Apple Announces iPhone Accessibility, Blind Community Cautiously Optimistic

At Monday’s WWDC conference, Apple announced the inclusion of VoiceOver on its new iPhone 3 GS, making a unique touch screen interface accessible to a cautiously optimistic blind user community for the first time.

“iPhone 3G S provides new accessibility features including VoiceOver, a screen reader that speaks what appears on the iPhone 3G S display, enabling visually impaired users to make calls, read email, browse web pages, play music and run applications,” said Apple representatives in a June 8 press release.

Loyal Apple fans in the blind community are ecstatic to have been granted access to the iPhone after waiting over two years.

“My God. I am in awe,” said Josh de Lioncourt, publisher of the popular Mac-cessibility Round Table Podcast on Twitter.

Shane Jackson, publisher of the BlindWorld Blog and Podcast said on Twitter “Jump up and down, folks. Jump really, really high! iPhone! Yes!”

“It’s the world’s first gesture-based screen reader, enabling you to enjoy the fun and simplicity of the iPhone even if you can’t see the screen,” said Apple representatives on the company’s iPhone Accessibility page. “Instead of memorizing hundreds of keyboard commands, or endlessly pressing tiny arrow keys to find what you’re looking for, with VoiceOver, you simply touch the screen to hear a description of the item under your finger, then gesture with a double-tap, drag, or flick to control the phone.”

Some blind technology users are uncertain about the practicality of making a native touch screen interface accessible, but they are reserving judgment as they wait to see the new iPhone in action. “I am very very concerned about the touch interface. That could be a deal breaker but will wait and see,” said Jeff Bishop, a blind database developer at a major university.

Twitter Quietly Fixes Broken Audio CAPTCHA

A blind Internet user has reported that Twitter has corrected issues with its audio CAPTCHA during a one-hour Friday evening maintenance window. Blind Access Journal has confirmed the fix.

On August 22, 2007, Twitter implemented the ReCAPTCHA service to protect the site from abuse while granting a level of accessibility to blind and visually impaired people wishing to sign up for the new social networking service. The enhancement was implemented by Twitter in cooperation with members of the connected online blind community. Twitter received praise for this move.

On December 7, 2008, reCAPTCHA began deploying a new audio playback scheme. “Instead of using spoken digits or letters, our new audio CAPTCHA presents entire spoken sentences or phrases that the best speech recognition algorithms failed to recognize,” Luis von Ahn, the project’s executive producer, said on the reCAPTCHA Blog.

“For now, if you are using our custom theme option, we ask that you update the instructions for the audio CAPTCHA to say something along the lines of ‘type what you hear'”, von Ahn told web site developers who implemented reCAPTCHA, signifying the possible need to modify their sites in response to this change.

Reports began to surface of blind people locked out of Twitter’s account creation process. Investigating, Blind Access Journal opened the urgent support ticket 329388 with Twitter’s technical support team on May 28.

“Please resolve this because, as it stands right now, some people are being locked out solely because they’re blind / visually impaired,” Darrell Shandrow stated as part of the request for assistance.

On June 3, the support ticket was closed and removed with the statement “Twitter is a free service, and while we try to provide as much help as we can, we can’t get to every email”. A subsequent request for follow up went unanswered.

On Friday, Twitter underwent an evening maintenance window lasting approximately one hour. Shortly after, an update appeared on the Twitter Status site “The maintenance was successful and we are back up!”

Early Saturday morning, Mika Pyyhkala (pyyhkala) reported “the audio captcha for the Twitter sign up process has been fixed and works now!”

Twitter has made no statement regarding the audio CAPTCHA or any other issues that may have been resolved in Friday’s maintenance downtime.

“Unfortunately it was a very frustrating issue for a lot of people who couldn’t get beyond it,” said Larry Gassman (Lgsinger).

