Bus pass case goes before judge

By Mike Leidemann
Advertiser Transportation Writer

For Richard Morse, it's not about the money. He just wants the city to live up to its agreement with him, the one that says his bus pass is good until next year.

"It's all a matter of principle. If they can break that agreement, they can break any agreement," Morse said. "It has nothing to do with money."

But U.S. District Judge Helen Gillmor focused on money yesterday when attorneys for Morse and four other bus pass holders sought a temporary injunction that would require city officials to honor all existing bus passes until their expiration dates.

Gillmor, who delayed a ruling on the injunction, wanted to know if the plaintiffs would be irreparably harmed by city plans to require all senior and disabled riders to buy new, more expensive passes by Nov. 15. The old $25 passes were good for two years; the new pass is $30 for one year.

If the pass-holders have some means of ultimately recovering their losses, a temporary restraining order would not be appropriate, she indicated.

For the riders, the money is a matter of extra pennies a day they'll end up paying once they receive a rebate for the unexpired portion of their passes; for the city it's a $650,000 question of fare revenue that will be lost.

Attorney Rory Soares Toomey, representing the riders, said the passes represent a contract or license and a protected interest that can not be taken away from the pass holders.

"Changing the passes now wipes out what my clients bargained for — a one-time fee for bus service for a period of years," he said.

City deputy corporation counsel Gregory Swartz argued, however that the riders are not suffering any irreparable harm because they are being compensated for the unused portion of the passes.

"No one is losing their means of transportation," he said. "They simply have to buy a new pass and seek a refund."

Attorney Jack Schweigert, also representing the bus riders, suggested that the irreparable harm suffered by the riders could include the inconvenience they suffered in waiting in long lines for a new pass or other "undefinable injuries."

"You're dealing with things that have no monetary value," he told the judge.

"People put a monetary value on injuries every day in the legal system," Gillmor shot back.

George Quillin, a bus rider who came to court to listen to the arguments yesterday, said the principle of the issue was more important than any monetary compensation.

"I gave them my money for a pass, and it's supposed to be good until 2005," he said. "Now they say I can't ride the bus unless I get a new one. That's what made me mad."

The next hearing on the request for an injunction was set for Nov. 7, one week before the city's new deadline for all seniors and disabled riders to obtain the new pass or pay a full fare.