X hits on this document

32 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

3 / 11

Edmonton (ETS)

39.4%

Montreal (STM)

57.1%

Ottawa (OC Transpo)

43.2%

Toronto (TTC)

65.2%

Toronto, Hamilton and area (GO Transit)

83.6%

Vancouver (TransLink)

54.1%

Asia

Hong Kong (MTR)

149%

Osaka (Hankyu Railway)

123%

Osaka (OMTB)

137%

Taipei (MRT)

119%

Teito RTA (now Tokyo Metro)

170%

Europe

Brussels

28%

Copenhagen

52%

London Underground

100%

Milan

28%

Munich

42%

Paris (RATP)

43%

Stockholm

44%

Vienna

50%

Zurich

66%

2007 2006 2007 2008 2008 2008

2007 1991 1991 2006 1991

1991 1991 2004 1991 1991 1991 1996 1991 1991

(The Wikipedia entry includes the sources for the percentages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox recovery ratio )

State Transit Subsidies

A survey of APTA transit agency members conducted in May of 2009, found the following:

  • -

    More than 80% of transit systems have flat or decreased funding from state sources. Among

those systems facing a decrease, the average decline was more than 20% with several reporting the elimination of all state funding.

  • -

    Revenue decline is widespread, with more than 80 percent of public transit systems reporting

flat or decreased local and/or regional funding. Revenue declines average more than 12% among agencies with a decrease in regional or local funding.

  • -

    Among transit systems facing decreased local, regional and/or state funding, nearly nine in ten

(89%) had to raise fares or cut service; three in four (74%) have raised fares; more than 60 percent have cut service. Almost half, (47 percent) have both raised fares and cut service.

  • -

    Among those public transit systems reducing service, nearly two-thirds (65 %) have eliminated

or reduced off-peak service and nearly half (48%) have reduced the geographic coverage of public transit service.

  • -

    More than 60 percent of participating agencies reported higher ridership in the first quarter of

2009 over the same period last year despite declining economic conditions, lower fuel prices, and in some cases higher fares and decreased service.

  • -

    One-half of the systems participating in the survey eliminated staff positions to address budget

shortfalls with several systems individually reporting reductions of more than 400 staff positions.

The AASHTO Characteristics of State Funding for Public Transportation 2007, provides a summary of state transit funding for the 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC). Information includes funding sources, amounts, programs, eligible uses and allocation, and per capita state transit funding. Below is the list from the report of state funding for transit from 2002 to 2006.

State

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Alabama

$453,600

$0

$0

$0

$0

Alaska

$1,128,607

$0

$0

$59,850,000

$80,830,400

Arizona

$382,961

$445,000

$329,096

$20,068,000

$18,042,000

Arkansas

$400,000

$331,900

$0

$2,800,000

$3,277,637

California

$113,579,750

$340,162,248

$1,344,778,819

$1,399,800,143

$2,208,814,477

State Funding for Transit 2002 - 2006

3

Document info
Document views32
Page views32
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 06:58:37 UTC 2016
Pages11
Paragraphs691
Words5411

Comments