Dear Editor: After reading Stefania Seccia's July 31st article (TransLink decision sparks concerns about transit use drop) and Derek Zabel's response, I think everyone should visit the Crilly report - a seven-page memo on the potential for cost savings. (http://tinyurl. com/TransLinkreport).
Costs up, ridership down and quality of service down. This from a TransLink audit after three-and-a-half years of amalgamation. Based on numbers produced by this decrease in productivity, yes, taxis might appear less expensive, but a HandyDart bus, properly scheduled, can move more clients for less money. How can they say there are no cuts when funding has been frozen for four years and will be frozen for at least another two when demand increases every year? Sounds like Enron accounting.
This is the study Mr. Zabel quotes when he says "the regional transportation commissioner's efficiency review both identified potential improvements to our custom transit services to be more efficient and still meet the needs of customers."
How, by reviewing eligibility criteria? Sorry, you're not in quite enough pain for our service? TransLink suggests taxis and a brokerage system. Then they say, "HandyDart is a well respected program and there are no plans to reduce service or cut back the program."
I guess it's all in your point of view as to how you interpret the data.
John Scarr
HandyDart driver
