Getting from Hoboken to Secaucus or back has always been a problem – even during rush hour.
In mid-1990s, New Jersey Transit cut back their bus service, eliminating stops in downtown Secaucus and limiting the route of bus No. 85 to the Mall at Mill Creek.
Residents in Secaucus protested the move, but NJ Transit statistics would not justify continuing full service. While the No. 85 ran weekdays only and mostly only during the morning and evening rush hours, the service has not been profitable, even though it has local stops in parts of Jersey City, Union City, Secaucus and Hoboken.
As an alternative to eliminating the line altogether, NJ Transit chose to drop only the Plaza and North End connection because the riders didn’t justify the expenses to maintain those stops. Instead, the bus has been routed to the mall areas of town in hopes of increasing the ridership.
For Hudson County officials, the route was significant for people moving from Welfare to work since the mall areas provided a significant opportunity for jobs – not just in the stores, but in the nearly 20 hotels that Secaucus hosts as well as the business offices, convention center and restaurants. The bus also can provide a vital link to West Side Avenue in North Bergen, which boasts numerous corporations and many possible job opportunities.
The problem for many job-seekers, however, was the limited hours bus service ran. Many of the employment opportunities required workers at odd hours, beyond the rush hour schedules on which the bus normally ran. Cleaning staff for hotels often had to get to work later in the day and leave later in the evening than the bus provided for. Workers at local theaters had to come on weekends, which the bus did not run at all.
Last year, Hudson County came to an agreement with the state Department of Human Services in conjunction with its Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, then came to an agreement with New Jersey Transit to fund increased hours for the bus. Under this proposal, Hudson County pays $450,000 a year for the service to be run from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. and 7 to 10 p.m. on weekdays, and 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekends.
What bus service is this?
Most of the Hudson County Freeholders that met at the Dec. 10 caucus knew nothing about the service until the bill for last year was put before them in a resolution, raising questions as to why the county had operated the service for a year without telling any of the freeholders, and why the bill had come so late.
Several freeholders also raised the question as to why the county is subsidizing bus service when for the amount of money being allocated, the county might well be able to run its own service or give business to some of the many jitney operators doing business in Hudson County.
Carol Ann Wilson, director of the county’s Department of Health and Human Services, who had set up the program, said a clerical error over the summer had prevented the freeholders from seeing the bill sooner – although this quickly drew the wrath of Jersey City Freeholder Bill O’Dea, who said the bill would still have come before the freeholders months after the agreement was started, instead of being proposed before.
“Even under the best of circumstances, we would have seen this in May, five months after the program started,” he said. “We should have been apprised of this last year this time. What we should be looking at now is whether we intend to renew this program.”
O’Dea asked for statistics on how many people the program served, where they lived, where they worked and how much money they made.
Wilson said the program provided 9,836 rides per month (or about 300 per day) at the cost of $2.71 per ride. But O’Dea said the numbers did not tell him if these people were riding within the regular hours or in the extended hours, and did not account for the fares people paid to NJ Transit in addition to the bulk payment the county made.
“If it was 300 rides a day, that means about 150 people are being served,” he said. “Can’t we do this ourselves?”
Freeholder Maurice Fitzgibbons said the freeholders should take a look at a program instituted in Freehold, New Jersey, where bus services had been provided to allow workers to access distant employment opportunities.
Freeholder Chairman Sal Vega recalled a meeting with jitney drivers last year, which led to discussions about providing better service throughout the county, and he said the county needs to look at ways of redirecting their services to areas of the county where transportation is needed.
“Everyone wants the high-volume routes,” he said. “Then what happens, you have all these buses competing for riders on routes already well-served by NJ Transit, while other areas in the county are neglected.”
‘If it makes sense, we’ll pay’
Although County Administrator Laurie Cotter said the county owed NJ Transit this money since the service has already been provided, Vega said the freeholders would review the matter and vote to pay it based on the information it received.
“Time and time again previous administrations have come to us like this telling us the clock is running out and that we have to pay the bills,” Vega said. “If it makes sense for us to pay the bill, we will. But we won’t be a rubber stamp Board of Freeholders.”
At the same time Hudson County freeholders debated bus service for job-seekers in Hudson County, a Passaic County freeholders’ forum outlined some of the same issues. Representatives from businesses and government gathered to talk about the issue of getting people to work. Communications between employers and job seekers was vital, the forum concluded: How do companies let people know there are jobs to be had?
But even more importantly, the forum concluded that jobs are not matched up to modes of transportation, leaving officials to ponder how to best provide transportation during off peak-hours.
Transportation is often an insurmountable obstacle to for people getting off Welfare, many of whom do not own their own cars.
O’Dea, in addressing the issue before the Hudson County Freeholders, said the county should not be providing a permanent incentive to any transportation body. He said by providing an initial outlay for transportation, the county gives workers a chance to get to a job, get revenue or opportunity to buy a car or establish a car pool.
Tell somebody about it
Freeholder Barry Dugan, who represents Bayonne, also questioned the limited geographical area serviced, noting that sections of Jersey City and Bayonne also needed transportation for residents seeking jobs. Dugan said that numerous constituents throughout the county work in remote areas and that this program does not help them.
Freeholder Bill Braker, however, said he had confidence in Wilson, even though the downtown section of Jersey City he represents doesn’t get a direct benefit from the program.
Freeholder Brian Stack, who also serves as mayor to Union City, said he knew nothing of the program, even though it was designed to benefit people in his district.
“I’ve been deeply involved with Welfare to work in my town and I knew nothing about this,” he said, and along with Dugan and other freeholders, asked for a better accounting of services provided in the county.
Regarding the fact that some people didn’t know the services the city provides, Fitzgibbons said, “The ‘green book’ that Hudson County issues is pitiful. Many of the phone numbers in it are wrong and some of the people listed in it are dead. I would like to see something that actually tells us and the county what services we provide.”