As
the Schwarzenegger Administration goes into the final weekend of
number-crunching before the May Revise to the budget is announced on
Monday, transit advocates urge the Governor to reverse more than $1
billion in cuts to public transit.
“With more than 50 million people expected to live in Californianot
to invest in public transit. We already have too much traffic and too
much pollution, and travel will only get worse unless we invest in
convenient alternatives to driving. The Governor’s proposed cuts are
unacceptable,” said Emily Rusch, Advocate with CALPIRG. by 2030, we cannot afford
“Investing in quality public transit must be an integral part of California's strategy to address global warming. 41 percent of our state's greenhouse gas emissions come from transportation. And, as California
becomes home to more people and as Californians drive more and farther,
cleaner fuels and more efficient vehicles alone won't lead to a
reduction from today's emissions levels. We have to make a commitment
to funding quality, dependable public transit in order to achieve the
momentous goals of AB 32,” said Carli Paine, Transportation Program
Director for the Transportation and Land Use Coalition in Oakland.
In
total, Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed cutting over $1.1 billion
from public transit in the state budget for next year. Specific
concerns with the current budget proposal for public transit include:
- Governor
Schwarzenegger’s January proposal would cut the State Transit
Assistance program, the only state program that assists with operating
costs, by 70 percent from last year. Only $185 million in state funds
would be available to help cover operations. With gas prices up again,
transit agencies need more funding to cover fuel costs and increased
ridership.
- Governor
Schwarzenegger’s January proposal would use $600 million from Prop 1B
bonds to replace $700 million in redirected transit funds, rather than
using Prop 1B to supplement the transit agencies’ budgets, as voters
clearly intended when they passed the bond measure. The Governor’s
proposed cuts counter voter intentions and threaten to put many
upgrades and expansion projects on hold. In a recent letter to the
Legislature, the California Transportation Commission Chairman wrote
that the governor’s proposal could under-fund the State Transit
Improvement Project (STIP) by $750 million in 2007-08 and $1.5 billion
over five years. He goes on to add that “using Proposition 1B funds to
fund previously programmed STIP projects, as suggested in the budget,
seems to be doing a disservice to the voters who enacted the
proposition.”
- Governor
Schwarzenegger’s January proposal would make many of the transit
funding cuts permanent. For example, he proposes permanently
redirecting what’s known as the “spillover,” a funding pot for public
transit operations that increases when gas prices are high. By
proposing to redirect those funds, the Governor refuses to recognize
that when gas prices are high the costs of providing public transit
increases, and the demand for more services many systems also
experience a jump in riders when it costs more to commute by car.
Here
are the expected impacts of the proposed cuts, reported by the transit
agencies themselves in a survey by the California Transit Association:
Bay Area |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
AC Transit (Alameda, Contra Costa) |
· 67.6 million trips, including 656,000 ADA/ Paratransit trips
· 227,000 trips daily |
· $10 million gash in AC Transit’s operating budget
· Cut of roughly 80,000 hours of revenue service annually, leading to more traffic
· Service
reductions for commuters, students, seniors, people with disabilities,
low-income working families, and the general public |
So. California |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
Metro
(Los Angeles) |
· 1.6 million bus and rail boardings each weekday
· Over 416 million trips/year |
· Transit pass increase in 2007 from $52 to $75 per month – a 44% increase
· Significant hardship for low and fixed-income riders
· Limited new rapid bus lines that reduce travel times
· Reduced support for light rail extensions
· More commuters on the road in the city with the worst air pollution in the U.S. |
Long Beach Transit |
· 27.2 million trips in FY 2005-06 |
· No bus purchases from bond funds because no funds to operate them
· Potential service cuts and fare increases |
Foothill Transit (San Gabriel, Pomona Valleys) |
· 14.9 million trips in 2005-06
|
· Cuts in both local and express transit
· Impacts especially on downtown L.A. employees using commuter service
· Reduced new Silver Streak service, which links Montclair, Pomona, West Covina and El Monte with transit connections, Cal State LA, USC Medical Center and downtown L.A.
· Employee layoffs |
Orange County Transportation Authority |
· 68 million bus trips/year
· Over 1.1 million ADA/Paratransit trips/year |
· No new vehicle service hours
· Unable to purchase 54 more buses for fixed-route services
|
San Diego |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System |
· 85 million trips/year |
· No replacement buses, increasing maintenance costs & reducing dependability
· Cuts in service frequency, especially in high-demand and rural areas
· Cuts to Express commuter routes, increasing traffic on congested highways |
Inland Empire |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
Riverside Transit Agency |
· 6.8 million trips/year |
· Keeps
vehicles in service past their active life, reducing dependability for
those who rely on RTA to get to school, work, and critical services |
SunLine Transit Agency (Riverside County) |
· 3.6 million trips/year |
· Reduces facility improvements and replacement/new buses for service
· Eliminates or delays new service to areas with increased growth and demand for public transportation
· Risks service cuts and layoffs |
Central Coast |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
Monterey-Salinas Transit |
· 6 million trips/year |
· New fare increase when $2.00 fare is already among the highest in the nation
· Coming on top of service cuts every year since 2001 from increasing insurance rates after 9-11, and jumps in health care costs
· Third fare jump after increases in 2005 and 2006 due to skyrocketing fuel costs |
No. California |
Annual Trips |
Impacts of Proposed Cuts |
Capitol Corridor |
· 1.3 million trips/year |
· Cuts only source of capital funds for design-ready track reliability projects between Sacramento and San Jose |
E-tran
(Elk Grove) |
· 890,000 trips/year |
· No new service |
Yolo County Transportation District |
· 1.3 million trips/year |
· Reduces bus purchases so system will be short buses
· Prevents implementation of system-wide security program
· No heat for maintenance personnel |
Additional Contacts:
Carli Paine, Transportation Program Director, Transportation and Land Use Coalition (TALC)
510-740-3150 x315
