Uber Mobility

Prompted by a posting about Uber on Facebook’s Amador Political Discussion Group a dialogue ensued about the mobility situation of the elderly, disabled and drunk and our local options. We have a few expensive taxis, an excellent, but skeletal bus service, a limited Dial-A-Ride (DAR) service and a new and well functioning, but small, Volunteer Driver Program.

Among those transported by the Volunteer Driver Program are people going to dialysis in nearby cities. While this is vital, its contribution to county wide mobility and building a transit system is relatively small. However, they are acquiring a van and grouping individual trips together can add efficiency. Other social service agencies own vans, but often their use is limited by grant restrictions or other rules. So we do have some underutilized vehicles available.

The only for the ADA certified Dial-A-Ride, although recently vastly expanded, is still very limited in scope and the most expensive use of our transit money. The ADA certified can also request route deviations on the fixed route buses. Obviously, this slows the other passengers down and can inhibit developing a more thriving transit system.  Minimizing route deviations and DAR use through system design is the best alternative. The funds saved are better used for service that attracts more riders (and revenue).

Recent developments in our system are illustrative.  The service to River Pines was stopped due to negligible ridership, but some in River Pines and also Fiddletown would still benefit from a transit connection. The additional upcountry run has been successful because one can now run errands or make appointments in the Jackson/Sutter Creek county core without having to wait half a day for a return trip. Another situation, although seemingly unrelated, is the fact that the Ledger Dispatch finds it much cheaper to home deliver rather than mail. This supports the obvious that we have a surplus, certainly in terms of time, of transportation vehicles in the county along with unmet transit needs.  The success of the volunteer drivers program clearly points to this.

I am suggesting that we continue to build the trunk/backbone system. It is the best investment with the best return. Improvements in one area feed the entire system. No matter now many volunteer drivers or Dial-A-Rides we have, we still have a rural county with dispersed homes and the General Plan aside, most of us want it to remain this way. I can envision the Uber type technologies, the volunteer driver program and the bygone jitneys (peso cabs in some places) coming together into a workable bus stop to home system. After all, taxis at the railheads are as old as the railheads.

At each bus stop, or callable to your home, would be private individuals in their own vehicles. Over a short period of time it would become routine with the same passengers having the same drivers.  If a shuttle trip costs an affordable $2 someone working an hour a day could easily make about $2500 per year. This could be someone on their way to or from work or a retired person wanting added income. An enhanced system with this sort of passenger collection and distribution would make the proposed Grapevine route for those who shouldn’t drive as well as other services possible. While I don’t have the technology or the details, I can’t imagine that it can’t be figured out. If we did it here we would not only benefit, but be able to sell it to the world.

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett