Reader comments
UTA implementing another 25-cent surcharge due to rising fuel costs

"As the rising cost of fuel has pushed motorists to look for alternative means of transportation, many have turned to public transportation. Inglish said that UTA has had more demand for their services than ever before and the increase is necessary to prevent cuts in service"

I'm not an economics major but I know that when I get more clients it means more money in my pocket. No need to raise fees. With the above statement they are contridicting themselves. If anything they need to hire more people to keep up with demand and increase service. With the cuts in service to Redwood Road in August of last year and the mess they have made recently with route 35 it has gotten harder for disabled people to get around. Max does not really have the room for wheelchairs. We have had to cancel appointments because of the regular route 35 bus being full- 2 wheelchairs already on it. We tried Max - what a waste of money.

Maybe if they raise the rates high enough, they won't need to worry about all those bothersome riders. It's much easier to operate buses and trains that are mostly empty. If they don't need to spend the extra money on extra passengers then they'll be able to give themselves bigger raises from the government subsidy money.

Has UTA looked into being flexible on the type of fuel it uses? Why not get the ability to use natural gas on busses and frontrunner?

Wouldn't this save money?

Interesting, more riders would generally mean more revenue from rider fares. I find it annoying that UTA feels it necessary to increase the fare again. The top dogs running the show must want a pay raise. I will NEVER use UTA for anything.

Since ridership is up the fuel cost actually goes down because there are more people paying for the same ride!!

Paying that with only 60% ridership and then increase riders up to 90% and that cost actually goes down so the rise in fuel should offset the rise in fuel cost!!
Not to mention the tax rate increase that should also have offset the cost!

Not sure how UTA does math?

Maybe the Cost of upper management at UTA needs to go down!!
A recent study showed UTA upper management were higher paid than any other transit system!

More riders does result in increased revenues. I am not aware of UTA placing more buses, or adding routes, (variable costs) in service because of the increased demand. Rather the previously empty buses (fixed costs) now have riders on them. It doesn't cost more to run those buses that were already in service. So why the subsequent fuel surcharge? Inglish, and his lapdog board, needs to justify the fare increase.

How do increased demand increase costs. The busses/trains run on a set schedule. More demand, just means full busses (not more busses) instead of empty ones. I would imagine that a full bus uses slightly more fuel than an empty one, but wouldn't the riders fare easily cover the cost?
Service to Davis county was already cut when we didn't pass a UTA tax increase, now, since more of us want to ride, service will be cut again? It doesn't make sense.

The public is side-whacked repeatedly because of poor vision and planning on the part of those overseeing the "public transit systems." Why with all of the focus on alternatives, particularly electrical, are we burdened with "traditional fuel" problems?

With all the added weight of the people who are riding the busses or trains UTA is using more gas. It's cheaper to just drive around empty busses because there is less friction.

That makes about as much sense as anything UTA will claim. Keep raising the fares, eventually it will be cheaper to drive. For me and my little truck, with this new increase it will be. I guess they just lost a rider. And aren't gas prices coming down??

Somebody educate me as to why TRAX fares are going up. Last I checked, TRAX doesn't run on gas/diesel - it runs on electricity. So why a "fuel surcharge" (read: fare hike) on an electric train?

I've recently lived in DC and LA and their bus systems only charge $1.25/ride. Despite this, I think it's better that those who ride pay rather than government subsidizing riders from everyone's pockets. It's only fair, those who ride should pay their own way. I'm willing to accept a price hike knowing that gas prices are higher.

At the same time, I assume that the UTA analysts understand how equilibrium with supply and demand work. As bus fares rise and eventually are high enough, overall ridership will begin to fall unless demand (because of even higher gas prices or lower fares) increases. In other words, if you keep raising fares you're not going to make more money because the decrease in demand due to higher fares will offset any gains. You have to find the equilibrium point, and my guess is that $2.25/ride may be above that.

"Inglish said that UTA has had more demand for their services than ever before and the increase is necessary to prevent cuts in service."

I'm with the other people posting on this board. Why didn't the reporter ask the obvious question: Doesn't increased demand for a set bus schedule decrease operation costs because efficiency is increased and more riders means more revenue?

