Features, Transit| Published on June 11, 2012 1:00 pm

Curtis Stitt Discusses the Future of Public Transit in Columbus

By: Walker


In January of 2012, Curtis Stitt was named the new CEO at the Central Ohio Transit Authority. After six months on the job, we had the opportunity to sit down and discuss the current state of public transit services in Columbus, and what Stitt has in mind for the future of the region.

Walker Evans: First things first, can you tell us a bit about your background at COTA?

Curtis Stitt: I started at COTA on January 11, 1999. My first day at COTA was also Governor Bob Taft’s first Monday in office… I think he had been sworn in over that weekend. I started as Legislative Counsel and I handled all of the governmental affairs related matters for COTA. I worked in the legal division for a number of years. In 2004 I was moved to the Business Development Division, which housed all of the external communications operations, so it made sense for a governmental affairs person to be in that position. Then when Bill Lhota came on, he thought the governmental affairs person should report directly to him. So I moved from one building to another, and then back.

On February 10, 2005, I began in a new role as General Counsel, on an interim basis. About four or five weeks after that, it became a permanent basis. I was General Counsel until March 4, 2011 at which time I became COO. And you know the rest of the story… on February 1st, I became CEO.

WE: I’ve heard people make references to Bill Lhota as the person brought in at a time COTA needed to be turned around. He ‘righted the ship’ so to speak. Do you see your vision for COTA as continuing with some of the policies that he put into place, or do you have a new direction in mind?

CS: Bill’s philosophy for COTA was that ‘we should pursue excellence in everything that we do.’ Some folks around here will laugh, but understand through some of the things he did. He would go out on the weekends, ride his motorcycle, or drive around in his car, and he’d stop and take pictures of COTA facilities and bus shelters. There is a famous, if not infamous, photograph that he took of a bus shelter. Not the whole shelter, just the bottom part of the leg of the shelter where there’s a flange parallel to the ground and the bolt that secured the shelter at that leg was not driven perpendicular to the ground. It was slanted. And he takes this picture, among others that weekend, and he brings it back on Monday morning to the leadership team and he says, ‘This reflects COTA’s image in our community.’

It was just a little thing. But, you’ve got to pay attention to the details if you want to achieve excellence. Certainly, that approach to things has got to continue. If we lose sight of that, we might find ourselves in a position where we spiral down and, worst case scenario, we’ll be back in 2006 when we hit rock bottom. But we’ve got to continue to pay attention to the details. In 2004, when Bill came in, we had two more years of decline. In trying to get the budget balanced, we had to cut more service and we had to lay off more employees. In 2005, we did an administrative reorganization and non-represented employees’ ranks were reorganized. We had incumbents that had to reapply for their current positions, and some of them didn’t get their current position. There were some very hard decisions that had to be made in 2004-2006 to get the budget balanced. And then there was a lot of hard work that took us from 2006 through 2011 and helped COTA to make a come-back, if you will.

We’ve got to continue that level of work. If we don’t, again, we’ll start slipping backwards. So, yes, some of the things have got to continue. They’re basic things, whether we were in a point of decline or not, those same principles, excellence, attention to detail, and focus on the hard work and hard decisions that need to be made to keep the organization moving in the right direction. That’s got to continue, and it will.

We’ve also got to keep our commitment to the community: to grow COTA’s service, and improve COTA’s service. We’ve been doing that, and that’s going to continue. Some people think that if you say you’re going to continue things, that just means business as usual and COTA isn’t going to get any better. But COTA has been getting better over the years, and we project that it will continue to get better.

We’re going to continue to add somewhere between 30,000-60,000 hours of service each year, through 2016, at which point we will have reached a level where we will have to level off our service, because in order to continue to increase the service levels, we’ll have to increase the base on our sales tax level. We now have a .5% sales tax comprised of two separate taxes. One is permanent for a .25%, one is for ten years at .25% and that expires in 2016. So in 2016, we’ll have maximized our capacity by adding service.

What we’ve got to do at that point, is to find ways we can operate more efficiently and convert those cost savings to more service on the street.

WE: Is that sales tax a city-wide or county-wide tax?

