| Author | Message | ||
     Joan Citizen Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 2223 Registered: 5-2001 |
In all the discussion I have heard regarding whether the jitney should be self-sufficient, nobody has pointed out that the jitney only serves part of the Maplewood community. There are large areas of town (much of middle Maplewood for instance) where the closest jitney stop is at the train station. Should these people pay to subsidize a service that doesn't even serve their part of town? Another point which is not generally raised is that there are plenty of Maplewood train commuters cannot use the jitney service because their working schedules require that they depart on trains which leave before the jitney program starts for the day and return either before the jitney begins its first afternoon run or after the last jitney has departed for the day. It is wrong to assume that the jitney is serving the town's entire commuting-to-the-City and/or Hudson County population. On this basis I think it is inappropriate for jitney service to be subsidized by the entire town. The jitney should be made self sufficient. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 1569 Registered: 5-2001 |
I don't think whether or not something is useful or practical for every single person should be the measure for whether or not it's subsidized. By that logic, nothing would be subsidized. Tennis courts? I don't play. Schools? My neighbor doesn't have kids. Lots of people who don't take the jitney benefit from it, by easier parking, fewer cars on the street. I don't take it, but I'm glad it's there. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 2218 Registered: 9-2001 |
Tom, The tennis courts and schools are available for everyone's use, the jitney is not... IMHO, Profeta and Grodman did well by paying attention to Charlie Bibbins and the hard working Transportation Committee. For only a few more dollars a year, the increases recommended by them would have covered the jitney's operating expenses. What's the point of having a Transportation Committee to study the issue, or for that matter, why bother with this soon to be organized “Community Stakeholders”, who are being selected to help guide the ultimate decision of where to locate the new police facility? FWIW, I’ll go with Bibbins, Profeta, and Grodman, the jitney should be made self-sufficient. BTW, easier parking, fewer cars on the street? Where did you say you live Tom?  | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 1570 Registered: 5-2001 |
Heh. Plenty of traffic on MY street, but when I drive to the station I can get a block or so closer than if all the jitney riders drove too! | ||
| Joan Citizen Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 2225 Registered: 5-2001 |
Tom: The question under discussion isn't whether there should be a jitney service but whether that jitney service should be subsidized by the town. If a commuter has to drive to the station anyway because the jitney service doesn't cover his/her part of town and/or because the jitney doesn't run at the times when s/he travels to/from the train station, should the town subsidize that person's parking fee? If the answer to the above question is yes, this would mean that the town would be subsidizing people to drive their own cars to the station when a major purpose of the jitney subsidization is to enourage people to leave their personal vehicles at home. If the answer to this question is no, then you have people who are unable to use the jitney program because of inherent inequities in the provision of this service paying additional taxes so that someone who lives in a covered part of town and travels during what are considered to be more prevalent hours can be subsidized for using a service from which that tax payer is excluded. This is not a comparable situation to the one of parents who choose to send their children to private school rather than to school(s) in the SOM school district. The public school is available to these parents and they have opted out. In the case of the commuter who is unable to use the jitney, it is the system which has excluded them. | ||
| harpo Citizen Username: Harpo Post Number: 1046 Registered: 6-2001 |
Joan, I think tom's point is a valid one: Everyone in town benefits from the jitney. It helps traffic flow, parking, air quality and raises the profile of the town as a community with good amenities, which helps sustain real estate values. Whether the benefit to everyone is enough to justify continuing its subsidy is the issue, along with whether it can actually be self-sustaining. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 1572 Registered: 5-2001 |
Joan, please note that I'm NOT advocating that Jitney rides should be free. I'm just saying that a portion of the expense should be underwritten by the town. | ||
| eliz Citizen Username: Eliz Post Number: 638 Registered: 5-2001 |
Why? If the cost to make the jitney self-sufficient is reasonable and affordable then why should the town subsidize it? | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3940 Registered: 5-2001 |
