Using stimulus money for Metro operations? Make a plan to pay it back

The WMATA board has reached a deal to use stimulus money to fill Metro’s budget gap. It’s great that we’ll be able to save current levels of service. However, it’s even more important to act responsibly with Metro’s budget in the future. Metro needs to start work now on ways to make the bus system more efficient, build political support for stronger subsidies, and explorer targeted sources of revenue.

The stimulus money was intended to fund capital repairs. During tight budgets, agencies often defer maintenance. That saves money now, but costs more down the road. If Metro is putting off some repair, the bill will come due later, and the longer we defer, the worse it will be. Right now, avoiding service cuts may be a more important goal, but Metro should also devise a plan right away to pay it back.

Think of it as a loan. Metro is borrowing from the future. We’re doing a lot of that lately. But this should be a very short-term loan. We need a plan to cut costs, enhance revenues, and/or grow jurisdictions’ contributions. That plan must plug the following years’ budget gap, fund the maintenance we didn’t do this year, and perform extra maintenance to make up for the year’s deferral.

With the looming deadline for fare hike or service cut hearings, Metro staff didn’t have time to thoroughly analyze the system to find more ways to save money. Nor was there time for Board members to build a political consensus in the states and the District for more funding. Once they pass this compromise and win a year of breathing room, the real work must begin.

Transit service is incredibly important. The more convenient our service, the more people take transit, which helps not only riders but all the drivers who enjoy roads with fewer cars. Still, the bus system can be more rational without harming riders. Right now, it still bears the legacy of multiple independent bus operators. The routes, especially downtown, are tangled and confusing. As a result, commuters take the one route from home to work, while casual users seldom know where or when to use the bus system. We’ve optimized the route network for those who already take the bus, but at the expense of many who would but don’t.

Metro should immediately begin a study similar to San Francisco’s Transit Effectiveness Project. That comprehensive analysis found changes in the bus system which improved service while simultaneously cutting costs. In downtown SF, they had multiple lines running on parallel streets. Without taking away service to needy groups, they combined some of these. They added service on high-demand “trunk lines” and divided some lines that experienced heavy delays. We need a similar study here. No change can benefit every single rider, but on balance, it should help more riders than it inconveniences, and balance both the gains and the few losses among rich and poor alike.

We can also save money by investing in priority bus corridors. With dedicated lanes, queue jumpers, and signal priority to “hold the green”, buses can move much more quickly. Not only do they get riders to their destinations faster, but they finish their routes faster, saving on labor costs or allowing more service with the same number of drivers.

Finally, Metro should continue exploring targeted opportunities to raise revenue. Our underpriced parking garages are one example. Metro can explore vending, advertising, and more. Many of these take time to develop. The time is now.

At the same time the Metro board votes to redirect the stimulus money, they should pass a resolution directing staff to develop a bus route restructuring and streamlining plan within six months. The plan should save at least $20 million a year in bus service efficiency improvements while not unfairly burdening low income or transit-dependent riders. These would not be cuts, but enhancements that save money while improving, rather than diminishing, service for more people. The resolution should require a report within six months containing recommendations Metro can implement within one year from now.

Last year, Metro balanced its budget with a one-time trick. The fare increase went into effect in January, but all of the money went into the fiscal year beginning in July. They had 18 months of a fare increase for only 12 months of costs. We can’t use that trick again. Transferring capital stimulus money to operating costs is another one-time trick. Soon we’re going to run out of tricks. It’s time to start working on a serious plan that balances Metro’s budgets without any illusions or sleight-of-hand.