County pattern of disrespect hogties our transportation trust

Miami-Dade officials have once again shown disrespect for the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust and, by extension, the voters who approved a trust to guard their transportation tax money.

In the latest glaring example, the county this month forced an emergency meeting at which trust members had a gun at their backs to immediately and without study commit $125 million of the taxes they were chosen to safeguard.

That county lack of respect for vital oversight has been evident since the trust was formed and disgracefully shows no signs of abating. 

The losers are not only trust members but also the taxpayers, who were hoodwinked into voting for a special sales tax to get new transportation with the pledge that a trust of private citizens would carefully oversee every dime of spending. The trust and the taxpayers, however, never stood a chance of that occurring consistently.

Look at the history.

County officials had long sought a tax to fill a pot of money for new transportation. The aim was admirable. But voters mistrusted commissioners and how they would spend the money, and nothing could win public approval.

Finally, in 2002, Mayor Alex Penelas sold voters on a half-percent sales tax just for a list of new transportation projects with a trust of citizens who would approve all spending in advance, but only after analyzing each expenditure’s impact. With spending tied to a trust, the package passed.

So, what happened? First, commissioners who were to appoint trust members dragged their heels and spent a large share of tax receipts before a trust was even named.

Then, they created a trust but gave it no independent staff to analyze projects, expenditures and tax receipts – all the things a trust was meant to do. Instead, the trust got its analyses from county hall – letting the fox guard the henhouse.

Once the trust finally got staff to help, the commissioners and then-mayor cited the impact of Miami’s circa-2010 Great Recession on county funds and used for other purposes money that long had run transit. Then they drained the surtax to pay transit’s operating losses instead of adding new routes as promised. 

The result: an outcry of bait and switch, as citizens were taxed extra just to pay for operations and not the promised new transit.

Just last year the county formally agreed to again reserve the surtax for new projects. But with the first big project on that 22-year-old list, the South Dade Corridor Bus Rapid Transit, nearly done, the county for months refused to answer the trust’s questions. 

As a result, taxpayers won’t get what they were promised – high-speed South Dade rapid transit in both directions all the time. They’ll get it just one direction at a time and only a few hours a day. 

If that isn’t bait and switch, what is?

That brings us to this month’s emergency meeting. The county told the trust it had just learned that it needed an immediate OK to nearly double the costs of 10 existing consulting contracts to $125 million to pave the way for federal funding. 

The trust got sketchy facts the night before, too late to examine. And when members dug into them, they learned that only two contracts had to be rushed, but – conveniently for the county – the two couldn’t be separated from the other eight so the trust had to pass all 10 sight unseen or lose future federal aid.

Besides, Commissioner Eileen Higgins told the trust, “I want two years of transit projects and I want our commission to see it holistically. I guess it’s not ideal, but we certainly would appreciate you advancing this.”

I guess Al Capone appreciated money handed over at gunpoint too. But taxpayers shouldn’t. We were promised study by a trust that had no chance to do it. Members lamented that their fiduciary responsibility was being compromised.

“This item was not signed off by the administration until yesterday afternoon,” Chairman Robert Wolfarth said. “It just seems to be a pattern where items are delivered at the last moment.”

It was done on purpose, not by chance. It’s clearly a pattern of disrespect, avoidance and perhaps disdain for independent oversight when commissioners and county staff think they know better and don’t want any second-guessing.

In a way, it’s understandable: elected officials and department heads know what they want and mere citizens stand in their way.

But over time, questions those citizens on the trust ask have improved transit. Just knowing that someone is watching carefully has sharpened decisions and results.

The county must show a lot more respect for the oversight team. First, it has been positive when it’s allowed to work properly. Second, it’s not only what the voters were promised, it’s what the election that authorized the tax requires. And third, it’s the right thing to do.

If county officials can’t do that, why should the voters trust them to keep any promises at all?