CATS unveils budget plan

Shorter wait times, jobs  in proposal

The Capital Area Transit System unveiled a draft version of a $17.7 million operating budget for 2013 on Tuesday that could cut wait times for buses from 75 minutes to 20 minutes during peak hours.

The 2013 budget, which includes funding for 40 new positions, is about 23 percent bigger than this year’s budget thanks to the 10.6-mill property tax approved by Baton Rouge and Baker voters in April.

However, the budget is still significantly smaller than it will be in 2014 and beyond because CATS plans to use $6 million for some one-time purposes. The property tax is expected to generate $15.3 million, but only $9.2 million of that tax money will be applied to CATS’ operating budget.

This year CATS had to take out a $3 million loan to stay open until the end of the year because of a budget shortfall caused by losses of state and federal dollars. CATS will use tax revenue to pay off that loan next year. Another $3 million of the tax revenue will be held as a reserve fund for emergencies.

Chief Financial Officer Gary Owens said CATS has never been able to afford to maintain a reserve fund in the past, although that is a regular budgeting principle of almost all public agencies.

Jared Loftus, board president, said the cushion is necessary for unexpected increases in costs “like oil prices and maintenance costs.”

CATS won’t have to set aside as large of an amount to contribute to the reserve fund after the first year, Loftus said. He said CATS can create the reserve pot next year without affecting its ability to deliver its service promises for 2014, which was its self-imposed deadline.

After 2013, Loftus said, CATS expects to have a more significant budget that will include the additional $6 million in tax revenue, as well as increases from fares, advertising and state revenue.

CATS could receive as much as $850,000 extra in state revenue beginning in 2014 because the state’s funding formula favors parishes that have dedicated tax revenue, Owens said. He said the state won’t take CATS’ new tax into account until a year after it’s been in place.

Owens told the CATS board the goal of crafting the budget was to reduce wait times at peak hours of service from about 75 minutes to 20 minutes. He said CATS can accomplish this by adding 40,000 additional hours of bus service next year, by putting more buses on more routes.

Brian Marshall, CATS chief executive officer, said next year’s budget will fund about 40 new positions, of which only three will be administrative. He said more administrative positions could be added including a human resources director and chief operations officer.

Commissioner Montrell McCaleb made a motion to consider a moratorium on administrative hires until the board can assure that it delivers on service goals. But there was an objection to the motion by Commissioner Dalton Honoré, so the item won’t be considered until next month.

Loftus noted the city-parish did not provide a $3 million contribution as it has in recent years, and he said CATS will make no argument to the Metro Council to restore the funds.

“We need to stop the narrative of CATS having its hand out for more money,” Loftus said.

CATS came under fire in recent weeks because Owens said the agency would likely be able to deliver only two out of eight express routes that were promised ahead of the tax election. He cited the loss of anticipated revenue sources such as the city-parish allocation.

Owens made the statements in a court hearing for a lawsuit alleging the tax is unconstitutional.

CATS officials have since said they will be able to provide seven out of eight routes.

The final budget will be voted on by the CATS board in December.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (24)


1) Comment by phil - 14/11/2012

Leif - no new districts were drawn but new districts were used - and it turns out those districts just so happened to match municipal districts although after the vote it was determined that CATS is not even a municipality. If you want to figure out a new name for it then that is fine but it is still a case of manipulating tax districts to get more yes votes - which is basically the same thing that gerrymandering does.

2) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 14/11/2012

Do us all a favor. Please. Go stand on the nearest road. Do not move. Stay there an hour, minimum.. Then, come back and tell all of us how that road transported you.

3) Comment by DMJ - 14/11/2012

Government doesn't provide transportation?? Who do you braniacs think built every road in Louisiana?

4) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 14/11/2012

As much as I enjoy disagreeing with MEM, he's got this one 100% right.

5) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 14/11/2012

Here are the facts: providing transportation is not a legitimate function of government.

6) Comment by Straight Shooter - 14/11/2012

@Leif Thank for the informative comments made here. Most of the comments made about CATS have been simply based out of ideological differences with the tax proposal. So it is difficult for someone like me who is on the fence about the tax proposal to understand what is or is not spin. I want the facts without the demonizing of CATS and their board or employees. Your informative comments shed light on facts that I was not aware of.

7) Comment by Leif - 14/11/2012

phil, it is not gerrymandering because no new districts were drawn. Perhaps you mean to use another more appropriate term to describe the process of polling a subset (cities and towns) of a larger group (the parish), then having that subset pay the tax and get the service they pay for. To address the other items you listed, I think we can agree that more transparency and communication are needed. Where we likely disagree is that this can be done without repealing anything.

8) Comment by phil - 14/11/2012

By the way, even if you do take the gerrymandering argument out of my first comment, you still have all of the other issues.

9) Comment by phil - 14/11/2012

Yes it IS gerrymandering - or manipulating tax areas based on previous election results to get more "yes" votes. Should we keep making tax districts smaller and smaller for example and keep having elections until we can group three homes together with a past history of 1 no vote and 2 yes votes so the tax will always pass? Also the fact that the homestead exemption applied to the first tax votes that actually failed is a good indication that it would have also failed in the last election if the homestead exemption had applied from the very beginning. We were sold a pig in a poke.

10) Comment by rdj! - 14/11/2012

Driver certification is needed for coach operators. It is too difficult to obtain a CDL just to operate a bus at $11/hr. Drivers should be trained, tested and have the ability to test for a LA CDL... AT CATS.

