mas, you can't really compare those with October, it was up to $164,000 although there was a lower number of riders than in October. That reflects the fact that the fare went up in October. Mr. DowDY. Any questions, gentlemen? Mr. GUDE. I wonder, in reference to the way these tickets are issued: You say the student has to take these to the teacher, and the teacher certifies them? Mr. AVERY. He goes to the teacher and gets a form which the teacher signs which says he is a bona fide pupil. Mr. GUDE. Then, he can submit this form? Mr. AVERY. Then, with that form he can buy one book of tickets, either a dollar book or a two-dollar book. Mr. GUDE. How many rides is this? Mr. AVERY. Well, it is ten or twenty. Mr. GUDE. I would imagine-I see that in the summer months, e.g., July of 1970, they had 437,000 riders, which is actually just half of the ridership during the winter months of that same fiscal year. Mr. AVERY. Which year are you looking at, Mr. Gude? Mr. GUDE. Yes, 437,000 or 438,000 in July, which is almost half of what it is during the winter months of that same year. Would the July figures be summer school? Mr. AVERY. Summer school, yes. Mr. GUDE. In other words, a student would have to actually be presenting these on a weekly or monthly basis to the teacher to get the forms unless he accumulated these forms? Mr. AVERY. Yes, that is right. You are saying he might accumulate them and use them for periods other than school rides. Of course, the hours in which they can use these tickets are restricted, too. Let's see. I know it cuts off in the evening at 7 p.m. I do not remember what time it starts in the morning. Is it 7 in the morning? 7:30 or 8 in the morning; and it cuts off at 7 p.m. SENIOR CITIZENS FARE Mr. GUDE. I believe you all are studying the possibility of a fare subsidy for senior citizens, aren't you? Mr. AVERY. Well, we have put in a senior citizen's fare starting May 9, but it will not be subsidized. It is being put in on a 90-day experimental basis. Our hope is that it can be supported on the basis of increased ridership. The company has agreed to put it in on an experimental basis without a subsidy in the hope that this will prove economically self-sufficient. Now, there is a significant difference in the senior citizen and the school rider. The children have to go during the rush hour in the morning because their school starts at 9 o'clock and the incremental costs of carrying those kids during the peak hours is very high. The senior citizen's fare only aplies to non-peak hours when the buses are out there anyway with empty seats. We hope that difference, plus the possibility of increased ridership, will make the senior citizen's fare economically feasible without subsidy. In any event, I emphasized very strongly when I made the announcement last week of the senior citizen fare, that it was on an experimental basis. It is on a 90-day trial period in which we will see just how it does work. Our hope is that it will not have a detrimental effect on the company's revenues. Mr. GUDE. What percentage of the regular fare will the senior citizen pay? Mr. AVERY. It is going to be a 15-cent reduction of whatever the applicable fare would be. So that, in the District, the fare for senior citizens in non-rush hours would be a quarter. On the suburban fares, fare-zone system being in effect, 15 cents will be deducted from whatever the applicable zone fare is. Mr. GUDE. Has this experience in other cities been such that you think this reduction will accomplish what you hope it will? Mr. AVERY. Well, there has definitely been an increase in senior citizenship riding in other cities when they have put into effect the senior citizen fare. I can't say that the experience in other cities conclusively proves there is enough make-up of losses for all those 15 cents. But we put it to the company on the basis that we would like to try this and find out whether it will work. In other words, you can sit around and conjecture about it for months, and do studies, and never get anywhere. Mr. GUDE. But what would concern me is that this might not be significant in relation to the reduction, you get the increased ridership Is the reduction you provided for comparable to what was done in other cities? Mr. AVERY. Yes, I think there are some cities that have less of a reduction. Some have reduced it to half of the adult fare, which, in our case, would be 20 cents instead of 25 cents. But I thought that a quarter fare, is a significant reduction for a senior citizen. Most of the riders are in the District. It seemed to me a reduction from 40 cents to a quarter was a significant reduction, and a quarter was a pretty fair price even for somebody on a fixed income to pay for a bus ride. And the company was willing to try it on that basis. So, we went ahead on that basis. Mr. GUDE. Thank you very much. Mr. AVERY. If