Minneapolis spokesman., 1962-07-06

transportation is that 1T was the opinion Of the
Twin City Road Transit personnel that the demand
will continue to lie the arterial Streets not on
the freeways." We hope that the opinion of TCTR
will not weigh too heavily in major decisions of this
kind because there is little in the record to indicate
that TCRT is interested in doing the job that is
needed in our burgeoning metropolitan area. Its
imaginative energies appear to have been concen-
trated in other directions in the past many years.
In apoogizing for TCRT the highway depart
ment says that reduced service and increasing fares
are symptoms rather than causes Of decreasing use
of transit. We do not know whether this Is true and
we do not believe the highway experts know, either
We do suspect that more imagination and enterprise
in planning and expeditng service fullest use Of
the freeways for example) and more single-minded
devotion to the job Of mass transportation might
well change the picture here Surely, the applica-
ton of TCRT resources to this job which were in
recent years feloniously diverted into pockets Of
characters in prison or facing it, would have
resulted in more favorable mass transportation
picture than we have today 1t is interesting that
on the need for transportation the highway
statement argues both sides Of the question and
seems to conclude that it is here to stay Witness
this monumental admission:
Thus there can be no doubt that mass transit
public utility function and that its effective
continuation is in the public interest"! (Exclama-
ton points are ours.)
MID Tells Us What We Cun Have
The final question dealt with in the highway
department statement is the question of a transit
authority for the metropolitan In editorial
pointed out that the present pattern Of supervi
sion by the Railroad and Warehouse Commission
has been for a number of reasons, costly failure
eliminating in the recent scandals in the Twin City
Rapid Transit Company. We suggested metropol-
tan authority with powers similar to the Chicago
Transit Authority to regulate all public transport
alton in the area, to order service where needed,
and to provide service where in its Judgment this
is the best solution. Surely, in growing metropol-
tan where the primary carrier is discontnuing
rather than adding lines, such authority is in
order. We believe the decision this, however, is
up to the legislature, not the highway department
and that the highway department exceeds its
powers and responsibilities in seeking to lay down
the limits for such authority to define its
functions or dictate its philosophy
Certainly in raising the objection that "ade-
quate service" provided by a public agency might
entail subsidy, the highway department is har-
ously out Of line The department has been spend
ing subsidy funds in the millions for years. some
times efficiently sometimes in ways that disturb
us. But on the whole the result has been good.
Transportation the easy movement of people and
goods from place to place, is great boon to man.
kind, and the highways have played a big part in
this. We recognize their Importance by subsidizing
them to the tune of millions of dollars each year.
The only point that we have been making in
this and foregoing editorials is that we want the
people who administer these millions to do so in
the public interest and with due regard for sound
planning procedures It would be unfortunate If
crucial decisions to continue to be taken in
the present case by experts specialists and power
bureaucrats, without public hearings and public
debate.
The Papa-knows-best approach never had very
much to commend It, But in this case Papa doesn't
seem to know. He doesn't have very plausible
line of argument to support him.