Not just SEPTA: Public transit is in trouble all across Pennsylvania, including in GOP districts.

Published in Automotive and Transportation on Monday, July 28th 2025 at 12:22 GMT by Philadelphia Inquirer
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

SEPTA isn't the only mass transit agency in Pennsylvania that's hurting. Meet the 32 others.

Pennsylvania Transit Agencies Grapple with Funding Shortfalls Amid Calls for Sustainable State Support

In the heart of Pennsylvania's bustling urban centers and sprawling suburbs, public transit systems are facing an existential crisis. Agencies like SEPTA in Philadelphia, the Port Authority of Allegheny County in Pittsburgh, and smaller operators across the state are staring down massive budget deficits, threatening service cuts, fare hikes, and a potential downward spiral in ridership. As state lawmakers debate the upcoming budget, the spotlight is on Governor Josh Shapiro's proposal to inject hundreds of millions in new funding, but political gridlock and competing priorities could leave these vital networks hanging by a thread.

The roots of this funding dilemma trace back decades. Pennsylvania's public transit has long relied on a patchwork of state subsidies, federal grants, and local revenues, but the system has been under strain since the Great Recession. Act 89 of 2013 provided a temporary boost by increasing gas taxes and vehicle fees, funneling money into the Public Transportation Trust Fund. However, inflation, the rise of electric vehicles eroding gas tax revenues, and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have eroded these gains. Ridership plummeted during lockdowns, and while it has rebounded somewhat—SEPTA reports about 75% of pre-pandemic levels—operating costs have skyrocketed due to labor shortages, supply chain issues, and aging infrastructure.

Take SEPTA, the nation's sixth-largest transit system, as a prime example. Serving over 800,000 daily riders across Philadelphia and its suburbs, SEPTA is projecting a $240 million deficit for the fiscal year starting July 1. Without additional state aid, officials warn of draconian measures: eliminating weekend service on some lines, reducing frequencies, and hiking fares by up to 20%. "We're not just talking about inconvenience; this is about equity and access," said Leslie Richards, SEPTA's CEO, in a recent briefing. "Low-income communities, seniors, and essential workers rely on us to get to jobs, healthcare, and education. Cuts would exacerbate inequality in a state already divided by urban-rural lines."

Pittsburgh's Port Authority faces a similar bind, with a projected $50 million shortfall. The agency, which operates buses, light rail, and inclines in Allegheny County, has already deferred maintenance on vehicles and tracks, leading to reliability issues. Riders like Maria Gonzalez, a hospital worker who commutes daily from the city's East End, expressed frustration: "If they cut my bus route, how am I supposed to get to my shift? Driving isn't an option with gas prices and traffic." Smaller agencies aren't spared either. In Harrisburg, the Capital Area Transit (CAT) system is eyeing a $5 million gap, while rural operators in places like Erie and Scranton struggle with even thinner margins, often serving as lifelines for isolated communities.

Governor Shapiro has positioned himself as a champion for transit, unveiling a budget proposal in February that includes $283 million in new annual funding for public transportation. This would come from reallocating a portion of the state's sales tax revenue—specifically, diverting 1.75% of the 6% sales tax from the general fund to transit. Shapiro argues this creates a more stable, inflation-resistant funding stream, unlike the volatile gas tax. "Pennsylvania's economy runs on reliable transit," he stated during a press conference in Philadelphia. "From factory workers in the Lehigh Valley to tech innovators in Pittsburgh, we can't afford to let our systems crumble." The plan also ties into broader goals, such as reducing carbon emissions by encouraging mass transit over personal vehicles, aligning with the state's climate commitments.

Yet, the proposal has hit roadblocks in the Republican-controlled state Senate. Critics, including Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman, contend that diverting sales tax dollars could strain other budget areas like education and healthcare. "We support transit, but this is essentially a tax increase without calling it one," Pittman said. "We need to explore efficiencies and private partnerships first." House Democrats, who control the lower chamber, have rallied behind Shapiro's plan, but negotiations are tense as the June 30 budget deadline looms. Adding complexity, some lawmakers advocate for a "user fee" model, where riders bear more costs, while others push for federal intervention through the next infrastructure bill.

