Transit
If those who pay for transit should pick the WMATA Board, where are the rider reps?
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell is trying to take some of Virginia's WMATA Board seats away from the Northern Virginia counties that appoint them, and threatening to derail the federal funding for safety-related improvements unless he gets it.
McDonnell's main argument is that the state pays about half of Virginia's share for transit, and therefore he should appoint two of the members. However, "half" is stretching things a lot and using some funny math. More importantly, if we accept the notion that whoever pays the bills ought to appoint the members of the WMATA Board, riders should be electing almost half the Board themselves.
Why not? Much of the criticism of the WMATA Board is that members are looking out for the interests of the local governments that appoint them, which sometimes align with riders and sometimes don't. According to a Transportation Research Board report, a number of U.S. cities, including Denver and Salem, Oregon, elect all Board members, while others elect a portion.
Michael Perkins analyzed the FY2009 budget and computed that if Board seats were apportioned based on contributions to the capital and operating budget, riders would get about 42% of the seats. That number has probably increased with the recent fare hike.
Right now, the Board has 14 members and is supposed to grow to 16, so about two elected representatives from each of Virginia, Maryland, and DC would do nicely, plus the federal government could select a rider representative or two for its unfilled appointments.
Meanwhile, the McDonnell Administration's calculation that the state pays half of Virginia's WMATA costs omits several key facts. First, it includes the 2% gas tax add-on that comes directly from Northern Virginia counties for transit. It also counts all money that goes to transit based on a formula, set by the legislature. Over time, Northern Virginia has negotiated to have some of its formula money go to transit.
The state isn't really paying so much as acting as the banker. It's like President Obama decreeing that since most transportation money is federal, he's now going to appoint the state Secretary of Transportation in all 50 states plus D.C. Most of all, McDonnell's calculations also completely discount all the money paid by riders. Virginians who ride Metrorail and Metrobus are putting in plenty of their own money, and even more with a fare hike of historic proportions. At least right now they have some elected officials who respond to their concerns representing them on the WMATA Board.
Maybe those Northern Virginia riders should get to elect two representatives instead of McDonnell appointing them. If we follow McDonnell's own logic, they have a better claim. Otherwise, let's leave the local officials in charge.
Comments
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Metro policy for refunds after delays falls short, riders say
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- Prince George's County struggles to get trails right
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money







I'm against the idea of elected "rider reps" because giving mini-politicans their own platform isn't going to help. And it will just increase the bias towards rail over bus in WMATA.
But this is sorta clever. Politically it works.
I think we need to have some very serious arguments about WMATA governance. I fear the system is set up to reward employees and management, not the users or local area. Somebody has to take a strong stand and strangle MetroAccess and pension benefits. Clever arguments like these, however, don't result in better ideas being formed.
by charlie on Jun 18, 2010 10:55 am • link • report
By your logic, tourists should get a seat on the board, too. They chip in a bunch of fare and tax revenue.
by jcm on Jun 18, 2010 11:01 am • link • report
by Ben Ross on Jun 18, 2010 11:07 am • link • report
I mean, I understand the knee-jerk reaction to take Virginia's request and expand the logic and try to throw it back in their face. But what McDonnell is proposing is nowhere near as radical as some think.
by Lou on Jun 18, 2010 11:08 am • link • report
by SteveRN on Jun 18, 2010 11:20 am • link • report
Back off, Bob - Metro is spending money raised FROM NoVa, and we know how to run our transit services better than from 2 hours away in Richmond.
by Glenn on Jun 18, 2010 11:36 am • link • report
And isn't the real issue not the current funding, which is determined by somewhat complex formulas, but the $150 million a year in new capital spending the federal agreement bring? As far as I can tell, all the money is coming directly from state coffers and not being raised in the traditional ways.
by charlie on Jun 18, 2010 11:42 am • link • report
Governor McDonnell holding funding hostage for seats on the WMATA Board jeopardizes the safety of Metro customers insofar as it puts essential capital funding at risk.
Even if I agreed with his end goal (which do not), he is putting his agenda ahead of the safety of Metro riders period. If he cares both about the safety of Metro riders AND getting seats on the Board, then maybe he should offer EXTRA money in exchange for seats.
Bribery is no better than blackmail. I know. But jeopardizing funding that would be used to replace 1000 series rail cars. Really? That's just wrong. The end simply does not justify the means.
Put simply, I have no faith in Governor McDonnell's ability or desire to improve our regional transit system.
by Penny Everline on Jun 18, 2010 11:51 am • link • report
by Michael Perkins on Jun 18, 2010 11:51 am • link • report
by Jasper on Jun 18, 2010 11:56 am • link • report
by charlie on Jun 18, 2010 12:03 pm • link • report
Listed as " Transportation Capital Bonds / Federal Match" 50M a year.
by charlie on Jun 18, 2010 12:07 pm • link • report
And how Virginia apportions who gets to represent the Va. taxpayers who are giving Metro their tax dollars, is a question for Virginia and Virginians to answer.
by Lance on Jun 19, 2010 7:51 am • link • report
by Matthias on Jun 21, 2010 1:16 pm • link • report
Add a Comment