Traffic in the central city is the number one complaint of our residents, so I urge you to consider this solution. We should invest in doubling our bus service and adding a light rail system, giving more options to those who don't want to drive through th

The mayor in his proposal to the City council suggests that in order to overcome the problem regarding the traffic congestion in the central city area of the city take measures to improve and extend the public transportation system such as bus services and light rail road system.Also, the current public transportation fees be reduced so that, transportation becomes easily accessible to people.At first glance, this proposal might seem fairly coherent and cohesive.However, upon closer examination, a number of flaws come into light.The mayor has made some questionable assumptions and dubious claims rendering the proposal wholly unpersuasive.

To begin with, the mayor recommends that the investment in the bus public services and the light rail road system should be doubled.According to him, this would give people other options rather than drive themselves. To a certain point, the mayor is correct. But, the assumption that the public transportation extension only will suffice the needs of the people travelling through the city is questionable. One more factor comes into picture- last mile connectivity. Indeed, better public transport facilities will help in reducing the traffic congestion, but this happens only if the last mile connectivity to their destinations is good enough. If this linchpin is missing, public transportation option will still remain unattractive to the public and thus not solving the problem at all.For instance, if a person travels to the central city area via bus, but to get to his workplace, 2 miles down the road, he is not able to find any transportation, then he might travelling by his personal vehicle next time.

Furthermore, the mayor proposes that reduction in public transportation fares would make it more accessible to the people and deter them to travel in their personal vehicles.However, this may hold true, still some additional facts are required to substantiate this proposed solution.For example, how much ticket fare reduction will be done in comparison to the current scenario or Will the fare /mile costing for the individual travelling be lower than the costing he will have while travelling in his personal vehicle.If the offset is not high, the incentive to travel via public transport will be less.

At the end of his proposal, the mayor avers that by implementing such a system will make people more productive and hence increase the revenue for the government. This statement of his is on wobbly grounds, as this might work on the people having higher income slabs only.The lower income strata people will benefit via this strategy is fine but will they be able to contribute to the revenue of the city via taxes is questionable.

In a nutshell, although the solutions recommended by the mayor have some basis, they are lacking in some areas making the proposal unconvincing and not compelling enough. If the mayor wants to convince the City Council on his proposed solutions, then he must provide additional information regarding the highlighted points such as last mile connectivity and fare reduction in comparison to the current scenario.