You are here: Main Page > Papers > Paratransit Supplement to Money For Nothing

Paratransit Supplement for Money For Nothing

(Published January 20, 2005)

This is the Paratransit supplement to the SCVTARU VTP 2030 report, “Money For Nothing.” It was written by Terry Applegate (barkingdog03@earthlink.net).

 The complete VTP 2030 plan - the Valley Transportation Authority's long-range transportation plan - can be found on the web. Go to http://www.vtp2030.org/

Paratransit
Seniors & Disabled Using Fixed Route
Conclusion

Paratransit

1. There are only very brief sections that address public paratransit, which is a federal mandate. There was no planning process with the CTA (Citizens for Transit Accessibility advisory committee to the VTA Board comprised of persons with disabilities and the agencies providing services to this population) or with disabled stakeholders to develop a 30-year vision for the preparation of this planning document. The draft of the plan was taken to CTA without adequate time to review. CTA members received the document in November 2004 - only 48 hours before the November CTA meeting making review for those with disabilities more than challenging. The CTA did not have an opportunity to meet again before the draft VTP 2030 Plan was sent to the VTA Board for approval in December 2004. The CTA, the advisory committee to the VTA Board on matters related to accessibility of both fixed route and paratransit, was excluded from any discussions or planning for the current VTP 2030 Plan.
2. Demographic Assumptions - Page 18 of the VTP 2030 Plan provides a table called “Aging of Population and the Impact on Paratransit”. The message in short is that VTA fears the aging of the population and that a large proportion of persons 80 years or older will register for paratransit. VTA’s orientation here is one of avoidance of having to provide service due to cost. The Plan provides no data showing what proportion of the population older than 80 uses public paratransit now. Fiscal Year 2003-2004 data from the paratransit program documented that only about 3,000 persons (80 years and older) countywide (all 15 cities) took a ride. However, there were nearly 50,000 persons in this age group in the County so one can see that only about 6% of those 80 years or older used paratransit. If this trend holds as it has for the past decade, then the graph shown by VTA need not be so alarming. Based on VTA’s data, a high estimate of 9,000 persons older than 80 could potentially be using paratransit in the year 2030. However, other factors will drive this number downward, such as affordability and eligibility of the individual and the trip (within the ADA corridor). However, the reality is that about 95% of the aged do not use public paratransit and that is not likely to change. In addition, this oldest group of users may only be on the service a few years and the majority do not recertify after 3 years.
3. Capital Investment Program (beginning on page 44): Lack of effort to support paratransit with any resources other than general operating funds: Lack of any effort by VTA to raise grant money or resources for paratransit using alternative or clean fuel vehicles; lack of planning for any capital over the next 30 years for public paratransit; lack of any plan to better leverage VTA’s other resources (e.g. underutilized parking facilities) with paratransit. VTA’s capital plan to support their VTP 2030 Plan sets aside no capital for paratransit. This misses an opportunity to leverage federal funds and to reduce the cost of the paratransit program. This shortsighted view that refuses to leverage federal dollars for capital will cost taxpayers as additional $30 million or more over the next 30 years. VTA staff claim that they need to use some of their capital dollars (millions each year) for their deficits in the area of preventive maintenance. Clearly, cost-containment in the area of preventive maintenance needs to become a high priority.
4. The section on paratransit (pages 120-123) appears to be a quick and dirty cut and paste of a VTA memo or document and is far from a 30-year visionary plan. It references the prior Paratransit Service Business Improvement Plan that was originally designed as an “Eligibility Study” and led the way for the current flawed and every expensive new Eligibility Program.

Return to Top

Seniors & Disabled Using Fixed Route

1. There is no section specifically addressing seniors using public transit in Santa Clara County. There is no utilization data from fixed route that profiles ridership trends for seniors and projects what the future will hold over the next 30 years. There was no needs planning or assessment of barriers to identify barriers to utilization.
2. There has been no process with the aging services from the County or the various cities, and the entities and organizations that serve them, and/or the elderly themselves to help forge a 30-year vision. There was no determination if the current and/or future transit system meets the needs of seniors and disabled not on paratransit in terms of routing (geography, time, and effectiveness); dependability; safety and cleanliness; accessibility (including transit stops and having to cross large streets); and cost/affordability.
3. For both disabled and seniors, there is a need for accessible and safe/secure transit stops; for better training of operators to assist these populations to board and ride; and to consistently use the automated and/or manual calling of stops.
4. VTA mentions seniors vaguely as one of the target populations for the new Community Bus Service. However, that may take years to develop in select communities only and that will do little to serve seniors who are trying to take a bus or ride light rail today.
5. VTA put in the plan a token senior strategy from their marketing program (page 124). It is called the “Golden Getaway” and it is of little use to a senior needing a ride for medical appointments, etc. Renting (expensive at hundreds of dollars) an empty large bus for a trip for a large number of persons has only limited value when one is trying to solve daily travel needs for health care, church, nutrition, and shopping.

Return to Top

Conclusion

The VTP 2030 Plan does little to identify an articulated vision for transportation services for the disabled and the elderly in Santa Clara County. VTA staff should be asked to provide some documentation with dates and agendas as to the inclusion of senior and disabled groups into any specific planning process for the VTP 2030 Plan.

back to vtaridersunion.org main page

Email info@vtaridersunion.org for more information
or to report problems with our website