Now, in my completely untechnical, I-think-I-get-this-sort-of fashion, I'm going to tackle that whole transit funding issue as it pertains to Georgia and MARTA. I do not work in transit, or the government, so I'm not an expert. But I think it needs to get out there, and since I'm trying to add to the advocacy world, this kind of stuff is important.
So, this started because I got a phone call from CV, my new lawyer-type friend, who wanted to inform me of my inaccuracies in my earlier funding post? Inaccuracies? I actually stole that stuff from my lobbyist-type friend, so I thought it was at least semi-accurate, if not without a propaganda. And besides, Two would tell me if I got it wrong, right? But CV went on to explain that I was part right, but that the game had changed.
See, MARTA is asking for access to its own capitol funds to keep itself in operation. What CV was saying is that due to new federal guidelines regarding safety measures, stemming from that accident in DC (way to screw it up for all of us, WMATA), that MARTA was burning through that reserve and it wouldn't be enough to save it. CV said this is the talk down at the legislature.
Well heck. How had I not heard about this? First I asked my favorite lobbyist, and he had no idea what I was talking about. So then I asked Two, who said CV was right, but that I really needed to ask One. One said that MARTA eis using funds to work on those safety regulations, but that this was an oversimplification of the situation, and that there is still money to help out MARTA, and, of course, they still need access to it. But like I mentioned before, this will only get them through the next fiscal year, then they're broker than broke with no back-up plan, which is why we ned new transit funding.
Then the question remains, where is this funding going to come from? Yesterday, republicans came out saying that they don't support a constitutional amendment to create a sales tax for the funding. You can read about that at the ajc:
GOP lawmakers abandon November vote on transportation sales tax
Instead, they favor new district, once again, making it a metro problem.
But it seems like this is our one shot to get things right, folks are going to be reluctant to keep going through this session after session, so we have to make sure that we get funding that will support transit well into the future. The Saporta Report has a really great take on that here:
If we can't do it right, maybe we should put the breaks on new transportation funding
And if I got it wrong, let me know!
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I haven't read anything on what is being proposed other than what we've all read in the media, but the statewide 1% sales tax is going to be a non-starter because the entire state would have to vote for it, and if it passed in that venue it would almost certainly heavily favor roads and bridges, if there was any transit included at all. However the most overwhelmingly likely outcome would be that those ouside Metro-Atlanta would play the I hate Atlanta card and vote against. The regional option is by far the most transit-friendly of the two. In the last two years, we have seen the statewide option pitted against the regional approach. Both times CfPT issued a statement that They would not support the statewide option if it were brought to the floor. Of course, neither time did either of the options make it to vote. It could be argued that it is perhaps a possitive that the statewide option appears to be DOA before even being considered. But its much too soon, and I guess we're perhaps a bit too cynical to start celebrating. The trick is to convince people that there are more people ho stain to gain from the regional approach than those in Metro-Atlanta. Savannah, Macon, Augusta, among others are also regions having to deal with transportation issues.
ReplyDeleteWake me up when it's over.