Posts about Budget

On transportation, he's budgeted $9.1 million additional for WMATA to maintain service. The agency was asking for $17 million additional from DC this year, so this only fulfills about half; unless this increases, WMATA may have to raise fares more than expected or cut service.

Some of the money would come from expanding performance parking, which is an excellent idea. Unfortunately, this number also includes taking the away the money from existing performance parking zones, which was dedicated to local improvements in the affected neighborhoods.

There's ongoing funding for streetcars including, in another slide, an item (without a specific number) about starting a new rail safety program to go with the streetcar.

It looks like the long-stalled traffic camera program will finally get moving, with $5.8 million of budget to buy cameras.

That's not really spending, though, since the program more than pays for itself in fines unless drivers start dramatically obeying the law far more often. The budget estimates $30.6 million in revenue.

Can drivers stop 82% of their speeding, running red lights, blocking the box, not yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks, and more? If they don't, DC will get the revenue; if they do, our streets will be a lot safer for everyone.

Just like last year, housing affordability didn't fare so well. Gray's budget moves $19.9 million from the Housing Production Trust Fund, which finances new construction of more housing in areas where the market value of land isn't enough to attract private investment.

That money will go to the Local Rent Supplement Program, but DCFPI says that just plugs a hole from taking away other money. In the end, people in need will still get help with housing, but we won't get a new supply of affordable housing.

The revenue section also includes $12 million from changing the inflation adjustment for tax deductions on the income tax and property taxes. However, the Mayor said that if additional revenue comes in, he would spend $1.1 million to restore a tax exemption for out of state municipal bonds.

This doesn't seem to make a lot of sense; why penalize people earning income and owning homes to give a tax break to people with larger investment portfolios? Other states do not exempt other states' bonds and there isn't a local policy we advance by just giving out this tax break.

Additional funds should go toward restoring the HPTF, if not actual budgeted money. Remember, last year the Council devised a priority list for how to use any new "unanticipated revenue," then ignored it and cherry picked items off the list. The housing fund was the second highest item that didn't get any money. Now DC has a surplus for this year, and the housing fund isn't getting it either. How long will DC leaders ignore this important priority?

Other housing programs covered with federal funds will lose money because of federal budget cuts.

There were a variety of other cuts in many departments, especially social service areas.

The budget also commits to continuing planned high school modernizations at Ballou, Cardozo, and Dunbar and finishing planning and design for Ellington, Coolidge and Roosevelt. It also funds the planned new middle schools in Ward 5 and adding and modernizing more middle schools in the future.

At the Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development, we have recommended the District focus on restoration and expansion of key housing programs in this budget, as a first step toward a full "Continuum of Housing" that fully meets DC's housing needs.

Restore the Housing Production Trust Fund

This budget must restore $18 million to the Housing Production Trust Fund (HPTF) for its intended purpose of housing production and preservation.

The HPTF is the District's most important tool for producing and preserving affordable housing in DC. Affordable housing providers around the District count on the HPTF to help build new affordable apartments, rehabilitate existing low-cost housing, and help tenants purchase their buildings under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA).

When tenants are able to purchase, it increases opportunities for homeownership, preserves low-cost housing, and keeps long-time residents in their neighborhoods. In the 10-year history of the Housing Production Trust Fund, 7,000 housing units in more than 100 locations have been completed or are under construction using dollars from the Trust Fund. It has developed and rehabilitated housing in every ward of the District.

Fully fund the Local Rent Supplement Program

The Local Rent Supplement Program (LRSP) must be fully funded from from the General Fund, including $6 million to address a projected shortfall in the DC Housing Authority's LRSP budget. Failing to fill this gap would jeopardize housing for 514 households.

Utilize the Housing First Fund and LRSP to serve new people

This budget should invest $5 million from the Nationals Stadium Community Benefit Fund for Housing First and $5 million for the LRSP to serve new people.

