ATLANTA TRANSIT (Marta, Beltline, Peachtree Streetcar, LovJoy Commuter, etc...)

[shivtim]

^That article has some pretty big factual errors and blatant omissions. How can you discuss MARTA's situation without discussing the 50/50 split and other restrictions placed by the state? He also says MARTA faces a "$120 million budget hole," which is not true. That figure was a projected shortage in operational funding for 2011, which is now drastically reduced because of the removal of the 50/50 provision. Towards the end of the article he talks about the transportation act and the 1 cent vote, saying people wont vote for any MARTA improvements because its a "sullied brand." Problem is, if he knew anything about the bill, he would know it specifically says the tax can't be spent on MARTA, so that's not even an option.

Finally, a matter of opinion. He says "It’s time to stop assuming that MARTA itself can or should expand throughout the region." This reveals his true intentions. He doesn't believe MARTA should expand, even as traffic and air pollution get worse and worse.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by WestsideATL

Based on my reading of the article, MARTA just needs to be more fiscally conservative as to how much service they put out on the street.

Well, I probably did miss the point.

Maybe the MARTA orto be thinking about shrinking instead of expanding. What I'm getting at is it should focus on being really good in a smaller area with lots of trains and buses and more frequencies at all hours of the day and night, instead of just trying to do a little bit here and there in areas it can't really cover.

Then if people see it is really great and useful in other parts of the ATL they will want to glom onto it where they are. I have been on many a bus and train where there wasn't too many people on there at all. I then I have stood there waiting forever on some bus that like to have never come. So why not use it where people actually want it and are paying for it.

[WestsideATL]

Ok Shiv, you've got several items to respond to.

On the 50/50 split, I'll grant you that the state should just remove the requirement instead of relaxing it back to 55/45 or 60/40 every three years only to have MARTA have to come back to Dome and request that it be done again (historically the State has relaxed the restriction during down years). I can't find anything online that says exactly how much lower than $120 the budget deficit is going to be due to the relaxation of the 50/50 rule. All I've heard that is that even with the relaxed 50/50 rule for the next budgetary cycle, it isn't going to give MARTA nearly enough money to keep their existing service levels intact.

On the TSPLOST, Gwinnett had done some polling previously on support for transit. When the survey asked about regional transit, the results were favorable, somewhere in the 55% range. When asked about being part of an expanded MARTA system, the positive results dropped down to 45%. So, whether warranted or not, the MARTA "brand" seems to carry some negative connotations in the suburban counties.

On MARTA expanding regionally, if our future transit expansion ends up being primarily light rail, it doesn't necessarily have to be under MARTA's watch. In San Francisco, BART is the heavy rail service provider and MUNI is the light rail and bus service provider. We might lose a few economies of scale by having different agencies operate service, but it's a model that does work in other metropolitan areas.

[shivtim]

^WestsideATL, it sounds to me like we're 100% in agreement. My comments are directed at what I perceive as blatant unfair ommissions in the article.

As you said, the temporary removal of the 50/50 split will provide a financial band-aid, but will not completely cover MARTA's projected deficit. But the author did not even mention this incredibly important aspect of the debate. Any article that talks about MARTA and transportation options without mentioning the huge restrictions placed on MARTA by the state is simply not being honest.

Of course MARTA has a sullied brand name, especially in the suburbs. However, this has nothing to do with the transportation bill's tax option, because MARTA can't be included in any referendum, based on the language of the bill. The author was simply wrong on this.

Agreed, MARTA does not have to run light rail etc. We already have multiple transit agencies in the metro area, and they should all expand. However, for economic and logistic purposes, it makes sense that MARTA should run any in-town expansions (such as the beltline, peachtree streetcar, or a heavy rail expansion to Emory/CDC/Toco Hills area). The author claiming that MARTA should not be expanded is just more anti-MARTA, anti-density ranting. All of the leaders in the city, the core counties, all associated planning agencies, and all of the business bureaus and chambers of commerce in the area call for MARTA expansion.

