Posts about WMATA Budget

The finding included statements that public transportation should be affordable; that the use of mass transit is affected by the prices charged, and that those prices are affected by labor costs; that labor costs have increased at an "alarming rate"; that higher operating costs cannot be offset by increases in fares or by increases in subsidy payments; and that arbitration standards will ensure that wage increases are justified and don't exceed the ability of transit patrons and taxpayers to pay them.

The statement of purpose and findings clearly include the cost to transit patrons at least four times. However, in the law the public welfare is defined as:

(1) the financial ability of the individual jurisdictions participating in the compact to pay for the costs of providing public transit services; and

(2) the average per capita tax burden, during the term of the collective bargaining agreement to which the arbitration relates, of the residents of the Washington metropolitan area, and the effect of an arbitration award rendered under that arbitration on the respective income or property tax rates of the jurisdictions that provide subsidy payments to the interstate compact agency established under the compact.

Fare increases were required to balance the budget in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Bus riders using SmarTrip had their fares increase about 20%, while rail customers with SmarTrip started paying 40% more if they ride maximum distances during peak of the peak, and nearly 45% more for those riding short distances. This came during a period in which consumer prices were relatively flat; the change in the CPI from mid-2007 to today is only about 8%.

This trend is not sustainable. Future labor agreement increases will continue to put pressure on fares, and the arbitration guidelines mention the cost to riders but do not require the arbitrators to take fare increases into account.

Unfortunately, the only remedy appears to be congressional action, to add a provision to the law requiring the cost to transit passengers be considered as part of the "general welfare" that must be considered when approving wage increases for labor.

Where does the money come from? Mayor Gray's budget shifted a lot of jobs from the capital to operating budget, mostly in DDOT and OCTO. Doing this saves money in the long run, since capital spending is paid for by borrowing, and that costs interest. Brown's budget reduces this shift, but would put back $21.567 million for it if future revenue estimates come in higher than current estimates, as everyone expects they will.

Some revenue measures proposed by the Mayor remain, including combined reporting, raising the parking tax from 12 to 18%, and allowing liquor sales until midnight. The sales tax on theater tickets and live entertainment events is gone, but sales taxes on armored car services, private investigators and security services remain.

The biggest tax increase, the income tax bracket on people making over $200,000 (which was very popular with DC residents), is gone as Kwame Brown promised. But he's replaced it with another tax measure, removing the exemption for out-of-state bonds that only DC and Indiana offers.

Bringing DC's tax treatment of bonds in line with 49 50 other states makes a lot of sense. Still, replacing the income tax for this is less progressive; the Fair Budget Coalition says ¾ of the savings goes to people making over $200,000, meaning ¼ of this measure will hit households with lower incomes. The proposed income tax, on the other hand, would have only affected those making more than $200,000 and really only strongly affected those making significantly more.

In the past, many councilmembers have opposed the bond measure. Brown seems to be seeking their support by offering to repeal part of this exemption with potential future revenue estimates. However, any repeal would only apply to bonds purchased before October 1, 2011. Any bonds bought after that are going to be taxed regardless, at least unless the Council passes a separate tax repeal before next year.

There's a long list of priorities for what to buy if there are indeed rosier budget outlooks from the CFO's office in coming months. After the $21.567 million for the capital to operating shift, 50% of any additional money would replenish DC's reserve fund and the other 50% would pay for a number of other items.

The table below lists the items and by how much the revenue outlook has to increase in order for that item to get funded under Brown's formula.

The housing for homeless (#2), bond exemption (#5), and parking meter reduction (#8) only kick in if all the revenue is available to fully fund that particular item; if not, the funding goes to the next priority. That means if the future estimate is $90 million more, as Jack Evans predicted, then the money would go to police, homeless, affordable housing, mental illness, (skipping the bonds since it's not enough), the MLK library, Main Streets, (skipping parking), and then buying books. That would be an irony if Evans' guess is right and it means his priorities, the ones that just lower revenues, all get skipped.

Parking rates would decrease if revenue estimates grow by $91.6 million to $108.1 million (which doesn't fund the bond repeal), or $118.4 million or more (which does). Nobody knows what the revenue estimate will be, but Evans' guess of $90 million was seen as high last week. Kwame Brown guessed $20-60 million, which might not be enough to pay for any of these priorities, or might be enough just to fund police and restore some homeless services and a tiny bit of the affordable housing.

