MARTA bill promises power shifts, more controls
A state lawmaker is proposing legislation to rein in MARTA’s awarding of lucrative consulting contracts, undercut Fulton County’s authority to appoint board members and reassure voters that rail service won’t creep into their county without them approving it.
State Rep. Mike Jacobs, R-Atlanta, said MARTA had requested an opportunity to negotiate installing rail lines in counties other than Fulton and DeKalb — which the law currently prohibits.
But he said the legislation — House Bill 1052 — would still require a county referendum, rather than simple approval by the County Commission as MARTA officials had wished. Many regional voters have long opposed MARTA, and opposition in Cobb County chipped away at plans to include a rail line to the Cumberland-Galleria area in the proposed regional transportation sales tax plan that goes before voters in July.
“The bill states a policy of respecting the right of the voters to decide the question of MARTA with the hope that some day we will see voter approval of MARTA in other counties,” Jacobs said. “You’re seeing more favorable polling numbers for MARTA in Gwinnett.”
MARTA officials declined to answer specific questions about the legislation. “We’re still in the process of reviewing the bill to fully assess the impacts it could have on MARTA and the customers we serve,” said Lyle Harris, spokesman for the transit agency.
Jacobs has a committee meeting scheduled for today in which MARTA officials will be able to make a case for any changes in the proposal.
The legislation also would affect MARTA’s governing structure. It would reduce Atlanta’s board appointments from four to three members, DeKalb County Commission’s from five to four and perhaps most cutting, Fulton County Commission’s from three to one while giving two picks to north Fulton County mayors. DeKalb County mayors would pick one of the four members for their county. The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority also would get a voting member.
Jacobs said the power shift just reflects the political realities of the county, noting that the commission has lost much of its governing jurisdiction with the growth of cities north of I-285, an area that often has been at odds with the Fulton commission.
Johns Creek Mayor Mike Bodker, a transit advocate, said MARTA provided no service to his city; Roswell Mayor Jere Wood said his residents wanted a clearer voice in MARTA spending, contending they needed more representation for their sales tax dollars.
“It is a symbolic gesture to north Fulton to say, ‘We hear you, we care about you and we want to do what we can to gain your trust,’ ” Bodker said. “There is a history of the mayors not having the cooperation of the Fulton County Commission.”
Fulton County Chairman John Eaves called the proposed legislation “divisive” and noted the commission already appointed two board members from north Fulton and one from south Fulton to the MARTA board.
Fulton Commissioner Bill Edwards, who represents south Fulton, said the MARTA representation already was weighted too heavily to the north end of the county, which has roughly twice the population of south Fulton.
“It is always a power grab,” he said. “Based on the things they say, you would think south Fulton didn’t pay any tax — not one dime.”
Bodker said the power shift would shore up MARTA’s credibility with voters along with another provision of the proposed legislation that limited the transit agency’s ability to award consulting contracts with little competition.
The proposal also removes MARTA’s ability to award contracts at its own discretion if a request for bids didn’t produce an acceptable proposal.
Jacobs said he wasn’t insinuating any wrongdoing at MARTA, but the current law allows the risk for “gaming” the system because officials could write the bid requirements to favor a particular contractor.
“This is a step toward tightening MARTA’s fiscal ship,” Jacobs said. “I want to see MARTA become leaner in terms of professional contracts, especially consultants.”
