Don Perata
Speaks His Mind
You were the legislative
champion for the new San Francisco Bay Water Transit Authority (WTA).
Now that the Agency is up and running, how does the "Ferry
Godfather" think his creation is doing?
I was sorry that we couldn’t
have gotten a little more money to put into it because I think the
$12 million will have to last us until the Authority gives the
Legislature a report and I think the $12 million is a little light
of what we need to do an effective job. Having said that, the
important thing for the Authority is for it not to become overly
bureaucratized and just become another of the 27 transit agencies
in the Bay Area. Rather, they should move very quickly to decide
what they want to accomplish with their mandate. That’s their
responsibility. I think they can do that. And I am pledged to do
all I can help the Authority. I will also keep a watchful eye on
their work as well.
The Metropolitan Transportation
Commission ((MTC) opposed you on the creation of the WTA,
prompting you to question whether MTC should even exist. Things
seemed to have cooled down; who came around, you or MTC?
Well, we probably both did. It’s
a mating dance, you know. I get upset when a new idea is opposed
by another public identity. Everyone is too concerned about their
own domain and not enough about solving the problem. That’s how
I interpreted MTC’s reaction. They felt there was going to be
another Agency outside their control and so their first response
was to oppose it. And so I immediately challenged MTC’s
right to exist because they only exist because of legislative
mandate. My consultant Ezra Rappaport did a lot of work with
people at MTC. I met with a number of them who assured me that we
were on the same page and we worked it out.
Aren’t higher bridge tolls a
sensible way to ration limited access to bridges, especially since
the added revenue can be ued to pay for better public
transportation?
Absolutely. It’s the only
"cash register" that exists to pay for Bay Area
transportation. If you make a direct correlation between the
increase in the tolls and the proper use of the revenue I think
the public will buy it. If we can say that a dollar raised in
tolls will be spent on ferries and other transportation plans that
will reduce congestion, then people will buy it. But you have to
make that correlation. That’s why the ferry study has to be
complete and it has to look at the Northern part of the Bay in
particular. Why would someone from Contra Costa County pay an
extra buck if they weren’t served? The only way we are going to
improve transit in the Bay Area is by increasing bridge tolls and
it is up to the WTA to make a compelling case.
Not long ago the Federal
government was willing to make money available to MTC to study
congestion pricing, meaning higher tolls at peak period, lesser at
non-peak periods. Yet the Legislature squelched this study by
ordering MTC to not accept the money. Was that wise?
That happened before I got to
the Legislature so I don’t understand the rationale that was
behind that decision. Maybe congestion pricing is not a good idea,
but to not think it through, to not have an open and exhausting
debate is wrong. We need to think of everything. There tends to be
a knee-jerk response with some people that any congestion pricing
or HOV lanes – the so-called "Lexus lanes" – will
hurt poor people. But the fact of the matter is that a lot of
individuals who are on these roads everyday are working people who
would not mind paying an extra dollar or two when they needed to
in order to expedite their business. I don’t believe we should
be making socio-economic judgments on behalf of people. Instead,
we should give options and let people choose.
