Today's vocabulary lesson: APP AR

I want to write in the morning. All last year I was able to steal a half-hour or so before I started work and knock out something about the day's ride in. Now I can't, and I'm having some trouble adjusting.

Trying to be creative or at least coherent late at night just doesn't have the same feel.

Today, for instance, I jotted down some notes riding to work. Something like this:

vvv

Sometimes you get so deep into your personal world, so immersed in a book, that you forget where you are. And then you realize something is out of place. It is like waking from a dream. What's real, and what's the dream? A fog slowly lifts.

The bus isn't moving. That was what was wrong. I looked up from my book and quickly identified where we were stopped. It wasn't one of the route's timing points. There was no one getting off the bus. It was just me and the three other people who had been on the bus when I boarded. I tried looking outside, but I didn't see anyone.

Several anxious minutes passed with each actual second. Is the driver even on the bus? I couldn't see the driver from my vantage point in the back of the bus. Did she walk across the street to get a cup of coffee? Not likely, I decided. We were on the wrong side of Watt Avenue. Damn, this was weird.

But then, without a word, the driver put the bus in gear and pulled back into traffic.

I think I know what happened, and I'm quite impressed.

The other day I was reading RT's Glossary of Transit Terms and discovered something new. I was already aware of the concept of "Time Points":

A designated location and time that a bus or LR vehicle can arrive before -- but not leave earlier than -- the stated time as indicated in the route schedule.

Often in the evenings, the buses will spend several minutes at timing points, waiting to catch up with the schedule.

What I discovered in the glossary was the concept of APP AR

An abbreviation for "approximate arrival" time point. RT's operating policy permits driver discretion to depart these time points up to three minutes earlier than specific time noted in the schedule.

This rule, of course, explains why RT drivers and the 321-BUSS people warn riders that you have to be at a stop a minimum of three minutes early if you want to be sure to catch the bus.

In the little more than a year I've been riding to and from work, I've never had a driver invoke the APP AR rule. I've had a driver stop outside a Starbucks and rush in and out with a coffee. I've had more than one driver stop and rush into a convenience store to get a snack or a soda. I've had drivers take potty breaks. But never have I experienced waiting to catch up with the APP AR.

I've decided this is one really dedicated driver.

An alliance for transit funding

A court ruling Jan. 31 said the state's raid last year on public transportation funds to help balance the state budget was illegal. Well, $409 million of the $1.18 billion taken from the state Public Transportation Account was illegally diverted, the judge ruled.

But since it will likely be an easy task for the state to shift accounts around to make the remaining $409 million theft pass legal muster, representatives of transit agencies are considering taking their cause to the public. According to an editorial:

Transit officials are discussing the possibility of going even further, perhaps forming an alliance with other state transportation interests to back an initiative that would put a gas tax or carbon fee on the ballot, with the funds earmarked for public transit.

This is fine. But an effort that focuses only on public transit isn't going to get the majority support necessary for passage in a statewide election.

Sure, people say transit is important. In heavily urbanized areas such as the Bay Area, transit is recognized as a essential service. But in areas such as suburban Sacramento or any of the outlying communities, transit is viewed as something only the poor and disabled folk use. Deserving folks, yes, but additional freeway lanes and road maintenance are viewed as a higher priority.

So transit needs some allies outside the highway lobby.

The purpose of a carbon tax would be to encourage a reduction in our global warming footprint. Therefore, the benefits of the tax should go to all of those transportation options that meet this goal -- not just transit, but funding for improved bikeways and making communities more walkable.

Transit people need to join forces with bicycle advocates and people who promote walking. Such an alliance could get majority support, even in Roseville. Well, OK, in my dreams. But statewide, a carbon tax, or an increase in the fuel tax -- a global warming tax -- that raised money for transit and bikes and walking would go much further than a transit-only proposal.

Books and buses

It's 7:40 p.m. on a Friday night. I'm waiting for an outbound train that is supposed to arrive at 7:41 p.m. The question occurs to me: Am I the only person in the world who is happy to have an hour-long ride home in which to read and unwind?

