Here are a pair of hearty
“Amens” to two recommendations contained in an in-depth grand
jury report on the Valley Transportation Authority. The grand jury
concluded that the public transit agency is badly managed by a
board that is too political, badly distracted and overly reliant on
staff members, and that building a B
ART-to-San Jose extension will financially cripple the VTA.
Here are a pair of hearty “Amens” to two recommendations contained in an in-depth grand jury report on the Valley Transportation Authority.
The grand jury concluded that the public transit agency is badly managed by a board that is too political, badly distracted and overly reliant on staff members, and that building a BART-to-San Jose extension will financially cripple the VTA.
Our first enthusiastic “Amen” is for the grand jury’s recommendation that the VTA immediately stop spending money on the doomed BART-to-San Jose extension. The report said that VTA won’t be able to afford the BART project for two decades.
The 16.3-mile construction project will be bankrupt by 2009 and be in a $1.9-billion hole by 2013, according to a 2003 report by the VTA’s own chief financial officer. Like us, the grand jury is incredulous that the VTA continues to spend money on a BART extension as if that report were never issued.
That fiscal doomsday report just addressed the cost to build the BART boondoggle. It doesn’t even begin to address the mammoth subsidy operating the transit system will require.
Clearly, as we’ve said for a long time, the VTA can’t begin to afford to build or operate a BART-to-San Jose extension. Building the BART-to-San Jose extension means that expanding and improving Caltrain service in South Valley, improving local and regional bus service, marketing the transit services the VTA already offers to reduce the huge subsidy taxpayers pay for every rider, will not happen.
Our second hearty “Amen” concerns the grand jury’s recommendation that the VTA board of directors be reorganized. We like the idea of directly electing the board, but we’re not so sure about the idea reducing the size. South Valley already shares representation on the board with Milpitas, a city with whom we have very little in common. Reducing the size of the VTA board will increase the likelihood that South Valley will be represented by board members with conflicting interests.
The VTA board needs to be reorganized and directly elected to provide a more focused board made up of directors who are directly responsible to taxpayers. We are concerned, however, that the grand jury report cites the Santa Clara Valley Water District – the agency that recently approved a hefty 25 percent rate increase to help pay for rapidly increasing handsome employee salaries and benefits – as a good model.
We’d love to see a reorganized, directly elected VTA board, but we can’t in good conscience recommend the VTA board be modeled on the Santa Clara Valley Water District, an agency boasting outrageous tax increases and 50-year-old uncompleted projects.
The grand jury report carries no legal weight but does require the VTA to prepare a formal response. Let’s make sure the VTA knows that BART to San Jose and a business-as-usual board should be things of the past.
We urge South Valley residents to get involved. The first step is to read the report. It’s available online at www.sccsuperiorcourt.org/jury/GJ.html. Then, contact your city and county representatives to make your views known. Copy the VTA’s board of directors on any correspondence.
If we say “Amen” loud enough and often enough, perhaps the VTA board will take off its political rose-tinted glasses, take a hard look at itself and the BART extension proposal, and make some important changes.
