Judge puts
the brakes on
bus pass changesThe city could end
up losing $650,000
In a decision that could potentially affect about 25,000 senior and disabled riders of TheBus, a federal court judge granted a temporary restraining order yesterday that allows six people who have sued the city to continue using their unexpired bus passes rather than buy more expensive new passes.
U.S. District Court Judge Hel- en Gillmor granted the 10-day restraining order to the six, which allows them to continue using their unexpired bus passes until Nov. 17 instead of handing them in to buy new passes.
On Nov. 17 she will hold a hearing to determine whether a preliminary injunction should be granted that would extend the use of the unexpired passes by 28 days.
If Gillmor grants a preliminary injunction on Nov. 17, the next step would be a permanent order. Her ruling could potentially overturn the City Council's decision to cancel existing passes.
"This is going to become utter chaos," said Deputy Corporation Counsel Gregory Swartz, who represents the city and said he was "flabbergasted" with Gillmor's ruling.
As a result of the month-long bus strike, the city raised bus fares to pay for the bus workers' new contract. The biggest increase was among senior citizens and the disabled, who saw fares rise to $30 for a one-year pass from $25 for a two-year pass.
The city said last week that it would honor the unexpired bus passes until next Saturday, so the six plaintiffs gained two days. Late yesterday, in response to Gillmor's ruling, the city issued a statement saying it would honor all unexpired bus passes until Nov. 17.
Five people sued the city last month, arguing that it was unconstitutional for the City Council to cancel unexpired passes and require seniors and the disabled to buy new ones. Yesterday, another plaintiff was added as part of an intervention in the case by the Hawaii Disability Rights Center.
Charles Luce, one of the original five who sued, was pleased with Gillmor's decision.
"This is about a big principle, and that is that we had a contract and it was arbitrarily canceled," Luce said.
Jack Schweigert, one of Luce's attorneys, added: "This contract was with the city government. ... The money isn't the issue. The issue is trust in government, which has been violated because the city canceled a contract to save money."
Swartz said he believes that state rather than federal court is the proper venue for the fight.
Schweigert took the case to the federal court on constitutional grounds, arguing that the bus riders were denied due process and that the government breached a contract it struck when it sold the passes.
The city has said that about 50,000 people typically carry the passes. As of last week, the latest count available, about 25,000 have relinquished their unexpired passes to buy new ones. When those riders bought their new passes, they waived their right to have their old passes honored. But the roughly 25,000 riders who still hold their unexpired passes could potentially be affected by yesterday's ruling.
Swartz said the decision also will create "chaos with people who have turned in bus passes and now want to use their former passes."
Swartz repeatedly has argued that the city needs the revenue from selling the new passes to keep the bus system running at full service. He said the city estimates that changing about 50,000 riders to the new rate would mean about $1.3 million in revenue.
Since half the riders have bought new passes, the city has raised about $650,000, but the remaining $650,000 is now at risk because of the judge's ruling.
"This is going to have a tremendous financial impact on the city, not just from lost revenues to passes that are essential to run the bus system," Swartz said. "But now, with Judge Gillmor potentially allowing a class action, we will face substantial attorneys fees and penalties."
Attorneys representing the six bus riders have discussed options such as a class-action suit.
But Schweigert said, "I'm hoping we don't have to go the class-action route."
However, he noted that if Gillmor grants a 28-day preliminary injunction, she would effectively be saying that the City Council's ordinance that raised fares and required the purchase of new passes is unconstitutional.
Schweigert said that if the six win, it would set a precedent for other riders to sue individually. "This could cost the city a lot," he said.
