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

[Curtis Chong]

Greetings:

 

If anyone is interested in sending email to the RTD Board members about this
issue, I have a complete list with the exception of Patrick O'keefe, whose
email is not correct as shown on the page.

 

Contact me at chong.curtis at gmail.com if interested.

 

Cordially,

 

Curtis Chong

 

 

From: Colorado-Talk <colorado-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Jo
Elizabeth Pinto via Colorado-Talk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2025 2:00 PM
To: NFB of Colorado Discussion List <colorado-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Jo Elizabeth Pinto <jopinto at msn.com>
Subject: Re: [Colorado-Talk] RTD's Conundrum With Access-on-Demand

 

Limiting trips to the ADA service area will have an incredibly negative
effect on users who live in outlying places. For example, I choose to make
my home in Brighton so I can be near my family. The Access on Demand program
has been incredibly helpful for me, both for getting to medical appointments
and for accessing social events in a variety of places. RTD services to
Brighton and other outlying areas is sketchy at best, and it has been cut
back even more since the pandemic, although we all pay taxes to support
public transportation, the same as urban citizens do.

 

Regards,

Jo Elizabeth Pinto

 

Please visit my author Website:

 <https://www.brightsideauthor.com> https://www.brightsideauthor.com

 

From: Colorado-Talk <colorado-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Curtis
Chong via Colorado-Talk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2025 1:14 PM
To: 'NFB of Colorado Discussion List' <colorado-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Curtis Chong <chong.curtis at gmail.com>
Subject: [Colorado-Talk] RTD's Conundrum With Access-on-Demand

 

Greetings all:

 

RTD typically produces PDF documents that are hundreds of pages long and
incredibly difficult for nonvisual users to read. Nevertheless, I was able
to extract some information from a document released in conjunction with the
November meeting of RTD's Operations, Safety, and Security Committee. Here
is what I was able to glean from the data I obtained.

 

*	By reducing the number of rides subsidized per month from 60 to 30,
staff estimates the cost savings to be $241,451.
*	By charging a base fare of $4.50 (LiVE participants would pay
$2.25), staff estimates new revenue of $212,850.
*	By changing the service area to reflect the Americans with
Disabilities Act, staff estimates a cost savings of $48,814.
*	The estimated net savings would be $503,115.

 

These figures are based on data from the month of September, 2024 as
follows:

 

*	Total number of boardings for the month: 61,340.
*	Average cost per trip: $17.20.
*	Total number of trips over the 30 trip cap: 14,040.
*	Total September costs = $1,054,886.

 

There are other figures pertaining to the number of trips which, in part or
in whole, were started or terminated outside of the ADA service area, but
given that the estimated savings for limiting trips to the ADA service area
is only approximately $48,000, one could argue that this savings is
negligible compared to the negative public relations impact to RTD and the
cost that would accrue by software changes and staff time required to
enforce this limitation.

 

Notice that there is nothing in any of this which discusses trips with
multiple stops. RTD's use of the term "equity" in conjunction with this
issue is, in my view, disingenuous.

 

Cordially,

 

Curtis Chong

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250109/a4ed5d4f/attachment.htm>