Pittsburgh Regional Transit’s third public hearing Thursday on proposed massive service cuts drew concerns from three distinct groups: medical professionals and their patients, communities that rely on public transit, and people with physical disabilities.
Because there hasn’t been an increase in state subsidy funds for more than 10 years and emergency federal funding provided during the pandemic is running out, PRT and other transit agencies across the state say they are facing devastating service cuts without more state funding. The state Legislature has until June 30 to adopt a new budget, but it’s unclear whether it will increase the transit subsidy.
Without an increase, PRT is proposing a 35% cut in service, elimination of 41 bus routes, no service after 11 p.m., and a 25-cent fare increase to $3. If the agency can’t eliminate a deficit of more than $100 million, those changes would begin in February.
Dr. Elizabeth Piccione, president of UPMC Passavant Hospital in McCandless, told PRT board members and staff at Downtown’s David L. Lawrence Convention Center that the proposed changes would leave the hospital with no public transit. That would cause “immediate and severe” problems for staff and patients who use the facility, she said.
Lack of affordable transportation could leave patients with serious illnesses deciding between getting medical care or buying food, she said.
“That’s not a choice anyone should have to make,” she said. “Transit isn’t a convenience. It’s a lifeline.”
Dan Patel of Bloomfield, who formerly worked as a social worker at Allegheny General Hospital, said lack of transportation was “always one of the most persistent reasons” patients gave for not seeking service. Providing transit to medical care – as well as food and other necessities — should be “a foundational element … in a flourishing city,” he said.
“If I don’t have the Silver Line, I don’t have a way to get where I need to go,” said Richard Walter of Bethel Park, explaining he uses the light rail system three times a week to get to dialysis treatments. The proposed cuts would eliminate the Silver Line and rely on bus service in that area.
Public officials and community leaders from Oakland, Squirrel Hill, Etna, and the North Boros of Avalon, Bellevue, Ben Avon and Emsworth stressed how important transit is for businesses and residents in their neighborhoods.
Maria Cohn of the Squirrel Hill Coalition and Andrea Boykowycz of the Oakland Planning and Development Corp. said transit plays a key role in getting shoppers and workers to their respective communities. Etna Councilwoman Alice Gabriel said her community is a food desert, and 10% of residents don’t have their own vehicle, yet there will be a 63% cut in service.
Leanne McLaughlin, assistant borough manager in Avalon, said many residents in the North Boros use transit to get to work in Downtown Pittsburgh and elsewhere. Eliminating service there would be “devastating,” she said.
A series of vulnerable residents with physical problems said they are unable to drive and rely on transit for their connection with the rest of the world.
Amelie Collette, who is visually impaired and uses a guide dog, said she also would miss the Silver Line.
“I can’t get to work. I can’t see my friends,” without the Silver Line, she said. “These are all things that keep me going and allow me to thrive.”
Joan Uliceny said the Access paratransit service has been “making our lives possible” for her and her husband since she suffered a traumatic brain injury in 2005.
“It would be a traumatic loss for me to lose this privilege of using Access,” she said of the system, which is facing a large cut in its door-to-door service area and a fare increase.
Service cuts also would have a ripple effect. Matt Lohr, a ticket specialist for theaters at the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust, said many of his behind-the-scenes colleagues use transit to get to work.
“We all know the value of the cultural trust,” he said. “What would it be like if you went to a show and it was canceled because the people who run the lights couldn’t get to work?”
Others were more succinct. Francis Graham of East Pittsburgh, a retired faculty member at Penn State University, said cutting transit would be “like ripping a vital organ out of a body,” while Patti Murphy of Bethel Park told PRT “what you are proposing would be an embarrassment.”
During a break in testimony, PRT CEO Katharine Eagan Kelleman said she believes she and her transit colleagues have been well received by many legislators when they make their pitch for more transit funds. She is “cautiously optimistic” the Legislature will approve additional funding, but she stressed that the agency needs long-term, sustainable funding to move away from service reductions, not just a couple of years of additional money.
“It’s not just the dollar amount, but it’s how long the money lasts,” she said.
Ed covers transportation at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, but he's currently on strike. Email him at eblazina@unionprogress.com.