Budget
Next stop: Metro funding
Metro's $300 million in dedicated annual funding is moving quickly toward becoming a reality. Last week, both houses of Congress approved the WMATA Compact Amendments, and according to Councilmember Jim Graham, DC has included its $50 million contribution in the revised budget they approved on Friday. The House and Senate's transportation appropriations bills both contain funding for Metro, meaning the conference committee in September shouldn't affect this, and the Obama administration is expected to approve the bills.
Photo by Millerustad.
Last year, Congress authorized $150 million a year for ten years for Metro, provided DC, Maryland, and Virginia each match it with $50 million each. The three jurisdictions also had to amend the WMATA Compact to add federal voting representatives and some other changes. They made the change, but the Obama Administration's original budget did not include the money. Immediately after last month's Red Line crash, however, Maryland and Virginia Congressional representatives introduced measures to add the funding.
Assuming the budget passes with the $150 million, Maryland and Virginia will have to each find $50 million in their already-tight budgets to match. And then we'll need to lobby Congress and the jurisdictions to maintain that funding into future years.
Metro needs this funding to maintain even our current levels of service. The system is aging, and Metro needs to replace many of its rail cars. While Metro managed to stave off service cuts during the last budget cycle, we've felt the effects of their staff cuts. After the Red Line crash, in particular, many riders have complained of poor communication. Some readers wrote in asking why Metro doesn't deploy platform conductors to help move people down the platform now that trains are pulling all the way to the ends of platforms. One part of the answer: there aren't enough staff left to do that. Even $300 million a year won't keep up with all of Metro's maintenance needs, but it's a big start.
Senator Barbara Mikulski (MD) also added a provision to the Senate bill asking USDOT to "submit legislative recommendations to Congress" on ways to increase their "role in regulating the safety of transit agencies operating heavy rail on fixed guideway." Currently, the FTA cannot regulate transit agencies' safety procedures. Some oversight is appropriate, as long as the FTA doesn't go overboard and require so many safeguards that they impede transit systems' performance. Metro is still many times safer than driving; it can be safer, but if, in our zeal to make it as safe as possible, we make it less useful, more people will just drive, cutting down total safety and hurting transit systems.
Meanwhile, advocates are reporting that Governor O'Malley is expected to announce tomorrow morning the State of Maryland's support for a light rail Purple Line. Fresh from securing money for Metro, the region's Congresspeople can next start pushing for the federal portion of funding for this project. Or, better yet, they should support a better allocation scheme that ends the double standard whereby transit projects must prove their value while highway projects don't, and which gives a higher percentage of federal funding to highway projects than transit projects.
 | David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.   |
Comments
- Cyclists are special and do have their own rules
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money
- Can Loudoun grow while protecting its rural areas?
- Silver Spring mall could get massive facelift, new name
- ICC losing bus service in classic bait and switch
- Suitland Parkway Trail is a mess. Will leaders seek change?
by JTS on Aug 3, 2009 4:35 pm • link • report
There will need to be a similar effort on the operating side. WMATA projects a $130 million deficit next year and most of the "low hanging fruit" has been picked. The Silver Line extension will add additional operating costs (as will other transit expansion projects in the Washington region).
It is a good start that Congress has recognized that it plays a critical role in keeping the system running (nearly 40% of rush hour commuters work for the federal government by some estimates). Hopefully, this will be a start toward similar operating assistance.
by kreeggo on Aug 3, 2009 8:28 pm • link • report
by Josh B on Aug 4, 2009 10:00 am • link • report
Unlike other transit agencies, where there's the possibility of a strike and therefore a honest public debate over whether union compensation is reasonable, (see, e.g., http://bartlabor.com/) Metro's union negotiations are held private. In fact, they're going on *right now* with ATU 689.
We don't have the benefit of WMATA and the unions clearly making their positions to the public, and the fierce urgency of impending doom that comes with the possibility of a strike.
If we had these things, we would likely have a conversation about the social justice of cutting off or reducing bus service for folks making $30,000 per year or less while asking little in the way of concessions from the unions.
by Michael Perkins on Aug 4, 2009 10:34 am • link • report
If the issue is pitting lower paid workers against better paid workers that's a false choice. It is neither's fault that there has been a widening gap between the top 1% of people in this country and the rest of us.
