(The following article by Larry Higgs was posted on the Asbury Park Press website on March 8.)
MANALAPAN, N.J. — They didn’t come in crowds, but what NJ Transit riders who came to the Wednesday night hearing lacked in numbers, they made up for in conviction.
While few riders came to a public hearing at the county library Wednesday night, most were opposed to a planned 9.9 percent fare increase. State Sen. Ellen Karcher, D-Monmouth, also attended the hearing to voice her concern about the increase’s effect on the wallets of constituents. She was one of five speakers.
“I understand your operations, but you’re increasing fares and doing terrible in customer service and service in general,” said bus rider Paul Pepitone of Manalapan, who’s been commuting for 10 years to midtown Manhattan. “To pay this increase for the third time in the last four to five years is unacceptable.”
While he would not consider returning to commuting by car, Pepitone said that bus service is inconsistent. He arrives 10 to 15 minutes before the scheduled departure time of his bus and still has been faced with a full bus, or buses going to a different place in New York than the Port Authority bus terminal.
“I can wait on the corner for 15 to 20 minutes in the morning, and there are five to six buses that go by that are not in service,” he said. “When it comes, it’s full or going to Wall Street.”
Even getting on the bus is no guarantee he’ll get to work on time. A broken-down bus in the express bus lane on the Lincoln Tunnel approach roads can bring everything to a halt, and Pepitone suggested building a shoulder so other buses could get by.
“This increase came as a shock to me when I read about it,” he said. “Ridership is up at all-time highs. It boggles my mind that ridership doesn’t mean increased revenue.”
After he spoke, an NJ Transit representative talked to Pepitone about some of the problems he’s experienced on the bus and said they’d look into it.
Bus rider Ian Winograd of Marlboro said he switched from an Academy to an NJ Transit bus to Jersey City and takes the PATH train to lower Manhattan, which comes out cheaper.
He suggested that Academy Bus and NJ Transit cross honor each other’s tickets.
“I’m sure Academy is subsidized by the state, they should work together,” he said.
Winograd estimated that the increase would add $17 a month to the $170 cost of his monthly pass.
While he said it’s personally not a burden, he knows it will be a problem for some riders.
“I imagine everything will go up if they don’t get state aid,” he said.
The hearing, the first of two in the Shore area, is among the final ones held by the commuter agency before a planned April vote by the NJ Transit board on a fare hike.
If approved by the board, a fare increase could take effect June 1. The next hearing is tonight at the Toms River Park and Ride from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m.
NJ Transit officials said they need the fare increase to close an estimated $60 million gap in the agency’s preliminary fiscal year 2008 operating budget.
NJ Transit officials said the deficit is the result of costs they cannot control, such as fuel and insurance and the cost to operate new services, such as added trains on the Northeast Corridor and new light rail lines.
Rail rider John Hendrickson of Middletown said his issue is with a fare increase and off-peak service.
“I speak on behalf of most off-peak riders. NJ Transit thinks 9 to 5 is the only time people work,” said Hendrickson who works a three-day-a-week night shift in New York and wanted to know why off-peak commuters don’t get the same 35 percent monthly pass discount as peak-hour commuters.
Hendrickson said NJ Transit needs to improve customer service and cited late trains on weekends and some unhelpful train crews he’s encountered.
“I find myself helping passengers,” he said. “Some (crews) are good and helpful, but it’s not across the board.”
He also expressed disbelief that in a proposed $1.5 billion budget, NJ Transit cannot find enough efficiencies to absorb the $60 million.
“It’s unbelievable that in a $1.5 billion budget, you can’t find a half a percent to help people overburdened with property taxes and no (salary) raises,” Hendrickson said.