The economic viability of the Falls Church City GEORGE bus system was questioned at the budget town hall meeting held earlier this week. I think the discussion is a good one and deserves its own post.
Let me set the stage a bit. GEORGE is a "clean diesel" local four bus system which provides transportation from city neighborhoods to the east and west Falls Church Metro stops. GEORGE was initially funded by state and regional transportation grants, but a few years ago the grants ended and the system became completely owned and operated by Falls Church City. 2008 ridership on GEORGE was a paltry 70,000 trips. The cost to City taxpayers in FY2009 for buses will be $580,000 - rising to an estimated $800,000 in FY2010. This is an incredibly expensive solution. It equates to about $8 in taxpayer cost for every single trip.
On the positive side, a local transportation system is relatively fuel efficient, helps keep cars off our roads, helps low income, elderly, and disabled seniors get around, and provides easier access to downtown commercial corridors. Plus a local bus system provides a little bright lights - big city transportation cache for the community.
An extensive review of GEORGE from 2005 can be found here: Download Final History of GEORGE.
As part of the FY2010 budget discussions, the City is considering: (1) eliminating GEORGE (2) reducing GEORGE routes or (3) coordinating GEORGE with a (much) larger local bus system in Arlington.
There have been several comments on another Blueweeds posts on GEORGE:
From Mike at Blueweeds (get rid of GEORGE):
"... The George bus system is on the chopping block. Mostly because it waddles around like a fat protein budget bug (no kidding - with an annual minuscule ridership of 70,000 trips, George costs taxpayers $580,000 to $800,000 per year. That, my friends, is about $8.00 per ride. Please stop the pain. Sell the buses for parts and provide every rider a subsidized cab ride to Metro. It would cost less. Really.) ..."
From Bob at Blueweeds (re-think GEORGE):
"... Ok...agreed GEORGE in its current usage is underutilized based on the stats and perspective presented. But. There's been no talk about re-thinking GEORGE usage via the school system, businesses, etc. No thought that we've been on the losing side of a car-based society to a level that mires us in being a "villagesque" zooming car cut-thru? No connections to the long-term realities of what sticking with a 1950s-think car-centric strategy means in terms of infrastructure, parking, economic development, public safety?
No regard for the fact that practically every successful metropolitan region worldwide is moving in a direction of multi-modal transportation---or is trying to. So, we being the moat-surrounded Falls Church should be contrary and make sure our public policy reflects the need for everyone to drive themselves and their kids everywhere? Yep, we need to make sure all kids are strapped in a mini-van and can't feasibly cross Broad St. because if they did they'd get whacked Luka Brasi-style by others kids' parents in their own DVD player disguised as a mini-van?
Or---do we use this opportunity to put into motion a re-think of how to better use public transportation as an asset, tie it to a wide range of actions including street re-pavings/major arterial street calmings, pedestrian and bicycle "green streets"? (which, incidentally, includes light rail in the future) Do we take our comp plan seriously about just what it means to be a transit-oriented community? Perhaps be a regional leader? Nah. Just cut it and let the General Motors gods sort it out.
It's always worked in the past, right? ..."
From Mayor Robin Gardner (make GEORGE work somehow):
"... Bob - agree that George needs to be re-thought. It is not utilized well and the City pumps a lot of money into it. Maybe we should stop the current service, change the buses out to smaller vehicles, and figure out a better way to use public transporation throughout the City. How can we make George work FOR us and not against us? I really am open to all suggestions. ..."
From Council Member Dan Maller (re-finance GEORGE with more taxes):
"... Bob, thank you for the comment; while many of us know the QUESTIONS, the real key is beginning the process of getting ANSWERS ... many of us share the vision of a better transportation system not fundamentally based on the automobile. If we do not begin to envision and really plan for this different future we will stay mired in gridlock with underperforming commercial corridors. I note that a very prominent member of our Chamber of Commerce suggested last night that the business community has a significant interest in George or more broadly a better transportation system. There is significant federal, state and regional money available for transit infrastructure capital investment, and remember that we have the authority to impose a commercial surtax for transportation. Why not engage the business community in a discussion about how to leverage all of this other funding and to build a system that will dramatically increase foot traffic in our commercial areas? I would not advocate this without real buy-in from those who would be taxed, but I believe a 5¢ surtax would allow bonding of at least $10 million, and could perhaps leverage at least $40 million of other funding. Anybody know what we could build for $50 million? ..."
So what say the masses about GEORGE?
