[Colorado-Talk] RTD's Conundrum With Access-on-Demand

Wed Jan 8 23:10:27 UTC 2025

I hope so! :)

Regards,
Jo Elizabeth Pinto

Please visit my author Website:
https://www.brightsideauthor.com

From: Colorado-Talk <colorado-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Gail Hamilton via Colorado-Talk
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 4:07 PM
To: NFB of Colorado Discussion List <colorado-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Gail Hamilton <gail at soaringintogreatness.com>
Subject: Re: [Colorado-Talk] RTD's Conundrum With Access-on-Demand

Is this so well worded email going to the powers that make the decisions?

Infinite Blessings,
Gail Hamilton
International Speaker
Soaring Into Greatness
Unstoppable, Unforgettable, Unbelievable
gail at soaringintogreatness.com<mailto:gail at soaringintogreatness.com>
(720)-377-7682
[Facebook]<https://facebook.com/gail.hamilton.9231> [LinkedIn] <https://linkedin.com/in/gaillhamilton>  [YouTube] <https://youtube.com/channel/UC2ETmkavYKd75Gz9NKBgPhw>  [Instagram] <https://instagram.com/soaring.into.greatness>
[Soaring Into Greatness Logo with gold wings on a green background.]<http://soaringintogreatness.com/>

From: Colorado-Talk <colorado-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org<mailto:colorado-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org>> On Behalf Of Curtis Chong via Colorado-Talk
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 12:53 PM
To: 'NFB of Colorado Discussion List' <colorado-talk at nfbnet.org<mailto:colorado-talk at nfbnet.org>>
Cc: Curtis Chong <chong.curtis at gmail.com<mailto:chong.curtis at gmail.com>>
Subject: [Colorado-Talk] RTD's Conundrum With Access-on-Demand

conundrum Hello to my fellow Coloradans:

When the Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD) started providing Access-on-Demand service to paratransit customers to the tune of $25 per ride, sixty rides per month, and no restrictions as to when and where a customer would be picked up or dropped off within its large service area, its intentions may have been altruistic, but the end result seems to be a system that is now costing RTD more than $1.2 million every month. RTD is telling us that this cost is "not sustainable."

I have to wonder how it is that RTD created this spectacular disaster in the first place. Did its well-paid management staff not know that the traditional Access-a-Ride service was plagued with so many problems that most people chose not to sign up for the service unless they were desperate for transportation? Did RTD management not understand that they would create much less resentment and public acrimony if they had started by offering a little bit of service and gradually expanded the service as they could afford to provide it rather than throwing opening the floodgates, offering everybody everything for nothing, then finding themselves in a position where they had to take services away from people who have now become dependent on it? Why is RTD surprised that Access-on-Demand has been flooded with a lot of new customers who would never have applied to receive Access-a-Ride services to begin with?

The Access-on-Demand service as we now know it has been operating for a little more than two years. Before Access-on-Demand, what did the people who now rely on this service do to go to and from work, participate in social events, or travel to medical appointments? I am fairly confident that while some folks did stay at home, other people found alternative ways to get around--ways, I fully recognize, that cost a lot more than Access-on-Demand does today.

RTD is now in an untenable position. No matter what it does to keep Access-on-Demand alive, it will incur the wrath of a community of paratransit customers who will feel that they have been forced to make a sacrifice in their personal independence simply to help a large government bureaucracy to reduce spending. We, the blind community and the community of folks with other disabilities, will experience  a reduction in one or more aspects of the Access-on-Demand program. The hope is that RTD will learn from its mistakes, obtain meaningful data from the community of paratransit riders, and implement cost-saving reductions in Access-on-Demand that hurt the fewest individuals.

Sincerely,

Curtis Chong

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1078 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1228 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1089 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2436 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 9689 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250108/1f49203e/attachment.jpg>