I hope I am wrong, but I believe Clayton County gave away the farm. The voters should ultimately make the decision, but state law provides that the Board of Commissioners put forth what is considered by the voters. The board chose to allow our voters to enter into a contract with MARTA that provides for buses and not rail. It offers the potential for rail, but at a severe cost. Should voters approve the referendum to join MARTA under the recently accepted contract, Clayton will pay an estimated $50 million annually to MARTA in exchange for $22 million in bus service and only the potential of future rail.
MARTA does not have the ability to extend rail into Clayton. I wish it could. I would be happy to pay the penny for it. But the transit agency does not have a rail system on this side of town, nor a right of way upon which to build. Norfolk Southern does, but the railroad isn’t interested at this time. I like (MARTA General Manager) Keith Parker’s written suggestion that Clayton and MARTA conduct a joint feasibility study. I think we should include Norfolk Southern, too. When there is a viable plan, we should bring it to the voters.
MARTA Board Chairman Robbie Ashe said Wednesday, “We will promise you … that Clayton’s money will not be used for system expansion somewhere else.”
Great! Then, why ask that we collect it? And why ask that we give it to MARTA to hold? There are provisions in the contract that specifically say our funds can be used elsewhere.
The contract approved by MARTA and Clayton offers “a rapid transit system, including the use of buses as well as a potential rail system.” Page 5 tells us, “Should the Clayton Extension as envisioned not prove feasible, the Authority will develop further plans for an alternative.” On Page 7: “The Authority is hereby authorized to use said monies, to the maximum extent permitted by law, in any manner it deems necessary or desirable … to finance the costs of the Clayton Extension and the costs of other Authority projects.” Page 8 really socks it to taxpayers: “Clayton will not exercise any right of set-off … nor will it withhold any such payment because of any claimed breach of this contract by the Authority.”
Clayton’s own feasibility studies report that its citizens want bus and rail. The contract does not provide for such services. It offers only the potential for a rail system that, if not feasible as determined by MARTA, can be abandoned and replaced at the discretion of MARTA. Consistent with the MARTA Act, the contract provides no mechanism by which Clayton can authorize, approve or even negotiate future operations, services or even routes provided by MARTA inside or outside our borders, including whether or not rail ever comes to Clayton.
Why would Clayton put itself in that position?
The MARTA Clayton Extension Report estimates $19 million to $22 million annual operating costs through the next decade for a “very robust bus service throughout Clayton County.” A half-penny sales tax is more than enough for that.
“At the present time, we need to have those counties who are going to participate in our system to help maintain and improve our infrastructure of the rail,” MARTA board member Harold Buckley Sr. said Wednesday. “In this particular instance, Clayton County is not taking that into consideration. We need the full one-cent sales tax in order for us to help improve the infrastructure so that when Clayton County does come into the system, we have a first-class rail system available for them to join.”
What? Goodwill and best intentions do not mean anything in a contract. If it isn’t on paper, it does not exist.
There are at least three proposed rail extensions ahead of Clayton’s. North Fulton County and south DeKalb County have paid a penny sales tax for decades without a rail system. Clayton just executed a similar contract. Why would it be any different this time?
I want the voters of Clayton County to have their say in whether we have public transportation. I think a sales and use tax is the most equitable method of funding public transportation. I want Clayton to get what we pay for. This contract doesn’t do that.
Michael Edmondson is a Clayton County commissioner.
