Last week, both Maryland Transportation Secretary Beverly Swaim-Staley and Maryland Transit Administration chief Ralign T. Wells owned up to the fact that communication with riders is the agency's No. 1 weakness.
It's good that these officials, who seem genuinely concerned about providing good service, recognize the problem. But it might be even worse than they think.
Consider the case of Melissa Schober of Baltimore, who wrote a well-reasoned and well-informed e-mail to Wells after a particularly bad commute June 22 — a night of troubles that was overshadowed by the even worse problems the night before. Schober's June 25 e-mail and Wells' reply, summarized below, provide a vivid picture of the brain death that affects parts of the MTA. Schober wrote:
Tuesday evening [June 22] I was subject to one of the worst commutes I've ever experienced. I boarded the 4:15PMWAS departure train to Baltimore Penn Station. A few minutes after pulling away from the platform, the train experienced partial engine failure. We reversed into the station — a process that took more than 30 minutes — and were shuffled onto another train.
Shortly after boarding the replacement train, Union Station lost catenary power. Knowing that diesel locomotives suffer from fewer power issues, I left the 4:15PM replacement train and walked over to the 5:20PM train. The train was dangerously overcrowded with aisles impassable, people sitting on stairs, and riding in the vestibules. The scheduled departure time came and went with no announcement. Finally, at 5:45PM, the train departed. However, an announcement informed us that yet another train had failed ahead and we would have to return to the station to be re-routed. Fifteen minutes passed and we began to move forward, with no further explanation.
We moved at reduced speed until just before the BWI Airport station where we were delayed another 20 minutes as an Acela moved past. I finally de-trained at Penn Station at 7:16PM, more than one hour after my scheduled arrival and more than three hours after boarding, with minimal air conditioning for the duration of the trip.
If service is so unsatisfactory with Amtrak, will you commit to exploring new operators, as the Virginia Railway Express has done? I know that the Penn Line is under contract through 2013; will you (offer) riders a chance to comment on contract negotiations when they open? What sort of contract conditions will you impose with regard to passenger safety and comfort during time of mechanical failure?
Here's the abridged response Schober received over Wells' signature last week:
Thank you for sharing your frustration with me regarding the MARC Train 538 incident on June 21. As you know, the train was stopped without air conditioning, and it was more than two hours before all the passengers were transferred to other MARC trains. The circumstance was unacceptable to Governor Martin O'Malley and me, and I apologize for the inconvenience and discomfort you experienced.
Although the reasons for the failure of the locomotive are still under investigation, what concerns us most is the way the subsequent delay was handled. The service staff did not take adequate measures to improve the comfort and safety of passengers and establish regular communication.
So do you see what's a little bit off with the reply? It was certainly timely, but it had nothing whatsoever to do with the problem Schober was reporting. It didn't address the serious issue Schober raised about the Amtrak contract. As she told Wells in a subsequent e-mail, the reply was "essentially a form letter that does NOT address any of the specific concerns I wrote you about."
She's right on the money. Schober's implied optimism that replacing Amtrak as the MARC operator would produce better results might be questionable — so far a switch hasn't worked well for Virginia — but she raised important questions. They deserved a thoughtful reply from an official high enough up the food chain to understand the issues. Instead, it appears some low-level functionary who barely bothered to read the letter threw it into a pile with all the complaints about the "hell train."
There is nothing wrong with a well-composed form letter when an organization is dealing with dozens of complaints about the same thing. But the form letter had better be germane to the original complaint.
Wells has so far shown himself to be an enthusiastic, engaging administrator, but he had yet to show the public he knows when to kick butt. This time he ought to do just that — and let the world know it's been kicked.
After the e-mails were posted on the Getting There blog on Friday, Wells contacted Schober directly by phone. He also posted a message on the blog affirming that he does know how to kick butt (and presumably has, though he didn't specify how) and that he expects "that an error such as this will not happen again."
Schober wrote that she appreciated the call but would rather see the communications issues fixed without having to send a copy to a journalist to get a response.
If you write the MTA, feel free to send a copy this way. That might just keep folks on their toes.