California transit systems' pleas for aid haven't moved the capitol

California’s public transit systems say they are facing a “fiscal cliff” as ridership continues to lag behind pre-pandemic levels and federal emergency aid expires. If the state doesn’t

cough up billions of dollars to underwrite bus and rail systems – they want $1 billion a year for at least five years – their managers say they will have no choice but to reduce service

and/or raise fares, mostly affecting low-income Californians. On Tuesday, transit system leaders, their unions and supportive legislators staged an “emergency press conference” near the

Capitol to raise the issue’s profile, as legislative leaders and Gov. Gavin Newsom work on a state budget that must be passed by June 15. “It’s a do or die moment for transit in California,”

state Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat, said. Transit’s pleas haven’t fared well so far. Newsom’s revised budget this month brushed them off with a vague pledge to work on the

problem later. Transit has some support in Assembly and Senate budget blueprints, but looming over the situation is the same cloud that affects every other budget interest group this year –

a massive deficit. Newsom pegs the gap between income and outgo at $32.5 billion – up $9 billion from his initial budget – while the Legislature’s budget analyst, Gabe Petek, says it’s

several billion dollars higher and that deficits will plague the state for several years to come. The deficit is not the only hurdle. While transit leaders say the money is needed to

maintain service while ridership rebuilds, there’s no particular reason to believe that it will return to pre-pandemic levels. The state’s population is dropping and commuting has declined

as many workers continue to do their jobs remotely. Moreover, there are rising complaints that buses and trains have become breeding grounds for criminal activity. The poster child for the

state’s troubled transit systems is Bay Area Rapid Transit, or BART, which has seen one of the largest declines in ridership, puny post-pandemic recovery and sharp criticism for operational

shortcomings and rider safety. Harriet Richardson, BART’s inspector general, resigned in March, saying that the system’s directors, managers and unions had obstructed her efforts to root out

waste and corruption. Richardson’s position has been created in 2018 as part of an effort to persuade voters to approve a transit ballot measure and Newsom appointed Richardson, the former

Palo Alto city auditor. “The board keeps wanting to support what the unions want, and that is an interference in our work,” Richardson told the San Francisco Chronicle. “It undermines our

independence and undermines employees’ whistle-blower protection rights, and I just simply can’t agree to it.” Steve Glazer, a Democratic state senator from Orinda, resigned from a

legislative committee studying transit finances, complaining that BART – which serves his East Bay constituents – was refusing to confront its managerial problems. Daniel Borenstein, a

columnist for the Bay Area News Group who has closely monitored BART’s performance for years, says the system doesn’t deserve help. “Most BART directors won’t even consider trimming the

district’s operating budget. It’s childish and fiscally reckless. And it demonstrates exactly why neither state lawmakers nor Bay Area voters should entrust BART with more money,” Borenstein

recently opined. “BART doesn’t deserve a bailout until it brings its spending into alignment with the new reality. There is no sign of the system’s ridership returning to pre-pandemic

levels – not in the foreseeable future and most likely not ever.” It would be fair to say that BART’s sorry state drags down the more persuasive pleas of other systems for state aid – a bad

apple, as it were, spoiling the whole barrel.