Portland Streetcar News

[sirsimon]

^ Wow! that's awesome news. Do you think it was mostly people who work at OHSU and were also taking the tram?

[Dougall5505]

it sounds great but i bet about half of those people didn't pay

[zilfondel]

about half were construction workers... the rest looked like random people, who may have been to the OHSU center or are living/working down there.

[pdxman]

Originally Posted by Dougall5505

it sounds great but i bet about half of those people didn't pay

Indeed dougall, most people who ride the streetcar don't pay or have a pass. Not that i blame them entirely, streetcar doesn't make it easy when the machines are weird and broken most of the time AND they almost never have any fare inspectors roaming. I think you and i are on the same page when it comes to the problems relating to streetcar

[PacificNW]

Getting rid of fareless square would help. Enter the front, pay and exit the back.

[Urbanpdx]

word.

Wouldn't it be nice to have fewer bums on board too? Last weekend I had to listen to them bitch about the food at various shelters and food banks (not enough steak) and try to intemidate old people into giving them money. I wont even go into the aromatics...

[IHEARTPDX]

Originally Posted by tworivers

I hope they've changed the upholstery. Even a flat color would do after the awfulness of that pattern in the old cars.

Speaking of upholstery...they might get some ideas from this collection of public transportation upholstery pix:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ludwig/...7594393043457/

The design for "Cork city town service" with a galloping golden retriever gets my vote for most "interesting".

[Drmyeyes]

"Wouldn't it be nice to have fewer bums on board too? Last weekend I had to listen to them bitch about the food at various shelters and food banks (not enough steak) and try to intemidate (sic) old people into giving them money. I wont even go into the aromatics..." urbanpdx

Why even say something like that? To do so is mean and shortsighted. And did you speak up on the old person's behalf as the "..bums.." were "...intimidating.." the old people into giving them their money? I'm sorry, but I can't see anything funny about this, even jokingly.

If we allow a momentum to build that starts excluding all this fine transit infrastructure we're building to only those with money that smell good, real problems could develop as a result. People up against hard times need transportion accessible to them as a motivation to do something constructive with themselves; look for work, any kind of work, paying or volunteer. Contact with clean people with jobs that have manners is good for those that don't.

We don't need any more ghettos or redneck bigots.

[Urbanpdx]

Oh, I don't think it is funny at all. Those bums are spoiling the system for those who pay for it. There is a fee for riding the trolley, we should exclude, as a group, those unwilling to pay the fare.

The contact with clean people can happen on free public streets and parks. The benefit that contact may or may not have does not trump that nice elderly man's right to not be hastled on the trolley he paid to ride on. Will he ride it again? What if it becomes full of bums staying warm and dry so no others have room to board? The trolley is not a shelter.

[65MAX]

Well, Urbanpdx, we could ban all smelly, homeless people from walking on public streets too. After all, streets aren't free, only taxpayers pay for the streets. So why should they be allowed to walk in public ROWs if they're not paying taxes, right?

This is typical of why you're not respected here.... Usually I ignore your comments altogether. Guess I need to start ignoring you again.

Oh yeah, BTW... parks aren't "free" either.

[PacificNW]

I have to agree with Urbanpdx on this...I don't consider myself a redneck or bigot. I do find it offensive when people, regardless of their means, feel it is okay not to pay their fares, piss on their streetcar/bus seats and being rude/offensive to other passengers. Portland/Seattle have only a couple of the transit agencies in the U.S. that have a fareless area...I am not against the fareless zones but it does make it easier to evade paying a fare.

For those without the means to pay the fare I think there are agencies out there that could be of help...especially for those needing medical/social care and employment. For those wanting to purchase their wine in an area of town that allows it and then hop the streetcar to another part of town to drink it I don't have much compassion.

[Urbanpdx]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Well, Urbanpdx, we could ban all smelly, homeless people from walking on public streets too. After all, streets aren't free, only taxpayers pay for the streets. So why should they be allowed to walk in public ROWs if they're not paying taxes, right?

This is typical of why you're not respected here.... Usually I ignore your comments altogether. Guess I need to start ignoring you again.

Oh yeah, BTW... parks aren't "free" either.

It costs $1.70 to ride the trolley outside of fareless square. What is the fare for a sidewalk or park in Portland? Should we let those who are "down on their luck" park downtown for free too?

[vjoe]

When I went to college in Santa Barbara, they had something similar to fairless square and had some problem with the homeless taking a lot of rides so they began charging a 25 cent fair. That reduced the bus problem quite a bit, they also enacted some no loitering rule around where homeless people hang out.
That free ride wasn't a part of the whole transit system though so it was easy to just charge everyone 25 cents. I can see it would be more difficult here in Portland.

