|
The agency is "not moving the goal posts," says former Tri-Met planner Jim Howell, "it's eliminating the goal posts." For instance, goal No. 2, ridership, contains no hard data on the last five years' performance, nor any projections. The report notes that "Tri-Met ridership grew almost three times as fast as the region's population," but gives no context. How fast was ridership projected to grow? Did Tri-Met meet targets? Howell, a transit activist, says that in 1993 the goal was to grow to from 195,000 to 325,000 riders per day in five years; today's average ridership is 227,000 per day--barely 70 percent of the goal. Other "goals" listed in the report include categories such as customer service, human resources and land use, none of which are presented in a way that can be easily measured. G.B Arrington, who wrote the Tri-Met draft, agrees that the agency should be held accountable. The final draft will include year-by-year projections, Arrington says, but won't be held up as benchmarks. Tri-Met officials believe simple numerical goals don't always tell the true story, he explains. Although the agency fell far short of its 1998 goal of 325,000 riders, for example, ridership did increase faster than car usage during the five-year period. We agree that numbers can be deceiving. But, as Howell says, the current version of the plan seems to be written so the agency will have nothing to be accountable for. |
|
