Talk:Valley Metro Bus

Untitled
Forked this page from the Valley Metro main page. My long term goal is to approach the quality of Toronto Transit Commission's article Transparenthuman (talk) 06:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Valley Metro Bus vs Valley Metro RPTA
It seems like moving this page to Valley Metro RPTA is somewhat backwards. The "RPTA" is actually the entire system, including dial-a-ride, circulators and rail, not just the bus system.

We reflect the system name (Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority) in the main article for the whole Valley Metro system itself. Furthermore, very few people actually know the system as "Valley Metro RPTA" or even know that "RPTA" is part of the system name at all, as it hasn't been widely publicised, possibly ever, from what I can tell. InfiniteFifty (talk) 21:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Pinging, , and , as you may be interested in this (and may be better judges of how this should be handled) InfiniteFifty (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

This page needs to be re-titled "Valley Metro Bus". I would be fine with it staying separate from the main Valley Metro page. Valley Metro is organized in somewhat of an unusual fashion in relation to other U.S. mass transit systems in my understanding. Msr69er (talk) 23:23, 9 April 2016 (UTC) I agree that it should be moved back to Valley Metro Bus, since the RPTA is the entire system including Valley Metro Bus, Valley Metro Rail, Dial-A-Ride, and Valley Metro Vanpool. ANDROS1337 TALK 00:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Just to reiterate, I started this section as this page was previously "Valley Metro Bus" however it was moved / renamed this morning, and I don't feel that the changes made are correct. However I'm also unsure that I have the capabilities to actually revert the move / redirect, so if there's support for returning this to "Valley Metro Bus", I was hoping one of the other editors could possibly help out with that. InfiniteFifty (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I've moved this page back to Valley Metro Bus and reverted the page contents to reflect this.

I just feel very strongly that moving this page to "Valley Metro RPTA" is not correct. As Msr69er mentioned above, Valley Metro has a unique organizational structure when compared to many other transit systems. Additionally, Andros 1337 and I have both mentioned that it isn't so simple as saying the RPTA just does bus operations, it controls many things including Dial-A-Ride, Vanpool, Rail and administration of the system. InfiniteFifty (talk) 01:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * As the user who made the move, I will lend my opinion. First off, Valley Metro Bus as an entity does not exist.  There is no mention of an organization by that name anywhere, especially on Valley Metro's web site.  Second, Valley Metro as we know it today was formed by the merging of two organizations, Valley Metro Rail and the Regional Public Transportation Authority  (RPTA).  The two organizations are still governed by separate board of directors, yet the staff are organized under one CEO and the Valley Metro brand name.  Third, Valley Metro RPTA does not operate rail at all.  It only operates bus, dial a ride, etc.  Valley Metro Rail only operates light rail.  Lastly, Valley Metro now uses taxis to provide a significant amount of dial a ride, especially in the east valley.  Thus Valley Metro Bus does not even describe the services the organization provides.  I am basing all of these points off of Valley Metro's web site.  See here for use of Valley Metro RPTA and here for the history of the merger.  I am fine with whatever the consensus is, I just want to point out that Valley Metro Bus is not the formal name of any organization. Thanks,  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @  15:45, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * After rereading some of the comments above, I want to stress that RPTA does not operate light rail at all. Valley Metro Rail operates light rail.  Also, RPTA is not the entire system, as a few users mentioned.  Valley Metro is the brand name of the entire system, which is clearly stated on the Valley Metro's web site. Thanks,  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @  16:32, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi there! Thanks for giving us a bit more insight into the decision behind the original move, I really appreciate it. I'm going to try and address some of what you said, as best I can.


 * It is true that "Valley Metro Bus" does not exist as a registered entity, however it is the brand that is painted prominently on an increasing number of vehicles that operate throughout the system, and it is also the brand which is annunciated onboard both bus and light rail vehicles for announcements about service. Valley Metro themselves seem to have hinted towards this brand being used more, especially as they migrate fully from "Metro Light Rail" to "Valley Metro Rail" on the LR side of the system. I feel like this page needs to reflect what the general public actually see on the vehicles they're boarding.


