Comments on: Concerns Aired over Transit Governance

By: Edward Vielmetti

Edward Vielmetti — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:38:10 +0000

Dave, how much of the Federal WATS funding is encumbered, and how much of it is unencumbered? It’s one thing to have a pile of money and something else entirely to have to spend it on something peculiar in particular.

By: Edward Vielmetti

Edward Vielmetti — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:30:17 +0000

I’d love to see the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority run a bus system for citizens to get to our area’s wonderful metroparks. Every bus would have canoe and bike racks, and they would run all weekend long around the perimeter of the parks in a constant loop. Bike to Delhi, get off at Metro Beach, then hop back on (or bike which ever part of the loop you wanted).

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:57:38 +0000

RE: WATS funding

Based on a quick phone conversation with WATS staff just now, 80% of the FY2011 WATS budget of $599,129 came from the federal government. WATS also receives revenue from local units in the form of membership dues. Washtenaw County pays $20,000 per year. Paying $13,000 each are the Washtenaw County Road Commission, the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, and the University of Michigan. Eastern Michigan University pays $7,500 a year. The city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, and Pittsfield Township pay based on population.

By: Jack Eaton

Jack Eaton — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:50:09 +0000

@M. Hunt – From their web page:
“The Washtenaw Area Transportation Study is a multi-jurisdictional agency responsible for transportation planning in Washtenaw County. The agency is mandated by Federal law to provide a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive transportation planning process, which guides the expenditure of state and federal transportation funds in Washtenaw County.” [link]

I understand that to mean that WATS is funded with state and federal transportation money.

Having AATA – our single-city, Act 55 transit authority – plan for county-wide service seems like a bit of overreaching. Similarly, WATS participation in planning commuter rail service to the far reaches of urban sprawl (Wayne and Livingston counties), seems to be beyond their area of authority. I suppose the next step is for Ann Arbor residents to subsidize the commuter rail trips of those living outside our county.

By: M. Hunt

M. Hunt — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:32:47 +0000

I have a question about WATS? What is the legislation that enables it and what exactly is its chartered purpose?

The reason that I ask is that this is the second project in recent memory that WATS has been involved in that also included AATA. The first project is the Wally train that was proposed to operate between Ann Arbor and Howell. In that project WATS played a leading role in organizing meetings and getting funding commitments for the project before AATA got involved. That project was projected to start within 2-years of AATA getting involved in Oct. 2008 – where most other commuter-rail projects have a multi-year timeline. I see a similarity here: again there is a big project that the community isn’t really sure it wants but WATS seems to be saying it has to happen *right now.* Is this really what WATS is set up to do?

By: Dave Cahill

Dave Cahill — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:14:01 +0000

Thanks, Dave and Jack!

I personally don’t think the county needs comprehensive transit, so I am happy to see hard questions being asked.

Also, last week I saw an AATA bus with a large sign on it saying “It’s your comprehensive countywide transportation plan” or something similar. I am not thrilled by the use of public dollars to campaign for this plan.

By: Stew Nelson

Stew Nelson — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:19:43 +0000

The Mayor of Grand Rapids had to hold all the pertinent parties hostage in a room and not them leave until they came up with a county wide plan. This important step toward county wide transit cannot be allowed to break down to petty politics and turf wars.

By: Jack Eaton

Jack Eaton — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:54:38 +0000

Act 55 of 1963 allows a city to incorporate its own transit authority, such as Ann Arbor has done. Act 196 of 1986 allows one or more political subdivisions to form a transit authority, which is what this plan would do.

Not mentioned in the article, Act 204 of 1967, MCL 124.401 to 124.425. Section five of Act 204 provided that “The southeastern Michigan transportation authority which shall include the counties of Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne is established, but a county choosing not to participate in the authority may withdraw by a resolution of withdrawal . . .” Washtenaw County elected to withdraw from that regional transit system.

By: Jack Eaton

Jack Eaton — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:22:50 +0000

David – Google “Michigan Act 55 transit authority” and you find that it is Act No. 55 of the Public Acts of 1963, as amended, being sections 124.351 to 124.359 of the Michigan Compiled Laws. “AN ACT to provide for the incorporation of public authorities to acquire, own, and operate or cause to be operated mass transportation systems . . .”

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:22:24 +0000

Re: [1] Act 196 of 1986: [link] Act 55 of 1963: [link]