Both LRSP and Housing First were developed to house the tens of thousands of people on the DC Housing Authority's waiting list, to address the ongoing homelessness crisis in the District, and to support the production of permanent supportive housing. Without additional funds, these programs are not able to serve any new residents.

Maintain funding for the Home Purchase Assistance Program

If federal funds for the Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP) are cut, DC should keep the program whole with additional local funds.

HPAP has been a key tool for increasing DC's homeownership rate. Maintaining constant funding is crucial to helping low- and moderate-income residents move into homeownership and remain in the District. The current funding level allows 500 families to receive assistance to buy their first home.

In the District, homeownership would often be a less expensive housing option than renting, but residents need additional support to move into homeownership. Homeownership maintains neighborhood stability and can also help families use equity in their homes to finance college and build their net worth.

In a recent press conference, Mayor Gray focused on his administration's appointment of a new team to review the 2006 Comprehensive Housing Strategy Task Force Report. The new task force will look at concrete ways to make the previous recommendations a reality.

We applaud this approach, but realize that the updated task force report won't be completed until well into the year, and if the mayor does not act now, 2013 will foster the same stagnation in affordable housing that we see now in 2012.

DC cannot wait another year or more for good affordable housing policy. Mayor Gray must respond to residents' concerns, made even more apparent in the One City Summit, with an investment in affordable housing that starts now.

Actually, it can, easily. And it can afford $12 million for the Metropolitan Branch Trail, which Leggett also cut from the current capital budget. All the county has to do is defer some of the $359 million in new highways in the 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). That $359 million is all for new capacity, over and above the necessary cost of maintaining the county's existing roads and bridges.

The projects include widening Goshen Road, which costs $129 million, but the justification in the CIP suggests it's not needed until 2025. Building Montrose Parkway East, for $56 million, will further despoil Rock Creek Park, while the completed western portion has already created a "Berlin Wall" that will hamper a future walkable, mixed-use neighborhood growing north of White Flint.

Widening Snouffer School Road and Snouffer School Road North, 2 projects costing $45 million, would meet "demands of existing and future land uses" in an area which "is experiencing growth with plans for future residential and commercial development."

Why does the County Executive claim that it doesn't have enough money for the Bethesda Metro, a necessary step for the Purple Line in the part of the county that generates the most tax revenue, and Wheaton, a prime spot for new mixed-use growth and an already-thriving community right on top of another Metro station, but can spend money on new roads in car-dependent areas which may grow in the future?

These new road projects would increase traffic congestion through induced demand, offer no economic development, and destroy irreplaceable Chesapeake Bay watersheds. Montgomery County has already agreed, through long public debates, to make the Purple Line, the Metropolitan Branch Trail, and growth in Wheaton top priorities. But Leggett's budget does not reflect this.

This is an unfortunate pattern with this County Executive. The Leggett administration consistently cries poverty when it comes to smart growth-oriented projects like these, or making Rockville Pike a boulevard in White Flint. However, it seems that no sprawl-oriented road project is too expensive to fund.

Whether it's putting up roadblocks to BRT, pushing harmful skybridges and underpasses, or a bizarre focus on resurrecting bad "zombie road" proposals from the 1960s, the County Executive's decisions do not embody Montgomery County's and Maryland's stated smart growth policies.

Fortunately, it appears the County Council does not share the County Executive's misplaced priorities. A council committee has since voted to restore funding for the Bethesda Metro entrance, and the full council will consider it soon. The council should also restore funding for the Metropolitan Branch Trail.

Despite claims to the contrary, these worthy projects need not compete with each other. The council can simply choose the least valuable of the plan's many expensive road projects and use the money to ensure Wheaton, Metro riders at Bethesda, the future Purple Line, and a valuable bicycle connection from Silver Spring to DC get the attention they deserve. Our county, state and region cannot afford more delay.

For example, in Montgomery County, the state will build a $63 million interchange at Georgia Avenue (MD 97) and Randolph Road, to speed up traffic near the Glenmont Metro station. With ramps and longer crossings, the interchange will further degrade pedestrian access to nearby shopping from residences.