This seems odd. Certainly it is at odds with the every-second-is-precious philosophy that consumes most commuters. I could drive to work and forgo the books. It's not like crowded highways are an issue in Sacramento when I go to work at 11 a.m. or travel home after 7 p.m..

No, it's the books. I crave the reading time, and I just don't have the discipline to set aside the time to read at home.

Tonight I didn't even mind -- well, OK, just a little -- when I arrived at 65th Street and realized I had been blocked into an extra 15-minute wait for the next No. 82 bus. I sat down at the base of a street light and read my book. The bus arrived 10 minutes early, and the driver allowed me and two other passengers to wait inside while he went off somewhere.

Dog-tired from the grind my job has become, seated in a warm, well-lit bus, the ride home reading my book was just fine with me.

RT's blind customer service (continued)

And then you witness something and you realize how good you have it, and you feel embarrassed to have even mentioned the trifling inconveniences of block bus schedules and the lack of late-hour service. That's how I feel tonight.

Back in November, I wrote about an incident where a light rail operator forced the train doors closed while one blind Sacramento State student waited for another to make his way to the train. The two blind students, a young woman and a young man, were left at the station by the train operator.

Then on Feb. 2, a woman named Kate stopped by and added a comment to my post:

Hey, its really funny that i happened to find out about this posting because we are positive this was us. The 82 line always seems to be late, I've almost gotten used to having to run for light rail which i was supposed to have 10 minutes to wait for.

They want more people to take RT rather then drive but they make it inconvenient. Why ride a bus that will probably be late, because they are SO often, which could cause you to miss a connection and be late, when you can just drive. As a blind person since birth RT has always, unfortunately, been apart of my life.

Also so many of the drivers don't have a clue where they are going. I tell the driver where I am going since i can't see the stop and so many times they have no idea, some straight say they don't know and others seem to just kind of pick a stop and tell me I'm at my stop, that is the most annoying and frustrating. Complaining to RT does nothing,they don't ever seem to care about their riders. Ok I'm done on my RT rant.

As I explained to her in my follow-up comment, I'm pretty sure the guy she was with that night rides my No. 82 bus home from Sac State in the evenings. He boarded the bus tonight at Sac State and told the driver where he wanted to go. He then took the seat behind the driver.

The bus left the campus. This was one of the older buses. It doesn't have an automated voice that announces each stop like the newer buses. The bus rattled and bumped along Fair Oaks and turned onto Howe. The driver didn't bother with announcing the stops. He turned east on Northrop. A couple of people got off at Northrop and Howe. The bus then made its way down Northrop until a rider pulled the stop request cord.

The driver pulled the bus to the curb and opened the door.

The blind guy stood up and faced the driver and asked, "Is this the Carro stop?"

The passenger who had requested the stop walked past the blind guy and exited. I didn't hear anyone answer the blind guy's question. I didn't know what stop we were at.

"Is this the Carro stop?" the blind guy asked again, a note of urgency creeping into his voice.

The driver said something, but I didn't hear what he said. A passenger next to the blind guy explained that this was the Northrop and Fulton stop, and the Carro stop was one stop back.

At this point the driver bounded out of his chair, grabbed the blind guy's arm and ushered him off the bus. The driver then walked the blind guy back to the Carro stop. It took a few minutes for them to make it to Carro and for the driver to return. Fortunately, it's only about a tenth of a mile between the stops. I heard just one person on the bus grumble about the delay. The rest of us, me in particular, were silently grateful that the driver helped the blind guy and didn't just let him off the bus to make his own way back.

I like this driver. He's friendly and cheerful. He's one of the drivers who leaves his bus open while he's on his break, allowing riders to stay warm while they wait. When he finishes his break, he counts heads and checks that everyone has a pass and off we go. And as I've said before, that's a piece of courtesy I wish every bus driver offered, even if it is against RT policy.