Code of Ethics

One of the courses I took last semester was Journalism Ethics and Diversity. Our final assignment involved writing a personal code of ethics accompanied by an explanation of how we arrived at the conclusions in that code. I have decided to share this with all of you, my dedicated readers, in hopes that you may find it helpful in your own lives. As with everything else on this blog, all constructive feedback is appreciated.

Ethical Development Overview

“Living in a way that is transparent. It means allowing light to pass through with little or no interruption or distortion so that objects on the other side can be clearly seen, to be completely open and frank about things.” (Gilligan 236)

Ethical development in my life seems to focus primarily on an evolution from a rights based approach to Carol Gilligan’s ethics of caring theory combined with Sissela Bok’s concept of consulting one’s conscience and engaging in discussion with experts prior to making decisions. Louis Hodges’ circles of intimacy theory on privacy and trust also factor heavily in the way I form and maintain relationships.

Many aspects of my life as a person with a disability have compelled me to focus on protecting my rights to equality of opportunity in endeavors such as education and employment. Staunch accessibility evangelism has, from time to time, caused me to insist on enforcement of existing disability rights laws and to show a willingness to bend established rules in order to reach a desired, fair outcome. In this regard, especially when interacting with unknown individuals or those I deem to be on the wrong side of an issue, I have employed a strictly rights based ethical approach much like that suggested by Lawrence Kohlberg. (Patterson and Wilkins 343) In this way, correct results are my primary aim, there are times when the ends justify the means and making friends is definitely not high on the list of priorities.

When it comes to close friends and relatives, those in my second and third circles of intimacy, (Patterson and Wilkins 154) my approaches are much different. I focus on maintaining strong connections with those closest to me. In many cases, I place their needs and desires above my own when making important decisions. The relationship holds the highest priority over all other considerations. Despite a tough, no-holds-barred public exterior, I am actually a person who craves acceptance and approval, especially from those about whom I care the most.

“We sat watching the candles burn down. Stars spinning in their distant constellations. Maybe love is the revolutionary emotion, the true freedom, because it releases something in ourselves…” (Gilligan 153)

The justice oriented approach has, thus far, served me quite well most of the time in professional and public life. My parents won the right for me to attend public high school in 1987 after winning a settlement in Federal court. I have successfully employed similar approaches in order to retain employment, save my wife’s job and bring accessibility advocacy efforts to a positive conclusion. In the public sphere, the way I have done business has largely equated to Kohlberg’s scenario in which a husband justifies stealing a lifesaving drug from the pharmacist in order to care for his terminally ill wife. My struggle has always been how to merge the caring ways in which I interact with those closest to me with the harsher rights based manner by which I have dealt with the rest of the world.

“A good listener will refrain from judgment, respect the narrator, and be willing to experience some of the terror, grief, and rage.” (Cote & Simpson 234)

In Carol Gilligan’s work leading to the theory of the ethics of caring, women were questioned about Kohlberg’s pharmacist scenario. (Patterson and Wilkins 344) By and large, their answer was to form a connection with the pharmacist in order to make a mutually beneficial arrangement that would enable him to justify handing over the drug. Many in my inner circle have suggested, and I believe they are right, that I ought to place a greater effort in demonstrating my caring nature to the wider world. Combined with the advocacy experience I have already established, they contend the results obtained would be even better. I would not only have accessibility and greater opportunities but I would also have new friends in my corner.

In class, I have learned about an ethical theorist whose model may represent a useful bridge between Kohlberg’s and Gilligan’s theories. Sissela Bok (Patterson and Wilkins 5) suggests a three-step ethics model in which we consult our conscience, seek advice from experts and conduct a public discussion of an issue prior to making an informed ethical decision. This is something I realize I already do on a frequent basis when I informally consult my closest friends and, sometimes, engage in wider discussions on the Internet as I move forward with my advocacy work.