[WestsideATL]

Originally Posted by shivtim

Of course MARTA has a sullied brand name, especially in the suburbs. However, this has nothing to do with the transportation bill's tax option, because MARTA can't be included in any referendum, based on the language of the bill. The author was simply wrong on this.

I don't think that's factually accurate. Based on my reading of the bill, MARTA can be included as a funding recipient, but only for new capital projects within their service area (i.e. Clifton Corridor, I-20 East, BeltLine, etc.). They just can't recieve additional operating support for the existing system through the TSPLOST.

I've seen some other posts as well as a blog from Maria Saporta claiming that MARTA has been singled out on this issue. None of the other urban systems in Georgia have a dedicated sales tax that supports their operations. That, in and of itself, makes MARTA unique. The state legislators simply didn't want the additional 1% sales tax to be used to cover things the existing 1% MARTA tax is supposed to be supporting (i.e. the existing bus and rail network).

[cybele]

Originally Posted by shivtim

However, for economic and logistic purposes, it makes sense that MARTA should run any in-town expansions (such as the beltline, peachtree streetcar, or a heavy rail expansion to Emory/CDC/Toco Hills area).

Well, but is the MARTA the one to do it? I don't see how being pro-transit and pro-light rail necessarily means being pro-MARTA. A lots of people would say the MARTA has gotten too bogged down in the politics and the unions and the negative image thing and whatnot, so why not set up something new to handle it. New blood and so forth.

[shivtim]

Yes, MARTA is the one to do it. Despite its critics, MARTA is one of the most efficient and cost-effective transit systems in the entire country by most metrics. It is incredible that MARTA accomplishes what it does with support from only two counties, and with direct antagonism from the state and surrounding counties. You want a name change? Fine, change MARTA's name so that Cobb and Gwinnett will vote for it. No big deal.

You're right, I double-checked and the exact language of the bill is:
"the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, created by an Act approved March 10, 1965 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 2243), as amended, shall not be authorized to use any proceeds from the special district transportation sales and use tax for expenses of maintenance and operation of such portions of the transportation system of such authority in existence on January1, 2011."

So, yes, the tax could be used to build new MARTA infrastructure. Now, why state legislators should have any word in what metro atlanta can use it's 1 cent tax for is beyond me, especially since each of the more than 100 other transit agencies in the state will be allowed to use their tax for operations if desired.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by shivtim

Yes, MARTA is the one to do it. Despite its critics, MARTA is one of the most efficient and cost-effective transit systems in the entire country by most metrics. It is incredible that MARTA accomplishes what it does with support from only two counties, and with direct antagonism from the state and surrounding counties. You want a name change? Fine, change MARTA's name so that Cobb and Gwinnett will vote for it. No big deal.

You're right, I double-checked and the exact language of the bill is:
"the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, created by an Act approved March 10, 1965 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 2243), as amended, shall not be authorized to use any proceeds from the special district transportation sales and use tax for expenses of maintenance and operation of such portions of the transportation system of such authority in existence on January1, 2011."

So, yes, the tax could be used to build new MARTA infrastructure. Now, why state legislators should have any word in what metro atlanta can use it's 1 cent tax for is beyond me, especially since each of the more than 100 other transit agencies in the state will be allowed to use their tax for operations if desired.

The anti-MARTA sentiment is such silliness I could just puke. It's a bandwagon many Atlantans have jumped onto without any real information to support their stance. I'm certainly not trying to say that MARTA is perfect...but it's not bad, either. I'm not sure what other agency is more qualified to oversee light rail than MARTA.

[WestsideATL]

To borrow Cybele's argument, one of MARTA's biggest failures has been their inability to attract development around their stations. Sure, they have the capability to design the guideway and stations; however, if we're talking about using transit-oriented development to reshape land use and travel patterns along major corridors such as I-285, I-75 and I-85, I have little faith that MARTA is equipped with the staff (or at least, capable staff) to develop a successful station area development program.

