Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mta Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Muni projects two‑year budget gaps; board hears plan mixing fees, reserves and service changes
Summary
MTA officials told the Budget & Finance Committee the agency faces a $15.3 million gap for FY2009 and a $66.2 million gap for FY2010. Their proposed two‑year balancing plan relies on Prop A revenue, increased permit/fee revenue, potential parking meter and citation changes, fare/pass adjustments and use of fund balance; supervisors pressed for detail, neighborhood impacts and enforcement metrics.
Muni staff presented a two‑year budget to the Board’s Budget & Finance Committee that showed a projected FY2009 shortfall of about $15.3 million and a larger FY2010 gap of roughly $66.2 million. Nat Ford (MTA) and Sonali Bose (MTA) outlined a mix of revenue and expense steps aimed at balancing those years.
Key revenue measures presented to close the first‑year gap include tighter cost recovery for neighborhood permits, revised special event and street use fees, a proposed $10 increase in the monthly FastPass, and options for parking meter rate adjustments and demand‑responsive pricing downtown. The draft also includes use of fund balance and targeted program reductions; staff emphasized that a portion of the solution is tied to Prop A revenues that must be used for Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP) improvements.
Supervisors pressed staff on impacts: the committee asked how a proposed meter or citation increase would affect neighborhood commercial districts and small businesses, and whether enforcement and productivity improvements (parking control officer activity, proof‑of‑payment officer deployment) could reduce the need for large fee increases. MTA staff said they are piloting proof‑of‑payment officers on selected lines and have increased revenue through cable car fare‑collection changes. Staff also noted hiring and retention challenges and described how several hundred vacant positions and new frontline positions factor into the two‑year forecast.
On enforcement and meter revenue questions, MTA staff pledged to provide detailed monthly production metrics (citations, PCO coverages, placement and response time), and the MTA’s blue‑ribbon revenue panel report was expected to provide additional recommendations on longer‑term structural fixes.
What’s next: MTA will present final recommendations to its board (April 15th in the meeting) and will supply requested data and pilot results to the Budget & Finance Committee. Several supervisors signaled that neighborhood impacts should be reexamined before adopting any across‑the‑board meter increases or citation changes.
