Beltline Rail Now (BRN), an organization that advocates for expanded transit and specifically light rail on the Beltline, is calling for MARTA to seek maximum federal funding for More MARTA projects that hang in the balance.
“No project in More MARTA should be advanced without a minimum of 40 percent asked as the federal match, and they should go, when it’s prudent to do so, for 60 percent, which is the maximum in the Biden administration,” BRN Chairperson Matthew Rao said.
Although Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg announced the Biden Infrastructure Act (IIJA) in Atlanta in May 2021, and named Beltline rail as the type of project the legislation aims to fund, Atlanta has not sought federal support for any rail projects through the $23 billion program.
The city’s audit of the More MARTA program raised questions about the allocation of funds and confidence in the agency to finance the full list of More MARTA projects. Federal grants as part of the funding formula put more pressure on MARTA and the city to deliver projects or risk losing those federal dollars, transit advocates say.
“Why they haven’t is there’s nothing ready to apply for — except Streetcar East, and that’s principle in our decision,” Rao said. “If this had been federalized to begin with, we would be further along than we are now, because they would not want to walk away from $150 million.”
The transit agency has already won a $25 million Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) grant for the Five Points station renovation, a $12.6 million federal TIGER grant for Summerhill bus rapid transit (BRT), and a $750,000 grant from the Federal Transit Administration for BRT on Campbellton Road.
Meanwhile, more than $3.6 billion has been awarded since 2022 to light rail projects in Boston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Maryland, Minneapolis, Phoenix, San Diego, Sacramento, and Seattle, and another $10 billion has been announced for heavy rail projects in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York and the San Francisco Bay area.
“MARTA evaluates every More MARTA project for eligibility and opportunity to secure federal (and state) funding to support delivery. Specifically, MARTA is pursuing Small Starts Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program funding for MARTA Rapid Campbellton and Rapid Southlake.
The FTA has a lengthy process of determining federal eligibility. In the case of CIG grants, the program requires a scoring step before a full application, and MARTA is working with FTA now to score these projects,” MARTA spokesperson Stephany Fisher said in an email statement.
MARTA is also exploring applying for federal support on the Clifton Corridor and has secured state support for the Bankhead platform extension, Fisher said.
- Immediately adopt a new financial model beginning in its FY2026 budget to allocate at least 80 percent of More MARTA tax dollars into actual transit expansion, like BRT and LRT projects, rather than the 50 to 55 percent it has been allocated so far.
- Include in its FY2026 budget the local matching dollars to apply for USDOT RAISE grants for the study and preliminary design of all the BRT and LRT projects as well as the four new infill heavy rail stations proposed by Mayor Dickens in his March 27th State Of The City address.
- Federalize the Streetcar East Extension, building on the Tier II EIS and NEPA that MARTA has already undertaken for the project and reducing the local funding requirement.
- Change the funding mix for all other transit expansion projects in More MARTA to include a substantially larger federal share and seek to fund a minimum of 40 percent of project costs for the Streetcar East Extension through federal dollars.
- Be prepared to take the momentum from the BeltLine Transit Study that ABI now has underway to move swiftly into New Starts project development for a combination of light rail on the Beltline south of I-20 with a seamless connection to an infill MARTA rail station at Murphy Crossing, while also advancing further phases of transit on the Eastside beyond Ponce City Market to Piedmont Park, Ansley Mall and Armour, the infill station on the north side of the city.
“Any approach to more significant and assured funding is what we should be pursuing. Because there’s been shakiness in More MARTA funding and execution, I think this is something we should consider,” Councilmember Amir Farokhi, a member of the city council transportation committee, said.
Rao argues that this approach would make the local funding go further and increase the size and caliber of projects MARTA is able to deliver, calling it “a win for everyone.”
Project costs have more than doubled over the last seven years, making it less feasible to fund projects such as the Streetcar East Expansion and light rail on the Beltline through local dollars alone, he said.
“These are just the kinds of things that federal grants are designed to pay for, and only MARTA or the City of Atlanta can ask for the money,” Rao said.
The rules around projects that qualify have changed in a way that would benefit MARTA, he said. Local transit agencies can now apply for design and study money, making projects open to federal support earlier in the process, and recipients have longer to spend the money awarded — now a five-year timeline rather than two.
“We will need to accomplish the planning process first before we have a full scope to apply for discretionary grants,” Fisher said. “MARTA reviews the project schedules to determine the best time to apply for additional federal funds. Funding awards expire if not drawn down within a specific time window, so we do not apply for grants far in advance of an eligible phase of work on a project.”
Of course, asking the federal government for more funding doesn’t guarantee that Atlanta projects will win grants.
