<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Metro Crash and Tax: Leaseback Infrequently Asked Questions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html</link>
	<description>The Law, the Universe, and Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:44:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-77570</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:38:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-77570</guid>
		<description>I thought you might be interested in some additional information.  Metro presented the additional $25 million in payments out of their capital budget to the KBC as a major hardship to the judge and the public.
 
http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/news/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=49
 
However, an interesting event happened in February 2009.  WMATA paid off about $430 million in outstanding debt ahead of schedule.  Does that sound like a financial hardship situation to you?  Since WMATA claimed publicly to be fighting a $100 million operating deficit, the money must have come from the capital budget.  Was that proper, legal, and valid?  They suffered no delays in new starts or ongoing capital activities.  In June, they replaced the short term debt with their largest bond offering ever.  Does all of this add up to you?
 
The following highlights were included in the FY2009 CAFR for WMATA:
  
Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Highlights
• Net assets increased by $93.5 million or 1.2 percent due primarily to increased capital
contributions.
• Capital assets before depreciation and amortization increased by $323.6 million, largely attributable
to new rail car and bus purchases, facilities enhancements, and rail rehabilitation. Capital
contributions were $578.3 million.
• Current liabilities decreased by $432.5 million or 44.6 percent, decrease due to the repayment of
the line of credit debt and replacement of commercial paper with long-term bonds.
• Operating revenues increased by $54.7 million or 7.9 percent, due to a mid-year fare increase
effective January 2008, and an increase in ridership. Special capital region events such as the
Presidential Inauguration and sporting events contributed to the increase in revenue and ridership.
• Operating expenses increased by $101.7 million or 5.6 percent, due primarily to an increase in
wages, pension plan contributions and workers compensation claims reserves, and investments in
risk and safety assessments. In addition, the continuous growth of the Authority&#039;s paratransit
service and propulsion power usage, also contributed to this increase in expenses. Operating
expenses include the increase in estimated liability for injury and damage claims related to the June
22, 2009 rail car accident.
 
The link to this statement is:
 
http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/cafr_FY09.pdf</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought you might be interested in some additional information.  Metro presented the additional $25 million in payments out of their capital budget to the KBC as a major hardship to the judge and the public.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/news/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=49" rel="nofollow">http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/news/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=49</a></p>
<p>However, an interesting event happened in February 2009.  WMATA paid off about $430 million in outstanding debt ahead of schedule.  Does that sound like a financial hardship situation to you?  Since WMATA claimed publicly to be fighting a $100 million operating deficit, the money must have come from the capital budget.  Was that proper, legal, and valid?  They suffered no delays in new starts or ongoing capital activities.  In June, they replaced the short term debt with their largest bond offering ever.  Does all of this add up to you?</p>
<p>The following highlights were included in the FY2009 CAFR for WMATA:</p>
<p>Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Highlights<br />
• Net assets increased by $93.5 million or 1.2 percent due primarily to increased capital<br />
contributions.<br />
• Capital assets before depreciation and amortization increased by $323.6 million, largely attributable<br />
to new rail car and bus purchases, facilities enhancements, and rail rehabilitation. Capital<br />
contributions were $578.3 million.<br />
• Current liabilities decreased by $432.5 million or 44.6 percent, decrease due to the repayment of<br />
the line of credit debt and replacement of commercial paper with long-term bonds.<br />
• Operating revenues increased by $54.7 million or 7.9 percent, due to a mid-year fare increase<br />
effective January 2008, and an increase in ridership. Special capital region events such as the<br />
Presidential Inauguration and sporting events contributed to the increase in revenue and ridership.<br />
• Operating expenses increased by $101.7 million or 5.6 percent, due primarily to an increase in<br />
wages, pension plan contributions and workers compensation claims reserves, and investments in<br />
risk and safety assessments. In addition, the continuous growth of the Authority&#8217;s paratransit<br />
service and propulsion power usage, also contributed to this increase in expenses. Operating<br />
expenses include the increase in estimated liability for injury and damage claims related to the June<br />
22, 2009 rail car accident.</p>
<p>The link to this statement is:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/cafr_FY09.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/cafr_FY09.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: that crash</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-64342</link>
		<dc:creator>that crash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:09:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-64342</guid>
		<description>[...] so the metro crashed a couple weeks ago (or i guess that was only last week actually&#8230;wow), which is really unfortunate. even more unfortunate is metro claimed its hands were tied. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] so the metro crashed a couple weeks ago (or i guess that was only last week actually&#8230;wow), which is really unfortunate. even more unfortunate is metro claimed its hands were tied. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Streetsblog Los Angeles &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-64300</link>
		<dc:creator>Streetsblog Los Angeles &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:21:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-64300</guid>
		<description>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Streetsblog San Francisco &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-64299</link>
		<dc:creator>Streetsblog San Francisco &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-64299</guid>
		<description>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Streetsblog New York City &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-64298</link>
		<dc:creator>Streetsblog New York City &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-64298</guid>
		<description>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Streetsblog Capitol Hill &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/06/the-metro-crash-and-tax-leaseback-infrequently-asked-questions.html/comment-page-1#comment-64294</link>
		<dc:creator>Streetsblog Capitol Hill &#187; The Wall Street Tax Shelter That Crashed Your Local Transit Agency</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=17653#comment-64294</guid>
		<description>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] arrangements? Sarah Lawsky, an associate professor at George Washington University Law School, has explained the situation in detail. But the short answer is that banks got tax write-offs for their newly leased transit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

