Metro board Chairman Jack Evans is so frustrated trying to lead the transit system’s cumbersome, 16-member governing body that he would prefer to scrap it and start fresh.
He conceded that would be “extreme” and it won’t happen. But he said members of such a board would not be “beholden to the local jurisdictions” and thus could do what’s best for Metro as a whole.
“How do you run an organization when you have that split loyalty, and you will always . . . err on the side of the jurisdiction you represent?” said Evans, who feels the tension himself because he also serves as a D.C. Council member representing Ward 2.
“That is what I think has caused enormous problems at Metro over the years,” he said.
Divided allegiances at the top have hobbled Metro since its creation. The problem has arisen again as the board wrestles over cutting subway hours and studying how to raise billions of dollars in coming years to rebuild the system and cover pension costs.
A consultant hired by Metro to recommend reforms in its governance structure echoed Evans’s concern.
Kevyn D. Orr, a prominent lawyer who helped lead Detroit’s municipal bankruptcy, told the board last week that it was “critical” to revise the agency’s compact — its founding document — to specify that its members serve a single entity.
Orr said Metro was “unique” in his experience, because its board members are legally obliged to represent both their jurisdictions and the agency’s overall interest.
“It puts an incredible burden on the board,” Orr said.
But no major changes will be forthcoming, members said. The board has dropped for now an initiative by Evans and some other members to clarify their roles and to reduce those of the eight alternate members in hope of making the panel more efficient.
Instead, the board will consider less controversial proposals from Orr to make what board members called necessary but modest revisions in the bylaws and code of ethics. One, for example, would allow board members to participate in meetings remotely by electronic means.
Resistance to change has come primarily from some board members who represent Virginia and Maryland. They said Evans and other critics exaggerate the damage from dual loyalties, and they worry about losing influence if the alternate members have a diminished role.
They also warned that a debate over governance risked bogging down the board at a time when it needs to focus on more pressing issues.
“This, to me, is an unnecessary distraction,” said board member Christian Dorsey, who also serves on the Arlington County Board. “There is no magic change to bylaws or the compact that is going to effectively guarantee that we provide a safe system.”
Board member Michael Goldman, who represents Maryland, noted that the panel had studied the problem of split loyalties several years ago, and it proved controversial.
“I don’t want to reopen that can of worms,” he said.
The Metro board is composed of four members each from the District, Maryland, Virginia and the federal government. Each delegation includes two voting members and two alternates.
Evans, who has been Metro board chairman for eight months, worries that the agency is repeating earlier mistakes, which led to the current wave of concern over safety, reliability and finances.
He’s unhappy that board members don’t share his sense of urgency about the need to find more funding.
“They are desperate not to go back to their jurisdictions and ask for more money. That’s the problem,” Evans said.
Referring to a famous warning from a general manager a decade ago that Metro risked entering a “death spiral” unless it invested more money in the system, Evans said, “Here we are in the death spiral, and everybody is acting the same way. It just drives me nuts.”
Several board members, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid offending Evans, said the chairman was too impatient. They emphasized that it would take time to restore Metro’s credibility and build public support for giving the agency more money.
Board member Malcolm Augustine, who represents Prince George’s County, didn’t fault Evans but emphasized that upcoming budget discussions will be “very tough.” He said they also will be time-consuming because, “All the stakeholders are going to have to participate,” including riders, unions, and federal, state and local governments.
Most immediately, the problem of divided loyalty on the board is hampering the decision over whether to end late-night service or further reduce Metro hours. Board members, including Evans, are wary of reducing service and alienating their constituents, even though General Manager Paul J. Wiedefeld says the cuts are needed to give workers more time to conduct critical maintenance.
Evans said the issue is particularly hard for him because many of his council constituents are among those who would be most affected if Metro were to permanently end late-night service.
About 50 percent of the D.C. businesses with liquor licenses and 70 percent of the city’s hotels are in his ward.
On the other hand, he noted, Metro got into this hole because some of his predecessors on the board had blocked previous general managers from instituting early closings to provide more time for maintenance.
Evans and some other board members also say they think the panel is too large to be efficient. Orr, the consultant, considered proposals to reduce the role of the board’s eight alternate members, or even abolish those positions.
The proposals were scrapped, partly because of concerns from jurisdictions that alternates represent areas such as Arlington, Alexandria and Prince George’s.
“When it was originally proposed, the Virginia people went ballistic,” Evans said.
Alternates can vote at board meetings only when principal members from their jurisdictions are absent. They are allowed, however, to participate fully in board discussions and are active in committee work.
Tom Bulger, one of the District’s alternates, said he doubted the board could handle its workload without them.
“When I saw the proposal to eliminate alternates, I said, ‘Who’s going to do the lifting?’” said Bulger, who is vice chairman of the board’s finance committee. “It’s almost a full-time job.”
Such objections didn’t satisfy Evans, who said his only satisfaction is that he tried to improve governance, even if he failed.
“I can say, ‘We brought it up, we discussed it, and you all want to keep it just the way it is,’” Evans said. “We had one of the best people in the country, Kevyn Orr, say it’s not a functional system, and you ignored him.”