This budget isn't bad, but the Housing Production Trust Fund and other programs deserve to be saved even without such extreme jumps in the revenue outlook. Housing First saves the District money by housing homeless people who would otherwise end up in expensive emergency rooms, and the HPTF builds housing including in parts of the city where there's vacant land that the market can't otherwise fill with units for people who might live there.

Brown could keep the income tax hike or just repay the reserve fund less aggressively. While it's great to build up the reserve, it's also important to invest in programs that help save DC money in the long run and keep our city a diverse place with people of many different income levels.

Updates: A few details to note:

• Indiana has eliminated their exemption for out-of-state bonds, leaving DC as the only "state" with the rule.
  
• As with all non-emergency, non-temporary legislation, the Council has to pass this on two readings. The first will be today, the second June 14.
  
• Weekend and evening parking will not be changed under Brown's proposal.

The E6 carries an average of 373 riders per day, according to WMATA, and eliminating the route would save an estimated $385,000. To replace the Knollwood portion of the E6, Metro would extend the M4 along Western Avenue to Oregon Avenue. Most residents testified in support of the E6, and a small number spoke about changing or eliminating the N8. No one spoke in support of the N8 as is, and no one spoke on the proposed K1 or V8 changes.

Cheh, Bowser, and others testified that the E6 serves upper Connecticut Avenue and Friendship Heights, both important commercial and medical destinations for seniors. They argued that cutting the E6 would hurt local businesses and burden seniors trying to reach doctors' offices.

Knollwood employees also use the E6. One resident said the M4 begins too late in the morning for staff members to arrive on time. The M4 terminates at Tenleytown and residents connecting to Friendship Heights would have to transfer to the 30s, take the Red Line one stop, or walk down Wisconsin Avenue. Although they are close, the extra commute time and walk to Friendship Heights would unfairly burden seniors and disabled riders. Several residents said shifting ridership to the M4 would create significant overcrowding and slower service.

One Barnaby Woods resident said the neighborhood is wealthy and many residents have cars. If Metro were to eliminate the E6, he would simply drive instead. The E6 is the only transit connection for many Chevy Chase residents, and some said eliminating the service would effectively isolate this section of Upper Northwest.

Metro's budget gap is $66 million. Cutting the E6 would only save $385,000, a tiny portion of this gap. Certainly, if this argument were made for every cut, it could cumulatively fail to close the gap. But because this route provides direct transit access for seniors, it is not a wise choice. Cheh indicated at the end of her testimony that the Committee on Transportation and Public Works may have found additional funds to save the E6.

The committee report does identify sources of revenue to help fund the District's WMATA subsidy, and perhaps some of this money could continue to fund the E6. Metro is considering asking the three jurisdictions for more funding.

Some residents also spoke about the N8. The N8 runs eastbound on Yuma Street from 49th Sreet to Tenley Circle. Metro estimates an average daily ridership of only 300. Eliminating service on this route would save an estimated $516,000.

Yuma Street residents are concerned that the street is too steep and with low ridership, N8 drivers often speed down Yuma, making it dangerous for children and other pedestrians. One Yuma Street resident joked that more people had spoken to save the E6 route than ride the N8.

An American University student did speak in support of the N8, saying it helps students living in Glover Park travel to AU. She supported moving the N8 off Yuma to create a more direct connection to AU, but said the route should stay.

No one spoke on the K1 or V8 routes.

In addition to public testimony on the proposed service changes, Metro officials gave a short presentation on the FY12 budget and took questions from the audience. Residents asked about customer service and problems with the weekly bus pass.

Several residents said they have had negative encounters with bus drivers and station managers, including problems using the 7-day bus pass. WMATA CFO Carol Kissal said the agency had fixed the bus pass issue and apologized for poor bus driver service. Kissal said customers will be able to load their SmarTrip cards online this summer.

Few at the meeting spoke about extending weekend rail headways, though one man commented that stopping weekend rail service at midnight would be a mistake. A representative from Amalgamated Transit Union 689, which represents Metro employees, said the union opposes service cuts because it will hurt bus and rail operators.

The WMATA panel included General Manager and CEO Richard Sarles, WMATA board members Tom Downs and Mort Downey, and Barbara Richardson, Assistant General Manager of Customer Service, Communications and Marketing at Metro. The agency held two hearings each in the District, Maryland, and Virginia. The entire docket, including all proposed bus and rail service changes, is available here.