“There’s a chance that we don’t get any of what’s remaining in the IIJA… but if we don’t try right now if we wait a year to analyze the auditor’s recommendations and figure out how to renegotiate the [intergovernmental agreement], we’re not going to get there. Because the money will have been spent,” Rao said.
This is a great proposal from BRN and should be adopted by MARTA without hesitation.
The argument that we don’t apply for the funding because of the time limit to spend it doesn’t hold much water if other cities are managing to put in applications and using the money. Why weren’t we prepared to hit the gas too?
It’s important to note that the streetcar extension would not get Federal funding because there is no data to prove the benefits. They are more likely to get funding with Bus Rapid Transit projects, which are way more cost-effective.
“No project in More MARTA should be advanced without a minimum of 40 percent asked as the federal match … ”
Well put, Matthew Rao! Under this stipulation the Streetcar Extension East shouldn’t move forward because MARTA officials didn’t believe it could qualify for federal grants. I agree!
Matthew also is right to note that the extension (in the linked BRN document) will cost much more than the current estimate of $230 million. The cost for the entire Beltline streetcar loop is likely at this point to have ballooned beyond $2.5 billion (I’m being conservative).
There’s no mystery why the first of leg the Beltline streetcar (and most likely every other segment) is falling ENTIRELY on local taxpayers: It’s an elitist boondoggle.
From an equity standpoint, the SCE will primarily serve Inman Park and other eastside neighborhoods, while siphoning money away from more cost-effective projects in parts of town that truly rely on transit.
From a ridership perspective, it’s far, far below what would justify a $100-million-per-mile streetcar. Even the optimistic official estimates project only 4,000 daily riders for the entire streetcar (downtown plus Beltline) once the east extension is built. And that’s not until 2040! Today, more people already walk and ride a much shorter segment of the Beltline trail!
The implication in this article is that MARTA isn’t doesn’t want maximize its federal funds. I seriously doubt that’s the case. And the idea that MARTA can get the feds to change their funding formulas just for us is some magical thinking.
But it sure does sound good to claim that we can complete the Beltline boondoggle if only MARTA just asked for more federal money. It reminds me of politicians who promise to painlessly balance the budget by cutting “waste, fraud and abuse.”
An important part of the BRN post from was left out of the article. In it, Rao urges “Mayor Dickens, MARTA and ABI [to] quickly increase funding from both existing and new sources, primarily the federal programs administered by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).” In the past BRN has been clear that it doesn’t expect to fund the streetcar with just federal funds. It’s called for the boondoggle to receive even larger portions of the More MARTA and TAD pies (taking that money away from other projects), as well as $500 million in new property taxes. Pretending that it’s concerned about all transit projects is a way for BRN to distract from the fact that it will throw other transit under the bus (or train) at its first opportunity.
Beltline Rail Now is a special interest group — interested in only one project. If that comes at the expense of other transit in Atlanta or the Beltline as we enjoy it today, too bad.
If you’re going to quote the article, then quote the article correctly. “Change the funding mix for all other transit expansion projects in More MARTA to include a substantially larger federal share and seek to fund a minimum of 40 percent of project costs for the Streetcar East Extension through federal dollars.” He mentions asking for federal money for this project as well as future projects.
Don’t lie.
I don’t understand your point. It’s an exact quote from the second paragraph.
“No project in More MARTA should be advanced without a minimum of 40 percent asked as the federal match …”
Ken Edelstein’s reaction is a blatantly special-interest-influenced misinterpretation of what was said. This is classic BAT ‘alternative facts’ rhetoric.
The Beltline transit is planned to go where the development has already been built, with demand for workers who will use the system to get to some of the largest concentrations of good jobs. To take it away is to deny access to those who need those jobs.
Atlanta, it’s special interest groups like this who are trying to take away YOUR Beltline rail transit project that will provide the greatest amount of access for the least cost, with the largest ridership and the most convenience.
So called ‘rapid’ bus transit will increase paving, it won’t be as handicapped accessible and, it will be stuck in traffic (regardless of so-called designated lanes). Most insidiously, it will restrict access to most areas of the city. Supporters of this system are simply trying to control where people can and cannot go around the city.
The Beltline transit loop will provide the greatest access for the most people. It will connect 45 neighborhoods. It will be within walking distance of 6 existing MARTA stations (and connect to 4 proposed MARTA stations). It will connect with dozens of bus lines. It’s the most efficient, effective and equitable option for expanding and improving our existing transit system.
Please email the mayor now and tell him to get out of the way of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve Atlanta’s present and future!
Ken, half of your comment is backwards and the other half is out of context when you note that BRN has called for “even larger portions of the More MARTA and TAD pies (taking that money away from other projects), as well as $500 million in new property taxes.”