But when one of these old buses creeks and groans down the street there's no way to know which stop is coming, especially if you are blind. This was a dramatic demonstration of why drivers are asked to announce each stop on these older buses. Certainly when the driver knows he has a blind passenger, he has a special obligation to announce the stops.

Blocked

My new job requires more flexibility on the hours I work. And that, unfortunately, keeps banging up against the inflexibility of Sacramento Regional Transit bus schedules.

Tuesday night, I was told to work a 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift. That eliminated any chance of leaving the car at home. The last bus connection home leaves 65th Street at 9:43 p.m. But the light rail trains to and from the Watt/I-80 station have two runs after 11 p.m. So I drove to the park and ride lot on Interstate 80 and left my car at the Roseville Road light rail stop.

The crowd on light rail in the early afternoon is not your average sea of gray bureaucrats ebbing and flowing as a tide into downtown office buildings. No, this was quite a lively lot -- and very colorful in appearance and language. And loud. And perhaps a bit intimidating. But I made it to work unmolested, walking from 16th Street rather than waiting for an outbound train to 23rd Street.

By 11:10 p.m. I was ready to head home. The walk back to 16th Street was quiet. The only people I encountered were coming out of Whiskey Wild, the new bar on Q Street next to the railroad tracks.

At the 16th Street station a half-dozen or so people waited for the next train. With the exception of a panhandler I felt compelled to tip a dollar, the wait was quiet. The wife, however, kept calling every 10 minutes to check on my well-being. That was not necessary.

I boarded the outbound Watt/I-80 train at 11:34 p.m. Inside was a burly security guard and three other riders. By the time I reached the park and ride lot, it was just me, the guard and the driver on the car. I was home by 12:15 a.m.

My regular shift is 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. A 9:39 a.m. No. 82 bus makes connections at 65th Street that get be to work at 10:45. That's pretty good. But today I wanted to take a 10:09 bus, which is what should be the next bus on a line with 30-minute interval service. But there is no 10:09 bus. The next No. 82 comes to my stop at 10:24 a.m.

I've written about being "blocked" before. After every four No. 82 buses, there's a 45 minute gap. I realize drivers are due their breaks, but I'm not convinced that disrupting the schedule is the only way to accommodate that.

Having to wait an extra 15 minutes on a line that already only runs every 30 minutes just feels like RT made the easy choice, ignoring or dismissing the interests of riders. It's just another cut from the blade of RT customer service. I lick my wounds and soldier on, ever the loyal transitarian, but I also understand why people with a choice ask "Why bother?"

* * *

As a follow up to my post about the RT sting operation, I realize now that what I thought were Sacramento Police Department black and whites were more likely RT police cars. Still, the effect was the same. The operation had moved down to 13th Street on Tuesday and was back at 23rd Street today. RT really should be publicizing this effort.

Party of One on the bus

Finished Daniel Weintraub's "Party of One: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of the Independent Voter." Weintraub does a fine job of crafting an admiring portrait of Schwarzenegger as governor.

Weintraub is upfront about where he comes from in writing the book:

For the past four years, I've watch Schwarzenegger do his job as closely as anyone. And I've watched with a special interest. Like Schwarzenegger, I am not wedded to the views of any one political party. I have been a registered Republican and a registered Democrat, and I am currently registered with no party at all. I consider myself to be a fiscal conservative with a bit of libertarian streak. I believe in individual responsibility. When it comes to social policy, I think government should act only as a last resort, and mainly to ensure equal opportunity, not equal results. I am an old-school liberal, a live-and-let-live person who believes government should generally leave people alone to do their own thing. And I am an environmental progressive, because when you blow soot in my lungs or dump toxins into my water, you are no longer just doing your own thing. You're messing with my life. As it turns out, these beliefs are a pretty good match for Schwarzenegger's.

And while Weintraub does criticize some of the governor's actions, his personal disappointment is clear.