The petition asks members to:

• Support the Committee on Public Works and Transportation report calling for graduated Residential Parking Permit fees;
  
• Oppose Councilmember Evans' rollback of parking meter rates;
  
• Support Mayor Gray's income tax increase on households earning more than $200,000 a year;
  
• Restore Housing Production Trust Fund money, and;
  
• Provide the needed funds to ensure Metro doesn't have to cut service on weekends.

Depleting parking meter revenues while slashing funds for essential transit and affordable housing programs will hurt all of us. Speak up now to ensure the city budget continues to build a more livable and inclusive city.

Evans, generally the Council's most eager to "comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted," complained that the RPP increase was "nickel and diming," and said that if the Council wants to fund an initiative, "just fund it." But earlier in the session, he presented his own committee report which recommended removing almost every source of revenue for the Council to "just fund" many important programs.

In response, Tommy Wells pointed out that last year Metro rail and bus riders suffered a significant fare increase, one which costs people a lot more than $25 or even $100 per year (the extra amount a 3-car owning household would pay under Wells' proposal.) But, as Evans repeatedly brought up during the meeting, he doesn't take transit, so he isn't sensitive to that.

Mary Cheh repeated some of her comments complaining that the Circulator expansion plan doesn't go to Ward 3 enough, and recommended a line in the Palisades. This is one of the lowest density parts of the city with very few commercial nodes and is rarely a destination for non-residents. In other words, it's one of the least appropriate candidates for a Circulator. Is she worried about getting votes from the Palisades?

The Circulator plan actually does include a future line expansion along Connecticut and Wisconsin, and eventually along Military from Friendship Heights across Rock Creek.

Bowser and Thomas similarly made many arguments complaining about how certain budget proposals don't do more for their own wards. It was very disappointing to have so much debate about policy based on how much investment goes into each ward when growth downtown benefits all. On the other hand, it's true that we should do more to improve transit service for neighborhoods in wards 4 and 5, as well as 7 and 8, plus 1, 2, 3, and 6.

Cheh also repeated some Board of Trade talking points that the parking meter rates might drive away potential customers for businesses. That's not false in the areas where parking is regularly not filling up; I previously endorsed studying parking occupancy and lowering it in areas that aren't filling up. The "Parking Czar" funded partly with the RPP money would hopefully solve these problems. Just dropping the rates sight unseen would make traffic worse and parking harder in many areas.

The most intelligent comment from someone other than Wells—and, honestly, one of the very few intelligent comments from any non-Wells councilmember in the whole parking discussion—came from Michael Brown (at-large). He pointed out that the issue most residents have with parking meters is having to put in large numbers of quarters or return periodically to feed meters.

That's another argument for hiring a good parking manager at DDOT as soon as possible. DDOT actually has upgraded all or almost all of the higher price meters to take credit cards or to use multispace meters, so some councilmembers may be reacting to constituent complaints from years past which have been largely addressed. Still, DDOT's parking strategy and roadmap remains a mystery, if they even have one, and it would go a long way to alleviate fears for them to devise and publicize one.

This parochial argumentation seemed more bizarre in the context of all the cuts that threaten the life or health of some of the least fortunate residents. Asking households with 3 cars to pay $100 more per year is apparently "exorbitant," to use Thomas' term, but having families unable to get basic food and shelter didn't stir up nearly as much outrage.

Nor did saving Metro service. Wells' chief of staff, Charles Allen, tweeted that it's "disappointing to see how many people don't see affordable mass transit as an issue of econcomic justice & access to jobs."

My neighborhood wouldn't benefit from the immediate Circulator expansion, isn't going to get a streetcar, and has few people on TANF. My household may well pay more in taxes under the Mayor's proposal. But I don't want my councilmembers voting against everything that doesn't benefit me personally. We should be looking to make the city better for all, and it quite simply won't make the city worse for all or even much worse for anyone if wealthy households do a little bit more.

For a DC Council that has often been quite progressive on human rights, the environment and more, it's sad to see such resistance to progressive measures on finance and transportation even from several otherwise excellent members.

The tax hike on people making over $200,000 even has strong support from residents in all wards, and even from residents who would be affected, yet so many councilmembers want to delete that proposal from the budget at the expense of the least fortunate.

