Contact the County Executive!!

Everyone did a GREAT job at the public hearing earlier this week. 14 out of 32 speakers were speaking on behalf of saving the 37. There were also more ppl in support of the 37 in the crowd, so they couldnt' miss the fact that we were there. Anyone who wasn't there or who didn't speak can make their comments in writing up until Tuesday, February 19th. These comments should be addressed to Ms. Carolyn Biggins at transit.dpwt@montgomerycountymd.gov

Contacting Ms. Biggins is necessary, but it may not be enough. We need to go back to Councilman Berliner to encourage him to pressure County Executive Ike Leggett to reconsider this. Councilman Berliner put that message in his memo of Feb 4th, but now he needs to back it up with action! His email is councilmember.berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov

Lastly & probably most importantly, we need to contact County Executive Ike Leggett directly. A few ppl have done so & Leggett's response has been a formulaic non-response (see below). Calls to his office today have been taken by people who have no idea what we're even talking about. This is NOT acceptable!! The old saying goes that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, so let's make sure Leggett hears us squeak!!! (Even better if he hears us *roar*!!) His contact information is:

Mr. Isiah Leggett, Montgomery County Executive
Executive Office Building
101 Monroe Street, 2nd Floor
Rockville, MD 20850
(240) 777-2500
oce@montgomerycountymd.gov

Let's bombard his office with phone calls & emails about how we feel about this proposal!!

I'm attaching below the letter Adam Garfinkle wrote to Leggett earlier this week, followed by the non-response he received back. This message from County Exec Leggett is the exact same response that Lisa Kruppa received to her letter -- VERBATIM!! Clearly, the County Exec is NOT paying attention, so it's up to us to inundate him/his office until he has no choice but to at least make himself aware of the issue!!


To: ocemail@montgomerycountymd.gov
Subject: Ride On proposals, viz #37
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:52:35 +0000
> Mr. Leggett,
>
> Last night's Ride-On forum at 100 Maryland Avenue turned up some many
> interesting points about the unfortunate proposal by the County
> Executive's proposal to reduce public transportation, not least the
> proposed elimination of the 37 bus. I regret that no Council members
> were present last night. But I hope you and your colleagues interest
> yourselves in the proceedings, and that having done so you will
> reconsider a proposal that is manifestly retrograde and counterproductive to our community.
>
> Note that, of all the points made last night, two stand out. First,
> the problem with the 37 bus, and other routes as well, isn't one of
> ridership but of measurement. Just this morning 22 people rode the 37
> bus to the Grosvenor metro, and the driver did not collect a single
> fare or punch a single card because the fare box was broken. This is
> common, and Ride-On's method of counting does not take this into
> account. How can a route that was EXPANDED just 3 or 4 years ago because Ride-On pronounced it too crowded suddenly turn into an "underperformer"
> despite even Ride-On's testimony that ridership has increased? This
> makes no sense, as must be obvious to you.
>
> Second, the proposed reductions for all routes account for only, I am
> advised, four tenths of one percent of the deficit. For such a paltry
> amount of money, the Country will pour hundreds of cars into rush-hour
> traffic? Will strand the handicapped and the elderly and the poor who
> do not or cannot drive? Will leave five schools, two elder care facilities and a vibrant shopping mall unserved?
> Will accelerate the pollution of our air with greenhouse gasses? Will
> make a mockery of the Country and the State's adjuration to all of us to "go green"?
> This beggars the imagination.
>
> Indeed, sir, with all due respect, your proposal isn't even
> revenue-positive; it is revenue negative in the mid-term and beyond.
> It will reduce Country revenue from affected businesses, reduced
> property values and increased road maintenance costs, to name only the
> obvious factors. Has the County consulted a professional urban
> economist on this point? Why don't you consider doing this? Or is the County allergic to having actual knowledge with which to make its decisions?
>
> I say all this not in anger but in sorrow. I find it hard to believe
> that seemingly intelligent men and women can propose doing something
> that is so manifestly retrograde, ignorant, shortsighted and, as I
> have already indicated, embarrassing. I can't believe that other, less
> harmful ways to balance the budget are not available. Show me your
> budget and I'll find them for you, if you like.
>
> Note, too, that we are not averse to compromise. As Councilman
> Berliner suggested to you in his letter of February 4, the schedule
> for the 37 can be put back to what it was before expansion, at least
> temporarily. Smaller vehicles can be used, also temporarily.
> Reasonable fare increases are possible. But if the route is eliminated altogether, the chances of its being resuscitated are low.
> The long-term negative impact on the County would be magnified.
>
> So, Mr. Leggett, the Ride-On Forum has come and gone, but we are not
> done opposing this counterproductive proposal. Nor will we forget--all
> of us, literally hundreds of us and voters every one--if the County
> Executive persists in implementing this foolish proposal. You would be wise to reconsider.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dr. Adam Garfinkle


Here was the (non)response from Leggett:

From: "Ike Leggett"
> Thank you for your email regarding the proposed Ride On service changes.
> The County held a public hearing on the proposed service cuts on
> Monday, February 11, 2008 at the Council Office Building.
>
> * The routes proposed for elimination in their entirety are: 7,
> 37, 124 and 127. These routes operate weekdays only (7, 37 and 124
> operate weekday rush hours only).
> * The routes proposed for elimination on Saturday only are: 30,
> 36 and 90 (no change to their weekday schedules).
> * The route proposed for only a Sunday service cut is route 98.
> * It is proposed to merge the following into one route: Route 34
> which operates from Aspen Hill to Bethesda, and route 42 which
> operates from Medical Center to Friendship Heights. The current
> duplication of service within Bethesda will be eliminated (3 bus stops
> in each direction eliminated along Woodmont Avenue). This proposed
> change in service to routes 34 and 42 would operate 7 days per week.
>
> All of these routes/segments have less ridership and are below Ride
> On's service standards, which are 10-15 passengers per bus-hour
> (varies by type of bus and time of day/day of week).
>
> The close of the public comment period is February 19, 2008. After
> the hearing, all comments that are received will be reviewed and a
> final decision will be made. Transit Services will post the final
> decision about the proposed service reductions and route consolidation
> on its website. The website address is www.montgomerycountymd.gov and
> click on
>
> Ride On.
>
> I appreciate your sharing your views on this important transportation
> budget issue.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Isiah Leggett
> County Executive

It's clear he didn't read Adam's or Lisa's letters/doesn't address the concerns stated in that letter. Let's see if we can get Leggett to care a bit more, shall we?