A streetcar departs an elevated concrete station with LED signs indicating the next departure time — Allegheny Station on the North Side Credit: CP Photo: Mars Johnson

Everything in America revolves around money. We’re a capitalist country, after all, and even the forced disappearance of legal U.S. residents feels baked into stock market fluctuations these days. Still, after decades of deindustrialization, Pittsburgh has a strained relationship with the almighty dollar. The city only emerged from 14 years of “financial distressed status” in 2018, and “Can we afford this?” seems like the first and last question around any public undertaking.

So it’s perhaps not surprising that public transit finds itself once again the subject of heated discussion as Pittsburgh Regional Transit (PRT) confronts a $100 million state funding shortfall and the possibility of massive service cuts. We’ve been here before, after all, and Harrisburg Republicans’ sudden concern about the state budget is again being used as a threat against services that millions in Pennsylvania use daily. The statewide dysfunction mirrors what’s become a tiresome national throughline.

Here’s the thing, though: transit is a service. PRT is not a business, and the idea that transit agencies should be held to short-term expectations about balance sheets doesn’t square with natural fluctuations in ridership, infrastructure, and local needs over many years. If the commonwealth’s lawmakers can’t get behind the idea that residents in its second-largest city deserve an alternative to cars, what else will it ignore, avoid, or defund in the name of savings?

Let’s start with some simple facts about the current state of play for PRT. Firstly, transit ridership is, in fact, down nearly everywhere nationwide to varying degrees, so Pittsburgh’s steep post-COVID decrease in transit users is likely part of a permanent national shift as more people work from home. Second, public transit has never been a money maker — farebox recovery ratios (the amount of service funded by passengers buying tickets) seldom crack 50% for any American transit system, and Greater Pittsburgh’s was barely 18% in 2020 before the COVID falloff. Third, the system is already locked into necessary but expensive upgrades including new T rolling stock and bus rapid transit, which should help ensure longer-term reliability.

A bus in livery announcing PRTX COMING SOON passes in front of a gas station — A PRT bus drives up Browns Hill Rd. Credit: CP Photo: Mars Johnson

The latter investments will be a boon to riders throughout the region — but not if Pennsylvania yanks the rug out from under PRT and forces route cuts, fare hikes, and less nighttime service. And if you’re sitting in your truck reading this and thinking, “Who cares?” I’d urge you to consider the long-term consequences of a short-term focus on balancing budgets and paying lip service to transit profitability.

If you’re business-minded, perhaps consider what local businesses say: Duolingo says public transit is “a key factor in us attracting top tech talent.” Giant Eagle says it’s “necessary for regional growth.” Some studies have found that spending on public transit can even yield a 5-to-1 return on investment. And there are already millions of dollars in transit-oriented development projects in the pipeline everywhere from Shadyside to Dormont.

If you care more about your fellow humans than “line go up,” consider this: 51% of PRT riders earn less than $25,000 a year, and people who would otherwise use public transit often end up spending as much as a third of their income getting around when they don’t have access to it. Good transit can mean an appreciable increase in standard of living. Meanwhile, transit use decreases traffic jams and the risk of crashes while cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Philly’s in the same boat as Pittsburgh right now, with SEPTA facing cuts that have clear consequences. The Pa. Secretary of Transportation agrees that transit is “an economic engine.” So the main sticking point now — stop me if you’ve heard this one — is how to pay for what everyone agrees is necessary without seeming like you’re somehow spending too much.

My take: Public transit, like the post office, healthcare, or running water, is a service. I don’t care how much it costs. Find a way to make it work for people: if you build it, they will ride.

A T streetcar on a concrete overpass with electric wires over head and the Modernist buildings of CCAC behind — Allegheny Station on the North Side Credit: CP Photo: Mars Johnson

It’s not like Pennsylvania is out of options. Transit for All Pa. has an entire menu of reasonable funding options to choose from including a corporate tax hike, a wealth tax, a surcharge on rideshare trips, tolls, and taxes on vehicle sales that would mean minimal change for the average Pennsylvanian. Pittsburghers for Public Transit is encouraging transit riders to pipe up about what they want to see in terms of a funding mechanism and against cuts more broadly.

Staving off cuts now is the way to prevent worse service down the line. Candidates know this, advocates know it, even real estate developers know it.

Imagine a fully-funded PRT in 10 years, when, if all goes to plan, thousands of new apartments will come online, Pittsburgh’s population will have rebounded after more than a decade of healthy growth, and the agency can consider major upgrades such as expanded T service that complement new bike routes and better-connected neighborhoods. A robust and financially sound PRT could mean hundreds of millions of dollars in transit-friendly development even when the agency isn’t necessarily turning a profit.

Now imagine the alternative: with bus service cut to the bone, Pittsburgh’s wealthy leaning more heavily on cars, clogging roadways, while our lower-income residents suddenly have to choose between $20 Lyft rides and eating dinner. Already anemic ridership gutters — many lines not already slashed are cut to truncated rush-hour schedules. North Shore T stations sit vacant while garages overflow on gameday. Transit-oriented development projects stop. Locals who can afford to move out, while those who remain face shuttered businesses, worse access to libraries, schools, and community centers, and longer trips to the doctor.

But hey, we saved a buck, right?

In short, we can’t afford not to invest in transit in Pittsburgh. To do so would be short-sighted and inhumane. Transit is a service, not a mechanism for making money — fund it or face a worse future for Pennsylvania cities.