The Council has still not decided on council-wide priorities for funding and spending. Contact your members and ask them to keep the RPP increase, reject the parking meter decrease, and to fund the council-wide priorities for Metro, affordable housing, and homeless services as the top priorities.

Update: Councilmember Cheh has clarified her position on both parking issues. She wants to tailor meter rates to neighborhoods (as do I) and is willing to let the DDOT "Parking Czar" work out a good approach, and says she is now supportive has always been supportive of the RPP increase. Thanks, Councilmember Cheh!

On Monday, Redesign_DC hosts "lightning talks" by designers, cartographers, and entrepreneurs about design challenges and solutions for DC. The event is at Cobalt, at 17th and R NW, and costs $8 in advance, $10 at the door starting at 7 pm. Matt Johnson will be talking about the map contest, whose entries we will be posting Monday for all of you to see and vote upon.

All next week, WMATA is holding their public hearings on proposed service cuts. They're Monday in New Carrollton, Tuesday in Alexandria (Braddock Road) and upper Northwest DC (Friendship Heights/Tenleytown), Wednesday in Arlington and Wheaton, and Thursday in Barry Farm near Anacostia.

To participate, see the instructions for signing up to speak or submitting written testimony, and detailed directions by bus or rail. There is also an online survey you can take to register your opinions, but written or oral testimony will have more effect.

Friday is Bike To Work Day. All you have to do to participate is bike to work! There are also many commuter convoys starting in places from Springfield to Poolesville to Glenn Dale, as well as many closer-in spots, to downtown DC and other locations.

49 pit stops all around the region will provide food, drink and entertainment. At the central site at Freedom Plaza, local and federal officials will also speak. You can get a free t-shirt and enter in a drawing for other prizes by registering to stop by a pit stop.

Building on the bike energy are two bike rides that weekend, Kidical Mass and BikeDC. The kid-friendly Kidical Mass is Saturday, with people gathering from 10-11 near Eastern Market Metro and then taking a leisurely ride through Capitol Hill followed by brunch. Register here.

The next day, Sunday, is Bike DC, the also family-friendly and non-competitive (but somewhat longer) bike ride on streets and parkways in DC and Arlington.

The ride starts at 7:30 am near the Capitol and proceeds along Pennsylvania Avenue, to the E Street freeway, over the TR bridge, around roads near Arlington Cemetery, and up the GW Parkway to beautiful views across the Potomac before returning to DC. All of the roads are entirely closed to motor vehicles during the ride, and this is a rare opportunity to ride a bicycle on E Street, the TR Bridge, and the GW Parkway.

Advance registration is $35 for adults, $20 for teens, 12 for kids 12 and under.

Finally, bring your suggestions for future Capital Bikeshare station locations to DDOT's public meeting on expansion on Wednesday, May 25th, 6 pm at 441 4th Street (One Judiciary Square), room 1107 (south elevators).

DDOT plans 25 more stations, and if Tommy Wells' committee's recommendation to add $2 million in capital funding gets accepted, they'll have to start planning for 40 more on top of that. They've suggested 55 potential locations, meaning they'll have to come up with even more places should that funding come through.

These and many other events are on the Greater Greater Washington calendar. If you know of an event we should include or see any errors, please let us know at events@ggwash.org.

Several local jurisdictions endorsed the required increase in jurisdictional contributions up front. Arlington and Fairfax's budgets included the increases. Last week, Maryland's representatives to the WMATA Board announced that they, too, would come up with the extra contributions. A few days ago, Alexandria dedicated some of its property tax revenue to the needed Metro funding.

The WMATA Board approved a docket for public hearings with relatively few cuts. Late-night cuts, the worst of the initial proposals, are off the table. DC routes E6, K1, and N8 could still be eliminated, and some fares to Anacostia station increased.

There's still an option to increase weekend headways to 18 minutes Saturdays, 20 minutes Sundays, and 25 minutes both Saturdays and Sundays after 9:30 pm. They would cause real damage to Metro and to the economy of the entire region. Riders should forcefully oppose these cuts. But the amount of money involved is relatively small—only $6 million. We are in the realm of reasonable debate rather than fighting off catastrophe.

While in past years the WMATA Board has delayed decisions on the budget until DC made its decisions as well, this year DC's representatives approved a docket for public hearings that almost forces it to come up with more money for Metro, even though that money hasn't been publicly identified yet.

