You think its bad for PAT now, it's about to get A LOT WORSE! (Harrisburg: cost, law)

[ferraris]

Brian, I don't doubt that what you're saying is true, but I'd love to see some sources and real numbers - especially on how much Allegheny County sends in for Transportation funding vs how much the state returns.

[Geeo]

Real and meaningful reforms have been enacted by PAT over the last five years or so. They've slashed routes, laid of hundreds, eliminated retiree health care for non-represented employees, raised the retirement age, and combined routes last year as part of a new transit plan that reduces costs. The problem is one that PAT cannot arbitrarily fix without a change in the law that governs PAT.

[raubre]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

Brian, I don't doubt that what you're saying is true, but I'd love to see some sources and real numbers - especially on how much Allegheny County sends in for Transportation funding vs how much the state returns.

The last thing we need is another post that is longer than "War and Peace" with endless stats.

Reader's Digest version, please.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by raubre

Corbett has no clue to what or how it will impact our region, nor does he care.

Corbett's own transportation commission explained what is at stake and why action should be taken. Corbett's reluctance is based on personal political calculation, not lack of understanding.

Our local officials can try to rally support for action, and in fact they are doing so. But they can't make Corbett take action, and we aren't helping to the extent we focus on our local officials rather than Corbett.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

From the Pittsburgh Tribune article about the source of the problem

Look carefully at what they are saying. Yes, they might still have to increase fares, and they do have LONG-TERM financial issues they need to keep working on. But the state funding cuts are what are triggering the draconian service cuts.

[Geeo]

This has been an issue since I moved here in 1981. PAT has never had a stable revenue source and has to go hat-in-hand to Harrisburg annually for funding. Nothing much has changed in three decades -we all knew for years that the way we fund transportation in this state was screwy, and we reach a crisis point every year.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

It's not that it can't be done it's that there is no current political push for it which I don't see why it's not pushed for, are there that many creditors to PAT to protect?

I'm not sure what other creditors PAT specifically might have, but of course the public unions themselves have bipartisan political support, and among others the police and fire unions don't want a precedent set of cutting pension benefits in this way. I also think anti-transit people prefer to have this excuse for being anti-transit.

In any event, I don't mind if people want to explore this idea further--just don't represent it as a live alternative for fixing the current crisis, because there is no reason to believe that is possible on that schedule.

Originally Posted by SuburbanPioneer

I said that I would hold back pressing on Corbett to do his part until I see some real and meaningful reforms done at PAT for it to deserve my request to Corbett.

Again, this is a statewide transportation crisis that affects more than just PAT, so I don't understand your conditionalizing your actions or Corbett's actions in that way.

I would also note that under the current management, PAT has in fact renegotiated its labor contracts to reduce benefit costs, and has also adopted a service redesign plan for improving efficiency. Those are real and meaningful reforms.

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

Brian, I don't doubt that what you're saying is true, but I'd love to see some sources and real numbers - especially on how much Allegheny County sends in for Transportation funding vs how much the state returns.

Unfortunately I don't know of anywhere to get those numbers. But for an overview of some of the funding issues, you can look here (PDF):

http://www.alleghenyplaces.com/docs/.../Chapter4I.pdf

One basic problem is that Allegheny County has a relatively large percentage of local and county roads, which means it gets shorted in the state funding formulas (again, I don't know of a source that actually quantifies the net results).

Originally Posted by Geeo

This has been an issue since I moved here in 1981. PAT has never had a stable revenue source and has to go hat-in-hand to Harrisburg annually for funding. Nothing much has changed in three decades -we all knew for years that the way we fund transportation in this state was screwy, and we reach a crisis point every year.

Ironically moving to a dedicated state transportation fund was supposed to alleviate that problem--but that doesn't work if you don't end up dedicating the necessary revenues.

[robrobrob]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Again, this is a statewide transportation crisis that affects more than just PAT, so I don't understand your conditionalizing your actions or Corbett's actions in that way.

I would also note that under the current management, PAT has in fact renegotiated its labor contracts to reduce benefit costs, and has also adopted a service redesign plan for improving efficiency. Those are real and meaningful reforms.

The crisis affects PAT more because you can put off fixing a pot hole but you can't put off funding for PAT (mainly labor costs and benefits). No one notices more potholes on the way to work but people notice when their bus route gets cancelled or when the bus passes your stop by because it is full.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

The crisis affects PAT more because you can put off fixing a pot hole but you can't put off funding for PAT.

The other transit agencies will also start having to cut service--SEPTA, for example, bought some time by raising fares and halting various maintenance/upgrade projects, but they will have to cut service soon too.

(mainly labor costs and benefits)

Don't forget fuel, and everything else in the operating budget. The state funding isn't allocated in any particular way within the operating budget.

[Goinback2011]

The trouble with your analysis, BrianTH, is you never acknowledge the legacy cost issue - the pensions that were created under a set of top managers who should have been prosecuted for racketeering. Instead, you point to the giant unicorn in Harrisburg and ask why it isn't pooping more skittles for everyone around the state so that the pensioners could have their ill-gotten pensions and the transit riders could have all the transit they would ever desire.

This is the position of the Transit union. Or its attorney.