Last week, I attended the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Policy Advisory Committee at the VTA headquarters on North First Street. This advisory committee is not the official VTA governing board you hear about, but a committee “underneath” the governing board which has a representative from each city in Santa Clara county.
At this meeting, Joseph T. Smith, the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of VTA, spoke to the committee about the VTA budget. As we knew, and he explained further, VTA derives much of its revenue from a sales tax. And because the recession has knocked consumer and corporate spending to the ground, less sales tax revenues are being generated for government bodies like VTA. He is forecasting decreased sales tax revenues in 2009—down 3 percent.
Smith predicted that sales taxes will increase by 5 percent in 2010. I think the 2010 predictions may be a bit rosy so I will set a date in my BlackBerry two years out to see if he is correct on that forecast. Coincidentally I set another date in my BlackBerry for VTA’s GoLive date on their $3 million plus SAP ERP software upgrade. VTA already spent $30 million on this software, before even starting the current software upgrade. I believe these type of multi-million dollar technology decisions are problematic, because I believe we should do a better job of managing budgets, and doing a better job of cost avoidance when it comes to technology.
The CFO continued on that 80 percent of the VTA budget is personnel costs. To do that, some people said that perhaps we should take money from the reserve fund. However we, are not sure how much worse the economy may become, so taking funds from reserves may be unwise.
VTA would like to keep its current personnel to maintain services instead of looking at ways to provide services differently. That means we are not going to cut costs, but just spend money. As a result, Smith told the committee, the plan is to take money from capital funds to fund daily operations. Capital funds pay for capital projects like the light rail extension to Eastridge or the electrification of Caltrain among many others. To me, taking money away from the capital projects seems shortsighted.
I am not sure how you feel, but I am leery or taking money from capital funds to pay for operations. What are your thoughts?
According to this article:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11202750
“That means, with sales tax revenues shriveling in the wounded economy, everything else — from express bus routes to electrifying Caltrain to extending light rail — likely will have to wait.”
So if you live anywhere in the county not directly served by the BART extension, you can forget any promises given to you by the 2000 Measure A sales tax campaign. Do you care about Caltrain, Light rail to Eastridge or improved bus service? Forget it. It’s all going to BART. Tony D, I hope you are happy.
It sounds naive, I know, but I do think that large projects needing large mass transit will help VTA.
As I have mentioned, I have a lot of friends in San Francisco, and I attend a dozen Giants games a year. That area of downtown San Francisco was a cesspool. CalTrain had low ridership. Then the stadium came, and on summer nights, CalTrain is packed.
A 49ers stadium in Santa Clara will be a boon for VTA. Ridership is directly proportional to service.
SJI discussion would be better if actual facts were used not opinions or more incorrect information
It was not government spending or investing in South of market that turned it around
Giants financed ballpark not SF city government / redevelopment and private developers build live work and high rises, and converted older buildings SF spent money on Muni extention
San Jose did not have private investors . developers invest money but San Jose spent billions to redevelopment downtown buildings most of it either wasted or increased profits of property owners, developers and insiders based on results
VTA wasted billions wasted on Light Rail system which is almost at bottom of US tranist sytems in US and getting worst
Few people take Light Rail / public transit compared how many should if it was designed right rather than by politicians for benefit of local political insider’s profits
1) VTA is really slow to where people want to go Even in rush hour ( #2 worst in US after LA ) you can drive faster
2) Does not go to most jobs, retail or airport
3) BART costs underestimated by $4-5 billion
will not solve county transit problem but will drain money from VTA requiring more transit service cuts, canceled projects and more local taxes
Voters were sold false hopes and lies which will come out in next 6 months
Government has never done economic development right in San Jose unless you mean handing out millions to insiders for few or no real results
Mr Rowen, I’d rather an A’s stadium work to boost ridership than a 49ers stadium. I say that as a 49ers fan and someone who doesn’t care for baseball in the least. Hopefully, this parlays into better service and reach across the valley.
You can slice the interpretation of economic results more ways than one can prepare a namoturko sandwich, plenty of mayo, and a chunk of Bologna.
However, there were subsidies to the Giants Stadium in San Francisco. Secondly, development creates further development, and the fact that there are over four different VTA routes and light rail that would benefit from a stadium in Santa Clara is a fact.
Indeed, one can only see how well the incumbents in Santa Clara did, and all of them did have either a heavy or moderate support of the stadium as their platforms.
We can watch a dancing bear like a Darby, or a Bailey with his FPPC issues, or we can deal with the actual facts that VTA would benefit from a 49ers stadium in Santa Clara.
Pierluigi,
Perhaps you could look into something for me. I was of the impression that RDA funds were very tightly controlled in terms of what could funded.
Just last week, I read where Fremont plans on using RDA funds to fund the Irvington BART station.
Can you tell your readers just how RDA funds may be spent?
Pier-
1- Remember to compare VTA sales tax forecasts against those for other agencies. VTA sales tax estimates have a history of being much higher than actual revenues. (They were forecasting 5 to 7% annual growth just two years ago.)
2- The same topic came up in 2003. Part of the reason that VTA can’t finish their capital plan is that they are already using Measure A funds for current operating expenses.
It seems history is starting to repeating itself.
Recall in 2001, VTA began its spiral of service cuts and fare hikes just after voters approved Measure A for BART and a host of transit projects. This despite their claims of sales tax revenue growth at the time. They never saw the dot-com crash coming.
A recent “take-one” flyer from VTA indicated that meetings will take place later in January to take in public input on more transit service cuts. This after voters (barely) approved another sales tax for running BART.
