POLL: Fare free zone on campus or make the U-Pass mandatory?

[twincitizen]

As you may have heard, some student groups (MSA & others) at the U have been advocating for a fare free zone for the Green Line on campus, between the West Bank, East Bank, and Stadium Village LRT stations. Others have suggested that it would be better to simply make the U-Pass a mandatory purchase as part of one's tuition/fees (of which it would be a tiny drop in a very large bucket) for full-time students. The per semester cost would likely drop from the current $97.

Please skim the following articles before voting:
MN Daily editorial in favor of a fare-free zone
Another one in favor of fare-free zone

MN Daily editorial in favor of a mandatory U-Pass

Sept. 2013 update on fare-free zone discussions

Discuss.

[talindsay]

Good poll, but I can't vote either of the two options until we know how the mandatory pass option would affect other University people - I prefer the mandatory pass at a policy level since it encourages use of the system and provides some funding for operations in this section of the line, but don't want to see a loss of service to all non-students on campus.

[FISHMANPET]

Isn't there an all of the above option?

Metro Transit wants the U to pay for the free-fare zone, and the U would pay for it be making the U-pass mandatory.

[twincitizen]

talindsay: I added a "Something else / not sure yet" option. I generally dislike ambiguous poll options, but I can see how these two options don't encompass the entire discussion. A fare-free zone would be a benefit for U employees with or without a Metropass. Making Metropass mandatory for employees is obviously not an option in this discussion, so I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. Cheaper Metropasses for U employees seems like a mostly separate conversation from this issue.

With regards to your "loss of service" concerns, who said anything about the Campus Connector or other campus circulators reducing service?

FISHMANPET, I modified the poll so you can select up to two options. Great idea. I would also support the free fare zone in concert with the mandatory U-Pass. I love the mandatory U-Pass idea for all of the less obvious benefits too (detailed in Chris Iverson's editorial) such as getting students off campus more frequently to explore the city, reducing the number of car commuters on campus (including the environmental & health benefits), reducing parking demand, etc.

[FISHMANPET]

As I posted in the other thread, I think the cost of the MetroPass is set by Metro Transit, not the U, so I'm not sure if it's possible to reduce the cost of the MetroPass.

[talindsay]

With regards to your "loss of service" concerns, who said anything about the Campus Connector or other campus circulators reducing service?

Edit: you're right, that assumption is from back in the AA phase of the Central Corridor project.

[woofner]

I think a fare-free zone is essential to making the median on Washington Ave work for pedestrians, so that is the most important thing (if this must be either/or). But the U should certainly mandate U Passes as well - it is certainly cheaper than building and maintaining parking lots.

This should probably have been worked out as part of Green Line restructuring, but it would have been cool if the service hours from the campus shuttles could be redistributed to logical Metro Transit routes. It seems like the WABC could be redistributed to the 6U, the 2 and/or a split-off south leg of the 22. The Campus Connector itself could then be an eastern branch of the 22 (or the 19 I suppose). The East Bank Circulator could also be redistributed to the 6 and/or the 2, or possibly the 3 (really how useful is the one-way service on East River Pkwy)? It seems from an end user perspective the legibility advantage of the shuttle is less than the accessibility advantage of having better frequency to more destination, especially if the same effective frequency is maintained (is the entire West Bank-St Paul length of the Campus Connector really have 5 minute headways? That's a lot of service hours). I may be oversimplifying the degree to which these service hours can simply be reallocated to other routes, though. The WABC and East Bank Circulator probably don't represent a huge amount of resources.

[matt91486]

I go to Cal right now, and we have a similar agreement with AC Transit as is being proposed. For us, we just get a sticker on our ID card each semester that indicates that it's current, and we just flash it when we get on the bus. A similar thing could be done with the U Card (or I'm sure there are myriad other technical ways of getting it implemented).

There are two real advantages. First, buying in bulk lets them pay less per student than they would otherwise. I'm sure Metro Transit would charge the university less if they were buying 35,000 passes or whatever. Second, with so much income coming from one source, AC Transit takes the University massively into account when making routing decisions, so it gets a better level of service than it might otherwise. I'm not guaranteeing that similar outcome with Metro Transit, but if they suddenly get a cash windfall from the University, it's possible frequency on some of the most useful lines could be increased, or maybe better shelters could be put in, etc.

