Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors delay approval of MTA'BART feeder payment agreement amid $12 million methodology dispute
Summary
Board continued action on a feeder-payment agreement between the Municipal Transportation Agency and BART after Supervisor Campos moved to seek renegotiation over the payment methodology and potential $12 million difference.
The Board of Supervisors voted to continue consideration of a feeder agreement between the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA) and the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), giving city officials two weeks to seek renegotiation over how reimbursements are calculated.
Supervisor David Campos moved to continue the item after raising concerns that the current methodology for reimbursing the MTA does not tie payments to actual trips taken. He said the change could mean "perhaps $12,000,000 that we would otherwise be entitled to, being left on the table." The motion to continue was seconded and approved without objection; the board agreed to return the item on August 2 for further exploration.
What the dispute covers The original agreements used different methodologies for calculating transfers and reimbursements. Campos and others pressed MTA staff to renegotiate so reimbursements to the city are tied to transit trips rather than the sales-tax-based method that MTA said remained in effect for fiscal 2010 while parties negotiated a new approach.
MTA response and limits An MTA representative (identified in the meeting as Ms. Bose) acknowledged the shortcomings of the prior methodology and said MTA intends to renegotiate with BART, pursue a trips-based methodology going forward for FY2011 and seek retroactive adjustments. MTA also said it needs board approval of the FY2010 paperwork because BART had not paid and MTA is carrying the receivable on its books.
Board options City attorneys advised the board that it could reject the agreement and thereby trigger renegotiation, but also cautioned that the board's vote is an up-or-down decision on the agreement before it. Campos moved to continue to allow staff to press BART on a recalculation and seek whether a portion of the disputed funds could be returned; the motion carried.
Ending The board continued the agenda item to August 2 so supervisors and staff could pursue further renegotiation and reporting back on whether additional funds could be recovered and how future methodology would be aligned with trips-based accounting.
