Some Salaries Raise Questions To MARTA’s Role
Decatur Metro | July 23, 2010Should MARTA pay a landscaper an $80,000 a year salary?
Well, they aren’t anymore. That was one of the many positions axed in the recent cutbacks. But regardless, the AJC uses that one question to dive into a larger debate on the role of public transit in Atlanta.
…the fact that highly paid landscapers and development managers were ever employed by MARTA — and that it plans to keep many other positions that have little to do with moving passengers from point A to point B — irks some who fear the public transit authority is prone to overspending until checked by a recession, and who accuse the agency of overreaching its responsibility.
MARTA and its allies across the country say, if transit is to thrive and attract travelers who can afford to choose, it must make the experience pleasant and safe. But it also means efforts much bigger: building denser developments near transit stations where condo-dwellers will hop from doorstep to fare gate every morning, and in the process shape a new kind of city that reduces suburban sprawl.
The AJC has really been holding MARTA to their description of their cuts as “drastic” lately. First with the empty bus routes article and now this one. But I’m pretty sure cuts can still be drastic even if you layoff a landscaper or two. 10% cuts or 50% cuts, he’s gone. So in essence, the title of this article, “Some MARTA layoffs: drastic or long overdue?”, makes no sense.
It’s not an either/or. I could be both or it could be neither.
Latest from Decaturish
I’d be quite OK with MARTA paying a landscaper $80,000 a year if the landscaper did a great job. The Avondale Station landscaping shows that the salary is quite undeserving. I mean really, has anyone seen the corner of Sams street and college avenue. What landscaping?
See “Pubic Transit: A Classic Example of Government in Action” — http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/07/19/public-transit-a-classic-example-of-government-in-action/
That’s quite an interesting article, but I take issue with the “cost per passenger mile” analysis.
That sort of calculation will always come out in favor of the most USED from of transportation rather than the most cost efficient. I’d much rather see a comparison of the actual cost per mile to build and maintain roads. v. rail.
Sure, you can cuts that are drastic on the whole, deeply affecting basic services, while at the same time cutting some pure fat. The larger question is: if MARTA has been suffering a financial crisis for so long, and, as many say, it is very well run, why did it take until now to cut the fat? Why didn’t MARTA do this long ago?
I’m sorry for the guy who ost his job, but landscaping seems quite secondary to MARTA’s core mission.
I don’t think we’re so far apart on this particular point DEM. But I think it’s debatable whether a $80,000 landscaper is considered “fat” in the first place, and even if he/she is, as you’ve stated before, every agency and company that large is going to have some “fat”.
Mostly I think the AJC was just reaching with this particular article. The larger questions of a transit agency’s role is the basis of a good article, but I don’t love the way they got to it in this particular case.
I’m a Marta rider and supporter, but there’s one topic I wish a future article like this would investigate. Marta officials frequently point to the fact that such a large percentage of their revenue is required to go back into capital improvements, yet I’d be hard pressed to identify any visible capital improvements that have been made to the system in the 10+ years I’ve been riding it. So is all that money just sitting somewhere, waiting to be used?
Two major capital improvement projects I know of are the Breeze card system and the rail car rehabilitation program. I assume the redo of the east entry to the Decatur Station was a capital improvement project as well, but I’m not sure.
The rest of the capital improvement money has been spent on the futile multi-year attempt to fix the escalator at Peachtree Center Station.
I am going to defend the utility of having a Landscape Architect working for MARTA. As a very frequent user, I have noticed a number of station area landscape improvements, (planters, benches, etc) and I am appreciative of them. The system needs to appear friendly, and well maintained, if it is to attract new riders, many who are afraid of MARTA and will not use it. Now in a tough economic time maybe other priorities should be looked at.
Also, the corner of Sams Crossing and College Avenue is not the responsibility of MARTA. I am nearly certain it is DeKalb County’s responsibility!
A question on the methodology – is it an $80k salary, or is it $80k being saved by eliminating this position? Because typically the cost of an employee is their salary times 1.3, to include benefits and facilities.
Anyone know if Marta is quoting salaries or savings per position?