back to vtaridersunion.org main page| Santa Clara VTA | Riders Union |
Editor's Note: Margaret Okuzumi, Executive Director of BayRail Alliance, filed this report. Any opinions expressed are strictly her own and not necessarily those of SCVTARU. Per our web site policy, links outside www.vtaridersunion.org will open up another web browser window.
At the last ad-hoc committee meeting, the independent financial consultant that I got them to hire produced a chart that shows that Measure A operating monies aren't even large enough to cover the operating expenses of the Vasona light rail, not to mention the Tasman East/Capitol line.
Last meeting, he showed that VTA has a "structural deficit" in the neighborhood of $110 million/year, now about $85-$100 million/year with the latest round of service cuts and pending layoffs. Since VTA probably can't raise any significant money within the next 6 months, look for another 21% reduction in bus service to be implemented this fall.
The best hope for VTA raising new money is through a payroll tax (generating an estimated whopping $662 million/year with a 1% tax), and maybe a new regional gas tax. Look to the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group (SVMG) to kick and scream about a proposed payroll tax. A parcel tax might also be possible but other groups, notably school groups, are eyeing that as a revenue source as well.
I brought up charging for parking but was basically shot down by folks who said it would be too difficult to implement.
More talk about fares...Working Partnerships opposes the call for VTA to try to achieve 30% farebox recovery, which is basically impossible given current land use policies. Even the other consultant they hired to advise on farebox and service said that 30% would not be advisable, although 20% or 25% might be more reasonable as a goal over the long term. The consultant's analysis showed that VTA's youth fares are higher than average, and that the base fare was pretty much in line, but that VTA should consider raising senior/disabled fares and monthly pass rates, and should take a look at raising EcoPass rates. pretty much what the Business Review Team came up with (they used the same consultant) except that he added EcoPass this time.
I feel that all this talk about riders not paying enough is wrong. Higher fares penalize current transit riders for Santa Clara County's sprawl and the VTA Board's poor land use decisions (when they make decisions wearing their other hats as councilmembers, etc.). Other places, such as Cleveland RTA and New Jersey Transit (NJT), have better ridership because they have better transit-oriented development (TOD).
back to vtaridersunion.org main page