Transit advocates weigh in on Maryland’s $2B transportation shortfall

Facing a transportation budget shortfall of $2.1 billion from 2024 to 2029, the state of Maryland is planning to eliminate all new road and transit projects, sparing only those projects already funded in their capital plan. Road and transit operating budgets will be reduced by eight percent. A decline in fuel tax revenue, inflation, and the end of federal stimulus aid has hit Maryland’s Transportation Trust Fund hard, sapping it of revenue.

To achieve that reduction, Maryland Governor Wes Moore and Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) Secretary Paul Wiedefeld have announced a slew of transit service cuts. The cuts to statewide bus service are particularly severe, with a possible elimination of all commuter bus services.

In response, transit advocates are arguing the Moore administration must raise additional revenue to stave off the worst of the planned transit service eliminations. Otherwise, they believe, the slashed budget will seriously undermine Maryland’s climate and social equity goals.

Roots of a crisis

Maryland’s transportation shortfall started brewing in 2019. As state transportation services grew in the 2010s, so did operating costs, which began dragging on the Transportation Trust Fund. But those budget realities were obscured during the pandemic when nearly $3 billion in federal subsidies came gushing into the state’s transportation coffers.

A number of factors have now combined to make the state’s funding situation even more dire.

Labor costs have risen, inflation is driving costs up, and gas tax revenue has decreased due to fuel efficiency. Plus, fare revenue collected by local transit agencies has fallen, as statewide ridership recovers from the pandemic era.

“All those things merge together into this perfect storm,” said Lindsey Mendelson, Clean Transportation Representative at Maryland Sierra Club.

The Moore administration may have been dealt a difficult hand; however, advocates believe the way the administration is handling the crisis deepens existing environmental and equity concerns.

“Across-the-board cuts aren’t the best and most equitable way to prioritize dollars, because the Maryland Transit Administration [MTA] was underfunded to begin with, so it’s not an even playing field,” said Mendelson.

Mendelson notes that the MTA has a $1.8 billion maintenance backlog, and now is not the time to underfund maintenance, especially with the recent two-week shutdown of Baltimore’s light rail system.

However, Wiedefeld points out that road funding, not just transit, took a huge budget hit as well. “We did cut all new road projects—anything that’s not advertised for construction is not funded. That was literally the first cut.”

Indeed, highway projects will receive $438 million less in state funding over the next six years, according to the overview of the Final Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP). Wiedefeld further argued that approved highway projects cannot be canceled without jeopardizing federal funding and because of contractual obligations.

Transit cuts will set back equity and the environment, advocates argue

Moore has stated his strong dedication to alleviating systemic inequity in underserved neighborhoods, notably in Baltimore, but activists say transportation cuts undermine that goal.

“Governor Moore is committed to a more sustainable future for the state, which includes the revitalization of Baltimore and investment in Prince George’s [County],” said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth.

“If that’s the case, investment in transit-oriented communities, transit, walking, and biking for these communities, should be the number one priority.”

Mendelson says Maryland’s push for increased adoption of electric vehicles is not enough. “We also have to reduce vehicle miles traveled,” she said. Boosting transit ridership is essential to achieving the state’s ambitious climate goals.

Transit unions also weighed in with dismay about the slash-and-burn budget. They say Moore’s cuts will only throw transit into a death spiral. “People use [transit] less, the quality of the service decreases, and therefore [even] fewer people use it,” said Mathew Girardi, political and communications director for Amalgamated Transit Union 689, which represents WMATA workers.

The Maryland Sierra Club and Coalition for Smarter Growth argue that a better way to address the funding backlog would be to shift more of the remaining road dollars to transit.

“Our hope is that the administration will flex its federal surface transportation grant program to eligible transit projects,” said Schwartz.

Mendelson added that already programmed federal transportation money can be shifted: “There is guidance from Congress that we can flex 50% of those dollars to transit, bike, pedestrian infrastructure, and vehicle electrification.”

Transit and environmental groups believe the shortfall creates a moment for Maryland to fundamentally revisit its transportation priorities and for the Moore Administration to reorient state policies around transit-first projects. Schwartz and Mendelson argued that projects like I-270 and Beltway widening should be scuttled entirely.

Advocates are also concerned that the cessation of the commuter bus service, which serves suburban neighborhoods that have few transit options, will increase driving in areas where the state can least afford more congestion. And while commuter bus ridership remains low—sitting 35% below pre-pandemic ridership according to the CTP—its termination could still be devastating to thousands of people who rely on it.

However, there is a small silver lining for transit supporters in the governor’s budget. Moore has committed $150 million annually for WMATA, the start of money Metro desperately needs to maintain its service levels. “That’s the first documented commitment among three jurisdictions [Maryland, Virginia, and DC],” said Schwartz. However, even more funding is necessary to stop fare increases, service cuts, or longer wait times.

How to raise funding?

Many of the long-term cuts to transit could be avoided by raising new revenue. Raising car tolls is perhaps the most obvious way to do so.

“Governor Hogan unnecessarily slashed the toll rates,” said Schwartz, “robbing the tolling authority of funding for maintenance.” Hogan cut tolls twice during his term in office, money that directly contributes to infrastructure upkeep.

Other possible ways to make up for missing revenue, suggested by transit advocates who spoke to Greater Greater Washington, could include:

• A tax on vehicle-miles-traveled so that cars pay for the roads they are using
• A dedicated transportation funding source, such as a sales tax
• Raising vehicle registration fees
• Raising transit fares

Chris Girardi, of ATU 689, called for dedicated funding for WMATA, which almost all metropolitan transit agencies have as a consistent, reliable source of revenue. He also called for more progressive funding, such as taxing nearby businesses to capture the value they derive from being near transit.

Girardi warned that increasing fares hurts transit at a delicate time. Drive away riders (sometimes literally!), and you end up with reduced revenue and benefits of transit, a point backed up by data. An internal 2018 Metro report, prepared for Wiedefeld when he served as the WMATA general manager, found that fare increases and service cuts only push riders away from transit. The report further found attracting increased ridership depended upon affordable fares and frequent, reliable transit.

Mendelson suggested that Maryland look to other states for creative ways to fund and support transit. She held up Minnesota as a model, lauding their recently passed omnibus bill. HF 2887 created a new sales tax in the Twin Cities to fund transit, indexed the gas tax to inflation, fully funded both intercity and intracity transit extensions, and required future highway projects to account for climate change impacts.

In fact, in 2016, Maryland’s General Assembly passed a transportation scoring bill, which mandated the Maryland Department of Transportation rate transportation projects according to each project’s economic, equity, and environmental benefits. While the Hogan administration undermined this, the legislature could act to ensure tax dollars are promoting Maryland’s climate goals.

With the economy strong, transit advocates believe now is the time to raise revenue and enact these new transit-first policies.“Inflation has come down, GDP numbers look good, unemployment numbers look good,” said Girardi. “If we are looking to get these revenue raisers, it would be now.”

The future might be better

Advocates argue that the transportation status quo isn’t good enough in a low-lying state in a world threatened by climate change. “Maryland needs to return to smart growth; they simply cannot afford to build new highway infrastructure to fuel more sprawling patterns and maintain what they’ve already built,” said Schwartz.

And change is possible. Wiedefeld believes that unprecedented money flowing from the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act could set the stage for a better transit future. He lauds the Frederick Douglass tunnel and improvements to the MARC Penn Line as critical infrastructure that could provide the bones of a better transit future. The potential is great, but any promise for a clean, equitable future will be wasted without adequate funding for transit.