RIPTA's finances are one hot mess. Lawmakers have four different solutions.
A bill by Sen. Sam Zurier offers one way to plug the $32.6 million hole in the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority's upcoming budget: increasing the bus agency's share of the gas tax.
The Providence Democrat's bill — one of four proposals seeking to solve the cash-strapped bus network's funding woes — would increase RIPTA's share of the state's tax on gasoline from 26% to 30%. It's a funding strategy that's garnered support from transit advocates and the agency's leader.
'With a $32 million shortfall, that's helpful,' RIPTA CEO Christopher Durand told the Senate Committee on Finance at a hearing on Tuesday.
But the chairman of RIPTA's board of directors is opposed to the idea, arguing Zurier's gas tax shift would take away from the state department he leads.
'It would result in an annual loss of approximately $7 million, significantly impacting our capital program,' Rhode Island Department of Transportation Director Peter Alviti Jr., who the state mandated to steer RIPTA's board in 2023, wrote to the committee.
Alviti did not attend Tuesday's three-hour hearing.
Zurier argued Alviti's stance goes against RIPTA's board-supported goal of finding a sustainable funding source — which the gas tax has become less stable as more drivers shift to more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles.
RIPTA now gets about $40 million in annual gasoline tax revenues, based on its existing allocation of 9.75 cents per gallon. That revenue is projected to drop over $1 million when fiscal year 2026 starts July 1, according to projections from the Rhode Island Department of Revenue.
'This would only restore the share RIPTA had,' Zurier said. 'It's very common sense.'
Three other proposals were heard by the committee:
A bill by Sen. Meghan Kallman, a Providence Democrat, would add a 75-cent fee to each fare collected by rideshare companies in order to fund mass transit.
A bill by Sen. Robert Britto, an East Providence Democrat, would earmark the state's existing tax on rideshare trips toward mass transit.
A resolution by Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, would allocate $32.6 million from the general fund to fill RIPTA's latest budget gap.
All four bills were held for further study by the committee as is standard procedure for an initial vetting by a legislative panel.
Realistically, Durand said RIPTA can only cut around $10 million from its deficit because most of the expenses in the agency's $154 million spending plan are funded with federal money or tied into existing operations.
'There really isn't a whole lot to trim,' Durand said.
The agency projects about 300 employees losing their jobs if lawmakers don't provide any new funding.
There are ways RIPTA can try to generate revenue. A presentation Durand gave the committee floated a 5% fare increase, which the agency projects would bring in $470,871 annually. But such a change could decrease ridership by 100,000 trips, according to RIPTA's presentation.
Durand had promised the agency's board of directors last December that raising fares would not be on the table.
Another potential source could be by courting more businesses to buy ad spots on sheltered stops, which the agency projects would bring in $440,000 annually.
Committee Chairman Lou DiPalma, a Middletown Democrat, suggested RIPTA could take over non-emergency medical transportation for Medicaid enrollees, something the agency used to provide until the service was privatized some years ago.
State leaders are still waiting on RIPTA to submit an independent efficiency study of its operations, as mandated in the state's fiscal 2025 budget.
The study was supposed to be done March 1, but the agency's board of directors delayed the bid process last year until it could find a permanent CEO Durand, who was the interim CEO for seven months, took over the agency permanently last November.
RIPTA's board finally awarded a contract to do the efficiency study on March 27 to Canadian engineering consulting firm WSP, which likely won't have a final report complete until the summer — after the General Assembly likely wraps up this year's legislative session.
Durand provided lawmakers with a two-page memo from WSP detailing how transit agencies nationwide are dealing with ridership and workforce challenges following the pandemic.
DiPalma called the lack of a final study at this point 'extremely disappointing.'
'We need facts and data,' he said. 'This is not going to satisfy what we need for the budget.'
But DiPalma did not blame Durand for RIPTA's latest financial crisis, instead placing it on Gov. Dan McKee for leaving it unaddressed in his recommended budget and passing the buck to the General Assembly.
