| THE FORMATION OF THE DETROIT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (D-DOT) (The Reasons Behind the Change from the DSR to DDOT) |
| Variations of the "official" D.O.T. logo have been in use by D-DOT since the transit agency was formed on July 1, 1974. |
Even though it's now been decades, many longtime Detroiters still ask that question.... "Why was the city's bus system
changed from the former (more reliable) D.S.R. to the present day D-DOT?"
Most folks, I'm sure, won't argue the fact that public transportation in Detroit has basically been on a major decline now for
decades. But many may be surprised to learn that the steady decline in reliable service actually began many years prior to
the formation of DDOT. As a matter of fact, the former DSR operation was reorganized in order to prevent the inevitable
collapse of what was once a proud, reliable, and respectable leader in the transit industry.
Of course, the need for a major name change for the bus system during the early seventies was indeed obvious. Since the
Department of Street Railways could no longer be considered a street railway operation, after it discontinued the last of
its streetcar service on April 8, 1956, its name had long become obsolete. But aside from the fact that a more appropriate
name was needed, other more important factors would play a role in the department's restructuring.
When the DSR was first founded in 1922, it was formed as a city-owned transportation company, and was to be operated
as a separate and financially self-supporting agency. The oddly structured agency was run much like a private corporation,
and was governed by a general manager appointed by the mayor. The transit company not only had to pay property and
school taxes to the City of Detroit, but also had to pay service charges to other city agencies for any services rendered to
the DSR.
But more importantly, the Detroit City Charter mandated that all of the agency's operating expenses could only be paid
through fare-box revenues. Although the DSR was owned by the City of Detroit, not one-cent of city tax money could be
spent on the agency. Consequently, during its first forty years of operation, the DSR operated solely out of the
fare-box.
But after the ridership numbers began to decline during the late forties and early fifties, and as fare-box revenues dropped,
and operating expenses increased, this charter requirement proved to be a major burden for the department. By the mid-
to-late sixties major cuts in bus service were being proposed. By the arrival of the early seventies, the city's transit system
was on the verge of facing possible bankruptcy.
Many issues over the years—-all too numerous to go into detail in this article—-helped to contribute to the ridership decline
the transit operation faced. As these factors continued to make an impact, it was becoming evident by the sixties that the
former transit system needed to be restructured, or the City of Detroit faced not having a public transportation system for
its declining population. Obviously, the fare-box revenues alone could no longer provide the needed money for
the DSR to operate.
Some limited and temporary relief did come for the system on Tuesday, September 1, 1964, when city voters approved
Proposition "G" — an amendment to the Charter which relieved the department from paying city and school taxes, and
service charges to other city departments. In addition, the amendment now permitted the DSR to receive Federal grants,
and authorized the Common Council to appropriate general tax funds for the DSR—but only for the purpose of providing
the local funds required to obtain grants from the federal government. Prior to these amendment changes, low revenues
made it difficult for the DSR to even provide the matching one–third local funds then required under the provisions of the
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964.
Another boost for the ailing DSR would later come on Tuesday, November 4, 1969, after Detroit voters approved another
amendment to the Charter — Proposition "A"— which granted the Common Council budgetary control over the transit
agency, similar to what it had over other city departments. The amendment now permitted the Council to use general city
tax funds to provide any needed assistance to the DSR. It also removed the restrictions that all DSR operating expenses
must be paid from fare-box revenues alone.
With the transit agency's budget now under the control of the Common Council, it was now felt by many — led primarily
by Councilman Mel Ravitz — that the time had come for the DSR to be restructured, and to come under the full control of
the City of Detroit. Meanwhile, with the much-amended "horse-and-buggy-era" 1918 City Charter already in the process
of being completely rewritten for the first time in over fifty years, a charter revision opportunity regarding the future of the
DSR could soon become a reality. If approved, a charter revision restructuring of the DSR could take effect in July, 1974.
On Tuesday, November 6, 1973, the voters of Detroit adopted the newly revised 1974 Home Rule Charter (186,283 to
140,697), which also included a provision establishing a newly-structured Transportation Department.