“Principles are not less sacred because their duration cannot be guaranteed.” (Bok 67)

This statement from Bok nicely sums up my personal code of ethics. It is a merging of traditional, old-world Western Judeo-Christian values and new ideas about how we can all be more caring and inclusive of everyone in our decision making. The journalism ethics and diversity course has given me a more systematic understanding of the concepts behind the ethical decisions I make on a daily basis and has acquainted me with new ideas I can apply as I confront future challenges.

 

Code of Ethics

  • Always demonstrate the greatest loyalty to my closest friends and relatives through actions, feelings and words.
  • Protect the equality of opportunity and self-determination of everyone, regardless of their age, disability, gender, race and any other condition or circumstance outside their control.
  • Treat others as I would like to be treated.
  • Actively seek and tell the truth without omission unless full disclosure would harm an innocent person.
  • Whenever possible, seek advice from experts and close associates before making important decisions. Consult my “personal board of directors.”
  • Equally consider the relationships between all involved parties as well as their rights and obligations when making all decisions.
  • Hold myself and everyone else accountable, as appropriate, for the consequences of actions taken.
  • Respect the religious beliefs and political ideologies of everyone without prejudice.
  • Advocate for accessibility for people with disabilities to participate equally in society to those without disabilities. Accessibility is a right!
  • Always ensure that my life is an expression of traditional values such as caring, dedication, hard work, loyalty and trust.

 

Works Cited

  • Bok, Sissela. Common Values. University of Missouri Press; Columbia, MO. 1995, 2002
  • Cote, William & Simpson, Roger. Covering Violence: A Guide to Ethical Reporting about Victims & Trauma. Columbia University Press; New York, NY. 2006
  • Gilligan, Carol. Kyra. Random House; New York, NY. 2008
  • Patterson, Philip and Wilkins, Lee. Media Ethics: Issues and Cases. McGraw-Hill; Columbus, Oh. 2008

New Solona CAPTCHA Solving Service Gets the Job Done, Implications for Accessibility are Uncertain

A new approach to solving CAPTCHAs has arrived on the scene for the blind and visually impaired. “Solona is a service that provides CAPTCHA solution assistance for visually impaired Internet users who encounter CAPTCHAS that are difficult or impossible to solve,” says Bernard Maldonado, the site’s creator. This unique service enables blind and visually impaired users to upload a CAPTCHA image and quickly receive the solved CAPTCHA code from a sighted person while safeguarding the users’ privacy and security.

I tested Solona on Twitter’s Create an Account page, where solving a CAPTCHA is required in order to sign up. After signing into Solona and opening the Twitter signup page in a new browser tab, I filled out Twitter’s form and captured the CAPTCHA image by pressing Alt+Print Screen. I then ran MSPaint, pasted the captured image into it and saved the image as a 256-color BMP file. Finally, I switched back to Solona, selected the option to Submit a CAPTCHA, uploaded the captured image file and pressed the Refresh button a couple of times as I awaited the solution. Within approximately 40 seconds, I received a correct answer which enabled me to create another Twitter account!

My experience, and that of many other blind Internet users, shows that Solona is a viable way to solve CAPTCHA images on web sites. I have two concerns with the Solona approach: one is practical and the other is philosophical.

In practical terms, the instructions for using Solona are rather complex, especially for all beginning and many intermediate blind computer users. There are instructions for use on Mac and Windows-based computers. Users are expected to understand concepts including copying and pasting, downloading and uploading files, saving files in a specific location or path and switching among several windows. Since many web sites time out if the CAPTCHA is not solved right away, the usefulness of this approach is likely to increase for beginners only after many unsuccessful practice attempts. Some intermediate and all advanced users should find the instructions easily within their grasp.