 * Even if this wasn't the case, I would still feel that this page being "Valley Metro RPTA" would be a little off. Mostly because we only cover the bus side of the system on this page, with zero mention of dial-a-ride, vanpool, ridesharing, trip reduction or much of anything else they do. We do however mention dial-a-ride and some state capitol trip reduction on the Valley Metro page, albeit briefly. However we don't mention Vanpool or other services, which is something that I now recognise, and is something I can add. If anything, this page is simply a split from the main Valley Metro page, in much the same way that the pages for Metro Local, Metro Rapid and Metro Rail are splits from the main LACMTA page. We're attempting to offer more information on the bus side of the system, while the Valley Metro page is focused on the system more broadly, including organization and history.


 * Additionally, it's completely true that Valley Metro Rail is responsible for the actual operations of the light rail system, including maintaining contracts with the operators/unions and procuring assets and services from other companies to support the system. However they do share certain functions between the two, including information technology, customer support (call center and broader customer relations) and a percentage of planning and research work done on future extensions. They are technically one entity (and even say that) with two separate boards and a common CEO, however they do share functions between them. It could be argued that they don't make this overly clear though, including this text at the bottom of a recent press release...


 * "About Valley Metro: Valley Metro provides eco-friendly public transit options to residents of greater Phoenix and Maricopa County including the planning and operations of a regional bus system and the development and operations of 26 miles of light rail. [...] Two Boards of Directors set the policy direction for the agency with the intent of advancing the regional public transit system. [Press Release]"


 * The link you provided about the merger didn't seem to mention anything specifically about the merger, as it goes to 2005 and then mentions lottery funds, however they do mention in a "Fast Facts" release here that...


 * "In 2012, METRO and Valley Metro merged to become one regional transit agency and adopted the Valley Metro brand. The agency is responsible for planning, building and operating both the light rail and bus systems in the region. (seen on bottom of page 5/6 and top of 7/8)"


 * As for dial-a-ride, I'll very openly admit that I'm not as in touch with this side of the system as I would like, simply because I don't use it. I am aware that EVDAR (East Valley Dial-a-Ride) does sometimes use contracted taxis where the cost may be lower compared to using a traditional, fully ADA compliant DAR vehicle, as not all Dial-a-Ride trips require use of such vehicles. This is in addition to subsidized taxi trips for eligible residents, which are not part of the "traditional" DAR service. As per their documentation on the new paratransit plan, Total Transit operate around 75% of EVDAR service while the remaining 25% is operated by subcontracted third parties. It is still the case that administration and oversight of this program is the responsibility of Valley Metro, in cooperation with member cities, to ensure compliance with federal law.


 * I apologize for this being a fairly long response, however I just wanted to offer my thinking behind keeping these pages as they are. As you also said, I'm totally fine with whatever the broader consensus on this is, so long as we can continue to improve the quality of these pages to better reflect the system. Thanks! InfiniteFifty (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, I appreciate the time you took to provide a thorough comment. I guess I am confused as to the major purpose of this article.  In my mind, Valley Metro is about the overall brand and transit agency, Valley Metro Rail is about the legal organization that manages the rail system, and Valley Metro Bus is about the legal organization that manages the rubber-wheeled transit.  This is why I think the name of this article should reflect the actual name of the organization that manages the rubber-wheeled transit (such as 'Valley Metro RPTA' or 'RPTA').  I don't think having 'Valley Metro Dial-a-Ride', 'Valley Metro Circulators', 'Valley Metro Vanpool', etc articles would be a good direction to take, so it seems like one article covering all of this info would be beneficial.  Since VMR manages the rail side, RPTA manages the rubber-wheel side, and Valley Metro is over-arching brand and organizational name, it would seem to me that having Valley Metro Bus article renamed to Valley Metro RPTA and the text changed to more closely resemble the depth of the Valley Metro Rail article would provide a good organizational breakdown for the Wikipedia articles.  However, this course may require a greater expansion of this article, something I don't have time for :) As it stands now, it seems the consensus is to maintain the current title.  If any of the previous commenters have anything else to add, please do so.  If not, it would seem that this issue can be wrapped up :)  Thanks!  « Gonzo fan2007   (talk)  @  04:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)