'That's categorically what happened — we're given the charge to figure it out, and we're going to figure it out,' DiPalma said. 'Rhode Islanders expect to have a public transit authority that serves their needs — in an efficient and effective manner.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
23 minutes ago
- Politico
Florida's universities face research overhaul courtesy of Trump and DeSantis
Part of an effort to 'reduce pollution and increase community climate resilience,' the grant was meant to help extend water service to 50 multifamily complexes still dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Milton. These facilities are running on well water and septic systems that may be contaminated due to polluted stormwater ponds, according to the university. The agency advised USF to tweak the grant proposal by scrapping words like 'disadvantaged,' 'climate change' and 'minority,' yet it was still terminated by the EPA for not being part of the agency's new priorities. The school is appealing and searching for private industry partnerships to keep the project going. 'If that's not your priority, then what is your priority?' said Christian Wells, a professor and director of the Center for Brownfields Research & Redevelopment at USF who is leading the project. At Florida A&M University, the Department of Agriculture canceled a $4.9 million grant to help expand the markets for 'climate-smart' industrial hemp throughout Alabama and Louisiana. In canceling these grants, part of a $3 billion Biden-era program, the USDA argued not enough of the funding was reaching farmers. 'Secretary [Brooke] Rollins has made it clear that all USDA programs, including our research programs, will now put American farmers and ranchers first instead of promoting woke DEI initiatives or far-left climate programs,' a USDA spokesperson said in a statement. FAMU has also been fighting to keep other projects, such as a $16.3 million pharmacy grant targeted by NIH. School leaders are optimistic some grants can be salvaged after they were able to protect some student scholarships that were initially on the termination list. 'We've taken it in stride,' G. Dale Wesson, interim dean and associate vice president for research with the FAMU College of Agriculture & Food Sciences, said about the changes in federal priorities. 'We do the best we can to solve problems they're interested in solving.' Across the country, there is a labyrinth of legal battles playing out in opposition of the federal research changes, including a lawsuit brought by 16 Democrat-led states fighting the NSF. Officials and researchers are challenging the grant terminations, as well as other Trump policies like a proposed cap on research overhead costs shelled out by the federal government. In certain cases, like a California lawsuit and the overhead costs challenge, opponents have been successful in blocking the Trump administration and recouping grant dollars, at least for now. A recent ruling, however, allows the NSF to continue withholding research funds as the lawsuit from Democrats in states like New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut plays out. Conversely, Florida, under DeSantis, is majorly supportive of the federal efforts to reshape education, many of which mirror the state's conservative policies. In at least one instance, Florida's own DOGE team recommended a grant to NSF for cancelation at the University of West Florida. This grant went toward scholarships for teachers completing projects on water quality sampling methods and aspirin synthesis, according to school officials, but got singled out due to 'social justice' language UWF contends was not incorporated.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump rips ‘disgusting degenerate' Pelosi, alleges ‘average' minded husband got rich off ‘inside information'
President Trump blasted former House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi as a 'disgusting degenerate' while alleging that she and her hubby reaped a fortune off 'inside information.' 'Crooked Nancy Pelosi, and her very 'interesting' husband, beat every Hedge Fund in 2024. In other words, these two very average 'minds' beat ALL of the Super Geniuses on Wall Street, thousands of them. It's all INSIDE iNFORMATION!' Trump wrote in a blistering attack on Truth Social late Saturday. Trump also implied that someone should look into Pelosi (D-Calif.) and gloated over how he overcame two impeachment efforts the leading Democrat oversaw. 'Is anybody looking into this??? She is a disgusting degenerate, who Impeached me twice, on NO GROUNDS, and LOST! How are you feeling now, Nancy???' Trump wrote. It is not immediately clear what sparked Trump's broadside against Pelosi, 85, who has fiercely denied any accusations of insider trading. 3 Nancy Pelosi has defended her husband's business ventures as part of the free market. AP 3 President Trump has long seethed at Nancy Pelosi, who was the source of many political headaches for him during his first term. NATHAN HOWARD/POOL/EPA/Shutterstock 'Pelosi does not own any stocks and has no knowledge or subsequent involvement in any transactions,' spokesperson Ian Krager told The Post last month. The Post contacted a Pelosi spokesperson for a response to Trump's latest swipe against her. Nonetheless, the speaker emeritus has long faced scrutiny over her husband Paul's venture capital and other business endeavors. Lawmakers are not required to publicly divulge their net worth, which means it is unclear exactly how much she is worth. An estimate from Quiver Quantitative has pegged it at least $263.23 million, making her the fourth richest member of Congress. But there are open questions about whether she is even wealthier than that. Last year, Paul Pelosi's trades in 2024 outperformed the S&P 500's 25% gain last year, by hauling in some 54% in returns, as The Post previously reported, citing Bloomberg data. In January, Paul Pelosi invested in an artificial intelligence health firm, Tempus AI, buying it when it was worth some $31.83 per share. But then the firm cut a $200 million deal with AstraZeneca and is now worth about $60.87 a share, almost double the price when Paul Pelosi purchased it. 3 Nancy Pelosi and her husband, Paul, have a nine-figure fortune. FilmMagic Other transactions that have raised eyebrows include well-timed trades of NVIDIA, Palo Alto Networks, energy company Vistra, and more. Last year, Paul Pelosi dumped some $2.2 million shares of Microsoft stock, in one of his largest sales in about three years, just a few months before the Federal Trade Commission began an antitrust probe of the company. Back in 2021, Pelosi ripped into a push for a ban on stock trades by members of Congress, arguing that 'we're a free‑market economy.' She has since backed some iterations of such a ban. Last month, Sen. Josh Hawley's (R-Mo.) Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act cleared a key Senate Committee and drew ire from both Trump and other Republicans. The PELOSI Act restricts lawmakers from owning individual stocks or trading them. Initially, Trump raged against Hawley as a 'second-tier' senator after being left under the impression that the ban would apply to him and require key divestments. Hawley has since appeared to have won Trump over after explaining that the ban would not impact presidents until early 2029, when his term concludes. That bill could come up when the Senate reconvenes from recess next month. Pelosi has not said whether or not she intends to vie for reelection in 2026.


