I think it is important the AATA retain the ability to apply directly to the State or FTA for discretionary grant opportunities, both for transparency and timeliness of these requests, but I don’t find the formula grants to be an area of concern in the legislation.

Thank you for the emphasis on the potential for the RTA to become the first recipient of federal and state formula funds, with the AATA merely a contractor. As you note elsewhere [link], the long-awaited Financial Task Force meeting for today has been cancelled (most likely in order to assimilate the state bills information). The importance of the shift of federal and state formula funding to the RTA cannot be overemphasized. AATA has been very forceful and creative in obtaining Federal money and it would be much inhibited in this if merely allocated an amount to maintain contracted service. The “UM advantage”, in which UM bus ridership is allowed to count as riders for AATA in order to increase proportionate Federal formula funding, would also likely be lost.

Quite frankly, I believe that the entire TMP process needs to be put on hold while the implications of this legislation get sorted out.

One point to bear in mind: since any revenues derived from vehicle fees (including fuel and registration) must have 90% dedicated to roads, the effective maximum to transit is 18 cents per $1000 of vehicle value. I’m sure someone will pretty quickly estimate what that adds up to, but my guess is…not a huge windfall.

Overall, I think the legislation (as summarized here) sounds reasonable. It addresses the major weakness of Southeast Michigan: fragmentation and lack of regional cooperation. We are captives – and always have been – of geography. Lou Glazer [link] has demonstrated conclusively that economic prosperity depends on metro-regions working well, not on smaller units. Attempts to isolate ourselves from the troubles of our neighbors only leads to dysfunction in the whole region. Southeast Michigan has demonstrated that to the nation; can we now demonstrate the fruits of regional cooperation?

First, it’s doubtful that the legislation’s proponents see Washtenaw as a tough sell on transit. Of all the counties in metro Detroit, we’ve been the most active in pursuing regional transit, like the Ann Arbor-Detroit link outlined in the proposal. It’s more likely that Washtenaw is heavily weighted on the board to bolster the new authority’s overall enthusiasm for expanded transit, since the Oakland County administration has been less than supportive in the past.

Second, given the fact that Governor Snyder is the one promoting this legislation, it’s unlikely that his (nonvoting) board representative would oppose a tax for transit. I don’t expect that Washtenaw’s representatives would, either. On the contrary, our county’s major complaint with the area’s existing regional bodies has been that they haven’t adequately funded transit: [link]

End result is the same: any single County’s appointees (except Wayne+Detroit) can’t block a funding measure from the ballot, but my guess is that Washtenaw wouldn’t be the first holdout.