Under the 1974 Detroit City Code: Article 7, Chapter 14, Section 7-1401; the transportation department shall:
The establishing of this new Transportation Department consequently resulted in a name change for the city-owned transit
system from the Department of Street Railways to a newly formed Department of Transportation.
On Monday, July 1, 1974, at 12:01AM, the Detroit Department of Transportation (D-DOT) took over as the
transit providing agency for the City of Detroit.
changed from the former (more reliable) D.S.R. to the present day D-DOT?"
Most folks, I'm sure, won't argue the fact that public transportation in Detroit has basically been on a major decline now for
decades. But many may be surprised to learn that the steady decline in reliable service actually began many years prior to
the formation of DDOT. As a matter of fact, the former DSR operation was reorganized in order to prevent the inevitable
collapse of what was once a proud, reliable, and respectable leader in the transit industry.
Of course, the need for a major name change for the bus system during the early seventies was indeed obvious. Since the
Department of Street Railways could no longer be considered a street railway operation, after it discontinued the last of
its streetcar service on April 8, 1956, its name had long become obsolete. But aside from the fact that a more appropriate
name was needed, other more important factors would play a role in the department's restructuring.
When the DSR was first founded in 1922, it was formed as a city-owned transportation company, and was to be operated
as a separate and financially self-supporting agency. The oddly structured agency was run much like a private corporation,
and was governed by a general manager appointed by the mayor. The transit company not only had to pay property and
school taxes to the City of Detroit, but also had to pay service charges to other city agencies for any services rendered to
the DSR.
But more importantly, the Detroit City Charter mandated that all of the agency's operating expenses could only be paid
through fare-box revenues. Although the DSR was owned by the City of Detroit, not one-cent of city tax money could be
spent on the agency. Consequently, during its first forty years of operation, the DSR operated solely out of the
fare-box.
But after the ridership numbers began to decline during the late forties and early fifties, and as fare-box revenues dropped,
and operating expenses increased, this charter requirement proved to be a major burden for the department. By the mid-
to-late sixties major cuts in bus service were being proposed. By the arrival of the early seventies, the city's transit system
was on the verge of facing possible bankruptcy.
Many issues over the years—-all too numerous to go into detail in this article—-helped to contribute to the ridership decline
the transit operation faced. As these factors continued to make an impact, it was becoming evident by the sixties that the
former transit system needed to be restructured, or the City of Detroit faced not having a public transportation system for
its declining population. Obviously, the fare-box revenues alone could no longer provide the needed money for
the DSR to operate.
Some limited and temporary relief did come for the system on Tuesday, September 1, 1964, when city voters approved
Proposition "G" — an amendment to the Charter which relieved the department from paying city and school taxes, and
service charges to other city departments. In addition, the amendment now permitted the DSR to receive Federal grants,
and authorized the Common Council to appropriate general tax funds for the DSR—but only for the purpose of providing
the local funds required to obtain grants from the federal government. Prior to these amendment changes, low revenues
made it difficult for the DSR to even provide the matching one–third local funds then required under the provisions of the
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964.
Another boost for the ailing DSR would later come on Tuesday, November 4, 1969, after Detroit voters approved another
amendment to the Charter — Proposition "A"— which granted the Common Council budgetary control over the transit
agency, similar to what it had over other city departments. The amendment now permitted the Council to use general city
tax funds to provide any needed assistance to the DSR. It also removed the restrictions that all DSR operating expenses
must be paid from fare-box revenues alone.
With the transit agency's budget now under the control of the Common Council, it was now felt by many — led primarily
by Councilman Mel Ravitz — that the time had come for the DSR to be restructured, and to come under the full control of
the City of Detroit. Meanwhile, with the much-amended "horse-and-buggy-era" 1918 City Charter already in the process
of being completely rewritten for the first time in over fifty years, a charter revision opportunity regarding the future of the
DSR could soon become a reality. If approved, a charter revision restructuring of the DSR could take effect in July, 1974.
On Tuesday, November 6, 1973, the voters of Detroit adopted the newly revised 1974 Home Rule Charter (186,283 to
140,697), which also included a provision establishing a newly-structured Transportation Department.
Under the 1974 Detroit City Code: Article 7, Chapter 14, Section 7-1401; the transportation department shall:
- 1. Own, maintain, and operate a public transportation system above, on, or below the
surface of the ground, or in any combination thereof, utilizing technology known or to be
developed.