WMATA workers wages have risen well below the rate of inflation when averaged over the past 15 years. Pension costs were zero for many years until very recently when the markets began performing poorly. The normal cost of the pension plan as determined by an actuary has been between 7 & 8 % for many years. Do you really want to blame the workers for WMATA's decision not to put pension funds aside for market variations?
Michael assumes that no concessions have been made by WMATA's unions but let's look at the last agreement. The pay raises over four years were 1.5%, 1.5%, 3%, 3% (Avg 2.25% per year--hardly bloated) and there has been no pay raise for the past year as the contract expired June 30 of 2008. 25% of all health insurance increases have been shouldered by union members.
Michael seems to advocate the right to strike for transit workers. Final and binding arbitration has been provided for in the WMATA compact since inception. The few major public transit agencies where strikes have occurred have seen an outcry that binding arbitration was not used--New York City, Toronto & Ottawa (where a strike drug on through the winter last year). I would simply say be careful what you ask for.
Michael unfortunately seems to be parroting the WMATA management. Michael should know that the cost drivers of bus service are congestion not wages. As traffic has increased, more buses have been required to provide the same level of service (same headway)--meaning that the product (travel time) has degraded while costs have increased. Management has sought to carve out these costs by limiting workers wages (with some success I might add) instead of addressing the problem by making buses more productive through bus priority and brt measures.
WMATA has become recent converts to bus priority/brt measures and that's a good start. I think we'll all be better served by addressing that problem instead of scapegoating workers.
by Kreeggo on Aug 4, 2009 11:52 am • link • report
For comparison, the recently agreed to BART labor agreement had pay raises of 0%, 0%, 0% and 0.75% for the next four years.
by Michael Perkins on Aug 4, 2009 12:00 pm • link • report
____________
Metro has currently multiple managers at one division bringing home over $100,000.00 each, X the # of divisions bus, rail.
Answer: Cut the number of managers and integrate the work.
The "Line Managers" were not fired.
These six figure salaried employees were just moved around or sitting in the basement at a division with a desk. "I say let them go."
Cut upper level managers salaries by 35%. Remember they gave themselves a 35% raise several years ago.
Then lets look at the overtime for salaried workers and utility supervisors who mgmt gives additional overtime, sitting in back rooms or girl watching outside of the stations when there is a game or special event. (This overtime is waste)
Cut the number of workers sleeping on the job or doing nothing at the stations.
Instruct managers to drive their own vehicals to and from work. (Especially since multiple managers/supervisors have wreckless driving charges, multiple speeding charges, suspended license charge, HOV violations/arrest and motor torts awaiting in court currently.)
How can managers get away with criminal records and expect to instruct subordinates on safety?????
I see this is the problem with Metro. Hire reputable mgmt..
by Donna on Oct 20, 2009 1:55 pm • link • report
Metro is flawed from the concept in my opinion. It is limited in scope, and clearly offers no mechanism for expansion.
Metro Center is operating at capacity and if there is a disaster there will be countless deaths and injuries.
With narrow tunnels, no chance of expansion or double decking, and exits and entry's that are so limiting the system has already surpassed the projected ridership in my opinion. New York on the other hand, has numerous tracks through each station, and the ability to run express trains, and is designed far better with multiple exits and a plan or organization that in the event of an emergency, the communication is in place to prevent riders from entering the system.
I was in Metro Center a couple of years ago and experienced first hand what happens where there is a back up on the trains leaving the station. Far too many people were allowed into the station and onto the platforms. It was precarious and dangerous. We were eventually told to leave. At which time one escalator didn't work and hundreds of riders were running up the stairs. It was chaotic and confusing and dangerous. People in wheel chairs were left with no way out and the look on their faces along told the story of just how poorly trained and managed the stations and the system are. Catoe should be fired and not extended any benefits and the federal government should take the system over. Then maybe it could become safe. The board is comprised of people that don't have the experience or the expertise to know right from wrong.
by ward4 realizm on Feb 11, 2010 1:45 pm • link • report
Add a Comment