Swaim-Staley says “Maryland will deliver,” but will it?

The Fair Share for Metro campaign and the Washington Post’s supportive editorials have finally triggered a response from the O’Malley administration.

Maryland Transportation Secretary Beverley Swaim-Staley wrote an op-ed in yesterday’s Post, insisting that “Maryland’s commitment to WMATA cannot be questioned” and that “Maryland will deliver for WMATA when needed.” She makes several good points and announces greater support from the O’Malley administration for transit, but the deleterious effects on the WMATA capital budget remain, despite her assertions that Maryland “will deliver.”

The most promising part of the op-ed appears to say that the state will not require bus cuts to make up its portion of added jurisdictional funding requested by the Sarles budget. Interim GM Richard Sarles’ proposed budget, which gained general support from most WMATA Board members on April 22, requests $26 million in increased jurisdictional contributions. However, while Maryland representatives Peter Benjamin and Elizabeth Hewlett said Maryland would meet its share, they held out the possibility that some of that would come from bus cuts in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties.

Swaim-Staley says Maryland will increase its contributions: “Maryland will provide… a 6.5 percent increase in the operating subsidy, consistent with the latest budget proposal put forth by interim general manager Richard Sarles. This subsidy increase provides $9 million to cover the growth of MetroAccess in Maryland and $5 million to reduce the need for service reductions elsewhere.” Previously, Maryland had offered the $9 million, so this is a new commitment of $5 million more.

She also defends Maryland’s deferring capital contributions:

Maryland has determined that it will defer a portion of its capital funding for WMATA this year, a sum of $28 million, until the money is actually required rather than make an up-front payment to WMATA. The reason is simple. WMATA simply can’t spend the capital dollars it already has. In this fiscal year, the agency is budgeted to spend $623 million on capital improvements under the Metro Matters part of its budget. As of April, with just three months left in the budget year, it had spent only 40 percent of that money. The reality is that WMATA won’t be able to spend the remaining 60 percent.

This is not unusual for transit properties. Planning, design, engineering and other factors can experience unforeseen delays. But the fact remains, $375 million is in WMATA’s bank account, just sitting. Given the impact of the economic downturn, Maryland cannot allow its funds to simply sit. We are using our existing taxpayer dollars to fund shovel-ready, job-creating projects. To divert money from those worthy projects to sit idle in a bank account would be a drag on the regional economy.

It’s indeed true that WMATA has some unspent capital floating around, but as Craig Simpson argued, it’s not quite the mismanagement it sounds like. The Board has discussed ways to either speed up the process or hold back some funds. It’s reasonable to discuss ways to fix this problem. However, while it’s true the $28 million deferral this year won’t slow down repairs and upgrades, the expected deferral for next year, and the suddenly smaller capital budget, will.

Maryland essentially hit the capital budget three times. Just one of the three isn’t harmful, but all three together sure are. Swaim-Staley is just defending the one and not addressing the others. She does talk about holding WMATA more accountable, and that’s laudable. There’s probably some fat in the capital budget. Maryland representatives could say what that is, and outline some specific ideas for reform. But just cutting off funds to replace dangerous and aging railcars won’t magically increase accountability. It’s just penny pinching.

Until recently, everyone had been expecting the new Metro Matters program to keep funding levels about the same as the 2006-2010 program. That provided about $645 million per year, excluding $200 million in FY10 stimulus money. Add to that the $300 million in “dedicated funds,” half from the federal government and half from local jurisdictions, and WMATA would have about $9.5 billion over 10 years.

WMATA has identified capital needs of about $11 billion, leaving it $1.5 billion short. Maybe some of that isn’t really necessary, but the $9.5 billion almost certainly is.

Knowing that Maryland (and the other jurisdictions, to a lesser extent) faced short-term budget problems because of the economy, WMATA offered to “back-load” the next capital budget, with smaller payments now growing to larger ones in future years. It would also have scaled the entire budget back to total about $9 billion over 10 years, leaving a $2 billion gap.

However, when Maryland announced it wanted even smaller commitments, WMATA again scaled back the capital budget by $460 million over 6 years, delaying or canceling many projects including replacing the 1000-series railcars, upgrading power systems to accommodate 8-car trains, which are necessary to avoid overcrowding, and the test track and commissioning facility needed to get 7000-series cars into service fast enough to open the Silver Line on time.

This doesn’t sound like Maryland “deliver[ing] for WMATA when needed.” Cutting important projects out of the 6-year plan isn’t keeping what’s needed. If Maryland wants to push for an agreement where they actually pony up money closer to the time it’s actually needed, but which maintains the previous 10-year spending timeline, fine. The previous Metro Matters agreement doesn’t need to be renewed exactly as is.

However, the O’Malley administration can’t ask WMATA to cut its repair and upgrade schedule for vital components and then say the state will be there for WMATA. It just doesn’t ring true.

The way to ensure the state will fund a project is to make a firm commitment. With the Intercounty Connector, the state borrowed against its future tolls and federal aid, making it impossible for them to reverse course even when the economy turned and their budget situation became dire. They shouldn’t shortchange transit by forcing WMATA to beg for jurisdictional dollars every year when highway projects that are bankrupting the Transportation Trust Fund get their guaranteed share.

The O’Malley administration should sign a commitment to provide funds up to at least the $9 billion level on some schedule, a commitment that would withstand any shifts in circumstances. Anything else doesn’t deliver.