The More MARTA project list presented to Mayor Bottoms in 2018 and adopted by the MARTA Board identified $1.1 billion of the 40-year $2.7 billion program (based on the $68 million raised in 2018) for BeltLine and Streetcars. BRN’s 2021 Funding White Paper called for four infill MARTA stations that were not included on the Board adopted list and it recommended transferring more of the half penny sales tax to the BeltLine project by adding federal funds for Streetcar segments that MARTA otherwise planned to build with 100% local funds. Rebalancing funds between BeltLine Rail and on-street Streetcar segments has no impact on other expansion program budgets.
The 2005 BeltLine Redevelopment Plan that created the TAD imagined that the $1.7 billion raised over 25 years would provide $530 million toward the local match for a federal transit construction grant. Recognizing that the TAD did not perform well as early as anticipated, BRN’s funding paper called for only $250 million in BeltLine TAD funding for light rail infrastructure and infill MARTA rail stations. That’s less than half of what was originally promised. Earlier this year, ABI adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan estimating $700 million in additional BeltLine TAD revenue through 2030 and allocated exactly $0 to transit construction or infill stations. Spending of TAD funds on developer incentives that don’t create permanently affordable housing for renters at or below 60% Area Median Income (that’s what FTA evaluates when awarding Capital Investment Grants) is what BRN would like to take money away from.
BRN’s two recommendations for additional property tax are targeted value capture tools limited to parcels that benefit from the upzoning permitted and amenities provided along the BeltLine corridor. There has never been any call for a general fund commitment as you seem to imply. BRN’s first idea for a Transportation Improvement District would have transit as the primary eligible expense and would be intended to last sufficient decades to service an infrastructure loan, but is otherwise similar in scope (2 mills) to the BeltLine Special Services District (SSD) the City created in 2021 to repay trail completion bonds over 10 years.
The second kind of special assessment property tax that BRN recommended is something even BAT should logically support – extra millage exclusively on the land value (i.e. no difference whether developed or vacant) around infill station locations. Contributions from surrounding property owners through special assessments, development impact fees and land donations are typical forms of public private partnership for infill metro stations.
So to recap, BRN wants no more of More MARTA than what was allocated in 2018 for BeltLine Rail & Streetcar; BRN wants the BeltLine TAD to live up to no more than half of it’s original commitment to transit; BRN wants to capture and recycle a portion of the private real estate value created by the BeltLine to fund transit infrastructure that extends public access.
BRN’s only recommendation to take funds away from other projects is to move some of the $1 billion per year Georgia receives in flexible federal funds that typically go to highway projects towards building BeltLine Rail and infill MARTA stations instead.
This seems more of an accounting scheme to throw more money into the special interest project “Beltline Rail (Streetcar)”. While I agree that More MARTA money should be allocated towards service an expansion as it was voted for, we can only benefit if the limited funding is spent on projects that are chosen based on certain criteria, instead of trying to deplete More MARTA funds and every other tax for a project that a few loud people want, and not many can actually use.
This wasteful and linear park destructive project is standard Atlanta Big Project misdirection. BAT is all in on smart transit investment – but there is no rational conclusion supporting a project that deflects from far more practical and cost effective transit solutions. Once again this is a narrow interest “vision thing” in search of a need. The Saporta Report has refused to publish a BAT response and is now viewed as a promoter of BRN’s misleading messaging exclusively.
You aren’t making any sense? Beltline Rail is clearly a great solution to Atlanta transit problems. Light rail, that’s been researched, planned, and ready to break ground 2025. I am so excited for it to connect downtown to Ponce city market!
BAT doesn’t have a single viable idea that can be implemented and used by all Atlantans when we need it? Every time I look it’s some foggy idea that’ll take YEARS of additional research. Why would anyone take BAT seriously when all it is, is promising to spend more money research and more years of nothing being done. BAT is literally the opposite of what Atlanta wants.
Marta has applied for Federal funding for the Streetcar expansion on 3 previous occasions. 2 of the 3 were denied based on one central question: Valid Ridership numbers. The 1 project: the existing Streetcar provided Ridership that the Fed say as reasonable – but sadly proved to be total ” Fiction”.
In March Beltline Inc. Chair said in the AJC – they needed to do a “Study” – corporate speak code for -” We don’t have a Clue.
Marta Sr Project Manager, in a public meeting when pressured several times said, in documented record ” We don’t know & we don’t Care” – it’s just like the Interstate Hwy system – we are going to build it & people will eventually use it.
ATL saddled with Billions in debt for something no agency has a clue about actual need speaks to very bad decision making.
