News
Stop the Attack on Public Transit Civil Rights and Enviro Justice!
On Thursday, February 9th, TRPT will be joining a broad coalition of equity advocates in a National Call-in Day against the Federal Transportation bill H.R. 7.
Reasons to vote no on H.R. 7 (the American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act) and maintain 30 years of dedicated federal commitment to supporting mass transit, creating jobs and protecting civil rights and environmental justice:
1. It would eliminate all dedicated federal funding for mass transit
The bill would eliminate the 2.86 cent portion of the 18 cent federal gasoline tax currently dedicated to mass transit and "replace it" with unidentified general fund revenue from the federal budget. The current dedicated federal funding formula of 80% for highways and 20% for transit would now be 100% for highways and roads! Transit operators would be forced to make historic cuts in service and institute massive fare increases as they cut operations costs to backfill billions in lost capital funds from the House bill.
Related stories:
Free Muni rides for kids plan gains speed
Muni riders under the age of 18 may be allowed to board for free by summertime.
The idea could land at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency governing board as early as March 6.
"In one form or another, free or reduced Muni for youth seems likely," San Francisco Transportation Director Ed Reiskin said Friday.
His agency has not pushed for the program but is responding to the drumbeat by youth advocacy groups and their supporters in elective office to make the city's transit system more accessible to youths by removing the economic barrier.
"In this economy, paying for transportation is a hardship for many families," said Supervisor David Campos, who has taken the lead in championing the proposal at City Hall.
Related stories:
NCLR Applauds Appeals Court Decision in Federal Challenge to Proposition 8
Statement by NCLR Executive Director Kate Kendell
(San Francisco, CA, February 7, 2012)—Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the August 2010 decision of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco striking down Proposition 8, the 2008 measure that stripped same-sex couples of the right to marry in California. The Court affirmed the ruling of former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker that Prop 8 discriminates against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court also rejected Prop 8 supporters’ offensive argument that Judge Walker should have refused to preside over the case because he is gay and in a relationship with a man.
(San Francisco, CA, February 7, 2012)—Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the August 2010 decision of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco striking down Proposition 8, the 2008 measure that stripped same-sex couples of the right to marry in California. The Court affirmed the ruling of former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker that Prop 8 discriminates against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court also rejected Prop 8 supporters’ offensive argument that Judge Walker should have refused to preside over the case because he is gay and in a relationship with a man.
Related stories:
BART Would Provide Access to Jobs in Livermore
Extend BART to Livermore in order to transport people to jobs there, a number of speakers argued.
Many declared that fairness should be honored, since Livermore residents have been paying for BART for almost 50 years. Health issues provided another theme, since pollution caused by traffic continues to impact the quality of life in the Tri-Valley.
Related stories:
Coalition criticizes spending plan for Alameda County sales tax
By Denis Cuff
OAKLAND -- Plans for a November ballot measure to double Alameda County's sales tax for transportation to 1 cent are being rocked by a debate over allocating $400 million of the money to a BART extension to Livermore.
A coalition of social justice and public transit advocates said Tuesday the tax proposal needs an overhaul because it gives too much to expanding BART to Livermore and not enough for maintaining and operating public transit systems like struggling AC Transit.
"When you don't have enough money to take care of your existing systems, it doesn't make sense to make them bigger," said Jeff Hobson, deputy director of TransForm, a transit advocacy group. "This draft plan doesn't cut it, but it's not too late for the Alameda County Transportation Commission to get it right."
Related stories:
The Tea Party, Planning and Democracy (Part One)
Editor's Note: This is the first part of a two-part news analysis which explores some unexpected synergies between Tea Party protesters and progressive opponents of planning policies which are perceived as anti-democratic. Part 2 will appear on Friday.
Most people regard meetings about regional planning, if they regard them at all, as soporific, PowerPointed affairs frequented by policy wonks. But on January 11, I attended a regional planning workshop in Dublin that was anything but dull. That’s because protesters from the East Bay Area Tea Party showed up along with some “fellow travelers” and nearly took the evening over. Their appearance was no surprise.
For over a year, members of the Tea Party have descended on planning events around the country. The Dublin event, sponsored by the lead regional planning agencies in the Bay Area, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), was the Alameda County installament of the second round of county-based Plan Bay Area public meetings [http://www.onebayarea.org/spotlight_12-11.htm] about the forthcoming Sustainable Communities Strategy/Regional Transportation Plan (SCS/RTP) mandated by the 2008 legislation, SB 375. The Tea Party also weighed in at the first round, held last May, as well as at all of the second round workshops that have been held so far.
Related stories:
APIs Urged to Let Voices Be Heard in Redistricting
Whether Little Tokyo will remain in the 9th Council District or Koreatown will be united into one district will depend on the redrawn map of the Los Angeles City Council. A 21-member citizens commission is seeking input from the public and Asian Pacific Islanders are urged to get involved.
Several members of the Redistricting Commission attended a press conference on Wednesday in Little Tokyo, including Arturo Vargas, chair of the redistricting commission, and commissioners Robert Ahn, Helen B. Kim and David Roberts.
“Redistricting means many things, it means empowerment and having the opportunity to have an equal voice and equal representation,” said Kim, an attorney and board member of the Korean American Coalition.
Related stories:
Pleasanton Rezones Sites For High Density
The Pleasanton City Council voted to rezone nine properties for high density housing. The council also approved a supplemental environmental impact report (SEIR) for the new housing element and climate action plan at a special meeting held on Wed., Jan. 4.
The 73 acres will accommodate affordable high density housing units in Pleasanton. In total, 2,326 units are planned. That is 238 units over the required 2088. A new extremely low income category was included. The city also committed to adopt a density bonus ordinance and standards for multifamily housing.
The 73 acres will accommodate affordable high density housing units in Pleasanton. In total, 2,326 units are planned. That is 238 units over the required 2088. A new extremely low income category was included. The city also committed to adopt a density bonus ordinance and standards for multifamily housing.
Related stories:
Pleasanton's rezoning for affordable housing enters final stage
PLEASANTON -- The debate over where to rezone land to accommodate nearly 2,300 affordable housing units focused Tuesday more on sites left off the city's list than those included.
The city's planning commission and City Council met Tuesday to provide input on nine of 17 sites Pleasanton submitted to the state in July as part of its housing element and to comply with a legal settlement.
Related stories:
Alameda County TJ groups fight to shape 30-year transportation spending plan
Before the end of 2011, Alameda County will commit to a spending plan that will shape its transportation system for generations to come—and transportation justice advocates are working feverishly to ensure that the plan is fair, fiscally sound and environmentally friendly.The half-cent sales tax enacted when county voters passed Measure B in 2000 supplies the county’s largest source of transportation funding. With that tax set to expire in 2022, the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) is preparing to put a new measure before the voters in November 2012. The new proposition, if approved by a 2/3 vote, would double the tax to a full cent and make it permanent. ACTC expects to raise $7.7 billion with the expanded tax; this will represent more than half of the county’s total transportation funds. The 30-year plan for spending that money will be part of the measure on the ballot. If it is approved, county residents will not have another chance to shape transportation spending until 2042, when ACTC will submit another budget to the voters.
Related stories:
