PENNSYLVANIA LT. GOV. AUSTIN DAVIS, WITH PITTSBURGH REGIONAL TRANSIT CEO KATHERINE KELLEMAN.
State Senate Republicans are stalling on the funding
The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Monday, Aug. 11, voted to pass legislation that would earmark nearly $300 million in funding for the state’s mass transit agencies, like Pittsburgh Regional Transit.
But the work is far from done.
Without the state Senate passing the bill, there’s a real chance that Pittsburgh Regional Transit’s operations for customers will look drastically different.
Forty-one bus routes eliminated. Fifty-four bus routes reduced. An entire “T” line, the silver line, eliminated. Buses and trains unable to run past 11 p.m. One way fares rising to $3, one of the highest fares in the nation.
This is not good news for the bus/train operators and riders of PRT, a sizable number of whom are African American and live in Pittsburgh and Allegheny County.
Lieutenant Gov. Austin Davis, a Black man from McKeesport who understands the importance of public transit, pushed state legislators to pass the bill during what felt like a serious moment in time for the region. The lieutenant governor stood at the steps of the Martin Luther King Jr. East Busway’s Negley Station, Sunday, Aug. 10.
“I’m proud to be here as the son of a Pittsburgh Regional Transit bus operator—who, today, is out driving a bus to help folks get where they need to go,” Lt. Gov. Davis said. “We’re here with a single message: it’s time for Senate Republicans to break their vacation, come back to Harrisburg, and do the work to fund mass transit—not just here in Pittsburgh, but all across our great Commonwealth.”
PRT has said it is facing a $100 million shortfall, and it needs some funding from the state in order to keep the current buses/trains operating as is. Without the funding, PRT CEO Katherine Kelleman said the cuts could come as soon as February 2026. Standing at the Negley Station on Aug. 10, she said 40 to 50 percent of the buses that run on the busway would be eliminated beginning in February without the funding.
Pittsburgh Regional Transit concurrently is building out its BRT, or Bus Rapid Transit system, which will see much faster service from Downtown Pittsburgh to Oakland via dedicated bus lanes. A quick peek Downtown, and one can see the bus-only lanes that are painted red. Buses like the 71B Highland Park, 61A North Braddock, 61B Braddock-Swissvale and 61C McKeesport are outfitted in new elongated blue buses that are meant to shuttle riders quickly to Oakland from Downtown before progressing to their final destinations. The money for the BRT system has already been committed to PRT via $150 million in federal funding. The BRT system, dubbed the “University Line,” will happen whether or not PRT gets funding from the state.
Still, for many riders, there would be a serious problem if their buses that get them to and from work stop running at 11 p.m., along with dozens of bus routes being eliminated.
State Senate Republicans don’t want to pass a bill that would increase state taxes on residents, even if residents wouldn’t feel the increase for a few years. Democrats have been pushing for Senate Republicans to “get to work,” stop being out of session, and get the transportation bill passed. Republicans, who are in the majority in the Pennsylvania Senate, have already voted against a form of a transportation bill four times.
Adam Brandolph, PRT spokesman, told the New Pittsburgh Courier on Aug. 11 that if the state Senate approves the transportation bill, PRT would receive $40 million in state funding. That’s $60 million less than the $100 million shortfall PRT is facing come 2026, but it would still be considered a big win.
“If we receive the additional $40 million that has been proposed, riders would not see a 35 percent service cut,” Brandolph said.
If PRT can reduce its shortfall to $60 million for 2026, that’s when PRT’s Board of Directors could choose to dip into some of the agency’s reserves. Brandolph said as of June 30, there was $394.2 million in operating reserves for the agency. But PRT can’t always rely on its operating reserves as a long-term solution to funding mass transit in Allegheny County.
In the worst case scenario for PRT, three city neighborhoods would lose bus service altogether—Banksville, Ridgemont and Swisshelm Park. And 19 municipalities would lose bus access altogether, like East McKeesport, Ambridge, Ben Avon, Glenfield and Trafford.
While African Americans in Allegheny County can be found on any bus or “T” route, a worst case scenario would see the complete elimination of the 18 Manchester bus, 20 Kennedy bus, 29 Robinson bus, 26 Chartiers bus, 53L Homestead Park Limited bus, the P16 Penn Hills Flyer bus, and the Y49 Prospect Flyer bus; buses that are used by many African American riders.
“It goes without saying that cutting 41 bus lines and the silver line (T) and leaving 19 communities stranded with no access to transit service in the county would be catastrophic for riders, for businesses, for access to food, health care and schools, all the things people use public transit for,” voiced Laura Chu Wiens, executive director of Pittsburghers for Public Transit, to the Courier, Aug. 11. “Ultimately our goal is not just to maintain existing levels of service and prevent these cuts, but to actually restore and expand transit to where people really need it to be beyond the service we have now.”
Wiens also is calling on PRT to use some of its operating reserves funds even if the state Senate does not pass the transportation bill to prevent a “worst case scenario” beginning in February 2026.
When will PRT have to receive state funding by? The exact date hasn’t been decided, unlike the cross-state Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), which services Philadelphia. That agency needs state funding before August 2025 ends, or severe cuts will have to be made.
“Our cuts would not occur until February 2026, so we have a bit more time thankfully,” Brandolph told the Courier.
“Every community, particularly the Black community, many communities rely on public transit,” Brandolph added, “so potentially cutting 35 percent would be detrimental to people’s lives.”
About Post Author