As an accessibility evangelist, I have a philosophical
concern about the use of services like Solona, where direct sighted intervention is required in order for the blind person to achieve their desired result. According to the instructions on Solona’s How it Works page, “The process is a two prong approach: The user submits a useable image of the CAPTCHA according to our instructions and a Solona operator processes the image and returns the text solution back to the user in order to proceed with the offending website.” This solution is dependent on the availability of a sighted operator. When noone is available, we can’t use this approach and an inaccessible CAPTCHA will lock us out once again. Web site owners may feel they’re off the hook with respect to ensuring the accessibility of their CAPTCHA schemes. Instead of improving accessibility, they may tell us: “Use Solona. That’s what it’s there for, isn’t it? To help you blind people?” My ultimate worry here is the creation of a separate-but-unequal status for blind people where a form of accessibility exists for us that is vastly inferior to that granted the sighted.

A major advantage of Solona is its complete accessibility for everyone, including the deaf-blind who continue to go completely unserved by web site owners who implement audio playback as their “accessible” CAPTCHA scheme. Unlike automated CAPTCHA solutions such as CAPTCHA Killer and Webvisum, no “cracking” or “hacking” is involved and there are no reasonable concerns that the service may be easily utilized to breach the protection CAPTCHA intends to deliver against spammers and other abusers. Solona is also cross-platform. Any computer and web browser that can be used to capture and upload images can be used with the service.

If stable plug-ins or screen reader scripts are created to make Solona easier to use for beginners, plans to ensure the continuous availability of sighted operators are realized and an organizational structure is established to ensure the ongoing viability of the service into the future, we may ultimately have an accessibility winner on our hands! Will the blind community embrace Solona as an acceptable way to solve CAPTCHA authentication? How will the technology industry respond? Will it raise awareness of the need for better access or will companies just dump us over to Solona without meeting their responsibility to deliver reasonable accommodations? Once a viable organizational structure exists for Solona, who will provide the funds to sustain the project? Would web site owners consider donating to Solona in leu of improving the accessibility of their own CAPTCHA schemes an acceptable accommodation? I invite all of you, my loyal readers, to take a stab at any or all of these questions in your comments. As always, your reading and participation is appreciated.

The Desert Cafe Goes Live Tonight!

Hello Everyone,
 
      Come in from the heat and be cool.   Join Darrell and I in the Desert Cafe.  We will  serve up some fun  tunes and  favorite beverages. If you haven’t heard 70’s music in awhile and  want to Celebrate Summer, be here with us.    You don’t need a mood ring or strobe lights.
 
We   will also be  celebrating our third wedding anniversary, which is June 3. You will have a chance to hear the audio from our Ceremony in Boston.
 
In addition to all this fun, Darrell will tell us all about what we can do to advocate for an international copyright exemption treaty that would enable the reproduction and exchange of books that have been converted into accessible formats for the blind and others with print reading disabilities.
 
The show can be heard on ACB Radio Interactive at 02:00 Universal time on Tuesday, that’s Monday evening in the United States at 7:00 Pacific (and Arizona), 8:00 Mountain, 9:00 Central and 10:00 Eastern. Visit http://interactive.acbradio.org to listen.
 
See you tonight,
 
Karen and Darrell in the Desert Cafe on ACB Radio Interactive

Abledbody Blog Covers International Copyright Exemption Treaty Letter Writing Campaign

We thank the folks at Abledbody for including an article about the letter writing campaign in their News Watch segment. This blog appears to be an excellent resource for advocacy and information about assistive technology and disability rights activities. I have just subscribed to their RSS feed in Newsgator, and recommend all of you consider doing likewise in your favorite RSS aggregator or reader.

Updated Information on Contacting the White House Electronically

We have discovered that it is no longer possible to write to the President by simply sending e-mail to president@whitehouse.gov. Doing so results in an automatic reply that gives information on the accepted ways to make contact. All information needed to send comments to President Obama is available on the White House’s contact page.

In our letter writing campaign on the international copyright exemption treaty, please submit an electronic message of 5,000 characters or less, FAX the White House or send your letter via snail mail if you are able. We may also want to consider calling the White House, but I feel getting started in writing may be best at this time. I hope all of you are writing and sending letters to President Obama on this important issue. Please feel free to stay in touch and let us know how we may be of assistance.

