KU students boost 'T' ridership
The Lawrence Transit System reported a 37 percent spike in 'T' ridership this August. Enlarge video
The launch of a new coordinated bus route serving the city of Lawrence and Kansas University helped boost the T’s ridership in August, officials said.
A total of 48,313 riders took the Lawrence Transit System’s fixed-route buses last month, up 37 percent from 35,349 in August 2008, said Bob Nugent, the city’s transit administrator. The total had been 32,744 a year earlier.
Nugent attributed the latest increase to KU students riding the joint Route 11, which runs from South Iowa Street to downtown Lawrence through the KU campus. The route stops at three major apartment complexes: The Reserve, on 31st Street; The Exchange, at 31st and Ousdahl Road; and Campus Court at Naismith, at 24th Street and Naismith Drive.
Route 11, considered a “spine” for the two bus systems, started Aug. 17 — just before the opening of KU’s fall semester — and has exceeded expectations ever since.
“With the success of this route, we look forward to exploring other ways for the city and university to continue coordinating services,” Nugent said. “It appears that Route 11 has accommodated the needs of both KU students and city riders.”
One-way rides on the bus cost $1, or are free with a valid KUID.
Because students do not pay fares to ride the bus, Nugent said, city officials do not expect to see additional revenue generated by the coordinated route.
Instead, he said, both the T and KU on Wheels are working to provide the most efficient and convenient service possible with a minimum of resources.
“At this point, it’s about making sure we’re using resources as efficiently as we can,” Nugent said. “We have a better quality product with about the same amount of money.”
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
smitty (anonymous) says…
And to think that the city vehmently refused to merge the two bus operations during the start up of the T.
funkdog1 (anonymous) says…
I don't remember that the city "refused" to merge the two operations. I remember that in order to secure federal funds to start the T, it had to be its own city bus service and not affiliated with the university. Does anybody know for sure?
govenorteacup (anonymous) says…
Why doesn't KU give some $$$ to the T from the student fees that come with tuition? I assumed that this is how the merge would work...is that not so? An increased bus fee of 10-25$ per student would do the job.
govenorteacup (anonymous) says…
Funkdog....
Perhaps your statement about the city bus service not being legally affiliated with KU is why KU doesn't give money to the T....?
gl0ck0wn3r (anonymous) says…
lolz. More usage, less revenue. That makes sense. Yay.
sunflour (anonymous) says…
govenorteacup, the new route is using resources from all three of the previous routes that covered the same ground (T 8, KU 24 and 25), and is funded by both entities. There are a lot of federal guidelines that limit how much of the money can be put in the same pot, based on how the T and KU fund and use their vehicles.
govenorteacup (anonymous) says…
But if KU students can ride any T-bus, shouldn't KU have to give more money to the T? I haven't read the fed. guidelines, but it seems to me that KU ought to use our fees to contribute more to the system.
All well, it gets me to campus and back to home.
Irish (Leslie Swearingen) says…
The 11 stops right in front of where I live and takes me to Walmart. Perfect.
sunflour (anonymous) says…
govenorteacup, KU students already fund the T as much as any person in Lawrence, since they pay as much sales tax as any regular citizen when they go shopping in town, AND they pay a fee to fund KU on Wheels -- so they're paying more for the T than the average guy on the street.
govenorteacup (anonymous) says…
then they shouldn't call it free.
Informed (anonymous) says…
They're only paying more than the average non-T-riding average guy on the street, sunflour. Those who ride the T, but are not KU students, pay taxes AND pay bus fare.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
The emp-T is still a bankrupt embarrassment to the city. Hopefully the 70% of Lawrencians who who voted themselves two tax increases last fall are becoming cognizant of just how much they're paying and just how little they're getting.
moderationman (anonymous) says…
STRS - If you don't use it, how do you know what they are or are not getting?
consumer1 (anonymous) says…
Stats are so easily manipulated to get the disired results. It is all a hat trick that will eventually show it's real colors.
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
sunflour (Anonymous) says…
"govenorteacup, KU students already fund the T as much as any person in Lawrence, since they pay as much sales tax as any regular citizen when they go shopping in town, AND they pay a fee to fund KU on Wheels — so they're paying more for the T than the average guy on the street. "
Patently untrue. The 'average guy on the street' pays the $1 fee plus the sales tax. The KU students pay the sales tax only - the $25 goes to KU, not to the mT. Even if they did give some of it to the mT, the 'average guy on the street' doesn't get to pay a flat fee and ride as much as they want. And they don't get to ride the KU buses for free, which is what the $25 the KU students pay goes towards.