CS: COTA is a political subdivision of the state of Ohio and as such, our board has its own authority to levy a sales tax. Once the Board levies the tax, the next step is to put that tax on the ballot for approval. The county, I think, can levy a sales tax up to a .5%, without approval of the voters. Anything more than that, they have to get approval of the voters.

WE: But what is the boundary area of where that tax is collected?

CS: It is defined by all of Franklin County, and also parts of Union, Delaware, Licking, and Fairfield counties where the cities in Franklin County have extended their boundaries into those counties. For example, Westerville has extended into Delaware County. Columbus has extended into Delaware County, and I think a tiny bit into Fairfield County. Dublin is in Union County and Delaware County. Reynoldsburg has some area in Licking County. Our boundaries, even though they started within Franklin County, grow outside of Franklin County as the cities that are part of COTA’s Charter expand outside of Franklin County.

WE: Gotcha. One thing that Bill Lhota said a few times that stuck with me is that bus riders are divided into two categories: riders of necessity and riders of choice. Riders of necessity being people with limited mobility options. And riders of choice being the people who have cars or bikes, but they choose to ride the bus for other specific reasons. I got the impression that under his leadership, there was a higher emphasis placed on providing services for riders of necessity, and less focus on implementing new changes that would attract riders of choice. For example, many riders of choice would potentially like to swipe a debit card to ride the bus. Which would be a nice upgrade, but the riders of necessity who are already riding probably aren’t going to use that as much. The same applies to smart phone applications or other technological upgrades.

CS: I think that has some accuracy. I don’t agree completely, because we do have both those categories of riders right now, and the ones who like the technology updates will use them. Others that don’t like it -whichever group they’re in- might not like to use it. It may be a difficult transition for them if they’re just not technologically savvy, or just aren’t interested in it. We’ve got to serve both of those groups. I think you can’t neglect one or move to far or get too focused on one group, because then you lose your focus on the other.

Certainly, the riders who need COTA are there. That’s just a fact of life. They need COTA, so they use COTA, and we have got to provide excellent service for them. For the riders who need COTA, we need to make sure that there’s frequency, there are routes that span the day long enough to get people to where they need to go, at the times that they need to get there. Especially third shift workers. That’s a tough one for us because we don’t operate 24 hours a day. Even some second shift workers can get to work on COTA, but can’t get home on COTA. So we’ve got to do more in that regard.

But we’ve also got to recognize that if we’re going to continue to increase ridership, we’ve got to look where the new markets are. Who isn’t riding, and why aren’t they riding, and try to attract those folks as well.

WE: There’s a growing demand for new transit routes that reach out into to suburban neighborhoods and have destinations at suburban office parks and job centers. Is COTA’s role to respond to how suburban development patterns change over time, or to be more of a tool used enhance the livability of inner-city neighborhoods that are already dense and urban by design, and therefore easier to serve by transit?

CS: The way you asked that question – ‘responding to development’- that’s one of the issues that we grapple with. Oftentimes, developers, especially in the outlying suburban areas, don’t focus on the public transit needs of their development. They build something new and they configure in a way that isn’t conducive to public transit. We then often find that the developers come back to us and say, ‘we need employees to get to our new development and we can’t get them there.’ I think the big thing that we need to focus on as a community, is how do we look at our development regulations and incorporate some required public transit considerations so that when development is occurring, the accommodation of public transit has to be considered.

Often, we say, ‘you’ve got to have X number of parking spaces if you’re going to development of this type.’ Well, why don’t we allow fewer parking spaces if developers can provide certain transit amenities and make the development transit friendly? There is little of that in our local municipalities’ development regulations. Our planning department has reached out to, and continues to reach out to, the City of Columbus, Franklin County, and all of the suburban municipalities, trying to get them to incorporate and to work with them directly. They know what development is going to be occurring in their cities and we work with them, even though there aren’t regulations that require them to do so.

And how do we deal with it in the older communities? We continue to serve them. Sometimes the decline in population leaves behind the people who are more likely transit dependent. People who can afford to move elsewhere do, and oftentimes it’s people who are committed to the neighborhoods regardless of their means and the people who just don’t have a choice, just like the choice riders and the riders of necessity. We’ve got people who remain in neighborhoods by choice and by necessity. We still want to serve all of those people and continue to serve them.