Letter Writing Campaign Asks President Obama to Fully Support International Copyright Exemption Treaty for the Blind and Print Reading Disabled

I have written the letter shown below to President Obama. Thanks to Alena Roberts, Kelly Ford and Milica Trpevska for their assistance in the editing of this letter through three revisions. I am asking all my American readers to send a similar letter to president@whitehouse.gov to show support for an international treaty that would expand the copyright exemptions we enjoy in the United States to the blind and other people with print reading disabilities in the rest of the world. If you are not an American citizen, please write a similar supportive letter to your nation’s prime minister or other appropriate political leaders.

May 30, 2009

Dear Mr. President:

As a blind American, I am writing to ask you for your help in order to expand our limited access to printed books. Specifically, I would like you to direct your representatives on the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights in the World Intellectual Property Organization to fully support the treaty on copyright exceptions for visually impaired persons.

In the United States, Blind Americans currently enjoy the highest level of accessibility to books in the entire world! The National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped provides tens of thousands of books as audio recordings. Recordings for the Blind and Dyslexic provides thousands more books in recorded form primarily to K-12 and college students with reading disabilities. Finally, a project called Bookshare delivers access to more than 50,000 copyrighted books in an electronic format we can read with our Braille displays and on our talking computers in a manner that is most similar to the way sighted people are automatically able to read. All of this is possible by way of an exemption we enjoy in our copyright laws called 17 USC Section 121 that allows certain authorized organizations to make books accessible to us without the constant need to obtain written permission from publishers.

In contrast with the specialized nonprofit organizations (authorized entities in copyright law) that work with us to adapt reading material, the marketplace has continued to fail the blind despite ongoing advocacy. I am willing to purchase books in the same way as our sighted peers, so long as I am able to read them in an accessible format. Almost without exception, however, authors and publishers have been unwilling to work with the blind on a voluntary basis and have vigorously resisted all the legislative gains we have made to force their compliance.

Many electronic books are now sold for reading only on Amazon’s Kindle book reader. The Kindle is inaccessible to the blind, Amazon has made no plans to rectify the issue and no software exists to convert the books to an accessible format. Even the most recent revision of the reader, the Kindle II, contains voice output, but remains completely unusable by a blind person. Further, the Author’s Guild is working against people with disabilities by advocating publishers disable voice output on Kindle books and making statements about audio books that could hamper the expansion of accessibility. One major publisher, Random House, is selling their Kindle electronic books with the text-to-speech feature disabled. Even if the Kindle were to become accessible to the blind, many books sold in that format would remain unreadable by blind customers. Other books are sold in equally inaccessible formats that employ security features specifically designed to disable our specialized screen reading software. As long as the marketplace continues to ignore our need for equal access, I am asking you to intervene in ways that support our efforts to adapt information so that it is readable by those of us with print disabilities.

American accessibility projects like NLS, RFB&D and Bookshare represent an attempt by our own community to essentially make our own accessibility. Hundreds of Bookshare volunteers acquire, scan and convert books into a specialized accessible format known as DAISY. NLS readers and RFB&D volunteers verbally read books for distribution as digital audio recordings in another subset of the specialized DAISY standard. In all three cases, the blind and others with reading disabilities must prove eligibility in order to receive access to copyrighted books through these authorized organizations. This level of access to books really makes a positive difference for blind Americans who wish to learn, work and participate in all aspects of our society on terms of equality with the sighted.

Alena Roberts knows firsthand what a difference accessible books can make in the life of a blind person. A graduate of the University of Oregon, she struggled with the lack of accessible textbooks. “In college, if my required books were not available at RFB&D, my university had to do the recordings, which meant in a lot of cases that I only got to read the pages that my professor required,” Roberts says. “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve listened to book reviews on the radio just to find that they’re not available in an accessible format.”