That share, after the bus cuts, comes to $13.3 million, in a budget that already treats transportation well while making painful cuts for needy residents in areas like affordable housing. Most likely, Tommy Wells' Committee on Public Works and Transportation will need to find that money through revenue increases like graduated RPP fees or the free parking loophole.

Much remains to be done to improve Metro's policymaking. Long-term planning of budgets and service is not what it should be. Local governments still ignore the costs they dump on Metro when they make land use and traffic engineering decisions.

But the new Metro board's approach to the budget puts us ahead of where we were a year ago on these questions too. Transit's needs are now getting put on the table, just as highway departments do their job by pointing out deficiencies in the road network. There is a chance to begin an honest dialogue about priorities among elected officials and the public.

The hearings are May 16 in Hyattsville (by New Carrollton Metro), May 17 in Alexandria (Braddock Road Metro) and upper northwest DC (Friendship Heights/Tenleytown Metro), May 18 in Arlington (Court House) and Wheaton, and May 19 in Barry Farm (Anacostia Metro). All hearings will start with an open house at 5:30, a town hall format at 6, and the formal public hearing at 6:45.

By all means, oppose the weekend rail cuts and call for preserving needed bus service. But it's also worth thanking the Board for what's right about this year's budget process.

April 13, 2011

Ms. Catherine Hudgins
Chair, Board of Directors
Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority
600 Fifth Street NW
Washington, DC 20001

Subject: FY 2012 Operating Budget Hearing Docket

Dear Ms. Hudgins:

The Transit First coalition is representing transit riders, environmentalists, labor, and community groups throughout the Greater Washington area. We commend the WMATA Board of Directors for the thoughtfulness it has demonstrated thus far in preparing the FY 2012 operating budget hearing docket. We are pleased to see that cutting back late night rail service hours is no longer being considered. However, we are concerned by the remaining proposed bus service cuts and proposed significant widening of rail headways on weekends that were discussed at the Board's most recent meeting.

While the widening of rail headways on weekends might at first glance appear innocuous, we believe it would be devastating to weekend travelers. This is because many travelers take more than one rail line to get to their final destinations. Thus, widening of headways would not only extend the wait on two legs of passengers' trips (i.e., origin to destination and then destination back to origin); it would also result in the compounded effect of extending the wait on four or more legs of passengers' trips (i.e., origin to transfer point, transfer point to destination, destination to transfer point, transfer point to origin).

Not only would the round trip be significantly lengthened in this manner, but the likelihood of missing one's transfer would also be significantly impacted. Thus, what appears to be an innocuous increase in travel time of a few minutes in a person's trip could result in an increase in travel time of over 30 minutes, for example. Because weekend rail service headways are already too wide to be considered convenient by many travelers, we believe further increasing headways would further depress weekend ridership numbers and, consequently farebox revenues.

Therefore, we urge that in addition to encouraging increased jurisdictional contributions to close the $72 million operating budget deficit, the Board propose additional revenue-generating options. We recommend establishing a $1 increase in parking fees for those Metrorail stations that have a weekday average occupancy of 100%.

Increasing the parking fee by $1 for those rail stations that have a weekday average occupancy of 100% would not only have the benefit of raising additional revenues, but would also better align parking fees with market demand, in turn resulting in better utilization of parking spaces system-wide. As you know, however, this measure must first be included in the hearing docket in order to be considered for enactment by the Board.

Again, we thank you for your thoughtful consideration and discussion of how to address the FY 2012 operating budget deficit. We urge you to include revenue-generating measures in the hearing docket such as the aforementioned $1 parking fee increase for facilities with a weekday average of 100% occupancy.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Action Committee for Transit
Amalgamated Transit Union Local 689
Arlington Coalition for Sensible Transportation
Coalition for Smarter Growth
Greater Greater Washington
Montgomery County Sierra Club
Prince George's Advocates for Community-based Transit

Another part of the proposal eliminates three bus routes (K1, N8 and E6), and extends the wait between weekend trains to as much as 25 minutes.

Unfortunately, WMATA did not include any other options for the public hearings. Customers can come to complain about the proposed service reductions or about the specific fare increases, but there is no general fare increase option on the table.

Last year, WMATA included a "menu" of options to close the gap, including options for fare increases.

We were strong advocates of the menu approach last year, and hope WMATA will try the approach again, the public should be given some choices when asked how to close the budget gap in a public hearing. The Board should have the WMATA staff include a fare increase of up to 5% as one of the advertised options for closing the gap.