Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

SF Muni's LRV lease-back deal may have safety implications

Expand Messages
  • 7/28 SF Weekly
    Published Tuesday, July 28, 2009, by SF Weekly Muni Tax Shelter Deal Could Lead to More S.F. Rail Carnage Did promised millions froma shady tax shelter deal
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 31, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Published Tuesday, July 28, 2009, by SF Weekly

      Muni Tax Shelter Deal Could Lead to More S.F. Rail Carnage

      Did promised millions froma shady tax shelter deal blur Muni's judgment?

      By Matt Smith in Public Transit

      A month before investigators began to sift through train wreckage to determine the cause of last week's Muni light rail crash, officials examining the aftermath of a deadly transit accident in Washington D.C. discovered a phenomemon that could eventually lead to problems with San Francisco trains.

      According to Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, and other outlets, Washington transit officials had decided not to to replace dangerously worn-out rail equipment because a bizarre set of tax-shelter deals -- similar to ones in place in San Francisco -- actually prevented such upgrades.

      While San Francisco's tax shelter deal hasn't been mentioned in reports about investigations of last week's crash, these types of deals are suspected to contribute to safety concerns nationwide.

      According to the Journal:

      "Washington transit authorities failed to upgrade aging rail cars in part because of tax-shelter deals, triggering charges days after a fatal train crash that financial concerns were outweighing passenger safety."

      "The transit authority's failure to upgrade the old cars was thrust into the spotlight Monday, when nine people died after a Metro train plowed into a stationary train in northeast Washington, D.C. The victims may have had a better chance of surviving had they been riding in newer cars with better safety features. The cause of the crash hasn't been determined, but investigators on Thursday found flaws with the agency's automatic train-control system that may have contributed."

      Brace yourselves Muni passengers, because San Francisco's transit system is party to a tax-shelter transaction of a type critics such as U.S. Senator Charles Grassley now say threaten the safety of rail commuters. And it just so happens SF Weekly was a lone dissenter to that deal citing -- guess what -- safety concerns.

      In 2002, SF Muni raised $30 million by leasing its light rail cars to tax-shelter investors, then signing a 30-year deal to lease the vehicles back, while allowing the investors to claim to be the "owners" of the cars for tax purposes. This way, the investors got to write off the cars' wear-and-tear on their taxes. This tax-write-off privilege was worthless to Muni, because city agencies don't pay federal income taxes. So the $30 million fee seemed like a good deal to government bureaucrats.

      SF Weekly called the deal a disaster in the making <http://sfweekly.com/2002-04-10/news/runaway-train>, not least because it required us to keep the same cars running for nearly 30 years, no matter how worn out -- and dangerous -- they became.

      "First, there's the matter of the length of the lease. Muni must promise to lease the Breda cars back from investors for 27 years. Even Muni's own, highly optimistic analysis says that if the "proposed transaction terminates early, the cost to the City would be enormous."

      If the cars were to wear out before the lease was up, Muni could end up owing huge sums of money -- perhaps more than $100 million," I wrote at the time. It hadn't occured to me at the time that transit agencies such as Washington D.C.'s might simply avoid the expense by simply deferring safety upgrades.

      "There hasn't been enough time to know if the cars would wear out before the 30-year life span the Muni-Breda lease assumes they would have," I wrote in 2002. "When I asked why Muni thought the Breda cars would last 30 years, spokeswoman Maggie Lynch faxed me two words: "Industry practice."

      The "industry practice" Lynch was referring to was pioneered by cities such as Washington D.C., which entered into a tax shelter deal that's now apparently contributing to multiple passenger deaths by discouraging replacement of worn-out equipment.

      Michael Burns, the former San Francisco Muni manager who led the deal, left in 2005 to run the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.

      May God have mercy on Silicon Valley transit users' souls.


      [BATN: See also:

      Sacramento RT could face $32m hit after lease-back deal backfires
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/40000

      Transit agencies seek fed help on lease-back deals gone bad
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/39805

      AIG-backed lease-back deals may cost transit agencies billions
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/39692

      LA MTA service cuts loom due to AIG lease-back deals gone bad
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/39629

      Lehman Brothers bankruptcy hits SMCo. TA, Caltrain, BAAQMD
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/39628

      Letter: Sale-leaseback a legal boon for Muni
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/16341

      Opinion: Transit sale-leasebacks are evil and dodgy
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/16026

      Bush may block transit lease lease-back tax deals
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/15864

      Transit leaseback contracts questioned
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/14421

      BART, Muni leaseback deals abet sham tax shelters
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13276

      Frankfurt seeks to lease subway to US investors
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/12794

      SF Muni eyes LRV lease-back scheme to raise money
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/6017

      SF Muni may reap $38M from LRV lease-back scheme
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/6014 ]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.