Recent advancements in the accessibility of books have opened the world for Alena and tens of thousands of blind Americans. “For me personally, having access to books means that I get to read what I want to read more often,” says Roberts.

Despite this level of accessibility, most published books continue to be outside our reach. Many are still found only in print while the vast majority of electronic books are delivered in formats that are incompatible with our screen reading software. Internationally, the World Blind Union says that people with print reading disabilities are granted access to less than five percent of all reading material available to the sighted. I believe that, were your closest friends and relatives locked out of 95 percent of the world’s books, you and Michelle would be insisting on change now. I am certain you are sensitive to the need for equal access for blind people everywhere.

In comparison to the American experience of people like myself and Alena Roberts, Milica Trpevska, a journalism student from Macedonia attending American University at Bulgaria, lives in the dark ages with respect to the unavailability of accessible books. Many of the textbooks required in her classes are made accessible in the United States, but copyright laws prohibit her from acquiring and reading them simply due to her location. An accessible copy of a book that is available to blind Americans for the cost and time of a download over the Internet requires hundreds of hours of work by herself and one or more sighted people in order for Milica to be able to access the same content her sighted peers can read without a thought. In addition, Milica has scanned hundreds of books over the years that she is unable to contribute to accessibility efforts like Bookshare due to the same restrictions currently imposed by international copyright law. Your full support of an international copyright exemption for people with print reading disabilities would open many doors for deserving people like Milica while further increasing the amount of printed material accessible to blind Americans.

It is time for positive change in the availability of reading material for the blind and others with print disabilities. I am asking you to help make the resources we already enjoy here in the United States available to the rest of the world. Doing this would serve to increase accessibility not only for people with print disabilities outside our nation, but it would also foster full international participation in our efforts to increase our access to the world of reading. Duplication of efforts would be eliminated and organizations in other countries would finally be able to deliver to us new books not yet made accessible here in America.

As a blind person who relies on the ability to read the same material enjoyed by my sighted peers in order to learn and to work as a productive member of society, I am asking for nothing less than equality of opportunity. If a copyright exemption is good enough for us here in the United States, then it is good enough for the rest of the world. Please work to expand the letter and spirit of 17 USC Section 121 to the rest of the world through the WIPO treaty by directing America’s delegates to avoid delay by prioritizing the needs of people with disabilities, actively demonstrating this stance to authors, publishers and the rest of the world and approving the treaty every time it comes up for a vote.

Sincerely,

Darrell Shandrow

Accessibility Evangelist

BlindAccessJournal.com

Balanced Agenda on Internationalization of Copyright Exemptions for People with Print Reading Disabilities

At the 18th session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) of the World Intellectual Property Organization recently held in Geneva, a treaty was proposed by the World Blind Union to grant a copyright exemption for the production and distribution of books in a specialized format accessible by people with print reading disabilities. The result of such a treaty could be the international availability of accessible books from organizations such as Bookshare, National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Disabled and Recordings for the Blind and Dyslexic.

Predictably, organizations representing authors and publishers are concerned about any copyright changes that might expand the piracy of their work. These concerns are currently being expressed by SCCR delegates as opposition to the copyright exemption treaty. Blind people and others with print reading disabilities need and deserve equal access to books, while authors and publishers have the right to earn an income in compensation for their efforts. According to blogger James Love, who updated us via Twitter as the meeting progressed, “Group B has offered amendments to a proposed conclusion for the WIPO SCCR 18 meeting. The amendments are designed to eliminate any agreement to discuss a treaty for blind and reading disabled persons at the next meeting of the SCCR. The United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Norway, the Holly See (the Vatican), the members of the European Union and other high income countries have joined in this statement.”

I think all of us in the connected, online blind community can agree that print reading material and other forms of information should be usable by the blind and other people with disabilities that curtail their ability to read print. Further, I also think we can agree that the marketplace (companies and organizations representing authors and the publishing industry) has largely ignored us and has taken unfortunate steps to curtail our right to equal access. This overall ignorance on the part of the marketplace has generated the need for copyright exemptions that enable us to make our own accessibility without the need to seek written permission from publishers to reproduce books in accessible formats.