2. Operate the system within the city and to a distance outside the city as permitted by law.
The establishing of this new Transportation Department consequently resulted in a name change for the city-owned transit
system from the Department of Street Railways to a newly formed Department of Transportation.
On Monday, July 1, 1974, at 12:01AM, the Detroit Department of Transportation (D-DOT) took over as the
transit providing agency for the City of Detroit.
| Click here to return to "THE D-DOT YEARS" Main Page. |
| For Comments and/or Suggestions, Please contact Site Owner at: admin@detroittransithistory.info |
© 2006 (PAGE LAST MODIFIED ON 12-22-07)
| PRINTER- FRIENDLY VERSION |
FOR RELATED TOPIC SEE: CITY CHARTER REFERENCES GOVERNING THE CITY'S REVISED TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
| DETROIT TRANSIT HISTORY |
| DETROIT TRANSIT HISTORY |
| The web-site which takes a look back at the History of Public Transportation in and around the City of Detroit. |
| .. |
| Coach #1577 displays the second paint scheme design used on DDOT coaches beginning with the GMC RTSs delivered in 1978. |
| Redesigned logo launched in Sept., 2007 |
| The original 1974 DDOT logo |
The 1974 charter revision also resulted in the consolidation of other municipal transportation–related functions, resulting in
the former Streets and Traffic Division being merged into the Transportation Department and becoming the Planning
and Engineering Division under the new Charter.
The 1974 charter, under Article 7, Chapter 14, Section 7-1402, also abolished the three membered Board of Street
Railway Commission, which had been the policy–making governing authority of the former DSR, while under Article 5,
Section 5-103, granted sole authority to supervise, manage and control the department to an administrative head, or a
"Director" of Transportation, appointed by the mayor. The Street Railway Commissioners were replaced by a new
Advisory Commission for Transportation, composed of at least five members, also appointed by the mayor, but who
were limited to only making recommendations (under the guidelines of Article 7, Chapter 1, Section 7-103).
Since there didn't exist a dedicated local transit tax back then, earmarked to support public transportation in southeastern
Michigan, this new arrangement would now allow for the city to help subsidize the transit system until a regional transit tax,
and a proposed take-over by the then recently formed Southeastern Michigan Transportation Authority (SEMTA),
could be approved.
Unfortunately, after years of city and suburban fighting over this issue, it has now been over thirty years and no regional
take-over of the system has ever resulted, and a separate transit tax to support the Detroit system never materialized. As
a consequence, DDOT remains to this day just another revenue producing city department, and largely subsidized by the
city's general fund, to the tune of $80 million a year.
For better or for worse, D-DOT has continued now for thirty-plus years providing transit services to Detroiters.
the former Streets and Traffic Division being merged into the Transportation Department and becoming the Planning
and Engineering Division under the new Charter.
The 1974 charter, under Article 7, Chapter 14, Section 7-1402, also abolished the three membered Board of Street
Railway Commission, which had been the policy–making governing authority of the former DSR, while under Article 5,
Section 5-103, granted sole authority to supervise, manage and control the department to an administrative head, or a
"Director" of Transportation, appointed by the mayor. The Street Railway Commissioners were replaced by a new
Advisory Commission for Transportation, composed of at least five members, also appointed by the mayor, but who
were limited to only making recommendations (under the guidelines of Article 7, Chapter 1, Section 7-103).
Since there didn't exist a dedicated local transit tax back then, earmarked to support public transportation in southeastern
Michigan, this new arrangement would now allow for the city to help subsidize the transit system until a regional transit tax,
and a proposed take-over by the then recently formed Southeastern Michigan Transportation Authority (SEMTA),
could be approved.
Unfortunately, after years of city and suburban fighting over this issue, it has now been over thirty years and no regional
take-over of the system has ever resulted, and a separate transit tax to support the Detroit system never materialized. As
a consequence, DDOT remains to this day just another revenue producing city department, and largely subsidized by the
city's general fund, to the tune of $80 million a year.
For better or for worse, D-DOT has continued now for thirty-plus years providing transit services to Detroiters.
| ||||||
 | |  | |  | |  | |  |