Transit hearing heated

By the time Van Hill got to his concluding statement, the crowd, 250 strong and bristling… By the time Van Hill got to his concluding statement, the crowd, 250 strong and bristling with pent-up energy, was roaring with such ferocity that one could barely hear the timekeeper’s ” time’s up” plea.

Hill had begun his three-minute statement with the history of his loyalty to the Port Authority Transit of Allegheny County. He recalled the beginning of PAT in 1964 and remarked that only a year later he had sold his car. For more than 40 years he had ridden the buses to and from work, noting for effect the number of times he had found himself at these same public meetings, begging the board not to cut more buses.

He spoke of the pressing need to organize the public against Pittsburgh’s transit system and the politicians who control it in order to ensure, for those that do not have vehicles, that they do not lose the means to their livelihoods.

“I hear people talking about the [Pittsburgh] Penguins,” stormed the longtime Squirrel Hill resident, “but what about more funding for PAT?”

It remained the highlight of the evening, although Hill was only one of approximately 100 citizens who gave remarks at the second of the Port Authority’s public hearings on proposed fare and service changes, which was held from 4 to 8 p.m. in Alumni Hall at Pitt last night.

Stephen Bland, chief executive officer of PAT, opened the hearing with a reiteration of the proposed cuts and alterations in busing schedules that would go into effect in late June or early July. The changes would remove 25 percent of the existing daily transit hours, reduce 11 percent of the current riding demographic and cut a total of 212 current routes.

Bland defended the cuts as necessary to deal with an anticipated $80 million deficit for the 2007-2008 fiscal year – the result of this year’s deficit coupled with rising health care, pension and fuel costs.

Rather than harping on the negative aspects, however, Bland said that he remained optimistic about the future of public transportation in Allegheny County.

“Should we choose to do nothing, or affect only nominal changes, our transportation system would shut down in the next fiscal year,” said Bland before taking his seat next to the other 10 members of the PAT hearing committee.

With these ominous predictions, the hearing began with other local voices joining and supplementing Van Hill’s stark pronouncements. Steve Donahue, a member of Save Public Transit, talked about the risk of reducing current routes. He argued, like many others, that reducing these routes would not only hurt lower-wage workers, but also harm Pittsburgh’s economy as a whole.

Many members of the community with handicaps spoke about how they would not be able to get to jobs or hospital appointments with particular route cuts.

“People have handicaps. I have arthritis. I have a bad leg. I can’t walk home. Save the 84B,” Renee Linder begged.

The two most prominent route cuts that people talked about were the 28X airport flyer and the 67F.

One woman remarked that she had originally moved to Forest Hills in 1993 because of the 67F. She concluded that with the loss of this route she would either have to relocate or change jobs.

Meghan Larkum, a member of the Carnegie Mellon University student senate, noted that the 28x was not only important for students to get to the airport over academic breaks, but also necessary for those who worked at either the Robinson Towne Center or the Pittsburgh International Airport.

After the hearing was over, Steve Bland said the hearing had been well worth it for his discovery of the importance of the 28x and 67F, and he said he had been convinced of their necessity.

Lastly, Bland said that he and the board will make the final decision by the end of March.