Not that there's anyone better currently, but perhaps a new organization or a re-organization of GRTA could bring a fresh look to TOD in the region.

[cybele]

Well, it's a political and a image thing as much as anything else. Even if you have got the expertise you have to get the powers that be on board, which includes the taxpayers not just in Fulton and Dekalb but all over the ATL. You probably have a bunch of people in some of these places that just goes, "the MARTA, no way!" when they would actually like to get some transit. So why not take the good parts of the MARTA and set it up as part of some new thing that doesn't have the negativity and so forth.

[RobMidtowner]

^^What "negativity" are you talking about? If someone is pro-transit, why would they say "MARTA, no way!" What is so much more "negative" about riding a MARTA train than a GRTA bus? I don't buy this argument.

[smArTaLlone]

Originally Posted by WestsideATL

To borrow Cybele's argument, one of MARTA's biggest failures has been their inability to attract development around their stations. Sure, they have the capability to design the guideway and stations; however, if we're talking about using transit-oriented development to reshape land use and travel patterns along major corridors such as I-285, I-75 and I-85, I have little faith that MARTA is equipped with the staff (or at least, capable staff) to develop a successful station area development program.

Not that there's anyone better currently, but perhaps a new organization or a re-organization of GRTA could bring a fresh look to TOD in the region.

That's not just a Marta failure but a city, regional, state failure. Marta couldn't possibly transform the region when everything else is geared toward car transportation. It was quite frankly not in the culture of this region to develop and live around Marta stations particularly during Marta's expansion years when much of its coverage area was stagnant or losing population.

Its a transit agency. They shouldn't have to create a development program.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by cybele

Well, it's a political and a image thing as much as anything else. Even if you have got the expertise you have to get the powers that be on board, which includes the taxpayers not just in Fulton and Dekalb but all over the ATL. You probably have a bunch of people in some of these places that just goes, "the MARTA, no way!" when they would actually like to get some transit. So why not take the good parts of the MARTA and set it up as part of some new thing that doesn't have the negativity and so forth.

Or better yet, why can't the people who have some "perceived" problem with MARTA do a little research that would enlighten them rather than jumping on the "MARTA, no way" wagon?

By the way, Atlantans really just call it MARTA - not THE MARTA.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by TarHeelJ

Or better yet, why can't the people who have some "perceived" problem with MARTA do a little research that would enlighten them rather than jumping on the "MARTA, no way" wagon?

Well, it's a brand situation. You don't hear them going, "Well, why don't people who have some perceived problem with the BP Oil do a little research before getting on us about this oil spill thing." If you are the one selling you can't holler at the ones you want to buy to go do more research so they will like you better, it's on you to come up with something they like, which is just Marketer 101.


In other words the man at the car lot knows he's not going to sell many by fussing at people for being too stupid to come buy one.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by RobMidtowner

^^What "negativity" are you talking about?

Well, wrong as it may be there is those who has negative ideas about the MARTA, which is one of the reasons why they have been against it for 40 or 50 years. They say it is inefficient, the unions run it, it will bring crime, the property values, it won't help me just other people, who will get stuck paying for it and this, that and the other. It is the perceptions you are dealing with which has to be dealt with. Look at all the places in the ATL that has already got big time transit but people don't use it.

[Fiorenza]

The main problem that Republicans like me have with MARTA is the union. It means operating costs are 1.5 times higher than they need be.

[WestsideATL]

Originally Posted by Fiorenza

The main problem that Republicans like me have with MARTA is the union. It means operating costs are 1.5 times higher than they need be.

Well, Georgia is a right to work state, and several of the MARTA bus drivers I know opted not to join the union because their dues were too high. It's just a shame that unions are still so strong in a field where employees are extremely well compensated for what they do.

