The CEO of the Port Authority will go before the board of directors to inform them that the transportation agency is facing a $50.6 million budget deficit for 2010-2011.  He claims that unless more revenue comes from the state level, the agency faces "draconian" and "damaging" changes.  He claims "the Port Authority that serves us today will not be the Port Authority that exists afterward."  Will his fears be realized or is this yet another empty threat at the heads of taxpayers?

Recall that when the state passed Act 44 in 2007, the Port Authority was afforded two new streams of revenues-a poured alcoholic drink tax in Allegheny County and funds from the tolling of Interstate 80.  Since then the Federal government denied the application to toll I-80 and the money available for mass transit across the state has been cut in half.

The Port Authority CEO claims that unless more state money is found, weekend and evening services would be cut, routes would be eliminated, and maintenance and service garages would be shuttered. 

But this scenario may not have happened had they listened to the Governor's task force on transportation (2006) and implemented some of their recommendations such as engaging in competitive contracting and moving at least 20 percent of operations to the private sector.  Furthermore the task force recognized the high cost of the Port Authority's labor when compared to other transit agencies around the country and noted that in future contracts concessions would be required from the agency's labor force.  However when time came for a new contract (2008), immediate short-term concessions were not part of the deal and any long-term concessions were minimal at best.

And what does the union have to say on this matter?  The transit union chief notes that he agrees the situation is dire and something needs to be done.  However don't count on the union to offer up concessions.  Instead he recommends waiting until the state comes up with a fix rather than making cuts.