Greenbelt cooperator. (Greenbelt, Md.) 1937-1954, 1940-04-04
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT

This report will complete one important phase
Of this Committees work, namely, the Investigation
and development Of alternate means of Transports
ton, the need for which has become progressively
apparent since last April.
Your Committee has held that the whole Of the
metropolitan area, theoretically, could best be
served by a single transportation system. This is
generally recognized, and metropolitan system is
normally accorded monopoly position. It's operation
is vital to community welfare and regulatory bodies
are created to protect and advance the public vel
fare.
It is very doubtful that the basic conflict
between private ownership and public interest
ever be adjudicated satisfactorily. In any it
is clear that the Capital Transit operation is
cerned with the public interest only so far it
comedies with direct, immediate excessive pro-
fits. It is equally certain that Commission
forcenent of the accepted theory Of "fatr return
operation in the best public interest" will, in
this case, be a slow process.
The present public service is felt to be in
adequate to be detrimental to the community and
its development. The organization of an alternate
service the only practical solution. Mr..
Ketcham has presented report covering the find
ings of the Comm ttee the "mlni cipal" plan.
It is not anticipated that such plan would con-
stitute a competitive service. Membership in the
organization would be required in order to obtain
service. Essential elements of this plan may be
stated briefly follows. Deficiencies Of pr1-
vate car transportation, as we'll as public trans
portation, have been given consideration.
l. Service. The vehicle proposed would be Of
twelve passenger capacity in order to accommodate
groups of members with respect to hours and places
Of employment and to insure minimum traveltime.
F1eNo111ty would De PROVIDED oy 1nSta llat1on or
drop seats for emergency passengers.
z. Economy. The cost of operation would be ade-
quately covered by revenues of $l.75 per week per
passenger. saving than sufficient to bal
ance the proporti onate1y higher operation cost Of
the small unit would be attained through volunteer
driving.
3. Practicability. Initially, only rush hour er-
vice is proposed, thus limited to regular
patronage and dependable No Immediate heavy
capital investment would be necessary-one vehicle
only would be required to initiate the operation
and additional vehicles would be purchased only
full passenger load had been subscribed MEMBERS
/. Safety. Safe transportation through regular
maintenance and safety provisions.
5. Insurance. In amounts to conform with I.C.C.
regulations for this capacity vehicle and charac-
ter of service.
6. A membership fee of $500 would adequately
provide for organizational expense.
7. Purchase of equi lment would be by capital
loan, to be repaid from operation revenues.
8. The organi rational form would be non-profit
corporation chartered under Maryland Laws. The
corporation form would eliminate member risk.
9. Legality. Qualified attorneys have advised
that the competitive nature of the operation
removes it from the jurisdict ion of the Maryland
and District Comm ssi>.s The interstate Commerce
Commission may have jurisdiction but such regulation
would probably be advantageous.