We achieved a victory in the conclusion of the 18th SCCR session. The copyright exemption proposal will be discussed again at the 19th session of the SCCR. We have an opportunity to advocate for our right to equal access in a way that expresses a sensitivity to the needs of all stakeholders, including the very authors and publishers who regularly ignore us. In our advocacy, I propose the following overall agenda for our activities:

  • Accept publishers’ desire for reasonable anti-piracy measures that do not curtail our access, including: definition of what constitutes an “authorized organization” for the distribution of accessible books, description of who is eligible to receive accessible materials under the exemption, standardization of the specialized formats that will be used to deliver accessible books and specifications for any digital rights management (DRM), usage tracking and watermarking for the purpose of preventing unauthorized duplication of accessible materials.
  • When issues of digital rights management arise, we should prefer the Bookshare scheme over those employed by organizations like NLS and RFBD.
  • Except in cases where DRM technology makes existing electronic books inaccessible to us, let’s try to keep the issues of equal access and DRM as separate as possible in the communications that make up our advocacy efforts.
  • American citizens who are blind or have other print reading disabilities, and those without disabilities who care about us, should write letters to President Obama asking him to direct his delegation at SCCR to fully support the treaty on copyright exceptions for visually impaired persons.
  • Similarly, citizens of other Group B nations should write letters to their prime ministers and other appropriate political leaders asking that they direct their SCCR delegations to fully support the treaty on copyright exceptions for visually impaired persons.
  • It may be worth considering the creation of an online petition as a means of simply demonstrating the high levels at which most technology experts and users will support the proposed treaty.
  • Finally, we all must work tirelessly over the next couple of months to promote our cause and spread the word of our efforts as far and wide as possible as the 19th meeting of the SCCR nears.

I think it is absolutely critical that we advocate strenuously for our right to equal access to books while expressing a willingness to make reasonable compromises with those stakeholders who have significant financial investments to protect. We may endure a little pain along the way, but if we are willing to consistently advocate for ourselves and stay in the game for the long haul, I’m quite confident we will come out ahead.

Phoenix Area Dial-A-Ride Fares Increase on July 1, 2009

We have been asked by a Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) official to post the following important announcement concerning fare increases for Dial-A-Ride customers in the greater Phoenix area.

ValleyMetro.org

  • 602.253.5000
  • TTY 602.261.8208

Due to tax revenue shortfalls and increased operating costs, fares will increase on July 1. The new fare structure is designed to maintain transit service at levels that Valley residents need, although service cuts may continue to occur with the ongoing decline in sales tax revenues. Sales taxes provide a majority of the funding for bus and light rail service.

New East Valley ADA Paratransit Fares

EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2009

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Why have fares increased?

Valley Metro’s funding is based primarily on sales tax revenue. Since people are not buying as much in this economy, sales tax revenues for transit have declined by millions of dollars. At the same time, the cost to provide transit service is continuously rising.

How does this affect Dial-a-Ride fares?

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit Dial-a-Ride fares must keep pace with the bus/light rail fares. In the East Valley, the ADA Dial-a-Ride fares are $2.50 beginning July 1, 2009 with an increase of $.50 each July 1 thereafter until the ADA fare reaches $3.50. Please note that non-ADA fares for East Valley Dial-a-Ride are not increasing. In Phoenix, ADA Paratransit Dial-a-Ride fares will be two times the local bus fare or $3.50. For seniors and persons with disabilities using non-ADA services, fares are changing as follows: $1.50 to $2.50 for same day/first zone fare and $.50 to $1.50 for same day/each additional zone. For other city Dial-a-Ride fares, please contact your local Dial-a-Ride provider for specific changes to their fares. For your local Dial-a-Ride provider, visit ValleyMetro.org or call 602.253.5000.