Take a look at South Orange. In our neighboring town the jitney fees and parking fees are much higher than here in Mapleberry. I believe the original idea of the jitney was to serve Hilton only. Over the years the service has grown to include Parker routes and, interestingly, a route to the Wyoming area. Given the level of taxes here I find it hard to justify subsidizing peoples commutes. However, I wonder how many people have decided to move to MW instead of SO because of the fairly extensive jitney service and reasonably priced, no waiting list parking? | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 160 Registered: 7-2003 |
Well, I didn't choose to move here because of it but it definitely was a plus. Definitely attracted me over other towns such as Montclair, Glen Ridge, Scotch Plains. etc. | ||
| Fruitcake Citizen Username: Fruitcake Post Number: 40 Registered: 9-2003 |
I thought the jitney service was created to deal with the expected increase in parking demand and traffic congestion when Midtown Direct was introduced. In that context, the jitney can probably be judged successful. I’m intrigued by Joan’s comment about subsidized parking. I don’t know how much a commuter parking permit costs these days. However, if the fee is less than the market would bear, then the town is subsidizing parking, by default. Is that right? Is it valuable to the community at large? | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3943 Registered: 5-2001 |
Probably both the jitney and parking fees should be increased imho. However, remember that here in MW, unlike SO, a parking sticker doesn't garanttee a parking speace, so if the price goes to high there is going to be a lot of "discussion". LOL | ||
| lseltzer Citizen Username: Lseltzer Post Number: 1936 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bob, There's no problem guaranteeing a parking space because there's no shortage of commuter parking in Maplewood. When I go in, I go in late, so I see the worst conditions, and I've never seen a day when I've had to park more than a 5 minute walk from the station. OTOH, maybe what we could do is reserve a fixed number of the closer spots and a matching number of special "premium" permits and charge luxury box prices for them, like at least 5 times as much. I bet they sell out quickly. These spots will no longer be available to normal schmoes who show up for 5:48AM, but such are our fiscal times. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3944 Registered: 5-2001 |
Larry, so you are the schmoo who parks in front of our house above Ridgewood?  One mans five minute walk is anothers inconvenience, especially if you have paid four or five hundred dollars for a parking sticker. I agree, it might make sense to lease out the spaces near the station on Dunnel for a premium. Oh, and some of us are just naturally morning people. Growing up on a farm will do that to you. | ||
| Jackie Day Citizen Username: Zoesky1 Post Number: 202 Registered: 6-2003 |
BobK, why "interestingly" that jitney goes to the Wyoming area? I don't take it - I live withing walking distance to the train, but what do you mean? Wouldn't the people up there need the jitney as much as the Hilton people? I don't get your inference. Just wondering. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 3945 Registered: 5-2001 |
Just my opinion, and colored by my views of the then members of the TC, but I always thought the jitney was a "perk" for the Hilton area. Also, the Wyoming jitney ( which I take sometimes) doesn't seem to be overly patronized. Most of us, as Straw would say, wealthy Westies wouldn't be caught riding on a public bus!! | ||
| johnny Citizen Username: Johnny Post Number: 786 Registered: 5-2001 |
The jitney does serve a purpose for everyone. However, the people who use it should pay a larger portion of the costs. DeLuca stated that they never wanted the jitney fee to be larger than a certain percentage of the parking permit (something like 50%). Why this percentage was picked seemed to be totally arbitrary with no real analysis to back it up. Just another reason why DeLuca is out of office. | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 844 Registered: 6-2002 |
I don't remember the jitney fee being an issue in the election. I've never been on the Jitney but think it is a great plus for the Town. It is an amenity that makes the Town more attractive and therefore has a positive effect on property values. If it doesn't serve every area of Town or accomodate everyone's schedule, perhaps the service ought to be expanded. What is the total cost to the Town of the Jitney service? | ||
| mtierney Citizen Username: Mtierney Post Number: 440 Registered: 3-2001 |
I know of one WO resident who parks in the daily lot for $3 a pop. Says it is worth it because it is more convenient. For folks like myself who only go into the city once in a week or so and leave later in the am, it is often impossible to find parking even within a reasonable walk. Returning from NY after 10 or 11 presents other concerns. Making the daily lot function as it evidentally was intended to when it was set up makes good sense. I'm sure there are plenty of off-peak commuters here. No, I do not think we should subsidize the jitney - albeit a town image perk - we just can not afford to add to our taxes. Please, we should be looking for areas to cut costs, not add! | ||
| lseltzer Citizen Username: Lseltzer Post Number: 1937 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bob, Who in Maplewood pays four or five hundred for a sticker? Mtierney, I don't know what you consider a reasonable walk, but there are permit spots on Woodland beyond Beach, and they're available 100% of the time. |
