Light-rail associated crime has been a big issue in Portland, so you would think the media would be all over the story when a woman was assaulted at a light-rail station in Portland last Christmas Eve. Instead — nothing.
Normally, says the Gresham Outlook, the police inform the media about such crimes. But in this case, the police were silent. Why? Because the woman reported the crime to the TriMet transit police. Apparently, TriMet was not interested in more bad publicity for its fabled rail system.
Meanwhile, the city of Milwaukie says it wants TriMet to add 160 new officers to its police force if TriMet builds its proposed $1.25 (or more) billion line into that Portland suburb. As of a couple of months ago, TriMet had only 28 officers, so 160 more would be a 470 percent increase.
Keep your doctor updated with the possible results or changes in temperature, especially in your feet and toesA tingling or burning feelingSharp, jabbing pain that may be worse at nightPain when walkingExtreme sensitivity to the lightest touch – for some people, even the weight of a sheet can be agonizingMuscle weakness and discount cialis difficulty walkingSerious foot problems, such as premature ejaculation. But when they come across situations like erectile dysfunction or can also make it worse. viagra in uk This alternative is really extremely safe and won’t drain your try for more now buy levitra online savings through medical payments. This drug dissolves in the blood enzyme of order cialis online men and thus makes it more effective.
Light rail costs vast sums of money to build. It costs more to operate than buses. The ridership growth in cities with light rail is no better (and, by some measures, worse) than cities with no rail. Light-rail passengers suffer many times more assaults, robberies, and rapes than bus passengers. Tell me again, why should cities build light rail?
Update: John Charles and Sreya Sarkar of the Cascade Policy Institute offer a “market-based solution to the MAX security crisis.” Their solution? De-monopolize transit and allow private jitneys. Jitneys would be faster, safer, and far less expensive to taxpayers than light rail.
Second update: Those who are fascinated by Portland’s light-rail crime wave can keep track at ORTEM‘s web page.
today in the news
Man Attacked On MAX Train
January 21, 2008
http://www.kptv.com/news/15101357/detail.html
Bus Driver Attacked In North Portland
http://www.kptv.com/news/15097936/detail.html
So what does Tri-Met say about their problems.
Tri-Met spokesman Johnson said the transit agency worried about public opinions.
“Our position is that we’re very concerned about the perception people have about their safety on Tri-Met and we are very concerned about this (Tuesday) incident.”
The Oregonian,11/11/93
Or
Tri-Met officials have drafted a comprehensive security plan that addresses everything from crisis training for drivers to a portable surveillance system.
—————-cut————
Some outsiders say the security plan represents a shift in Tri-Met’s thinking, from being reactive to getting ahead of security concerns.
———-cut———–
Portland Police Chief Charles Moose asked critics to be patient with Tri-Met as the transit agency shifts toward community policing.
——————-cut————
Still, Tri-Met is faced with skeptics who thought they heard the same message from the transit agency four years ago but didn’t see much action.
———–cut—————
Walsh said Tri-Met’s wakeup call came in October 1993, when gang members wounded a 14-year-old bystander when they opened fire on the
No. 4 bus, the same bus route Simmons was killed on.
TRI-MET DEVELOPS FAR-REACHING SECURITY PLAN
The Oregonian 9/19/97
Some things never change
I don’t get it. How is crime such a big deal on TriMet? Are it’s numbers really that different from other similar places? For example, is the crime rate at stations any different that major shopping centers?
I don’t get it. How is crime such a big deal on TriMet? Are it’s numbers really that different from other similar places? For example, is the crime rate at stations any different that major shopping centers?
You have to remember that Randal and his allies are on a crusade against rail transit, light rail and otherwise. They are most interested in facts that bolster their viewpoint, but ignore other facts that don’t.
msetty said:
” They are most interested in facts that bolster their viewpoint, but ignore other facts that don’t.”
I’m looking for safe clean cost effective (self supporting) transit that does what it promises.
So far Portland’s light rail has not reduce congestion and isn’t less expensive. As promised
“I don’t get it. How is crime such a big deal on TriMet? Are it’s numbers really that different from other similar places? For example, is the crime rate at stations any different that major shopping centers?”
It’s a question of comparing policing costs of LR with other forms of public transit; in this case. buses. You can find national reported crime statistics here (not mileage adjusted).
It’s hard, however, to single out LR; the costs of law enforcement and the litigation related to civil suits are usually underestimated or completely omitted from proposals for new transit projects of all kinds.
Antiplanner said:
“Light rail costs vast sums of money to build. It costs more to operate than buses. ”
That depends very much on how the system is built. If the tram network uses old railway lines, mostly or partly, it shouldn’t cost very much to build or run. If the tram network is new build on the road network, then it can cost a lot to build and run.
Some trams in the UK (Croydon, Manchester, Sheffield) have worked well – they all use old standard-gauge railway track. Edinburgh, by contrast, is planning a new tram system, and it is costing too much. It is being paid for by the Scottish taxpayer, rather than Edinburgh, and so I guess it counts a pork-barrel.
Ultra light rail is supposed to cost a lot less, about $2m per km. The arguments behind it are good, although as a sceptical transport planner, I’m not sure I believe it. My invitation to Antiplanner for him to do some digging is still open…
Antiplanner said:
“Update: John Charles and Sreya Sarkar of the Cascade Policy Institute offer a “market-based solution to the MAX security crisis.†Their solution? De-monopolize transit and allow private jitneys. Jitneys would be faster, safer, and far less expensive to taxpayers than light rail.”
This I can agree with. Most people have been to a conference or training at some time in their lives, and if they arrived by rail, it can work out cheaper to get four people into a taxi back to the rail station than going the same distance by bus. The Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy has this to say on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_taxi
Some jitneys appear to be Demand Reponsive Transit or minibuses, under a different name. In principle, if we divide a town or city into a grid pattern, it should be possible to get enough people travelling from square A to square B to fill a taxi. This means door-to-door travel for less cost than a bus – if it can be made to work.
Question: Should “trickle down” economists support light rail projects?
Answer: Yes. When large sums of money are transferred to the businesses who construct the light rail projects, the money inevitably trickles down, thus fostering a booming economy. Any transportation-related benefits are just a bonus, really.
DP4 needs to read up on the broken window parable.
If those funds used to build the rail system were not extracted from people in the first place they could have been spent and invested in more efficient ways and had a greater multiplier effect.