I want you to get outside and actually walk on the Beltline tomorrow (a Saturday for future folks). You will see immediately that having an official study done for federal grants would be just a formality as using your eyes and common sense is more than enough.
From PCM to Krog street market to down by the shake shack are throngs of people. This isn’t counting all the businesses who have workers, and all the high rise apartments around Old 4th ward park and by the shake shack.
If you don’t want to go explore, then knowing that Atlanta re-zoned the area around the eastside trail to account for the additional transit will ease your mind. All the thousands of people moving into the massive apartment buildings along the trail will be able to reach Marta stations using the light rail.
You’re not working with facts. MARTA has NEVER applied for a federal grant to fund BeltLine light rail.
The City of Atlanta applied and received a federal grant to fund the downtown streetcar during Kasim Reed’s first term. Mayor Reed unsuccessfully applied for a second federal grant in his second term prior to the streetcar becoming operational.
Remember, MARTA took over downtown streetcar operations from the city two years or so after the downtown streetcar became operational.
One more time: MARTA has NEVER applied for a federal grant to fund BeltLine light rail and in doing so has left millions of dollars on the table. Grants that have gone to other major metros’ light rail projects.
https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/55138888/la-metro-receives-fta-grant-support-new-east-san-fernando-valley-light-rail-project
@Jerry Prine and @Matt Eckman — The reason the city’s second federal grant application for the downtown streetcar was denied during the Reed administration had nothing to do with ridership or proof of concept. (Successful light rail projects exist all over the country). It was denied because of the state of affairs at the time; it was clear the city was incapable of managing a transit project as it’s not a transit authority.
The real point behind the BRN position is Atlanta won’t put itself in a position to fund 22-miles of BeltLine light rail unless there’s a radical shift in applying for grants for everything. And for making larger asks.
They have been planning this for 20 years, and couldn’t come up with convincing data to get a grant, but Bus Rapid Transit did get grants for Summerhill. Let’s be realistic, transit shouldn’t be decided by special interest groups advocating for one specific kind of transit, but by transit experts and with a feasibility plan for the city.
Another Saporta Report article, another comments section filled with the same 3 grumps on the board of Better Atlanta Transit… give it a rest already guys, Beltline rail is a great idea and it’s going to happen
Matthew’s call for federal funding on Phase 1 of the Streetcar East extension is fantastic. Let’s get some of that money flowing to transit in Atlanta, which is desperately needed. Atlanta is a far larger city than the ones listed in the article with light rail projects under construction or recently completed. Walter Brown calling the Beltline a “linear park” is a dismissive pejorative as he pretends that Beltline isn’t about transit. Jerry Prine is just lying – there has been no application for STE – otherwise Beltline Rail Now wouldn’t be calling for that, would it. Gah! These rail haters are ABSURD. Ken Edelstein calling rail an “elitist boondoggle” really takes the cake for absurdism, considering rail is the opposite of elitism. It moves people around who can’t drive like the elderly, disabled, and people unable to afford a car. My god – these men are awful in their desperate attempts to keep the Eastside trail their own personal amenity instead of seeing it’s potential for the whole city.
I love to see this debate focused on technical and financial aspects of the project. With the growth projected for Atlanta, you have one shot to get this right. Seriously, future Atlantans will look back at YOU in 50 years and be amazed or disappointed with YOUR results. Good luck!! I ride the bus and train almost every day with thousands of other people. I ride my bike often in protected bike lanes. I never ride scooters. I drive 400 miles per month. Our transit experience with AC Transit (bus) and BART (rail) are amazing. I have sold one car and have lost quite a bit of weight from the additional walking – sounds a little bit like Mr. Gravel’s story. Don’t forget about our most vulnerable friends in the community – the children, the elderly, the disabled. Have real discussions on equity. What solution does the most good for the most people? I wish you the best, Atlanta. You were my home for nearly three decades. You’re an amazing city. So, do amazing things. I would love to visit one day and ride rail on the BeltLine. Go Jackets!!
I have been interviewing owners of businesses on the beltline who are eager to get rail on the beltline because they understand that they will get a bigger pool of employees. They see commuters using rail as instrumental in driving more customers/clients to their stores. These are businesses on all sides of the beltline – they are clear that rail will solve problems and create opportunities around our city. This is what we need and we need it as soon as possible – let’s stop futzing around and get moving!!
Reach out to me, I can get you in touch with some business owners that had to close due to ongoing construction during the implementation of the downtown streetcar. It’s hard to run a business when your front door is blocked for over a year. Turns out, the streetcar that runs past their front door hasn’t resulted in any increase in business downtown, and the route along the streetcar isn’t a thriving model of success.