Pierce doesn't have any dumbass geographic "service equity" requirements, right?

Just slash the service in the areas that voted against it to zero.

According to that map you did, Pierce County, which may vote Blue, is a Red Welfare County in terms of revenues received and revenues spent.

Kill the funding for the roads there and let them grok what THAT means.

I bow to the higher wisdom of d.p. @1 and say that's a better idea than mine.

Great idea @1. I would only add that, if possible, Pierce Transit review car-ownership demographics as well, and cut service based on three factors: bus ridership, car ownership & support for Prop 1.

For example: areas with a high ridership, low car ownership and highest support for the Prop should be be last to experience significant service cuts.

I've deliberately left out income as a factor, since the first thing the naysayers would likely start kvetching about would be that low income people don't support the service sufficiently through the existing tax structure - even though they probably pay more directly for service usage - and so why should THEY get a handout from everybody who doesn't want to support more service? The formula above is based primarily on usage, need (car owners at least have an alternate option available to them which many of the working poor don't), and support.

Yes, but then COMTE, you'd drop service in areas that a. pay more than they receive, b. voted against this, but c. have cars AND use transit.

An example would be Wallingford or Fremont or Greenwood which use transit or bikes to commute, but everyone pretty much owns a car.

I thought this was a good measure and I voted for it. I'm disappointed the red-sign people got their way.

This anti-tax bullshit has to stop. The problem is not waste or fraud or misuse, it's lack of revenue.

let's hope the opponents are forced to sit behind a boatload of new traffic & dying vehicles that barely run because the owner had to purchase a $500 P.O.S. car to replace their lack of public tranist options

d.p. @1: Just slash the service in the areas that voted against it to zero.

I hear ya. I sympathize.

I'd take a different, less political strategy if I were in charge of Pierce Transit. If you've got to cut service by 35%, then your last priority should be route preservation. Instead focus the remaining service on fewer routes--the most popular routes--and make them just as frequent and reliable as they ever were. The remaining, high-performing routes can serve as a model for how effective bus service can be when the day comes that residents can consider expanding it again.

Now, my apolitical approach probably produces the same result as "Just slash the service in the areas that voted against it to zero."

The political downside of that outcome, regardless of how it's motivated, is that voters in those areas will be even less inclined to vote for transit the next time around. Which is fine. The answer is that if you concentrate great service in fewer areas then those no voters get offset by the constituencies that take root in the transit corridors.

Remember, if you're stuck in traffic and your commute seems to be longer in Pierce County, you have only yourselves to blame.

Popular routes in dense areas connected to other transit services (e.g. rail like ST commuter Sounder) should be maintained.

Rural routes ... slashed to the bone. Or dropped.

Ones that run real real slow cause the highway is congested and there is a rail alternative - dropped. Then watch those people stew in traffic.

@8 you never learn, do you ...

When unskilled driver positions are compensated at $22 to $27 per hour (per TNT article) and their union demands pay raises that were approved before the economic downturn, the voters had no option but to reject Prop1. Bring their pay and benefits in-line with private sector jobs and they would receive more sympathy.

A couple other thoughts.

Isn't a special election in February absolutely the worst opportunity to bring a transit measure to the ballot? I've got to think they'd have a great chance of passing a similar measure in November 2012.

And I can't help noticing the one opponent's use of the word "generous." There's all kinds of "just don't get it" wrapped up in that one word. If I were running the no campaign, I'd use that word too, but I bet that fellow sincerely just doesn't get it. Tell me, if you're an affluent, educated person, which place would you rather live in?
A. A place where the prevailing view is that transit is a charitable service provided to the less fortunate.
B. A place where the prevailing view is that transit is one of the key cogs in said place's economic engine.

Recipients of The military welfare state, who hold sway down there, don't need transit. Uncle Sam provides everything for them. So why should they vote for something that's going to raise their taxes?

We hear it after each and every disaster, "Americans are a tough resilient people." So too with this mini transportation one. And when they figure it all out they will thank Jesus and their faith for keeping them strong.

@13: November 2012? What was Pierce Transit supposed to do until then, put the buses on their Visa card?

Yes, Radman, bus drivers are overpaid -- who said that bus drivers should be middle-class? Be able to maybe buy a house someday, or send their kids to college?

Nope, those people don't deserve anything over $15/hr. I'm sure there are many people out there who would be happy to drive buses around all day for that amount.

I was planning to head to Tacoma one of these weekends for some record shopping (hmmm, 6th Ave.), but if there aren't any buses to take me there, what's the point?

Catalina V-D @14 is spot on: the payroll-patriot Military welfare moms are against everything except what benefits them. Which is permanent war and big fucking pickup trucks. Why do they hate America?

When i first met Mr Vel-DuRay he had a house in an odious subdivision by Spanaway. It was all military and Seattle/Tacoma cops. They were all 9-11ey to the max, and conservative (although I have to say they were fine with us) and they were sluts: When a spouse was deployed, they started sleeping with other spouses of deployed troops. It was fascinating. I used to sit on the porch at night with the light off and observe the comings and goings.

Needless to say, I was not going to spend my life in Sodom-meets-Hooterville, so we dumped that property in favor of Chez Vel-DuRay. I still see one of the cops from time to time. Almost all of those couples are divorced now, and about half the houses are in foreclosure.

Yeah, let's pay the people responsible for the direct personal safety of hundreds of people per hour minimum wage, Radman. Sheer stupidity. School bus drivers too--they should get straight minimum wage.

sarah68 @16: @13: November 2012? What was Pierce Transit supposed to do until then, put the buses on their Visa card?

Forgive the ambiguity. I wasn't saying it was a mistake to go to the ballot when they did. I'm saying they'll stand a much better chance if they go back to the ballot in Nov. '12.

The reality is, most of the poor people this affects the most, probably didn't even VOTE in the election.

I've stopped feeling sorry for my fellow 'po folks since they're either too lazy to vote in things that benefit them, or too dumb to vote FOR the same.

There's ALWAYS more poor people than rich people, yet they refuse to vote for ANY new taxes, even taxes that target the "rich" because they MIGHT be rich SOME day.

Of course, the poor will be the go to ones for quotes on the evening news, whining about "They can't cut our services!!!"

Is this Einman's fault?