Indianapolis Star
2 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Trump's immigration raids normalize cruelty toward fellow humans
Americans are still firmly behind President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, but it appears that at least some of them are getting cold feet as his brutal tactics come into view. The spectacle of masked agents smashing car windows, detaining folks with no court hearings and deporting some of them to dangerous countries like El Salvador and South Sudan is starting to splinter public support. The reality is jarring, and for a growing number of Americans, it's becoming too much to stomach. I just wish more of them would see it now before more people get swept under Trump's indiscriminate campaign against migrants – legal or not. Let's start with the numbers. A recent Wall Street Journal poll found that 62% of voters still support deporting undocumented immigrants, and just over half approve of Trump's overall handling of immigration. But beneath that top-line support is mounting discomfort. Nearly 6 in 10 Americans opposed deporting people without court hearings or legal review. Independents, a key voting bloc, are especially critical. Most say the administration has gone too far, specifically when it comes to detaining and deporting individuals who've never had a chance to see a judge. The policy of offloading migrants to third-world countries – even countries that they are not from – should strike many more as not just impractical, but also fundamentally un-American. Hicks: Indiana shuns immigrants at its own peril This tells us something important and gives me a bit of hope. Americans want stronger border security, but enough of them aren't ready to abandon due process. They might have begun to reject the spectacle of lawlessness cloaked in the language of 'law and order.' Yet, cheers persist, which is why we must never stop speaking up. The slow public reaction and the applause for harsh enforcement reveal a darker side of the American psyche – a creeping comfort with dehumanization, a willingness to look away from suffering as long as it happens to 'others,' in this case, to migrants whom MAGA wants out of the United States at any cost. Nobody denies that the United States has the right and responsibility to protect its borders and deport those living here illegally. Trump didn't invent mass deportations. Every president before him has done it. Democrat Barack Obama, for instance, deported more than 3 million during his presidency. But Trump has done something different – he's normalized cruelty, weaponized it and stripped away even the pretense of procedural justice. Hicks: Immigration is the only hope for Indiana's dying small towns What's more disturbing is how far federal agents have gone under Trump's orders. Americans have watched as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in full tactical gear raid workplaces, pull people from their cars and drag individuals off the streets. Even a sitting U.S. senator, Alex Padilla of California, was tackled to the ground on national television simply for demanding answers. Legal residents and even U.S. citizens are being swept up, too. Due process isn't just being denied – it's being erased. Arizona Democratic U.S. Reps. Greg Stanton and Yassamin Ansari are sounding the alarm about inhumane conditions in immigration detention centers. But even as elected officials, they've been barred from inspecting facilities like the Eloy Detention Center in Florence, Arizona, where horror stories are emerging. One of those cases involves a green cardholder who has lived in the U.S. for two decades and is now battling leukemia while detained, according to Ansari. Opinion: Trump's $600 'rebate checks' from tariffs are just voter bribes Ansari told reporters that the woman has lost 55 pounds, is in severe pain and is not receiving adequate – or any – pain medication. If they can do this to a legal resident with cancer, and keep members of Congress from even entering the facility, what can't they do? And where is the collective outrage? Why isn't the public speaking louder and showing more than slow discomfort in recent polling? Blame that in part on the fragmented media landscape. The country is not just divided politically, but it's divided informationally, too. Many Trump supporters tune in to outlets and influencers that amplify the administration's narrative – painting ICE raids as righteous missions to capture "the worst of the worst.' The reality on the ground tells a different story. When they see that reality, they begin to wonder. Like Trump supporter Joe Rogan, who is finally questioning Trump's immigration crackdown. Briggs: Remember Jim Banks' tariff cheerleading when the economy tanks "It's insane,' the podcaster recently said. "Not cartel members, not gang members, not drug dealers – just construction workers. ... Gardeners.' "Like, really?' Rogan asked. That shifting narrative in the MAGA media landscape – from a one-dimensional tale of criminals to the undeniable truth of working-class migrants being ripped from their families – just might be starting to enter the national consciousness. I bet if more Americans like Rogan pay attention and speak up about what's really happening under Trump, the cheers will stop.