By all accounts, the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) is operating infinitely more responsibly and responsively and, for that, CEO Keith Parker and a largely sensible MARTA board deserve credit. Unfortunately, that and the flimsy prospect of MARTA rail service for Clayton County hardly justify adding a penny to Clayton’s sales tax for MARTA to operate its mass transit.
There’s that famous saying: “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” Many Clayton workers have struggled with public transportation since the 2010 shutdown of C-Tran service. Remember why it shut down? That was the result of a budget deficit: C-Tran cost $10 million a year to operate, but the farebox brought in just about $2.5 million. Cost-effectiveness, clearly, is of paramount concern for Clayton.
Consequently, it’s unwise to put county residents on the hook for a penny sales tax for 10 years when all agree it would take just a half-penny to fund efficient bus service. And it makes no sense to give MARTA an extra half-penny to hold onto in the unlikely event it can establish rail service beginning in 2022.
The writing on rail is on the wall: Just two days after Clayton’s commission voted for the November penny sales tax referendum, the federal government unfunded the proposed Atlanta-Lovejoy commuter rail project that had been debated for 10 years.
Setting aside what an 8 percent sales tax will do to Clayton businesses’ competitiveness, consider MARTA’s cost of doing business. Its operating expense per passenger mile is 93 cents; more than 85 percent of the total operating expenses for MARTA’s unionized, in-house operation comprise salaries, wages and benefits. By contrast, with outsourced bus service, operating expenses are far lower for Cobb (49 cents) and Gwinnett (29 cents). It makes sense to establish a bus service partnership – whether public-private or with MARTA – through an open, competitive bidding process. That can link into MARTA rail, as Cobb, Gwinnett and GRTA do.
Proponents argue Clayton rail service would help facilitate regional connectivity by linking with MARTA rail. But metro Atlanta’s suburban sprawl lacks the density that makes MARTA expansion the most cost-effective option. Regional connectivity in the future will be facilitated far more effectively through flexible, less-costly, more demand-responsive express bus service. As Georgia builds out metro Atlanta’s managed lane system into a seamless express-lane network that acts as a virtual bus rapid transit route, rail will be even less optimal in suburban counties.
Clayton’s residents want to get from point A to point B as quickly, cost-effectively and efficiently as possible. Clayton needs leadership standing up for the mass transit they need, not jumping on the bandwagon of the “world-class city” mantra of some Atlanta rail proponents or insisting that MARTA lead the effort. It’s commendable that MARTA wants to grow, but it shouldn’t do so at the expense of Clayton’s workers.