you are interested in subsidizing it, I will be glad to make a presentation in support of that idea. TRACK REMOVAL Mr. MCKINNEY. How much, on an average basis, does D.C. Transit pay on this track removal a year? Mr. AVERY. I do not know. It varies-You see, D.C. Transit has no control over the track removal program. That is done by the city. It varies. I do not have those figures. Mr. MCKINNEY. Do you have those figures with you, Mr. Brubaker? Mr. AVERY. It just varies. Sometimes it is a half a million. Sometimes it has been as much as a million. I think they are anticipating it to be pretty high within the next few years, because of the subway program. You see, they remove the tracks when they tear up the streets for some other purpose; they do not usually go in just to tear out the tracks. That is why the 20-year period I was talking about applies. The city has most of the track paved over. Then when they are going into a major repaving job and tear up the streets, they take out the tracks. Mr. MCKINNEY. Anyone who drives in Washington is only too well aware of what they are doing. But what I am trying to get at is obvious, and I must bluntly blurt it out: I think 40 cents is too much to pay for a bus ride. Mr. AVERY. So do I. Mr. MCKINNEY. What I am trying to determine is if there is some way the D.C. Transit did not have to reimburse the city for tracks that are being taken out for every other reason. Would this make any type of reduction possible in the regular adult standard fare? Mr. AVERY. The answer is "Yes." Mr. Dowdy has heard me talk about this subject previously. I agree 100 percent with you, that it is unfair to impose that obligation on the bus rider. Mr. MCKINNEY. I have never heard of such a program in the first place. We have been tearing out streetcar tracks for the last 50 years, and I have never known any bus company doing this, in fact, we do not have any left that are solvent. What kind of reduction do you suppose this could be in fare? Obviously, it can't stretch on into the future, because I think you are only talking about $18 million, anyway. But, say, over five years, ten years, or 20 years, what would happen? Mr. AVERY. I think the best answer I can give you to that is this: At current ridership levels, a penny in fare in the District of Columbia produces annual revenues of about $880,000. So, if you could eliminate $880,000 in expense in a given year, it could reduce the fare by one cent. But the context in which this question usually comes up is, of course, not whether you could reduce the fares; the context in which this track removal item has come up in my experience is always in a fare case. What we try to do, what we have to do, is add up the total expense that the company is going to incur in the years following the time of the hearing, and one of the factors that we have to crank in, because of the track removal obligation, is how much they anticipate spending on track removal in the coming 12 months. We always write to the District of Columbia Government, Department of Highways and Traffic, and ask them to give us a figure, which was six hundred and some-odd thousand dollars in the last rate case. They give us that figure, and we add that on to the total expenses of the company and then start computing how much fare we have to give them in order to produce the total amount, including that $600,000. If the track-removal obligation were eliminated, that $600,000 would be out of the picture. Mr. MCKINNEY. Thank you very much. Mr. AVERY. Thank you. Mr. Dowdy. Thank you, Mr. Avery. Mr. AVERY. Thank you, Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Chalk. Proceed. Mr. CHALK. Good morning, Mr. Chairman! I appear here with Special Counsel, General Dawson, and our Comptroller, Mr. Hatfield. STATEMENT OF 0. ROY CHALK, PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF D.C. TRANSIT SYSTEM, INC.; ACCOMPANIED BY DONALD D. DAWSON, SPECIAL COUNSEL, AND SAMUEL HATFIELD, COMPTROLLER Mr. CHALK. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am most appreciative of the opportunity to appear before you and express my views in support of H.R. 6638. Rather than burden you with a repetition of the history leading to the passage of the school fare legislation in 1968, I respectfully request you to incorporate that background, the statements and supporting material made a part of the House Committee's record in the adoption of the bill approved October 8, 1968. The purpose of this bill is to provide for the payment of school fares for students in the District of Columbia by the general public rather than by the bus riders alone. The Chairman of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, in a letter recently submitted to the Honorable John McMillan, has urged the extension of the school fare subsidy authorized in Public Law 90-605 for an additional three years. The