IMHO, one of the main difficulties I feel MARTA will face in gaining support from the region is the utter lack of diversity throughout the Authority. Much like Atlanta City Hall, reverse racism has been running rampant there for decades now. If you ever go to any public meetings at the HQ building, most of the employees are African American. There are very few Caucasian, Latin or Asian Americans walking around. Even if most of the existing employees are well qualified (hopefully Dr. Scott hasn't run all of the good ones off yet), the perception that there's a bunch of African American employees working for African American senior managers gives off the appearance of a "jobs program" you often hear critics of MARTA complaining about, and it's going to generate some anxiety from some suburban residents.

[BlindFatSnake]

Originally Posted by WestsideATL

Well, Georgia is a right to work state, and several of the MARTA bus drivers I know opted not to join the union because their dues were too high. It's just a shame that unions are still so strong in a field where employees are extremely well compensated for what they do.

IMHO, one of the main difficulties I feel MARTA will face in gaining support from the region is the utter lack of diversity throughout the Authority. Much like Atlanta City Hall, reverse racism has been running rampant there for decades now. If you ever go to any public meetings at the HQ building, most of the employees are African American. There are very few Caucasian, Latin or Asian Americans walking around. Even if most of the existing employees are well qualified (hopefully Dr. Scott hasn't run all of the good ones off yet), the perception that there's a bunch of African American employees working for African American senior managers gives off the appearance of a "jobs program" you often hear critics of MARTA complaining about, and it's going to generate some anxiety from some suburban residents.

Well, you heard it straight from the horse's mouth: "Them black people are running an inefficient transit system that ONLY benefits them, and we non-colored people won't stand for it." Hence, the state's anti-MARTA stance.

The BIG question is: how many whites, Asians, and others have applied for positions? Even in cities like Charlotte (where whites are the vast majority), 97% of the bus drivers are African-American, while 85% of the front office is Caucasian. So, is that RESERVED, REVERSED, OR PRECEIVED racism?

If Caucasians and others feel they're being discriminated against, then where are the law suits (class action) against MARTA. Surely, MARTA should be an easy target for those who have been discriminated against base on RACE if there is/was a history of racial discrimination...

So, who's playing the RACE card, eh?

[WSUSOM]

I hate the term reverse racism... racism is racism. So based off your line of thinking since the hospital I work at is mostly run by Caucasins, as a minority I should think it is a racist organization and just a jobs program for their incompetent offspring. This is way I will never move back to Atlanta, everything is about race.

Originally Posted by WestsideATL

Well, Georgia is a right to work state, and several of the MARTA bus drivers I know opted not to join the union because their dues were too high. It's just a shame that unions are still so strong in a field where employees are extremely well compensated for what they do.

IMHO, one of the main difficulties I feel MARTA will face in gaining support from the region is the utter lack of diversity throughout the Authority. Much like Atlanta City Hall, reverse racism has been running rampant there for decades now. If you ever go to any public meetings at the HQ building, most of the employees are African American. There are very few Caucasian, Latin or Asian Americans walking around. Even if most of the existing employees are well qualified (hopefully Dr. Scott hasn't run all of the good ones off yet), the perception that there's a bunch of African American employees working for African American senior managers gives off the appearance of a "jobs program" you often hear critics of MARTA complaining about, and it's going to generate some anxiety from some suburban residents.

[cybele]

Originally Posted by WSUSOM

I hate the term reverse racism... racism is racism. So based off your line of thinking since the hospital I work at is mostly run by Caucasins, as a minority I should think it is a racist organization and just a jobs program for their incompetent offspring. This is way I will never move back to Atlanta, everything is about race.

Well, I hear what you are saying but this is the heart of the old Confederacy and lots of the new people who has moved here from somewhere else seems to feel the same way or at least act like it. It was still your basic apartheid situation until the late 60s so it will probably take several generations to get the whole mess straightened out. It would help if folks like you stuck around but you can't blame a man for saying he has had enough.