Note: As public transit agencies across the U.S. begin implementing the new charter service rules on April 30, the sort of thing thats occurring in Eugene, Ore., could be repeated elsewhere.

Lane Transit District, the transit agency in Eugene, apparently has been providing illegal charters for years and sandbagging private operators to get away with it. Now its complaining it will no longer be able to provide the charters and disingenuously telling the public it was blindsided by the new rules.

Darren Berg, CEO of the MTR Group, which owns OC&W Coachways of Eugene, wrote the following opinion piece for the Eugene newspaper. Other operators might want to hold onto the article. It could come in handy when your local transit agency starts making the same noises.

By Darren Berg

There has been a lot of conversation and press coverage over the past few days regarding the new rules from the Federal Transit Administration that are slated to go into effect April 30, specifically regarding the effect those new rules will have on the Lane Transit Districts ability to provide private charter service to events such as the U.S. Olympic Track & Field Trials.

Problem is, all of the previous conversation and press coverage suggests that these "new" rules pose a threat to LTDs private charter operations - a threat that didnt previously exist. Thats factually incorrect. Worse yet, the suggestion that LTD has somehow been blindsided by these new rules ignores the reality of how new rules come to be.

Regarding the point of creating a threat that didnt previously exist, lets forget about the new rules for a moment: The shuttle program LTD proposes to provide for the Olympic Trials was (is) prohibited under the old FTA rules, too (see 49 CFR 604.11 "procedures for determining if there are any willing and able private charter operators").

Those old rules are surprisingly clear and understandable, requiring that a federally funded transit agency formally determine whether a willing and able private charter operator exists before providing private charter services that extend beyond its stated mission of operating a fixed-route transit system that collects fares from its passengers.

In its defense, LTD will point to the "annual notifications" it sent to the private sector as evidence that it complied with the FTAs old rules by seeking out willing-and-able private charter operators. But historically, LTDs notifications always have been nothing more than a lame attempt to comply with the old rules, never providing the private sector with the event-specific, detailed and timely information the private sector would need in order to gauge its capabilities and interest.

So the question back to LTD from the private sector has always been: Willing and able for what? LTD has never answered that question.

As a direct result, LTD always has found there were no willing-and-able private charter operators interested in the private charter work it was doing (which, given LTDs glib noticing method, should surprise no one).

In the end, such shady behavior on the part of federally funded transit agencies, such skirting of the rules, led us to the new rules LTD now complains about. Those new rules give more structure to the timing and level of detail of LTDs notices. Predictably, that has brought the private sector out of the woodwork as the true depth and scope of LTDs private charter operations have become known.

Its not that the private sector wasnt interested previously in the private charter work LTD was doing. Rather, LTD was successfully railroading its approval of private charter work past the private sector by keeping the details to itself. Under the new rules, LTD no longer can do so.

As for these new rules, it could be argued they actually arent "new" at all. In fact, the process of developing these new rules began four years ago as part of the Highway Reauthorization Tax Act of 2004 and has taken a very long time to dutifully run its course. Negotiations between work groups representing the private sector and transit have been extensive, comment periods collectively have spanned several years, and the new rules have been available in final form since early January.

Thats compelling evidence against LTDs claims of having been blindsided by the planned April 30 implementation of these new rules. When LTD asserts that it didnt know new FTA rules were coming, it illustrates that LTD management has either been asleep at the switch or has been in denial over the potential loss of revenues from private charter operations.

Bottom line: It was irresponsible for LTD to continue to work with Olympic Trials organizers as it did, in light of the fact a storm obviously was closing in on LTDs ability to perform on its obligations. At a minimum, LTD should have strongly encouraged event organizers to have a contingency plan in place with the private sector.

Reprinted from The Register-Guard, Eugene, Ore.