Turns out, the Transit Vision plan effectively launched a Memphis City Council led MATA public oversight conspiracy that now spans 6 years, from 2019 to the present. Taxpayers paid sufficiently to not have a botched public transit system. MATA is a sustained, long running and Council led, public ripoff conspiratorial scandal that needs to be reported as such.

With the former stated and as an example, did you know that from 2019-23 MATA spent $6,364,458 on bus fare collection, about the same as they did on passenger buses? And guess what? Today no one in local government can tell the public how many passenger trips are occurring on MATA buses. In fact, Little Rock, with 50% fewer riders than Memphis, spent $16M on buses while Memphis spent $6.4M (2019-23). More on MATA capital expenditures (capx) later.

Spending $6.4M (2019-23) on bus fare collection, when MATA collects less than $2M in fares per year is nuts. The former is an argument for making riding fixed route buses free.

So today, more than ever, the Council led conspiracy is crystal clear. After the replacement of the MATA Board, The Memphis City Council systemically continued the conspiracy, by not overseeing the $2.2M City of Memphis contract for MATA Transpro consulting services. Transpro was supposed to turnaround MATA, but sadly doesn't know how many people are riding the bus after being engaged in Memphis for almost 1 full yr. 

I was originally for Transpro turnaround services, on board and all of that, but am sadly disappointed. And yes, John Vergos warned me....

Overall, the conspiracy seems to have been launched by the Transit Vision plan and spans years 2019 to the present. Innovate Memphis facilitated the development of the Transit Vision plan. A component of the conspiracy occurred during Councilor Ford Canale’s 2022-23 Transportation Committee Chairmanship. Canale never asked MATA for their financials or budget. As a consequence, during 2022-23, MATA never produced current public financials, despite leading their peer group, on a per passenger bus trip basis, in technology capx spend.

Then as Chair of the City Council, while partnering with Councilor Edmund Ford Sr., Canale continued the oversight conspiracy by not scheduling monthly oversight of the $2.2M Transpro contract in Ford’s Chaired Transportation Committee. This Council led MATA oversight conspiracy is now more clear than ever, with yet another $2.2M public contract rip, this time with Transpro. 

Council members, elected prior to 2023, effectively mentored newly electeds in the practice of conspiratorial oversight. With this mentorship, newly elected historic Council members enjoined the MATA oversight conspiracy.

And the conspiracy is not "systemic racism", as the historic Council consists of the following: 6 strong black women, 2 fully grown black men, 4 mean ole white me and 1 watch me roar white woman. 

Keep in mind the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) National Transit Database (NTD) lists the “City of Memphis dba as Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA)” as the “Agency” of record. Ultimately, public oversight of public transit funds, from a Federal Government standpoint in Memphis, is a Memphis City Council function. So why even have both an Innovate Memphis and MATA Board? After all, both have been useless.

So not long ago, this blog noted that of city transit peers that had a 200-300 mile service area and 2M-3.5M in annual bus ridership, that MATA had the highest actual operational expenditures for the group, yet a botched system. Makes no sense, unless MATA is being publicly ripped off. So, what about capital expenditures (capx)? Is deficient capx a source of a botched MATA transit system? Let’s take a look.

Know that not long ago, MLGW’s Doug McGowen cited historic capital underspend as the source of MLGW’s unreliable grid. Turns out, based on data compiled by the Taxpayer Justice Institute, capx underspend never occurred at MLGW. Memphians historically spent the money for a reliable, but had an unreliable grid. 

KNOW, with 100% certainty, that Elitist led Memphis public ripoffs occur through public contract.

So, did capital underspend (2019-23) occur at MATA? Well MATA had a below average ranking with a total $41,010,550 bus capx spend, ranking 9 out of 14 in actual and per passenger trip capx spend. But nowhere near the bottom and nothing, from a capx standpoint, that would constitute a botched bus system. 

Did MATA spend their capx dollars wisely? NOPE. On a per bus trip spend basis, MATA ranked last in the 14-member peer group in per passenger trip bus capx spend ($6.4M), while leading the peer group in technology ($12M) and other bus related vehicle spend ($1.2M). And as discussed earlier, MATA unfortunately placed second in bus fare collection capx spend ($6.4M), while collecting less than $2M in fares per year.  

MATA effectively spent the same on bus fare collection as they did on passenger buses. In fact Little Rock, with 50% fewer riders than Memphis, spent $16M on buses while Memphis spent $6.4M (2019-23). The former will botch a transit system !

Does MATA have anything to show for their $12,032,732 bus related technology spend? NOPE. Their ERP financial system capx spend was a botch and MATA refuses to answer FOIAs regarding the ERP project. The other vehicles $1.2M spend is also a bit of a head scratcher but not as much as the others.

MATA is a proven public ripoff when looking at both operational and capital expenditures. And, Transit Vision effectively launched a Memphis City Council conspiracy and is now a dead plan.

Memphis will continue to fall behind their peers if public oversight conspiracies continue. No city grows, thrives, and evolves while ripping off the taxpayer…..

Check the Facts

National Transit Database (NTD) - https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd

Taxpayer Justice Institute NTD compilation -  https://1drv.ms/x/c/229429ba69455723/EZOcMneN1AxDiPS_Atc2vRABd4Ol6EmnpiakO3sXpGbGbQ?e=pTgf4o

NOTE: For the above spreadsheet, capital spend was added up for each peer agency 2019-23. Then divided by calendar year UPT ridership (2019-23) as opposed to fiscal year ridership as shown under monthly UPT. Technically 2019-23 FY ridership should have been used but this is close enough as FY23 ridership is not provided in the NTD and calendar year ridership, per the UTP, is provided. Guideway expenditures are included in the total but were not analyzed