reasoning behind his recommendation is well stated in that letter, and we concur and urge the extension for the same reasons. STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS I might add that I endorse his statement, with a few exceptions, as he made it today. One of the exceptions is he did not elaborate clearly enough, in my opinion, as to the running account between the city and the D.C. Transit System. There is an obligation to the city for track removal of $584,442.10. There is an obligation that the city owes D.C. Transit for school fares of $493,652. The city also owes D.C. Transit for snow removal $32,156.21, and the running account now stands at $58,633.89. This running account has been in existence for years. Sometimes we are ahead, sometimes the city is ahead, but it fairly current. It should be borne in mind that the funds authorized by this bill are to be paid for educational purposes and to benefit the parents and school children who have to ride the buses, and these funds will only reimburse the bus companies for the transportation provided. Without such payment, it would be necessary to fix adult fares at a higher figure to meet the cost of operation. In such event, the small segment of the public-that is, those who ride the buses--will be subsidizing the transportation of school children when such costs should be borne by the general public as a cost of education. Operations under this legislation insofar as D.C. Transit is concerned have worked well. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission strictly regulates the procedures the company adheres to and audits the financial operations. As far as the company knows, the public's reaction has been most favorable. I am aware of no complaints by the patrons of the bus company and the public at large. The prior records includes my statements and editorials supporting this legislation. For the further record, I submit editorials from THE EVENING STAR (March 27, 1971) and THE WASHINGTON POST (November 9, 1970) endorsing the present extension. During the year 1970 under the present legislation, the company has received $2,386,069.02 for the transportation of students. It should be noted that the regulations of the WMATC provide that the school tickets purchased by the students can only be used by residents of the District of Columbia and within the District of Columbia. They can only be used on school days and special types of tickets are issued for day school and night school, and are corresponding restricted in their use by students. Cash fares are not accepted and the school tickets are not acceptable for transportation to sport events or on special or educational trips. They are good for passage only from point of boarding to a school stop or area and return. D.C. Transit, therefore, respect fully urges your favorable action on H.R.6638. Mr. DowDY. Any questions, gentlemen? SENIOR CITIZENS' FARE Mr. Chalk, in regard to the proposed reduction of fares for senior citizens, do you think, it is your company's belief, that this is a substantial enough reduction that the difference will be made up by additional ridership attracted to bring in the same amount of yield that you are getting without this change? Mr. CHALK. Well, we are willing to go along on the experiment, and I do not know what the public reaction would actually be. I suppose once we initiate it, we will hear from the public whether this is satisfactory or they would want more. I do not know. I think it is a fair reduction; it is a substantial percent discount from the 40 cents. That is about one-third off. Mr. GUDE. I know a quarter is not much in some circles, but for somebody who is on a very fixed income, and pushed by inflation in every respect, it might not be adequate. If this should not work out, would you all be willing to give it another try at a different level? Mr. CHALK. I certainly would recommend that. We could try it at any level. If the impact is a fair one, both on the general riding public-Because, after all, if there is a diminution in income as a result of this, then the riding public would eventually have to pay the difference. I would be perfectly willing to experiment at a lower level than 25 cents or any level that WMATC thinks would be reasonable. The 25 cents is approximately one-third reduction. It is substantial, but I do agree with the chairman of the Commission that that does have an impact. Now, of course, 50 per cent would be an even greater impact. I support we could start at one point and end up at another after a period of experimentation. My suggestion would be to start it at 25 cents, and if there were no serious impact on the general income, possibly shoot for a lower figure. I am all for helping senior citizens. I am almost one myself. Mr. GUDE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 59-996 0-71-2 |