SacRT has released its proposed service changes plan and Title VI analysis, mostly for changes that will occur August 2024. The page is SacRT Proposed 2024 Service Modifications, and the document is Service Changes for 2024, Draft Plan and Title VI Equity Analysis. Comments are due by Friday, March 1.
It is strange that SacRT included ACE Airport Express in this plan and analysis, since the implementation is at least four years away. A lot could change in that time.
Overall, the service changes look good. The Gold Line 15-minute service to Folsom is the most expensive change, by far, $2,762,768 out of $3,082,038 total, or 90%.
The document includes a budget table, showing change items, cost, passengers added (or lost), and cost per passenger. What the table does not include is the low-income or minority characteristic of that route. First, the SacRT table, second, STAR’s version that does show low-income for each item. We think that it is important to look, not just at new passengers or cost per passenger, but the nature of the passengers to be served. Route 33 has by far the highest low-income rate, but SacRT is proposing to spend only $4541 on that route, the rest being covered by a planned portion of the TCC grant (Transformative Climate Communities). Minority rates are less important because minorities are spread across the income spectrum.
The document, in a detailed analysis of Route 33 Dos Rios service, mentioned wheelchair bypasses several times, yet didn’t present a solution, rather, said that at least it wouldn’t be worse. This is a questionable decision. As pointed out, increasing the frequency, or using different type vehicles, would cost significantly more, but if wheelchair users are getting left behind frequently enough to be mentioned, that is a problem.
STAR thinks that SacRT should consider changes to Route 33 Dos Rios that would reduce or eliminate the issue of wheelchair users being left behind. This does not mean we don’t support the positive changes to span of service and frequency that are being proposed.
The four maps presented in the document have flaws. The two maps for Folsom area changes show a connection for Route F10 Folsom to Route 24. Route 24 has not existed since 2019.
The two demographic maps have no legend for route colors. It appears that the colors indicate frequency, but if so, several of them are incorrect, indicating the wrong frequency. Route 81 Florin and Route 75 Mather are not high frequency service, and Route 142 Airport is not even moderate service, running only once per hour. The demographic data sources are also not well documented, poor practice for a map. It might make sense to just show the routes being proposed for changes, not the entire service network.
Sacramento Transit Advocates and Riders (STAR) 