MARTA interim CEO Jonathan Hunt on Tuesday defended a little-known committee vote that quietly halted design work on the Beltline’s Streetcar East extension, telling a packed board the move was proper and not secret. The Program Governance Committee’s late May decision to stop design funding for the Eastside trail extension has sparked disbelief and anger from nearby residents and transit advocates. At stake is who really calls the shots on big-ticket transit projects, and whether the public ever had a fair chance to weigh in.
The vote, the paperwork and the pause
Documents obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution show the Program Governance Committee voted 7-1 on May 27 to halt design funding for the Streetcar East project, and that MARTA asked consultant HDR to stop work two days later. According to the AJC, the program had racked up roughly $9.1 million in planning and design costs before the pause, and the motion explicitly ordered work to stop with no date set for it to resume.
MARTA’s defense
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” Hunt said when pressed about reports that the three-agency committee had been “colluding in secret,” according to Atlanta News First. Hunt and Board Chair Jennifer Ide argued that the intergovernmental agreement governing the More MARTA program gives the PGC authority to set the order in which projects move forward. With only about $9 million spent out of an estimated $250 million total cost, they said the pause did not amount to a “significant project change” that would have required a full board vote.
Neighbors and elected officials push back
Residents who packed the boardroom called the move a breach of faith. “I find the latest developments and secretive initiatives to stop the streetcar east project to be a colossal betrayal of trust,” Cabbagetown resident Brandon Sutton told the board, according to Atlanta News First. Atlanta City Council member Jason Dozier said he, too, was blindsided and is demanding more accountability from MARTA, including why the PGC’s decision never came before the full board where the public could have seen it coming.
Legal and governance questions
Critics are zeroing in on the More MARTA intergovernmental agreement’s definition of a “significant” change, which includes “any change in the implementation sequence of one project to the detriment of another,” and argue the PGC’s motion clearly fits that description, according to reporting by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The AJC also notes that diverting funds away from a top-five priority project could cross thresholds that are supposed to trigger board notification and public scrutiny, a point critics say undercuts MARTA’s claim that this was just routine sequencing.
What to watch
The city has already signaled it plans to prioritize light rail planning on the Beltline’s southside instead of the Eastside alignment, a shift advocates warn will reshape which More MARTA projects get built first, per SaportaReport. Expect a fresh round of public meetings, council briefings and a revamped project priority list as city leaders and transit officials sort out what gets funded next and how long the Eastside pause really lasts.
