San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo wants to repeat failed history.

In his first chairperson’s report at the Jan. 4 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Board Of Directors meeting, Liccardo advocated for further reductions in transit service to help close a $20 million operating deficit this fiscal year, and a $26 million operating deficit in 2019. He announced the formation of a committee to address VTA’s structural operating deficit, and provide solutions. The gist of his comments start at the two-minute mark of the following audio clip.

Learn more about how this service cut strategy fails to resolve any VTA operating deficit—and what you can proactively do to change history in your favor—below.

Background
On Feb. 1, the VTA board approved a formal list of who is on the “Ad-Hoc Financial Stability Committee.” That committee will be headed by Jeannie Bruins, last year’s VTA board chair, and will represent “small city groups.” Fellow VTA board member and Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez will represent unincorporated areas while fellow board member and San Jose City Councilman Johnny Khamis, will represent San Jose.

Here’s who else will be on this current edition of the ad-hoc committee:

• Santa Clara County City Managers Association
• Santa Clara Coalition of Chambers of Commerce
• Silicon Valley Leadership Group
• Transit Justice Alliance
• SPUR
• Amalgamated Transit Union Local 265
• Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 521
• Transportation Authority Engineers & Architects Association (TAEA) Local 21
• American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 101 (AFSCME)
• South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council

Note the lack of taxpayer, senior or disabled and environmental groups on the committee. Such groups are most likely to have the ideas needed to resolve VTA’s current fiscal crisis. Also note that the Transit Justice Alliance was convened by Working Partnerships USA, an organization that once employed Chavez.

This follows similar committees VTA formed in 2003 and 2010 to address prior operating shortfalls. Both past committees recommended transit service reductions to resolve operating deficits at the time.

Talking Points
Liccardo’s statements at the VTA board meeting in January contradict calls for the city to “reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Worse still is that his advocacy for further cutting VTA service violates San Jose’s own General Plan 2040 goals. One of those goals: reducing vehicle miles traveled in San Jose by 40 percent within the next 22 years.  For more about how Liccardo stands to exacerbate traffic gridlock in San Jose, click here.

The chart above, courtesy of the Almaden Valley Community Association, shows VTA’s historical bus ridership. Now, VTA has a third less bus service than what it promised voters who approved Measure A back in 2000. Compare that chart to VTA’s own bus ridership and bus service facts, which you can see below.

Note that VTA has 12 percent fewer active buses, 7 percent fewer peak (rush hour) buses, 3 percent fewer total scheduled hours, and 17 percent fewer weekday riders now than when its predecessor, Santa Clara County Transit, had in 1988. That’s despite Santa Clara County’s population growing by over 23 percent between 1988 and 2017. One reason why VTA’s bus service has failed to keep up with the county’s population can be found in a report on where your sales tax money went.

Another factor not acknowledged publicly in the VTA’s latest “financial crisis?”

Unfunded pension liabilities.