One reason is that Governor Schwarzenegger, as part of his “fix” for the state budget, wants to ultimately eliminiate the only stable source of transit operations funding…
http://transformca.org/campaign/state-budget
From estimates, VTA would lose $10 million in public transit funding. Also, from Hugh’s article, VTA won’t release a financial plan featuring BART until February.
I’ve already started drafting a letter to VTA stating what full details needs to be in that financial plan.
From Hugh’s post, this is what VTA is already starting to plan for its spending…
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/docs/svrtc_spending_scenario_notax.pdf
Even incoming Board Chair Dolly Sandoval indicated that VTA’s biennial budget – to be approved in June – will feature BART – six months before it has been formally approved!
All concerned need to protest and make their voices heard NOW to VTA management.
Contact info for the VTA Board:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/DIY/vtaboard.html
Councilmember Sam Liccardo will be the Vice Chair while Cupertino Mayor Dolly Sandoval will be the Board Chair in 2009.
Make it a point to make the January 8 VTA Board meeting – the first in 2009 – a must-attend and demand honesty from VTA…
WHEN: January 8, 2009, at 5:30pm
WHERE: County Supervisors’ Chambers, 70 W. Hedding Street, San Jose.
GETTING THERE: The 61, 62, 66, and 180 express buses stop near the County Supervisors’ Chambers. It’s also near Civic Center light rail station.
Remember: this is YOUR money that VTA will be spending. Make sure it is spent wisely.
Maintaining and building ridership must be VTA’s #1 goal. All projects should be prioritized to meet that. As much as I like Caltrain, electrifying it won’t boost ridership significantly, so it should be low on the list.
Most people’s #1 reason not to take VTA is the speed of the commute, so projects should focus on speeding up transit vs. car commuting before other tasks. I think more express bus routes and signals automatically triggered to allow buses priority are the most economical ways to improve the system. I think dedicated bus lanes (a la successful projects in Brazil and elsewhere) would be a brilliant next step. Focus higher-speed transit projects on streets people actually USE (Santa Clara/El Camino, Stevens Creek, Winchester, Story/Keyes, Capitol, etc.) – use bus rapid transit now and build light rail later.
Don’t cut service: it’s suicidal. It just makes the overall system less effective, meaning fewer riders and more car traffic.
The Governor is proposing an annual allocation of local RDA funds to the state in his plans for the budget retooling.
In my previous post, I meant to say that VTA had predicted sales tax revenue would continue to grow at the time of the 2000 election. This was just at the start of would be known as the dot-com crash.
GINABP #3,
This not telegraph, but internet. STOP
OK to use complete sentences. STOP
Will write when find work. END
Nam Turk;
– Criticized Golden Gate Park (strike 1)
– Doesn’t “care for baseball” (strike 2)
You’re down in the count, buddy boy.
Greg Howe #6,
As far as I can make out, the rules for using RDA funds are vague, frequently change, and can be interpreted quite liberally. This benefits developers and government bureaucrats but RDA really is the devil to taxpayers.
Try reading Dan Walters’ articles in the SacBee. It’s hard to grasp so read, think, reread…
Pierluigi,
The VTA really does not care what you or I think or understand, They march to a different drummer. Kind of insane, but insanity is knowing that what they are doing is completely idiotic, but,you just can`t stop them.If you continue going to VTA meetings you will become insane!
Pierluigi,
“Keep money for capital projects” is not only inconsiderate but criminal.
Acess to transportation by low-income individuals and families has become limited in our valley as the majority of low-income families reside in the suburbs.With new jobs emerging further and further away from our downtown city center, manylow income workers have difficulity accessing jobs,training and other services in our valley such as childcare because of inadequate public transportation in San Jose.
In addition, many minimum wage jobs require working evening or weekend jobs, but VTA transportation system in many area`s today do not serve their neighborhoods during these times.
Acccess to affordable transportation for low-income workers,elderly rural residents and their children makes the trip to work, school and medical appointments possible. Our present buss and light rail system within our city and county helps these people attain self-sustainability, promotes independence and permits spending on other important houshold needs to take care of their families.
rural transportation for our people in need is indespensible. I attended the VTA workshop last week at the County building and I was appalded by the attitude of our leaders and their lack of concern for the less fortunate here in Santa Clara County when they said,“BART first”, we must stop bickering and learn to speak as one”. They went on to say again and again,“the BART program must have a priority”. meaning the programs like the promised light rail extension to Eastridge must be given a less priority if revenues from sales tax fall short, BART must come first”.
Insensitivity of our leaders left me fealing very empty…transit can reduce social and economic inequalities by enhansing mobility of our less fortunate residents, many of which lack cars and need assistance in finding jobs outside their primary resident areas. Such jobs serve as a important source of income for those local residents that face limited employment opportunities. We voted for increased transportation services in 2,000 that have not been delivered eight years later because many of the dollars were spent for consultants working on the BART project,while Light Rail to Eastridge recieved almost no funding and, again the less fortunate on the east side of San Jose once again were left hanging with empty promices.
I would like the new Chair and Co-Chair and their fellow board members re-think their comments and put “people first” not BART. I would like the VTA Finance person to review his ethics training before he recomends moving necessary public transportation funds from sales taxes into Capital projects that are clearly for the benefit of “special interest groups”. San Jose and Santa Clara County leaders need to re-establish good core values in these times.It`s time to set aside the sexy capital projects and think of those in need.
Pierluigi,
regarding your question:
“I am not sure how you feel, but I am leery of taking money from capital funds to pay for operations. What are your thoughts?”
I’ll have to check with Mr. Gardino on that and get back to you.