Of course, I'm not a disinterested observer any more than Weintraub. I'm a yellow-dog Democrat raised by a woman who was inspired to become politically active by the Adlai Stevenson presidential campaigns. And I'm also a Democrat who was so disappointed by Gov. Gray Davis' performance in office that I voted for the recall, and I even voted for Schwarzenegger on the off chance that maybe he was something different.

Weintraub explains the Schwarzenegger's difference, how his ideas are not limited by partisan ideology. Weintraub argues that Schwarzenegger's success, at least in terms of popularity among voters, derives from this nonpartisan focus. This, Weintraub says, meshes well with the desires of Californians to have government officials working to fix problems rather than scoring ideological points.

Unfortunately, Weintraub has written the book before the story is over. Substantial portions of the book deal with issues -- health care, school reform and legislative redistricting -- that have since fallen victim to the economic downturn that has struck California. While his criticism of the governor for failing to attack the structural budget issues is prescient, it doesn't compensate for the way the book leaves these issues hanging.

Weintraub explains in the introduction:

I hope this book serves as a guide to readers of all political persuasions who want to better understand the Schwarzenegger phenomenon, its effect on California, and its potential application to the rest of the nation.

This he has done. Writing the book a year later -- or, better yet, when the governor left office -- might have provided the opportunity to hammer home the tragedy of the governor's failure to get a handle on budget reform. Still, Weintraub has written a valuable book. I imagine it will be one of several contemporary works used by future historians as original source material.

The light under RT's bushel

Light rail operators don't routinely interrupt the recorded voice that announces each stop. So when the driver came on the public address system this morning it was obvious something was out of the ordinary. Unfortunately, it was not at all clear what the operator said. Even after he repeated the message, the best I could make out was that it had something to do with the 23rd Street station, the next stop on the inbound train.

As the train approached the station, everyone got a pretty good idea of what was coming next. Parked on the sidewalk next to the inbound tracks were two Sacramento Police Department black and whites. At the rear of one car was a man in handcuffs. Another man appeared to be receiving a ticket.

When the train stopped, one passenger tried to bolt but was quickly convinced to stick around by waiting police officers.

Soon the Sacramento Regional Transit fare inspector and a couple of police escorts made their way through the light rail car, asking each rider to produce a ticket or pass. Besides the guy who tried to run, I didn't notice anyone else caught not paying.

One of the criticisms repeatedly leveled against RT is that not enough is done to keep people who don't pay from riding the trains. This was a clear, unequivocal response by RT.

So I looked at RT's Web site to see if it offered some further explanation, a notice that would let people know that RT was making an effort to improve.

Nothing.

Nothing under "Service Status Updates."

Nothing under "Safety Information & Crime Prevention Tips for RT Passengers."

Nothing under "RT Newsroom."

Monday's Sacramento Bee had a story that began, "Federal anti-terrorism agents with guard dogs and cameras showed up at the downtown train depot briefly last week, then just as mysteriously disappeared, leaving passengers at the normally sleepy depot scratching heads."

More Visual Intermodal Protection and Response today? Didn't seem likely.

Why does RT insist upon hiding its light under a bushel? A few dozen people who witnessed today's sweep know about it. Maybe they will tell a friend or two. But people who don't ride transit, who don't think it is safe, who fear riffraff they imagine fill each train -- those people will remain ignorant.

Sacramento Regional Transit needs to do more to tell people about these efforts. People who have a choice whether to ride transit or take their car need to understand and appreciate the efforts RT makes to create a transit system inviting to everyone.

Yes We Can -- Vote Feb. 5

I just love the "Yes We Can Song" by will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas and director and filmmaker Jesse Dylan, Bob Dylan's son. The music video, which was inspired by Barack Obama's "Yes We Can" speech, includes appearances by Scarlett Johansson, John Legend, Herbie Hancock, Kate Walsh, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Adam Rodriquez, Kelly Hu, Adam Rodriquez, Amber Valetta and Nick Cannon.

