>Status: U
>From: RicSilver@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:27:58 EDT
>Subject: Menlo Park City Council to discuss CalTrain service
>To: RicSilver@aol.com
>
>RailPAC Alert: Local City Councils want to tamper with Caltrain Service
>
>Tuesday afternoon at the Menlo Park Special City Council meeting
>(Menlo Park City Hall 701 Laurel St) at 5:45pm, the Council will
>consider a
>resolution "S<http://www.belmont.gov/doc_center.asp?d_id=240003129>upporting
>Expansion of and Safety Enhancements to Transit Service" Other city
>council may soon be asked to consider this same resolution.
>
>RailPAC finds it interesting that the City Council, which normally
>meets at 7pm includes this issue on a special, unscheduled meeting
>for 5:45pm. 5:45pm is a time not convient to the majority of
>Caltrain riders from Menlo Park.
>
>A small group of councilmember from San Mateo County. are promoting
>a resolution titled
> "S<http://www.belmont.gov/doc_center.asp?d_id=240003129>upporting
>Expansion of and Safety Enhancements to Transit Service" That could
>seriously damange Caltrain service along the entire line in all 3
>Caltrain counties
>
>While we all support the expansion of and safety enhancements to
>transit service, the real purpose and intentions of the sponsors of
>the resolution is different from the title.
>
>In fact this is a fraud. It is an attempt by a group of disgruntled
>city councilmembers, (from some cities that don't even have Caltrain
>service like Daly City and Pacifica) and led by Atherton and
>Burlingame who are upset only because the Broadway and Atherton
>Stations were closed because of lack of ridership.
>
>Now, in an attempt to hopefully get those station reopened, they are
>asking for a full restudy of the Caltrain schedule and operating
>system.
>
>Let me be clear, RailPAC was opposed to the Closing of the Atherton
>station, but considering Atherton's original response to Caltrain's
>plan to rebuild the station to maintain service it was inevitable
>that the station would have to close.
>
>But in any case, once a decision has been made, AND PROVEN TO BE
>VERY SUCCESSFUL, as is the case with the addition of the Bay Bullets
>and additions and changes to Calitrain schedule, we shouldn't be
>micromanaging what the Caltrain staff and Board are doing.
>
>Please let your local officials now that you are opposed to any
>political tampering with the current Caltrain Schedule especially
>changes that would reduce or eliminate the highly successful Baby
>Bullets express trains.
>
>
>We don't need Caltrain to spend $250,000 on a study to answer
>questions that the Caltrain staff has answered or could answer given
>the chance.
>
>IRidership is way up, (over 33%) service is being expanded. IT AIN'T
>BROKE!!! IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE FIXED!!!
>If you have any questions or comment, please give me at call at
>415-370-7479. If you can help also, please let me know by return
>e-mail.
>
>Thank You,
>Richard L. Silver, Executive Director
>Rail Passenger Association of California
>916-833-4218
><http://www.railpac.org/>http://www.railpac.org/
>
>
>Published Friday, March 16, 2007, by the various peninsula editions
>of the Daily News
>
>Editorial
>
>Don't derail Caltrain's new service
>
>Schedule can be tweaked but avoid drastic changes
>
>An ad hoc group of some city council members in the region, the
>Coalition to Expand Transit Service, is asking Caltrain to revisit
>its schedule in hopes of boosting service for certain cities. But,
>the system's steadily growing ridership suggests things may be just
>fine as they are.
>
>The decision to add the express Baby Bullet runs in 2004 came at the
>expense of local service, which meant ending weekday stops in the
>Atherton and Burlingame Broadway stations -- among the least-used on
>the line -- and making fewer stops at other stations.
>
>Even during the debate over service, however, riders have flocked to
>Caltrain. In January, average weekday ridership rose by 7.3 percent
>compared with that time a year ago. Year-to-year ridership is up
>about 31 percent since the pre-Baby Bullet ridership of 2003,
>Caltrain reported.
>
>"Our goal is to have as many people riding as possible," said
>Caltrain spokesman Jonah Weinberg.
>
>The Caltrain board will review station-by-station ridership numbers
>in April, Weinberg said, and it will be up to the board to decide
>whether to have an outside firm review the schedule, as the
>coalition suggests.
>
>Fine-tuning the schedule might bring improvements, but making drastic
>changes could be a zero-sum game. Adding a stop in one city may
>require nixing another city's stop. Adjustments that add time to the
>schedule will not appeal to the new commuters attracted by the
>express runs.
>
>Caltrain works best as a regional service, shuttling more than 30,000
>people up and down the line on weekdays. The Peninsula already has
>extensive bus service for multistop transit throughout its cities, so
>there is no need to replicate that.
>
>Many riders using Caltrain are driving to the stations anyway,
>Weinberg noted. It's just a matter of which station to drive to. The
>Atherton station is less than a mile from the Menlo Park station and
>Burlingame still has one station under the current schedule.
>
>Having fewer train stops is a worthwhile trade-off for the improved
>regional service commuters enjoy. Any changes that the coalition
>wants should be balanced against the need to keep the new riders coming back.
>
>
>
>
>
>

--