For the amount spent on this project, the county could build much of the long-discussed Georgia Avenue bus rapid transit project from Wheaton to Olney instead.

Montgomery County is pushing another grade-separated interchange at the Veirs Mill Road (MD 586) and Randolph Road. Based on past experience, we can expect that the planned Veirs Mill bus rapid transit project (the county's largest bus route) will continue to lose out to the expensive interchange for priority.

The interchange would not only compete for funds with this proposed rapid bus corridor, it would also make conditions much worse for the many pedestrians who cross these roads to stores and bus stops at the intersection. Read the whole list of the county's priority transportation projects here.

In Prince George's, despite numerous setbacks, the 6,000-acre greenfield Westphalia development project outside the Capital Beltway and miles from the nearest Metro station still maintains a top ranking on the list from local elected officials. The price tag for the road infrastructure to serve this massive tract of largely undeveloped land is $460 million.

The transportation projects would convert Pennsylvania Avenue (MD 4) into a freeway from the Capitol Beltway to Woodyard Road (MD 223), and add 4 interchanges along the way. The Westphalia plan calls for adding 14,000-15,300 new residential units and up 6 million square feet of commercial space.

The county transportation lists also contain important transit, bike, and pedestrian projects, but often these proposals languish while road projects advance. Other important transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and complete streets solutions never even make the list. We need to fund projects that meet the growing demand for more transportation choices that save time, energy, and money.

If Marylanders are asked to pay more, each dollar must be invested wisely. Residents need better and more affordable transportation choices. So where should this money go?

First, let's fix Maryland's existing infrastructure, like our aging roads, bridges and transit systems. Then, let's build modern transit to move more people efficiently and competitively, while providing alternatives to congested highways like the Beltway, I-95, and I-270. It's long past time for critical rail investments like the Purple Line, Baltimore Red Line and MARC expansion, and better bus service.

At the local level, state revenue to local governments should go to fix and maintain local street connections, sidewalks, and bikeways for existing communities.

Moreover, given high unemployment, smart growth transit options can help the economy. Public transportation and road maintenance are the biggest job creators. According to the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, investments in road maintenance projects create 9% more jobs than spending on new highway capacity; increasing transit capacity creates 19% more jobs than new highway capacity.

If Marylanders are going to pay more, we deserve to know what the money will buy. We need a bill that that specifies smart, fix-it-first policies for the state. Otherwise, we're just throwing our money into the dark.

A fairer solution would be to allocate those dollars according to the uniform per pupil formula that is already in place. That formula is designed to ensure that each DC school child gets the same amount of funding, regardless of where he or she goes to school.

DCPS has completely legitimate funding needs. They want to use the money to increase food service contracts, supplement teacher salaries, and for other personnel costs. DC's public charter schools also have legitimate funding needs. In fact, they have exactly the same needs to feed their students and pay their teachers and other staff.

Public charter schools already have costs that don't apply to DCPS schools. For example, a new charter school has to find, buy, and outfit a building, while a DCPS school does not. But all the charter schools want is equal funding and an equal chance to prove their worth, knowing they can lose their charter if they don't perform well in educating their students.

Mayor Gray still has time to do what's right and fix this by distributing the newfound revenues in accordance with the existing funding formula. Equal funding for all of DC's public school students is not only good politics, it's the law, and it is in keeping with the promise of One City.

Revenues

Since Metro's ridership is in a slow decline due in part to both high fares and a weak economy, it can't count on increases in fare revenue (without raising fares) to help balance the budget. Additionally, WMATA can't assume that local jurisdictions will increase their contributions, so the budget process presumes the same support as last year.

In combination, this expense and revenue mix almost guarantees that WMATA will report a deficit to start out the new fiscal year. This coming year's reported deficit is different, because nearly half of the shortfall is considered discretionary.

Carol Kissal, WMATA Chief Finance Officer, made that point last Thursday, and suggested that the board develop a fare increase to cover the higher costs of existing service, while the jurisdictions should be expected to provide funding for various initiatives meant to improve service.

