Even Bay Area's congressional reps question BART's fiscal folly
As BART hurls toward what it calls a fiscal cliff, one would expect the transit system to tap the brakes. Instead, its leaders are pressing the accelerator while insisting that Bay Area residents pay for a bridge over the rapidly approaching abyss.
It's fiscal recklessness that, if not stopped, could cost residents billions in higher taxes and bridge tolls. The good news is that six Bay Area members of Congress last week started questioning this insanity.
In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and the leaders of the state Senate and Assembly, Reps. Mark DeSaulnier, Anna Eshoo, Barbara Lee, Eric Swalwell, Mike Thompson and John Garamendi voiced “strong concerns” about a proposed $1.50 Bay Area bridge toll hike to bail out BART and other transit agencies.
The letter from the six, all labor-friendly Democrats, indicates that the union-driven BART board majority is pushing the envelope beyond even what some of its allies can stomach.
Congressional ethics rules prevent House members from explicitly opposing state legislation. So, they went as far as they could in challenging what would be the fourth bridge toll hike in six years.
“As proposed, these increases would have a disproportionate impact on low- and moderate-income residents in the Bay and would be borne most significantly by workers who have to commute for their work,” the congressional members wrote.
They call out the geographic inequities — that 59% of all toll payers on Bay Area bridges come from just three counties, Alameda, Contra Costa and Solano. And that the bulk of the revenue from the toll hikes would go to BART and San Francisco's Muni system, providing most of the benefit to people who live in or travel to that city.
The members of Congress also highlight the lack of public information or analysis of how the new bridge toll money would be spent, independent oversight of the funds, or planning for long-term fiscally sustainable solutions.
It's that last point that is the most important. Until BART develops a longterm plan that responsibly accounts for its new ridership reality, it doesn't deserve any new money.
Newsom, state legislators and Bay Area voters should be similarly skeptical as BART officials press ahead with their lobbying for the bridge toll hike and an expected 2026 ballot measure seeking new taxes.
Rather than capitulate to the transit agency's demands for an endless supply of new money, state lawmakers and voters should insist that transit district leaders responsibly manage what they have.
During the pandemic, as BART ridership plummeted, the federal government covered the district's revenue shortfall. But BART officials have refused to plan needed cuts as they wean off the federal money.
As a result, the district faces a $1 billion budget gap over the next five years, the so-called fiscal cliff. District officials want regional and state public dollars to make up the difference. The district's leaders insist that if they get it, BART will build back ridership.
That's unlikely. There is no sign that BART usage will return to pre-pandemic levels. For a year now, despite service that matches 2019 levels, ridership has leveled off at about 40% of what it was before COVID.
Instead of taking responsible steps — such as adjusting train schedules to meet the lower demand and trimming staff accordingly — BART leaders plan to do just the opposite, hiring more workers and running more trains.
They plan to double down on this folly. And they want more public dollars to fund it. The state Legislature and Newsom in June provided California transit systems with a $5.1 billion bailout. The lawmakers touted the supposed accountability measures in the deal, but, as I noted last month, those provisions are vague and contradictory.
Meanwhile, BART officials want more money as they press for passage of Senate Bill 532, the proposed bridge toll increase questioned by the Bay Area members of Congress. The bill, introduced by Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, would increase the levy for cars on the seven state-owned Bay Area bridges, currently $7, by $1.50, or 21%, to $8.50 on Jan. 1.
That would follow $1 increases in 2019 and 2022 and would precede one approved by voters for 2025 that would then raise the total to $9.50. The $1.50 hike on Jan. 1 would last for five years, buying time to seek voter approval in 2026 for yet another transit tax.
BART should instead start serving the reduced ridership more efficiently with less-frequent trains. If the train system can stick to a schedule, Bay Area residents are smart enough to plan accordingly.
BART officials claim that would send the transit district into a death spiral. There's no evidence to support that. In fact, the current irresponsible fiscal planning is the greatest threat to the solvency and survival of the district.
While BART officials purport to care about riders, the real driver here is political patronage. A majority of BART board members depend on the transit worker labor unions for political and financial campaign support. So, the goal is protecting jobs, even if they don't make operational or financial sense.
Which is why the letter last week from seven laborfriendly Democratic members of Congress, including the six from the Bay Area, was surprising. It signals that even the political left recognizes that it's time to stop enabling BART officials' financially irresponsible behavior.