Any way you want to spin this, the brilliant people that operate the mT and that suckered all of you into voluntarily increasing your taxes have made another brilliant move - increasing ridership by making it free to the new riders while charging *you* for doing so.
BTW, I thought the tugging-at-the-heartstrings crowd, sobbing about how much the mT was too valuable to die, claimed it was needed so poor elderly folk and such could get to work and their doctors' appointments, not give free rides to college students?
BigPrune (anonymous) says…
The free T rides for KU students was how the City bought the KU students' vote so the KU students would pass the freaking sales taxes, even though they are temporary residents at best.
RogueThrill (anonymous) says…
The emp-T is still a bankrupt embarrassment to the city. Hopefully the 70% of Lawrencians who who voted themselves two tax increases last fall are becoming cognizant of just how much they're paying and just how little they're getting
=============================
Nope, I would vote myself another tax increase to keep it.
smitty (anonymous) says…
funkdog, this is the best I can do with the hidden JW archives that are almost impossible to access:
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2000/jun...
In this story they also refer to a second unsuccessful provider bid but the JW archives will not allow me to access it.
What I remember is that the provider for KU wished to run the T but got slammed by Wildgen and the transit advisory people.
I have found the JW archives are getting worse/harder to research with each so called improvement in lieu of more accessible. What's up with that? Sure makes finding the dirt on the shakers and movers almost impossible. duhhh
autie (anonymous) says…
I reckon them federal and state funders just love to see collaboration between providers. Makes it look all pretty you see. I gots one cousin in Lawrence that relys on them buses as he ain't got no car. It gets him all tooked over to walmart and target and down to that Massushewit street so he can spend his money. He tolds me too that there was about 47000 other rides took each month to do the same thing. Sounds to me a little like that Soulsulism I heard about. You all better gear up and get them communist out of that city. Lordy you don't them poor people getting to work or out shop on nothing like that. Shoot, my cousin says it ain't nothing to walk about five mile to go to the store..his health is good so he don't need none of that Obamuh health surance cause he ain't sick no how and can walk if he needs to.
cowboy (anonymous) says…
I realize that the T's operating goals are as follows:
1. Have no apparent operational goals
2. Have no budget accountability , just give everything away
3. Don't change anything even though it's a complete financial disaster.
4. Celebrate your complete incompetence by publicizing gains in losing money and burning up your equipment at an even faster pace than before.
5. Make absolutely no effort to lower your cost burden on this community.
6. Tommorrows friday , party on , cuz no one in city staff or commission gives a sh!t either.
gl0ck0wn3r (anonymous) says…
I'd do the math again, but it doesn't really matter. Those that like the T - even if they don't use it - would pay any amount for it because they like the idea of a public transport system regardless of how ineffective or inefficient it is. No amount of cost/benefit analysis will sway them.
was_freashpowder2 (Alexander Neighbors) says…
TOLD you linking the city bus to Students would make a diff !.
parrothead8 (anonymous) says…
The 48,313 people who rode the bus last month means that 48,313 car trips weren't taken. That's less pollution in Lawrence's air and less congestion on Lawrence's streets. Nice.
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
was_freashpowder2 (Alexander Neighbors) says…
"TOLD you linking the city bus to Students would make a diff !."
Yes, it made a difference.
It added to the operating expenses of the mT without increasing revenues. And you're celebrating that?
*********************************
parrothead8 (Anonymous) says…
"The 48,313 people who rode the bus last month means that 48,313 car trips weren't taken. That's less pollution in Lawrence's air and less congestion on Lawrence's streets. Nice."
You're basing that on faulty assumptions. You're assuming that:
1) Every one of those trips would have been made if the bus were not available.
2) Every one of those trips would have been made by car.
and
3) Every one of those trips would have been made by single occupant car.
It could also mean that 48,313 trips weren't made by bicycle or on foot, *adding* to the pollution and contributing to the obesity and poor health of Lawrencians.
phoggyjay (anonymous) says…
about time
penguin (anonymous) says…
Just proof the T is benefiting from KU riders. You can argue they do not pay the $1 fee. However, the ridership numbers are what ensure that the T still gets their grant money. They just traded a minor amount of revenue for the ability to show increased ridership numbers and future security toward the money they receive from the feds.