WMATA proposed various service improvements:

More police on buses

The bus system has experienced some high-profile shootings recently, and the system also has some issues with fare evasion and driver assaults. For $2 million per year, the agency could provide an additional 32 police officers for its buses. This might improve rates of fare evasion and encourage people to ride the bus if crimes and assaults decrease.

Preventive maintenance for escalators and elevators

Earlier in the year, Metro stated that it doesn't have the staff available to complete all preventive maintenance items on time. $8 million per year would increase the number of maintenance staff and improve elevator and escalator availability.

Bus priority corridors

For $5 million, Metro can provide additional buses and supervision on key routes, which would alleviate crowding and improve service. WMATA said this initiative would require some capital improvement as well as coordination with the local jurisdictions.

Maintenance of capital investments

An increase of $2.5 million is needed for ongoing maintenance of capital assets.

Increase staff to reduce overtime

This would cost $11.2 million per year, but might improve safety since fewer fatigued workers would be on the job. Additionally, more alert workers would make fewer mistakes, leading to less rework to fix problems.

Engineering maintenance

$1.9 million is needed to increase maintenance performed on the fleet of buses and trains.

Rail grinding

Worn-out rails have speed restrictions and increase the likelihood of wheel or rail failures. An additional $2.7 million would improve fleet reliability and on-time performance.

Radio maintenance

Metro has had some public failures of its radio system, and $1.4 million is needed to improve the radio reception throughout the system.

All of these choices are improvements compared to the baseline service Metro offers today, so $55 million of the $121 million shortfall shouldn't factor in as a "deficit," but rather as the cost of improvements that staff are looking at recommending.

The next step in for WMATA's General Manager, Richard Sarles, to propose a new budget in January, and some of these improvements could be funded by local jurisdictions or fare increases. The actual deficit for the current service is $66 million, which could be covered by a modest increase in fares in the new budget, similar to the rate of inflation since the last fare increase.

Where was the emotional debate about the reduction in DPR programs? Did someone defend residents who want to see their parks facilities properly maintained? Why should anyone expect that DPR could continue to operate with a sharply cut agency budget and similar cuts in related support services?

Ward 5 Councilmember Harry Thomas Jr. has talked a lot about the benefits he sees to the District of selecting a DC-based landscaping company. It may indeed bring benefits, but Thomas should also consider the benefits to many more District residents of having rec centers open for more hours in his own Ward 5.

Ward 5 has seven recreation centers, three community centers, and a cultural center. All 11 centers are closed every Sunday of the year. Three centers (Fort Lincoln, Theodore Hagans, and Edgewood) are closed all weekend year-round. Not a single center is open for more than six hours on Saturdays. Are these limited hours adequate for Ward 5 residents?

For other signs of problems from underfunding, Thomas need look no further than the now-unavailable DPR Kids Retreat program. The program launched in 2010 as a coordinated effort for kids activities at rec centers on days when DCPS teachers have scheduled professional development. The program only lasted a couple professional development days because of funding constraints. There is no Kids Retreat planned for today, October 14, 2011, the first DCPS professional development day of the year for teachers and staff.

What will it take for Mayor Gray and the Council to examine how the grass cutting debate distracts from the poor state of DPR funding? Aren't tens of thousands of rec center users more important stakeholders than the employees and owners of various landscaping firms?

Focusing too narrowly on the grass cutting contract will only further hurt District residents by neglecting DPR's much more severe funding woes.

Update: John McGaw from the Mayor's Office of Budget and Finance has provided a clarification regarding this post.

The decrease in 2010 is more than offset by nearly $9 million being transferred to the newly created Department of General Services (DGS) to perform facilities maintenance. This adjustment gives DPR a total of $45 million in 2012 with the DGS funds. Nevertheless, the 2012 budget remains well below the $63 and $59 million available to DPR in 2008 and 2009, respectively.