WE: Another big trend right now is the changes emerging through several generational demographics. The aging baby boomers are wanting to downsize and are changing their needs, and also the Millennial generation are leaning toward living in smaller spaces, and using more public transportation. How do you see COTA serving both of those generations?

CS: On the younger end of the spectrum… in Columbus we talk about our greatest resource being our young people. We do find that young people are more likely to use transit. They want to use public transit because of the types of places that you’ve just described where they want to live, and because they don’t want to have to have a car. They want to be relatively close to the things they like to do, but sometimes you need transportation to get there because they’re not always in close walking distance. Public transit connects those neighborhoods and gets them to those venues around town. Those are the folks that I mentioned earlier — they are technologically savvy, and they want to be able to rely on public transit by using their smartphones. They want to be able to go to the bus stop and see bus information in real time — which we’re working on this year and hopefully there will be some things out on the streets later this year. Those are the riders of choice that are part of our target market.

The other demographic you described, the people who moved out to the suburbs for a more kid-friendly environment…

WE: …right. But that demographic is reaching a point in their lives where their kids are grown and moved out, and now they want similar amenities to what their younger counterparts want.

CS: If they’re moving into those neighborhoods, just as you alluded to with your question about development, then we’ve got to understand the demographics and the housing patterns and where people are migrating to and we’ve got to plan to serve those communities. In our long-range plan, we look at those kinds of things. How many more people will be moving Downtown and what should our operation look like Downtown? How do we connect these urban neighborhoods that have become very attractive to people in these demographic groups? Those are the kind of things that we have to be planning for. Not just in how we are going to change service in four months, but how are we going to change service forty months from now.

CLICK HERE to continue the interview on Page 2.

25 Comments

  • I know rail is talked about a lot here, but I really disagree with his statement that Columbus couldn’t support it on its own. Transportation should be comprehensive and regional, but rail is supported and successful in many cities, even those smaller and less dense than Columbus.

    I also don’t like that BRT is not really the focus I thought it was. Not that the BRT proposals have been particularly forward thinking, but it seemed to be more of a definitive than it sounds like here.

  • I don’t know, I tend to agree with his assessment that we first need to develop a comprehensive plan for transit in Columbus. Every rail/streetcar proposal that has come out in the last few years has been one piece of a mysterious larger transit puzzle. I think if we developed a long term light rail plan, with incremental phased construction, we’d be much better off than trying to develop one or two light rail lines without thinking about a comprehensive transit goal.

  • is a rail system really that hard to plan in columbus? spoke to the major burbs surrounding columbus (dublin, hillard, new albany, grove port, etc), a line that runs close to or under high street, a loop around downtown, outer loop connecting the burbs. granted, that’s just back of the napkin planning, but at least it’s a start. i keep reading we need a plan for rail, what’s the hold up in creating one?

  • “i keep reading we need a plan for rail, what’s the hold up in creating one?”

    Good question. Your guess is as good as anyone’s at this point.

  • I think COTA should run articulated buses on High St. I know they were canceled to purchase hybrid buses instead, but it seems the ridership is there.

  • I give Mr. Curtis one year at the helm. His ego will be his downfall. He spent the last year literally learning the business. Takes a lot more than one year following Bill Lhota around to learn a business. Don’t expect much from COTA during his term in office.

  • Might be worthwhile to ask why rail matters in the first place. The answer might have something to do with relationships among humans, and between humans and the rest of the ecosphere.

    Suggest if we focus on those core issues, we can do our best with what we have, where we’re at, instead of stressing out about why Columbus isn’t like some other cities or why the US isn’t more like Western Europe when it comes to rail.

  • Isn’t it Mr. Stitt’s job to develop a comprehensive plan for transit in Columbus? Didn’t COTA develop a comprehensive plan when they put forth the last ballot initiative for rail in 1999?

    What I see in COTA’s current long term transit plan seems to amount to not much more than tinkering with the edges, when perhaps they need to rethink the entire system.

  • To echo the concerns about rail, my follow up question to his nonanswer answer would be: “as a leader of a major transit agency in Ohio, what are you doing to communicate the vision and foster this coordination? Isn’t that a primary responsibility of yours?” What it tells me is that it’s really not important to Mr. Stitt. I’m a huge fan of yours, Walker, but I wouldn’t have let him off that easily.