I'd expect a story like this if ridership was going down. If fuel costs have truly outpaced the increase in ridership, I'd like some hard data to back that up.

Clayton, ask for numbers to back up the fee hike. Find out the cost per rider in 2006 and the cost per rider in 2008 if possible.

With this rate increase, and if gas prices continue to level off, it will be less expensive to drive my car to work.

This as exxon announced their quarterly earnings were the highest ever --> NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Exxon Mobil once again reported the largest quarterly profit in U.S. history Thursday, posting net income of $11.68 billion on revenue of $138 billion in the second quarter.

That profit works out to $1,485.55 a second.

Am I missing something? They must be ready to file bankruptcy at this rate. Oh wait - that would be me!!

Do any of you old-timers remember when there was an election to create UTA? That was many years ago. We had the option to choose "low-fare" or "no-fare." We were promised much better service if we selected low-fare. And do remember the subsequent elections to increase the sales tax for more UTA subsidy. And do you remember, each time, we were promised that if we chose the increase the rates would stay low and service would improve. If any of you are good historians and possibly have some old newspapers regarding UTA history it would certainly be interesting.
And I agree with the logic that increased ridership increases the fare-box revenue which should offset increased fuel costs.
Maybe, as these experts always tell us peasants, we need to be "educated."

UTA is a PUBLIC SERVICE! They RECEIVE PUBLIC FUNDS!

INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT TO JUSTICE EVERYWHERE!
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

We need to start ASKING: What UTA doing to ENCOURAGE MOTORISTS to take the BUS, and LEAVE their VEHICLES at HOME and HELP out our ENVIRONMENT?

UTA need to get ACCESSIBLE VANS and SMALL BUS to go into NEIGHBORHOODS to take INDIVIDUALS to the MAIN BUS ROUTES.

We also need to ASK: Is our TRANSIT SYSTEM, CONVENIENT, FREQUENT and AFFORDABLE for ALL CITIZENS?

GAS PRICES have SKY ROCKETED. UTA should not be GOUGING RIDERS with FARE INCREASES.

THROUGH MISMANAGEMENT, AGGRESSIVE ELIMINATION of BUS
ROUTE and FARE INCREASES UTA is DESTROYING the BUS SYSTEM.

JOHN INGLISH and the REST of the HIGH PAYED EXECUTIVES NEED to MOVE on. STOP THE GREED!

You know what is also messed up? My property tax goes partly to the water company. What's up with that since I already pay them once every two months!?!?

I ride the bus every day and use it mostly for leisure also. A couple of points: why not eliminate the "free fare zone" it loses revenue in a couple of ways. Also, I don't think the UTA board could care less what the public thinks, they'll do what they want because what little oversight they have is like the "old boys club" Look at the makeup of the UTA board and see if you can spot ANY public transit riders! I think if I could get 10 of my best friends in a room I could convince them to raise my salary to 260K especially when its not their money! UTA does some things well, but they have a lot of room for improvement. The additional fare means very little to me because I make a good salary but for those working low-paying jobs it may mean they can't AFFORD to get to work, resulting in more on public assistance (or crime). UTA would be much more efficient if it were held responsible by the state or started putting people on the board who actually RIDE public transit!

Lets also not forget that unfunded mandate from the federal government called the ADA and paratransit service. This service cost us about $25 to $35 per rider and uses lots of diesel to run these vans around mostly empty. While I am not saying the service is not needed, it is important to know how costly it is.

Ditto on the increased ridership should cover the increased fuel costs.

Also UTA always says they don't want to 'cut service'. But how about some common sense on providing service that isn't used. During the day I've ridden the train and there's hardly anyone there. Try reducing trains to once an hour during non-peak times--or cutting the number of cars to one or two outside of rush hour. I'm sure there are many busses in the same category.

Finally how about a little enforcement. I've had my ticket checked twice since FrontRunner started in April. One person caught cheating will pay the 25 cent increase for lots of other passengers and the orange-vested hosts don't seem to have much else to do--why don't they check?