I think people need to give up on the notion of riders fees ever paying for the cost of the system....because no public transit does.
Also the idea of using student fee dollars to pay the T is probably out of the realm of possibility. Once student fees are paid they are essentially state dollars. Heck it took an act of the legislature just to allow universities to keep the interest off of student fees that accumulated while they were in interest-bearing accounts.
The city had long been hostile toward joining with KU regardless of their opinion of LBC (Lawrence Bus Company). It would not have been possible with LBC buses. However, when the city did not get the ridership they needed...look who they came running to. I am glad the numbers are up, but given the nature of the coordination that is starting, I only expect them to keep rising.
cowboy (anonymous) says…
I see no reason why every city service should not pay for itself. Let the users , via their generation of revenue , determine the "right size" of the city's " variable" operations. We are now stuck with a bureaucrats vision of "right size" which has proven itself absolutely wrong.
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
"Because students do not pay fares to ride the bus, Nugent said, city officials do not expect to see additional revenue generated by the coordinated route."
Great. So we are now subsidizing transportation for KU students who live at places touting luxury student living. They might as well say "free bus rides courtesy of the taxpayers of Lawrence" in their slick brochures.
LogicMan (anonymous) says…
"burning up your equipment at an even faster pace than before"
In addition to the wear and tear on the buses' brakes, engines, tires, seat covers, etc. from more frequent stop and starts, and lugging more weight, the slight increase in fuel consumption needs to be included in a detailed evaluation. Not to mention the slight increase in pollution.
Any numbers yet on _decreased_ revenue due to this arrangement with KU? I presume some of those students rode the T anyway, but now don't have to pay the fare.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
One thing that's not mentioned anywhere in the article, or in any of the posts so far-- Anyone can get on any bus in Lawrence, whether it belongs to KU or the city. If you've got a monthly pass, there is no additional fee.
At this point, the merging of the two systems has benefitted primarily KU users because it entails only routes most frequently traveled by them. As the merger goes forward, routes will be improved/merged that will allow "city" riders to take advantage of the fact the KU has at least twice as many buses as the city.
But will it "pay for itself?" No-- with a few exceptions, no city service ever pays for itself, and if they ever were required to do so, the functioning of the city would likely grind to a halt.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
bozo,
That's why the city should use taxpayer money to pay for essential services only - not taxpayer-funded golf courses, art centers and multi-million dollar softball fields.
And we wonder why government is broke!
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Essential to whom, STRS? Cave men? Or modern humans?
penguin (anonymous) says…
Public transit never pays for itself. There is not a public transit system in the world that is not in someway subsidized by a source other than those who ride it. The only way to get public transit to break even would be to charge outrageous prices that would just kill ridership.
If someone does have the answer to accomplish this without charging the riders too much...I am sure the world would love to know.
matchbox81 (anonymous) says…
Just to reiterate what's already been said here. KU and the City have an agreement to recognize each other's passes. KU students just show their ID's and can ride any bus, city bus riders with a pass or a transfer can ride any bus. City riders benefit from the higher frequency of the KU routes, KU students benefit from the availability of the T on the weekends and evenings when the KU buses don't run.
SettingTheRecordStraight (anonymous) says…
So, bozo, you must support taxpayer funding of our city's debt-ladened golf course. After all, a small minority of citizens considers it an "essential" element of a modern society. When you really think about it, only a cave man would oppose a taxpayer-funded golf course, right?
Your way of thinking encourages every conceivable special interest group to lobby the government for higher taxes and additional government outlays. When a community has no definition of "essential," other than what you say it is, we can't reasonably expect to see fiscal restraint or intelligent stewardship of resources. We only have a cacophony of special interests crying for more, more more.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Cars and trucks cost taxpayers more than public transportation. By a long shot is my speculation.
Just owning a car can cost owners $8,000-$15,000 a year.
LogicMan (anonymous) says…
"Just owning a car can cost owners $8,000-$15,000 a year."
Maybe if you are rich and drive nice, new vehicles that get lousy mileage, or you live in NYC, SF, etc. Much, much less costly for us common folk, especially in this part of the country.