1993•Unpublished venueRequires access

COMPETITIVE CONTRACTING OF TRANSIT SERVICES

Jean Love, Wendell H. Cox

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the United States, transit operating costs per vehicle mile increased 418 percent from 1970 to 1990�twice the rate of inflation and two-and-a-half times the cost of similar service in the private bus industry. Two-thirds of transit costs are paid by federal, state, and, predominantly, local subsidies. The majority of the public funding has supported low and declining transit productivity and high transit wages and benefits. Transit's problem is not funding. Nearly ten percent of regular transit bus service is competitively contracted in the United States. Savings range from 30 percent to 60 percent, and independent studies report that the safety, quality, and reliability of competitively contracted service equals or exceeds that of the public sector. Political, bureaucratic, and perceptual barriers have prevented competitive contracting of transit in many areas. And competitive contracting is slowed by legal barriers such as Section 13(c) of the federal transit act. Under competitive contracting, the public authority retains the service franchise (ownership) and controls the service. The public authority specifies route alignments, service frequencies, fares, schedules, and any other requirements deemed to be in the public interest. Private transportation companies respond to requests for proposals from public authorities to provide specific services for a limited period of time (typically no more than five years). Winning cost proposals, final contracts, and requests for proposals are available to the public. In some cases, the public authority leases the vehicles (buses, etc.) to the successful contractor; in other cases the contractors supply their own vehicles.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the United States, transit operating costs per vehicle mile increased 418 percent from 1970 to 1990�twice the rate of inflation and two-and-a-half times the cost of similar service in the private bus industry. Two-thirds of transit costs are paid by federal, state, and, predominantly, local subsidies. The majority of the public funding has supported low and declining transit productivity and high transit wages and benefits. Transit's problem is not funding. Nearly ten percent of regular transit bus service is competitively contracted in the United States. Savings range from 30 percent to 60 percent, and independent studies report that the safety, quality, and reliability of competitively contracted service equals or exceeds that of the public sector. Political, bureaucratic, and perceptual barriers have prevented competitive contracting of transit in many areas. And competitive contracting is slowed by legal barriers such as Section 13(c) of the federal transit act. Under competitive contracting, the public authority retains the service franchise (ownership) and controls the service. The public authority specifies route alignments, service frequencies, fares, schedules, and any other requirements deemed to be in the public interest. Private transportation companies respond to requests for proposals from public authorities to provide specific services for a limited period of time (typically no more than five years). Winning cost proposals, final contracts, and requests for proposals are available to the public. In some cases, the public authority leases the vehicles (buses, etc.) to the successful contractor; in other cases the contractors supply their own vehicles.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the United States, transit operating costs per vehicle mile increased 418 percent from 1970 to 1990�twice the rate of inflation and two-and-a-half times the cost of similar service in the private bus industry. Two-thirds of transit costs are paid by federal, state, and, predominantly, local subsidies. The majority of the public funding has supported low and declining transit productivity and high transit wages and benefits. Transit's problem is not funding. Nearly ten percent of regular transit bus service is competitively contracted in the United States. Savings range from 30 percent to 60 percent, and independent studies report that the safety, quality, and reliability of competitively contracted service equals or exceeds that of the public sector. Political, bureaucratic, and perceptual barriers have prevented competitive contracting of transit in many areas. And competitive contracting is slowed by legal barriers such as Section 13(c) of the federal transit act. Under competitive contracting, the public authority retains the service franchise (ownership) and controls the service. The public authority specifies route alignments, service frequencies, fares, schedules, and any other requirements deemed to be in the public interest. Private transportation companies respond to requests for proposals from public authorities to provide specific services for a limited period of time (typically no more than five years). Winning cost proposals, final contracts, and requests for proposals are available to the public. In some cases, the public authority leases the vehicles (buses, etc.) to the successful contractor; in other cases the contractors supply their own vehicles.

Key concepts: Public transport, Business, Subsidy, Finance, Service (business), Transit (satellite), Call for bids, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
COMPETITIVE CONTRACTING OF TRANSIT SERVICES — Research Paper | ScholarLens