11) Comment by Leif - 14/11/2012

I think I'll address phil's "gerrymandering" comment. The State gave CATS two options for holding the election: in the parish borders or in the city limits. We've had two parish-wide elections, 2002 (1.25-mill, 5-year property tax) and 2010 (3.5-mill, 12-year property tax). They ended the same way both times: 47% yes and 53% no. (Election attempts in 2004 and 2006 were scrapped.) It was a perfectly valid decision to try again but within city limits, where the riders actually live. The city limits are a pre-existing boundary. They weren't created specifically for the election. If you want to talk about gerrymandering, let's talk about LA's House District 2.

12) Comment by taylor2285 - 14/11/2012

How is the district gerrymandered? It covers two municipalities that are entitled to operate independently of their parish government on taxation. Residents in each city in the parish can elect a tax that applies only to their jurisdiction. CATS can use the tax revenue generated by the municipalities to provide its core urban service, and fare dollars and state spending on its outer services. How is this complicated? It's accounting.

13) Comment by phil - 14/11/2012

A gerrymandered manipulated tax district based on past voting results. A tax proposition that was written incorrectly. A government system that did not catch the errors in the tax proposition. A possible bait and switch to destroy the homestead exemption. An Attorney General's office legal opinion that basically states we voted on something different than what we got. A cost estimate that is now in question and different people with CATS have stated different things (once in court). A law suit. A city-parish government that will apparently now keep the $3 million subsidy it was giving to CATS and use that money for who knows what. A 10 year messed up tax that we are possibly stuck with. All of this adds up to REPEAL THE TAX.

14) Comment by DMJ - 14/11/2012

Website overhaul, GPS tracking, more transfer centers, smarter and more efficient routes, more shelters at most-used stops and a good PR campaign. If people feel confident about being able to ride the bus, they will...which will raise fares...which will allow CATS to function better. Still, the CATS board needs to level with us: how many express routes will it offer? We were promised 8, based on earlier revenue projections, but then we were told they might only offer 2....now we hear they'll offer 7? Which is it?

15) Comment by taylor2285 - 14/11/2012

Really great to see two very positive and well-informed comments in a CATS-related article. There really is no such thing as a privately operated municipal bus system in America; the ones that exist still receive their funding from government (including Tiger Trails, which raises money from a mandatory fee imposed by the university). It's entirely ignorant to expect that a company could be formed and fully fund itself from fares and advertising. If you are terrified that the CATS tax will cripple you, by all means, please move outside of the city proper. You'd be doing progress a favor.

16) Comment by Leif - 14/11/2012

Businesses tend to split paid administrative officers from those who oversee the business's direction. The Board of Directors are the overseers, and they are unpaid. http://www.brcats.com/Directory/Directory.asp

17) Comment by Being_Stupid - 14/11/2012

Okay, okay, let me get this straight.... Gary Owens is the Chief Financial Officer. Jared Loftus is the Board President. Brian Marshall is the Chief Executive Officer. Montrell McCaleb and Dalton Honoré are Commissioners. And CATS still needs to hire somebody to be the new Chief Operations Officer? Just how many dang people does it take to operate a simple bus company?

18) Comment by Being_Stupid - 14/11/2012

****Comment Removed for Violation of Terms of Use****

19) Comment by Leif - 14/11/2012

I get the feeling those who negatively comment on CATS funding don't understand just how poorly CATS has been funded for most of its history, starting in 1970 when the City bought MTC from Keith Lanneau as well as the 8 other interurban systems. (http://theleif.org/tools/baton-rouge-public-transit-history.php) There appears to only be one period when the system was somewhat properly funded: 1998-2001. Federal funding increased and CATS saw a resulting increase in ridership. When the temporary funding disappeared, routes were removed and ridership dropped. There is a strong correlation between funding and effectiveness. We are talking about the law of diminishing returns, but we're so far on the low end of the curve that results look paltry. And about privatization... one thing we forget to mention about LSU bus service going to Tiger Trails in 2009: LSU pays them $3.5 million a year while CATS was only receiving $2.4 million. A properly funded system yields better results.

20) Comment by buzz - 14/11/2012

@Duckyluve: They committed to more than doubling the number of buses and hours of service. Do you think they can do that without hiring more people? Do you think they will use “smart buses” that drive themselves? You think maybe a private company could do that without hiring more people to drive the buses because they are smarter? Why not take a minute to think before you comment.

21) Comment by 8point6 - 14/11/2012

"He said more administrative positions could be added including a human resources director and chief operations officer." If you didn't have them before, then, you don't need them now! “We need to stop the narrative of CATS having its hand out for more money,” Loftus said. This has GOT to be the quote of the year!! Too funny!

22) Comment by tradewinns - 14/11/2012

CATS is really excited now. they have millions of dollars to spend, they're as giddy as a kid who found $20. what a waste. i hope they find the tax unconstitutional, that'll send them scrambling.

23) Comment by Duckyluve - 14/11/2012

Cats can't make it now even with more of our tax money and so they want more money so they can hire more people???? How about making some cuts like everyone else in American is having to do? No wonder cats is a total failure. All they want to do is spend more and more instead of finding a way to slow the bleeding.

24) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 14/11/2012

Turn CATS over to the private sector. Any problems will either be solved or they'll go out of business, end of story.