordable Housing Task Force members along with LEAB (Lived Experience Advisory Board) are all dedicated to understanding transportation needs and advocating for public transit. It IS an ESSENTIAL service for many in our community, and a choice that more of us could make.
Actions YOU can take for BIGGER impact than you realize:
- RIDE THE BUS! Our own Phil Swanhorst gives lessons on how to ride the bus – give him a holler if you’d like support on your first ride! (email)
- Historically JONAH and CVTA have advocated for more marketing of our great transit system so more people can ride it. We have heard from riders or would-be riders that the information is hard to find, out of date, or confusing. You can contact EC transit and the City of EC to request new and more marketing materials on our fixed routes!
- Contact the city to advocate for making fixed routes based on the needs the riders tell you, and keep as many fixed routes as possible. Only use micro-transit for new experimental areas, not to replace existing routes.
- Paratransit is a very important service! Please keep providing it to outlying areas. Since it currently is expensive and requires 24-hours notice, to keep looking for creative solutions to keep people safe, within ADA requirements, and accommodated.