Editorial: Now's not the time to cut transit service

When the economy starts sliding, no money problem stays fixed for long. That reality is about to hit the Legislature, which returns today from a brief recess to start rebalancing the budget members had thought they'd left in sturdy shape only 10 months ago.

They'll also need to shore up Metro Transit's finances, which legislators thought they'd set on solid footing a month ago when they put into law a 10-year, $6.6 billion package over Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto.

Metro Transit is already ailing financially, largely because one of its chief sources of revenue -- the sales tax on motor vehicles -- has taken a sharp tumble. In just the three months between the November and February revenue forecasts, expected motor vehicle sales tax (MVST) receipts for fiscal 2009 dropped 5.6 percent.

That stands to reason. In many households, one of the first responses to financial fear or trouble is to hold off on buying a car. Those same households might be planning to make greater use of transit. But, perversely, the financial underpinnings of Metro Transit were altered earlier this decade so that when auto purchases drop, so does transit funding.

The MVST dive put Metro Transit's fiscal 2009 budget $14.5 million into the red. Then Pawlenty proposed an additional $26.8 million cut to help balance the state budget. The governor is also going after transit budgets in greater Minnesota, proposing a $2.4 million cut, or about 5 percent of operating funds, in fiscal '09.

If those cuts happen, bus fares will rise and service will be trimmed. Transit-dependent seniors and disabled people will bear the brunt of the cost.

But worse consequences are also likely, Met Council chair Peter Bell told a House panel last week. The federal funding match -- $450 million -- needed to build the Central Corridor light-rail line won't be granted "if we are degrading our bus services." Federal grantmakers take a dim view of a request to expand transit in a state that's simultaneously reducing service.

The link between today's buses and tomorrow's hoped-for trains ought to have been reason enough for Pawlenty to spare transit from the full force of his recommended cuts. The connection should be impressed on both legislators and the metro county officials who are stewards of the newly authorized 0.25 percent sales tax.

The money generated by that tax, an estimated $85 million to $110 million per year, is intended for new transit projects. But as Bell points out, new projects will remain a pipe dream unless buses are adequately funded. The Legislature may have to help county officials see that the new sales tax has a role to play in keeping the buses running.