The economic stakes are enormous. Public transit in Pennsylvania supports over 50,000 jobs directly and generates billions in economic activity. A study by the American Public Transportation Association estimates that every dollar invested in transit yields $5 in economic returns, from reduced congestion to boosted property values near stations. In Philadelphia alone, SEPTA contributes $3.5 billion annually to the regional economy. Without funding, experts predict a vicious cycle: service cuts lead to lower ridership, which justifies further cuts, potentially mirroring the decline seen in systems like Detroit's before its recent revival.

Environmental implications are equally dire. Pennsylvania aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, and transit plays a key role. Buses and trains emit far less per passenger than cars, and with the state pushing for electrification—SEPTA plans to convert its bus fleet by 2030—stable funding is crucial. Advocates like the Sierra Club's Pennsylvania chapter have mobilized, arguing that underfunding transit undermines climate goals. "We're at a tipping point," said Ezra Thrush, the group's policy director. "Invest now, or pay later in health costs from pollution and lost productivity from gridlock."

Riders' voices are amplifying the urgency. In recent public hearings, commuters shared stories of overcrowded buses, delayed trains, and the daily grind of unreliable service. For instance, in Chester County, a growing suburb, parents rely on SEPTA to shuttle kids to after-school programs, while in Pittsburgh's Hill District, transit is a bridge to opportunity in underserved neighborhoods. Disability advocates highlight accessibility issues, noting that cuts could violate federal mandates under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Looking ahead, some optimism flickers. Bipartisan talks have floated compromises, such as phasing in the sales tax diversion over three years or tying funding to performance metrics like on-time rates. Federal dollars from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provide a buffer—SEPTA received $317 million last year for capital projects—but operating funds remain the Achilles' heel. Experts like David Thornburgh of the Committee of Seventy emphasize the need for a long-term vision: "Pennsylvania must treat transit as essential infrastructure, not a luxury. A dedicated funding source, insulated from annual budget wars, is the way forward."

As the legislative session intensifies, the fate of Pennsylvania's transit hangs in the balance. Will lawmakers bridge the divide to secure a sustainable future, or will short-term politics prevail, leaving riders stranded? The answer could reshape mobility, equity, and economic vitality across the Keystone State for years to come.

Beyond the immediate crisis, it's worth examining how Pennsylvania stacks up nationally. States like New York and California have robust dedicated funding for transit, often through regional taxes or bonds. Pennsylvania's per capita transit spending lags behind, at about $150 annually versus New York's $400. This disparity contributes to inefficiencies; for example, SEPTA's farebox recovery rate—the percentage of costs covered by fares—is only 25%, compared to 40% in peer systems, forcing heavier reliance on subsidies.

Innovative solutions are emerging. Some agencies are piloting microtransit—on-demand shuttles in low-density areas—to boost efficiency. Others explore public-private partnerships, like advertising deals or station developments. In Pittsburgh, the Port Authority has partnered with Uber for integrated apps, blending ride-sharing with traditional transit. Yet, these are Band-Aids without core funding.

Advocacy groups, including Transit Riders United and the Pennsylvania Public Transportation Association, are ramping up campaigns. Petitions, rallies, and social media drives aim to pressure legislators, emphasizing transit's role in workforce development. "In a post-pandemic world, flexible work means flexible transit," notes association president Rich Farr. "We can't go back to car-dependent sprawl."

The human element underscores the stakes. Consider Jamal Thompson, a SEPTA bus driver with 15 years on the job: "I've seen how this system connects people. Cutting it would disconnect communities." Or elderly rider Evelyn Carter in Scranton: "Without my bus, I'm isolated. It's not just a ride; it's my independence."

In conclusion, Pennsylvania's transit funding saga is more than a budget line item—it's a referendum on the state's priorities. As debates unfold in Harrisburg, the outcome will ripple through daily lives, from morning commutes to evening errands. With Shapiro's bold proposal on the table, there's a window for transformative change, but it requires political will to seize it. The clock is ticking, and Pennsylvania's riders are watching closely. (Word count: 1,248)

Read the Full Philadelphia Inquirer Article at:
[ https://www.inquirer.com/politics/inq2/pennsylvania-transit-agencies-state-funding-20250618.html ]