When Metro General Manager Paul J. Wiedefeld released his revised fiscal 2018 budget Monday, officials pointed to the fare increases and service and job cuts in the spending plan as evidence they had done all they could to put the agency on sound financial ground. Jack Evans, the agency’s board chairman, said it is now up to regional and congressional leaders to come up with a dedicated funding source for the struggling transit agency.
“I don’t like raising fares, cutting services, all that stuff, but it takes them off the table for the discussion next year,” Evans said Tuesday. “Metro has gotten its act together. . . . So what now? What other hurdle? What other excuse are the elected officials trying to throw up to avoid dealing with the problem?”
But not everyone is buying it. Some officials said the agency has much to do to convince them it has done all the belt-tightening and structural reform it possibly can.
“Not even close,” said Matthew Letourneau (R-Dulles), a Loudoun County supervisor who serves as vice-chairman of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
The board’s finance committee is scheduled to vote on a $1.8 billion operating budget Thursday. Since the finance committee consists of the full board, Thursday’s vote could effectively be viewed as final approval even though the full board vote is scheduled for March 23.
[Metro moving forward with fare increases for coming year]
Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.) said the fare hikes and other austerity measures have helped focus the attention of local and federal lawmakers. “The instability of our financial base is now apparent for everyone to see,” he said.
But others, like Letourneau, pushed back.
Achieving a balanced budget for the coming fiscal year is an important step, he said, but he bristled at the idea that Metro had exhausted all of its options for cutting costs.
“Maybe that’s true within the confines of the existing contract [with labor unions] that Metro is operating under,” Letourneau said. “But the whole point is that there are a myriad of things in the contract that are concerning — and whether those are addressed through the terms of the contract, of the [Metro] Compact itself, they have to do that.”
Letourneau pointed to a clause in Virginia legislation linked to a bill that establishes a new commission to oversee safety at Metro. It directs the Virginia transportation secretary to hold talks with his or her counterparts in the District and Maryland, and with the federal government, to rewrite the Metro Compact to tackle issues such as labor policies, board structure and financing.
Those issues, Letourneau said, “will need to be addressed. I don’t think that just simply having fare increases and doing what they’re doing this year is going to be enough.”
Letourneau, a Republican in a heavily Democratic region, is more outspoken than most. But powerful Democrats, including Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, have also said Metro needs structural reforms before more funding is discussed.
[Va. bill creating Metro safety body clears critical hurdle, but requires talks on rewriting compact]
The fare hikes and service cuts are part of Wiedefeld’s plan to fill a $290 million shortfall for the fiscal year that begins July 1. He also has eliminated 500 jobs and is in the process of cutting 500 more.
Rush-hour rail fares would increase by a dime, with $2.25 as the new minimum and $6 as the maximum one-way fare. Off-peak fares would go up by a quarter; bus fares also would rise 25 cents, to $2. There also would be longer waits for trains.
Wiedefeld has stopped short of advocating for dedicated funding, but he has indicated the belt-tightening measures Metro has turned to are unsustainable in the long term.
For more than a year, Evans has been sounding the alarm that Metro won’t survive without additional sources of revenue, such as a regional gas or sales taxes, or increased subsidies from the federal government.
“Most of the elected officials in this region believe that the fairy godmother will wave her wand and Metro will be okay,” Evans said. “That’s [what] they’ve been hoping for the last 15 years.”
Sharon Bulova (D), chairwoman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, applauded Metro’s efforts to get its financial house in order, but disagreed with Evans’ contention.
“I wouldn’t say that Metro has done all it can,” she said, naming governance and labor issues such as overtime and benefits. “I know that Metro is looking at all of those things and they need to continue to look at those things. I believe that the issues of governance and the issue especially of labor needs to be on the table not just for Metro but for all of us as a region.”
[Will Donald Trump make Metro great again?]
Evans proposes a 1-cent sales tax for the District and the Maryland and Virginia jurisdictions served by Metro. Bulova, however, declined to offer up specific proposal.
“Whether it’s a sales tax or some other source of revenue from Fairfax or from Virginia, that is still to be decided — but I acknowledge that there’s a need for additional revenue for all of the jurisdictions and I’m not sure exactly what that source of revenue will be.”
Maryland Del. Kumar P. Barve (D-Montgomery), who chairs the House Environment and Transportation Committee, said he was similarly open-minded about what form an eventual dedicated funding source might take. Still, he said, the responsibility for righting Metro should not just fall to the agency and its immediate jurisdictions. The federal government should play a more significant role in helping solve Metro’s financial problems, he said.
[Metro’s trains and buses are more reliable. So why aren’t they on-time?]
“We’d like for them to get serious about this, and to help us fix the system,” Barve said.
And fare hikes, service cuts and employee layoffs — however unpleasant for Metro riders and staff members — indicate that Metro has earned additional outside help, he said.
“I think the seriousness of Paul J. Wiedefeld is all the proof that anybody needs about the seriousness of Metro’s management,” Barve said.
Connolly also said that Wiedefeld and his reality-check budget have amassed goodwill on Capitol Hill, because “he’s shown that he’s willing to make tough and difficult decisions about issues like operations, finances and personnel.”
Still, goodwill may only go so far, Connolly acknowledged. Many lawmakers remain unconvinced that the federal government is responsible for taking a more active role in funding the system — and they continue to be wary about whether Metro’s safety, financial and operational improvements have gone far enough.
“I think it’s going too far to say that confidence is fully restored in Metro,” Connolly said. “I don’t know whether any one act or any one individual is going to be able to do that.”
Despite the entreaties for additional federal financial support, there also is some concern among the region’s congressional delegation that Metro will be able to hang on to its current levels of federal funding.
Last week, Connolly and other members of the region’s House delegation wrote to leaders of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, urging them to maintain transit grant funding levels for Metro in the coming year. The concern is that, in an administration seeking to transfer billions of dollars to defense spending, Metro might wind up with even less than it has now.
“I would suggest that the road is steeper than ever,” Connolly said of the prospect for increased federal aid in coming years. “I think it’s going to be a struggle across the board.”