RTA Opt Out Legislation Introduced
A bill has been introduced to the Michigan state house of representatives that would allow Washtenaw County to opt out of the four-county regional transportation authority (RTA) – which was established by the lame duck legislature at the end of 2012. The proposed amendment to the RTA legislation, which applies to any county or municipality in the RTA region, would provide the possibility of an opt-out on a simple majority vote of the governing body within the first year after establishment of the authority. After more than a year, it would require a 2/3 majority vote. From the draft bill introduced on April 30, 2013 [HB 4637]:
Sec. 4A
(1) A county or a municipality may withdraw from an authority within 1 year after creation of that authority under this act by a resolution of withdrawal approved by a majority vote of the members elected to and serving on the governing body of that county or municipality.
(2) A county or a municipality may withdraw from an authority at any time after 1 year after creation of that authority under this act by a resolution of withdrawal approved by a 2/3 vote of the members elected to and serving on the governing body of that county or municipality.
The wording of the bill indicates that the opt-out option is available to more than just the four counties that are members of the RTA – Washtenaw, Wayne, Macomb and Oakland. Any municipality in that four-county region would appear to be able to opt out.
The Ann Arbor city council had passed a resolution shortly after the original enactment of the RTA bill, objecting to the inclusion of Washtenaw County. That council resolution echoed sentiments of a resolution approved shortly before that by the Washtenaw County board. And a resolution of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board, approved in February 2012, had supported the concept of an RTA, but conditioned that support on the coordination of new funding so that existing levels of transportation services provided by the AATA are maintained.
Rep. Jeff Irwin, whose 53rd District includes most of Ann Arbor, had opposed the RTA legislation. However, he does not support the idea incorporated into the current draft of HB 4637, which has been referred to the transportation committee. In an email to The Chronicle, responding to a query, Irwin wrote: “I don’t have a good sense of whether this will move.” But for his own part, he continued:
I don’t support this idea. The Swiss cheese model of public transit authorities is contrary to best practices and is intuitively a problem for the provider. SMART currently operates on the Swiss cheese model, driving through communities like Livonia and failing to serve citizens in communities like Canton. In short, the Balkanization of SE Michigan is a limitation, not a feature, of Michigan’s governance model. This bill moves further in that direction. Even though I opposed the RTA bill last winter because of the rail exclusion language and the mismatch of AATA with DDOT/SMART, I still want to have a functional system in SE Michigan. This bill will make that even more difficult.
I agree with Jeff. I’ve been concerned about the impact of the RTA on transit in Washtenaw County. However, if individual communities within the RTA are allowed to secede, the efficacy of the entire effort will be called into question.
This issue of governance and local option has bedeviled efforts to regionalize transit for decades. I reviewed some of the issues in a post last year: [link]
Concur with Rep. Irwin’s comments. Either we are going to be part of the region, and participate, or put our heads in the sand and pretend.
If this bill passes the House, it will be dead on arrival in the Senate. Senator Warren will see to that.
As I recall, SMART is composed of three subordinate transit authorities – one for each county. The Oakland County entity was formed in a manner that allows local units to opt-out, while Macomb was formed in a manner in which the entire county is either in, or out. (Off the top of my head, I do not recall how Wayne County is structured)
The contrast between the experience of Oakland and Macomb counties should be instructive for purposes of considering this bill. A map showing service areas in Oakland County look like Swiss cheese because of the local units that have opted-out, while all of Macomb County participates.
If this bill passes, it not only would allow Washtenaw County to escape the RTA, but there is a likelihood that Macomb County would opt-out. Additionally, each local community could decide whether to participate. The result would undermine the concept of regional transit.