ShareThis Page
Pa. transit: All talk, little action so far |

Pa. transit: All talk, little action so far

Jim Ritchie
| Sunday, April 1, 2007 12:00 a.m

The wheels are spinning, but the bus isn’t moving.

It’s stuck in a public hearing.

Politicians have hosted a succession of public hearings and meetings to talk about the state’s transportation crisis — including seven state hearings on mass transit in March — but are not close to a cure.

“This is what I’m hearing on all fronts right now — all talk, no action,” said Russ Diamond, founder of PACleanSweep, a nonprofit reform group based in Annville, Pa.

“On one hand, I truly feel for the citizens of this commonwealth who depend on mass transit and reliable roads for their livelihood. On the other, I’m happy to sit back and watch the aristocracy try to fight its way out of the proverbial wet paper sack. They sow what they reap.”

The state’s highway, bridge and mass transit systems need $1.7 billion to maintain adequate levels of service, according to a special commission convened by Gov. Ed Rendell.

Last month’s transit hearings and another scheduled for April followed nine hearings held by Port Authority of Allegheny County where hundreds of people unloaded their thoughts about pending service cuts. Another six are planned in Philadelphia.

The city and county councils also have hosted public meetings to discuss the same issues.

And Rendell’s Transportation Funding and Reform Commission last year gathered testimony and data for a report detailing the problems and potential solutions.

Still, the hearings continue. With a quarter of the year gone, there has not been a face-to-face negotiating session between Republicans and Democrats in an attempt to resolve anything, officials said.

Some state lawmakers said the problems will be fixed in the next state budget, due to take effect July 1.

Rendell proposes raising money by leasing the turnpike and taxing oil companies, although he has not yet divulged details of his plans to lawmakers.

“I would say there’s a strong belief in Harrisburg that with the completion of the budget there must be attention paid to these two problems,” said Craig Shuey, executive director of the Senate Transportation Committee. “I don’t think we want to see transit shut down.”

Some said this could be transit’s most crucial point.

“Because of the way things work in Harrisburg, you don’t generally get more than one bite at the apple at these huge fundraising efforts,” said state Rep. Joe Markosek, D-Monroeville, who chairs the House Transportation Committee. “If we don’t do something now the problem’s going to continue to fester.”

Some of the hearings have focused on Rendell’s budget proposal, including one in Green Tree conducted by the House Appropriations Committee.

“Those are typical budget hearings,” said spokeswoman Johnna Pro. “That happens every year once the governor proposes his budget.”

Rendell crossed the state last week urging action.

“With his recent bus tour, he has asked those interested in this issue to make clear to the Legislature that action is needed, if not on his proposal, on some option around which consensus can be built. Doing nothing is not an option,” said PennDOT spokesman Rich Kirkpatrick.

Holding hearings is “crucial” to the process of government, he said.

For now, legislators say they’re waiting to see Rendell’s plan.

“Frankly, I think this will be a banner year for government ineptitude in Harrisburg,” said PACleanSweep’s Diamond. “Why• Because the state’s been running on fumes for a number of years, and now every issue that truly needs to be addressed is an absolute emergency.”

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.