Here, it's a pretty uncontroversial student fee at this point. (http://www.actransit.org/2013/04/18/uc- ... lass-pass/). It passed a student referendum to be continued (there was a lot of controversy about how it got onto the ballot, but that's a separate thing. The voting on it was more than 12,000 to 1,000 to maintain (http://elections.asuc.org/)

Moreover, it MASSIVELY increased use of buses. Two years after implementation, annual ridership from students went from 100,000 rides to 3,000,000 rides. (http://archive.dailycal.org/article.php?id=6994)

So, basically, it might be a bit controversial to start up, but if it is implemented, there are examples by which it can become highly successful.

[twincitizen]

Thanks for that. I'm worried that the Minnesota Student Association (MSA) has basically been advocating for the free fare zone for 2 years, and no one is advocating for compulsory U-Passes, other than my ramblings in comments on MN Daily articles and the one recent editorial piece by Iverson.

At this point it's a fringe idea, and I don't think anyone at Metro Transit or the U is actually considering it, let alone heard of it. It might be the kind of thing that people should start emailing the folks in charge about. It's basically a decision between the U and Metro Transit/Council, meaning the decision is going to be made more or less behind the scenes with little to no official public input.

[ECtransplant]

Students are nickelled and dimed for so much bs these days, and university balance sheets so bloated, I can't bring myself to support another compulsory fee, no matter how much a transit booster I am

[Anondson]

I think this is a great instance where both should be done.

[UptownSport]

Discuss.

Major concern on this site is where future transit $ come from.

Someone needs to be paying for the service, if large swaths are excluded from contributing to transit and using it like an army of ants, it puts burden on everyone else, and reduces ability to make system more efficient.
Not sure short hop needs to be full-fare, perhaps 50¢ like downtown zone?

Full disclosure, though- I get free rides because of disability incurred in a combat zone.
I doubt the few of us are even a small factor relative to legions of U students, but still.

[xandrex]

I'm sort of curious how much a mandatory U-Pass would increase ridership. How many students have a U-Pass now? When I was going to the U a couple of years ago, I didn't know anyone who didn't have a U-Pass who lived anywhere near campus. I knew a handful who drove places, but they weren't the type to ever get on a bus in the first place. The rest who didn't use the bus (but still had a U-Pass) were pretty good about walking or biking all year round.

[Andrew_F]

I think it's ridiculous that the U doesn't require U-passes yet. Most of Chicago's urban universities require them (at double Metro Transit's price), and I've heard very few complaints. I would argue that transit has the potential to be almost as valuable at the U (at least after the Green Line opens) as it is at most of Chicago's universities.


Edit: And what's the merit of a free fare zone anyways?

[reverjs]

Does anyone know the outcome of this? I live on the west bank and travel to the east bank frequently so this is of great interest to me.

[min-chi-cbus]

I chose making it mandatory/part of tuition.

I like the idea of a fare-free zone but I'd rather see it at the MSP Airport and downtown and if there is already one fare-free zone or reduced-fare zone on this line (downtown, right?) then that's enough and I think it could become tricky to try and police with multiple zones/rates. I could get on board with a REDUCED-fare zone at the U but I also think that "subsidy" should be paid as part of the tuition package so students a.) are incentivized to access and utilize mass transit, but b.) learn that there are no free lunches in life, starting now.

[IllogicalJake]

I pay 50 cents each day to get from my home to my job on opposite sides of downtown. Seems just silly that I'd have to pay $1.75/$2.25 to get from one part of campus to another as a student. Seems like a "U-Zone" would make the most sense to me.

[xandrex]

b.) learn that there are no free lunches in life, starting now.

How is bundling a U-Pass with tuition going to teach them about no free lunches? Most of them will see it (and it would no doubt be marketed) as a free service.

With tuition as high as it already is, it seems silly to tack on more fees, especially since I know some students who specifically try to save money by avoiding the U-Pass by biking and walking nearly year-round.

[min-chi-cbus]

If they see it on their bills they'll realize they (or their parents) are paying for it and that it's not free. If it's a reduced rate then they'll still be paying fares, even if it's partly "subsidized" already as part of tuition.

I'm sorry my opinion is so silly to you. It's a poll choice though, so talk to the OP if you think it's a useless option.

[reverjs]

I'll interpret the lack of any information on this as this resolution not passing. Too bad for me. If they're going to charge, though, there should really be a U-fare like there is a downtown fare, as someone else pointed out.