This was in the mid 90's. I don't think the homeless problem got much better though, maybe just less visible to the yuppies crowd from LA.

[mcbaby]

Originally Posted by Urbanpdx

It costs $1.70 to ride the trolley outside of fareless square. What is the fare for a sidewalk or park in Portland? Should we let those who are "down on their luck" park downtown for free too?

you should try running for mayor on that platform. honestly, if you have a problem with a percieved homeless person harrassing the elderly, you should seriously speak up but if you are going to bicker about who should ride for free in a fairless zone than you have no foot to stand on. i agree that if someone is being aggressive or belligerent on the bus or streetcar, they should be escourted off but being homeless is not a crime in this country and a lot of us are a paycheck away from being "down on our luck". also there are many people "down on their luck" that don't own a car that would require parking for free unless they are living in one.

[65MAX]

Originally Posted by PacificNW

I do find it offensive when people, regardless of their means, feel it is okay not to pay their fares, piss on their streetcar/bus seats and being rude/offensive to other passengers. ... ...I am not against the fareless zones but it does make it easier to evade paying a fare.

Yes, that is offensive behaviour, regardless of whether someone is a "bum" or not. It's TriMet's responsibility to enforce regulations on board their vehicles.

What's even MORE offensive (and this is referring to Urbanpdx's comment, not you PacNW) is referring to disadvantaged individuals as "bums". These people oftentimes are just like you and me, but maybe their job was outsourced to India, or they have substance abuse problems that aren't being treated, or they're veterans with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that the stripped down VA will no longer take care of, or they have learning or mental disabilities that social agencies can no longer afford to address.

Instead of looking at the cause of all of the homelessness here (26 years of Republican's dismantling of our social safety nets), you want to treat the symptoms by sending anybody that YOU feel is offensive to some concentration camp somewhere. So, Urbanpdx.... out of sight out of mind, eh? Zieg heil!!

[PacificNW]

Offensive people come in all colors and social status. I feel that the "free fare" system for mass transit needs to be examined. Do the benefits of such a system override the overall health of the system? I support vjoe's observation: Charge a min. amount (25¢, 50¢,??) to board the bus/streetcar/MAX for everyone. Maybe even eliminate the zones.

It bothers me more when I personally know of individuals who ride transit without paying a fare than some homeless individual who can't afford the fare.

65MAX: I agree. We need to look more at the root of the problems instead of reacting to the symptom. Being a Vet, I relate to your post.

[Urbanpdx]

I agree with PacificNW.

There are a lot of things goverment wastes money on that would be better spent helping metally ill and addicted people. That does not mean they should be using the Trolley for free though.

Oh, and PacificNW, thank you for you service.

[Drmyeyes]

A nominal charge like 25 cents is ok, but such things are often a baseline that can be progressively increased; 30-40-50 cents, etc.

Mass transit isn't designed to offer the kind of personal security from the public that a limo, a town car, or even a taxi can. Most people understand this, and through ordinary compassion and understanding, they can put up with another person who doesn't smell too good or is kind of dirty, if that person is polite and respectful.

Behavior can be changed through pressure applied by the presence and direct action of those who are examples of the kind of behavior that qualifies their accessibilty to public services such as mass transit. Everybody, including most homeless people, junkies, drunks, prostitutes know, even if the appropriate behavior is absent at times, that manners and respect for others are a condition for being able to use something like mass transit.

Knowing that a certain standard of behavior and presentability is the condition for getting to ride, is what can get people to shape up. Take that away from them and they have no incentive to do so whatsoever.

When somebody does not understand this, or fails to abide by it is when an effort is called for to keep such persons from unduly compromising the rights of others to enjoy relatively satisfying service. This is the time when other riders observing such things going on might either drop a casual word to the offending person, or call the driver or train operator for action. Tri-met really needs conductors to help out with this sort of thing.

It isn't right or economically wise to allow agressive drunks and thugs to badger paying people just trying to get a ride, but there is a difference between such a person and a person who has been drinking and might be asking somebody for change a little more persistently than called for.

[PacificNW]

Drmyeyes: I agree with your viewpoint 100%. I still have one basic question: Why are there expectations that TriMet continue their fareless square program when they can collect a higher % of fares from transit riders by eliminating the fareless square? I have paid for my transit fares in every city I have visited/worked. Only in Seattle and Portland have I ridden transit in a designated free zone. I am sure there are others but from my experiences, most people expect to pay a fare. It would be interesting to see how our system compares with other comparable systems on % of fare collections/evasions. I would bet we have a higher evasion % and lower collection %. I read somewhere that the feds' desire to eliminate "fareless" systems. I guess their concerns are more of security in nature.

[Urbanpdx]

The bum in question wasn't asking for change, he wanted $18. He forced the man to put on his dirty gloves and pretty much had him cornered.