    Kudos for bringing up the riders of necessity and riders of choice dynamic, and the need of serving both. Ditto for bringing up suburban development patterns. But again, his response – that COTA “grapples” with that issue indicates that he views COTA reacting to, rather than influencing, development.

    COTA is a key example of CMH’s refusal to aim itself towards a world class city. Our motto may as well be: “Columbus: It’s Good Enough”.

  • Light Rail, Light Rail, Light Rail… Get’r done

  • @ viciouscircle: By what criteria would you define being a world class city ?

    Suggest the definition involves how well human needs are met—clean air, clean water, food, public safety, opportunities for creative expression, and so on.

  • @ TomOver:
    Providing citizens real choices for efficient, effective mobility in an environmentally sound manner is a metric of world class.

  • One question I wish had been asked in this interview was whether COTA is thinking about moving from a hub-and-spoke system to a grid system. The majority of employment in Columbus is not downtown, yet almost all routes lead there. With other key employment centers in Polaris, Dublin, Easton, and south near Rickenbacker, and people more dispersed, COTA needs to think about how to move people from where they are to where they want and need to go. The bus line-up downtown doesn’t serve people efficiently.

    People always ask about rail. Rail just isn’t happening in Columbus in the foreseeable future. It’s been voted down repeatedly, and civic leaders here aren’t as persistent or creative as they were in Cincinnati about getting some type of rail system (and it’s questionable what the value of that one is). A better question would’ve been what the barrier is to 24-hour service on at least some routes. Mr Stitt brought the topic up, but it was just left sitting there. That’s a real issue for people who NEED to use transit.

  • ^ COTA is not considering a grid system. See the long term transit plan at http://www.cota.com/LongRangeTransitPlan.aspx.

    Voted down repeatedly? Well, the last vote was 13 years ago. How many other votes are we talking about, and how far in the past were they?

  • Last vote wasn’t 13 years ago. Columbus City Council unanimously buried the ill-conceived streetcar proposal back in 2008. Prior to that, the COTA Board itself voted down light rail as the locally preferred alternative for expanding transit options in the “North Corridor.” So, while you’re right that the public itself hasn’t directly voted on rail in some time, it has been rejected twice by the government since the failure of the 1999 vote.

    I guess my point is that federal funding for light rail is not on the horizon, and absent both the funding and the public will, it’s sort of pointless to keep asking “What if?” instead of asking about feasible ideas that would actually have an impact on transit options in Central Ohio. Thanks for the link to the long-range plan, though. It definitely speaks to the question I asked.

  • @MHJ – Incorrect. Coleman pulled the request before it went up for vote by Council:

    http://www.columbusunderground.com/request-for-streetcar-design-is-put-on-hold

    The pressure to do so came from City Council, but there was no vote.

  • Walker, that’s a distinction w/o a difference. He pulled it b/c Council was going to vote it down. The broader point remains: Columbus has evinced little appetite for rail over the last decade, and it’s unlikely that any funding for fixed rail transit is coming from the feds any time soon, in any case. As such, it’s just silly for every conversation about transit on this website to devolve into “Why don’t we have light rail yet?”

  • If the topic of light rail is regularly brought up then perhaps your statement that there is “little appetite for light rail” is false.

    Similarly, a city-wide recycling program is only starting to roll out as we speak, but I think it wouldn’t necessarily be accurate to say that there was little appetite for recycling in Columbus over the last decade just because it didn’t exist prior.

  • Ha! That’s a valid point.

    As for recycling, Columbus did have citywide recycling before. They got rid of it several years ago due to cost and are now bringing it back.

  • Could we make progress by framing the discussion about public transit in terms of the huge amount of downtown real estate that we waste on parking garages? Look at the wasted space being consumed by the new Columbia Gas garage in the Arena District. This just blocks away from the huge multi-garage garagemonster that Nationwide keeps at Front & Nationwide. How can public transit increase our density and get rid of these garages? Where we must have them, how do we integrate them better into the city? The Columbus Commons and Ohio Statehouse underground garages are much better than the above-ground beasts with no retail or interaction with the surroundings. It slays me every time I see the prime riverfront footage consumed by the old Columbia Gas garage.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.