According to an ABC News story,"Dylan and will.i.am say they did not coordinate the production or release of this video with the Obama campaign and the filmmakers say they don't even know if Obama is aware of the video."

Bus Pirates!

Bus Pirates -- The Movie

HT rtdriver and Buses, Trains and the Media

A one year blogversary

Friday, February 2, 2007
A Regional Transit diary: Day 1

I've decided to start a second blog in order to write about my latest self-improvement project.

I've decided to leave my car at home and use RT to get around. I have a bus stop less than 50 yards from my front porch and my employer offers half-price monthly passes. The gas saved by parking one of the family cars should more than cover the monthly pass. And I'll have all that commute time to spend catching up on my reading.

Why do this?

My New Year's resolution was to walk every day, and I've been doing it every week day and most weekend days. Since there are four Starbucks within a half-hour walk from my office, I've got the entire midtown grid to wander about.

With my walking resolution success it occurred to me that I didn't need to drive. My son is now in high school, and I no longer have to drop everything and ferry him around. I also have been wanting to do more reading, but finding I'm unable to set the time aside. Since my workday runs from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. or 6:30 p.m., I don't have to compete with the morning crush of commuters.

[snip]

I'm looking forward to the challenge of focusing on the benefits of riding transit and letting go of the concept that time is money and every second that isn't productive is somehow wasted.

That was then. This is now. And while it hasn't been a perfect year, it has been workable and at times even enjoyable.

Best of all, I was able to read 39 books while riding to and from work on the bus.

George Crile's "Charlie Wilson's War" (Jan. 27)
Joseph Cummins' "Anything for a Vote" (Jan. 8)
Bill Boyarsky's "Big Daddy" (Dec. 30)
Valerie Plame Wilson's "Fair Game" (Dec. 16)
Bob Drogin's "Curveball" (Dan. 7)
Marcus Luttrell's "Lone Survivor" (Nov. 29)
William Burg's "Sacramento's Streetcars" (Nov. 22)
David Halberstam's "Coldest Winter" (Nov. 19)
Terry Jones' "Douglas Adams's Starship Titanic" (Oct. 23)
William Burg's "Sacramento's Southside Park" (Oct. 16)
Kirsten Holmstedt's "Band of Sisters" (Oct. 12)
Paul Dickson's "Sputnik" (Sept. 28)
Seymour Hersh's "The Dark Side of Camelot" (Sept. 19)
Robert "Diesel" Kroese's "Antisocial Commentary" (Sept. 5)
Mariane Pearl's "A Mighty Heart" (Aug. 26)
Barbara W. Tuchman's "Bible and Sword" (Aug. 16)
Philip Caputo's "Means of Escape" (Aug. 3)
J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" (July 26)
P.D. James' "The Children of Men" (July 19)
Genichiro Takahashi's "Sayonara, Gangsters" (July 17)
Walter Isaacson's "Einstein" (July 8)
Ethan Rarick's "California Rising" (June 21)
Richard Brautigan's "So the Wind Won't Blow It All Away" (June 10)
Richard Brautigan's "The Abortion" (June 6)
Richard Brautigan's "Revenge of the Lawn" (June 4)
R. Harris Smith, "OSS" (May 30)
Richard Brautigan's "In Watermelon Sugar" (May 19)
Richard Brautigan's "The Pill versus the Springhill Mine Disaster" (May 17)
Richard Brautigan's "Trout Fishing in America" (May 17)
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.'s "The Crisis of the Old Order" (May 13)
Ishmael Beah's "A Long Way Gone" (April 30)
Rick Newman and Don Shepperd's "Bury Us Upside Down" (April 22)
Keith Lowell Jensen's "Oh Holy Day" (April 5)
Joe Mathews' "The People's Machine" (April 5)
George Black's "No Other Choice" (March 19)
Eva Rutland's "When We Were Colored" (March 4)
John Barron's "Breaking the Ring" (Feb. 28)
Barack Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" (Feb. 24)
John Le Carre's "The Mission Song" (Feb. 8)