Transportation Justice (Research)
Today’s MTA Civil Rights Crisis Cutting Transit Lifelines for Communities of Color
Source:
Bus Riders Union 
Civil Rights harms caused by bus service cuts:
Barriers to employment. High unemployment, mostly low wage jobs in transit-dependent areas; jobs in other areas difficult or impossible to reach, especially at night and on weekends. Barriers to education, health care, healthy food, recreation. Longer end-to-end travel time & more transfers. More money spent on fares, less time with family, more chance of arriving late to school or work. Longer walks and longer waits. These are hardships and safety concerns, especially for elderly and disabled and those traveling at night. Physical & mental distress. - Recognized nationally for its historic civil rights Consent Decree and signature creative tactics, the Bus Riders Union is a multiracial dynamo of 200 active members, 3,000 dues-paying members, and 50,000 supporters on the buses of L.A. The BRU has literally saved public transportation in Los Angeles and become the country's largest grassroots mass transit advocacy organization. From our focus on mass transit, the BRU carries out a wide, multi-issue progressive agenda based in comprehensive principles of unity and strong membership agreement.
Related stories:
Transit-Oriented Displacement? The San Jose Flea Market and the Opportunity Costs of Smart Growth
As California’s population continues to expand and places like the Bay Area metropolitan region experience new development pressures, land use and transportation planners, economic development agencies and policy makers must carefully weigh the economic and environmental benefits and costs of growth. If we focus new growth in higher-density developments served by public transit, what might be the impacts of such “smart
growth” on low-income households, the racial diversity of communities, and the viability of small or family-owned businesses? In San Jose, the largest city in the Silicon Valley high-tech industry cluster, there has long been pressure to better match housing availability – for workers of all
income levels – with jobs availability. Such efforts seek to reduce the time workers must spend commuting to and from their jobs, mitigate the air pollution and global warming effects of such automobile travel patterns, preserve greenfield lands in less urbanized locales, improve quality of life for workers, and prevent worker productivity declines attributable to burdensome commute times. These goals can, however, get buried under the counter-pressures a city faces to retain and expand its job base, while also increasing tax revenue from non-residential developments such as retail power centers or office parks (Elmer et al. 2006). Toward these multifaceted ends, San Jose has joined a growing number of cities that are experimenting with transit-oriented development around light or heavy fixedrail transit stations. Over the long run, the city is looking forward to the addition of four new BART stations that will comprise the commuter rail agency’s Silicon Valley extension into Santa Clara County. The first of these four San Jose stations will be built at the site of the current San Jose Flea Market in the Berryessa neighborhood.
Growth & Opportunity: Aligning High-Quality Public Education & Sustainable Communities Planning in the Bay Area
Source:
Center for City and Schools 
CC&S and ABAG partnered to support and inform local and regional innovation connecting schools to the Bay Area’s regional development and conservation strategy (FOCUS) and the Sustainable Communities Strategy as mandated by California’s climate change legislation, Senate Bill 375. Our new report identifies tangible policy levers at both the regional and municipal levels that realize the co-benefits of pursuing complete communities and high-quality education in tandem. We describe the regional educational landscape and develop recommendations about specific strategies to achieve cross-sector “win-wins.”
* What are the educational impacts of non-school policies, such as housing, transportation, and other regional planning investments?
* What are the impacts of educational efforts on non-school issues, such as housing choice, sustainable transportation utilization, and community-building opportunities?
* How can the region’s policy and practice interventions and investments in housing and transportation be made to strategically support improving school quality?
Impacts of the Recession on Public Transportation Agencies - 2011 Update
Public transportation agencies across the United States continue to face budgetary challenges as a result of the
current recession. Many transit agencies saw decreases in state and local funding in the past year. In order to
survive, agencies have been forced to cut service, raise fares, lay off employees, and implement hiring freezes,
among other actions. The actions come even as agencies are expected to serve an increased number of riders.
This report, based on a March 2011 survey, provides a national perspective on the extent to which the recession
is affecting public transportation agencies and the millions of Americans who use their services. The survey was a follow‐up to a similar survey in 2010 that asked about actions taken in response to the economic downturn. This new survey asked about actions taken since January 1, 2010 and actions agencies anticipated taking in the near future. 117 transit agencies responded to the survey. The results show that a large number of transit agencies are facing service cuts, fare increases, and reductions in staff and benefits due to declining funding. Larger public transportation agencies felt the most severe impacts. Transit agencies continue to find solutions to their budget pressures while still providing critical transportation service to connect people to jobs and support economic growth. Additionally, agencies are foreseeing future pressures as the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is proposing to cut an additional 37 percent in federal funding to public transportation and all surface transportation programs. State and local governments will not be able to make up for this lack of funding. Now is not the time to reduce critical federal funding that is needed to preserve service and address capital needs.Related stories:
Getting to Work: Transportation Policy and Access to Job Opportunities
“Getting to Work: Transportation Policy and Access to Job Opportunities,” is the fourth in a series of reports by The Leadership Conference Education Fund examining the key roles transportation and mobility play in the struggle for civil rights and equal opportunity. The reports highlight critical issues and make recommendations for policymakers as they draft a reauthorization of the nation’s surface transportation programs, which will allocate hundreds of billions of federal dollars for transportation projects that will have a profound impact on every person in our county. Transportation policies can have a significant impact on employment opportunity. Congress is now considering the surface transportation reauthorization bill, which will allocate funds for highways, rail, bus, and other modes of transportation across the country. The projects it funds will not only affect Americans’ access to existing jobs, it will generate hundreds of thousands of new jobs and have a significant impact on employment opportunity. Lack of transportation isolates many Americans from jobs. For decades, metropolitan areas have been expanding outward, and jobs have been moving farther away from the low-income and minority people who disproportionately remain in urban cores. For many of these people, inadequate or unaffordable transportation is a significant barrier to employment. Related stories:
The Road to Health Care Parity: Transportation and Access to Health Care
“The Road to Health Care Parity: Transportation and Access to Health Care,” is the second in a series of reports by The Leadership Conference Education Fund examining the key roles transportation and mobility play in the struggle for civil rights and equal opportunity. The reports highlight critical issues and make recommendations for policymakers as they draft a reauthorization of the nation’s surface transportation programs, which will allocate hundreds of billions of federal dollars for transportation projects that will have a profound impact on every person in our county. Access to health care is a civil right and a foundation for other rights. Today, low-income populations, people of color, households in rural areas, and people with disabilities disproportionately lack access to affordable, quality health care. This disparity has contributed to high rates of preventable conditions, which affect individuals’ ability to participate fully in education and the workforce. Lack of affordable and accessible transportation options is a major contributor to health disparities. It isolates low-income people from health care facilities and forces families to spend a large percentage of their budgets on cars and other expensive options, at the expense of other needs, including health care. Our transportation policy also generates public health problems that disproportionately affect low-income communities and communities of color. As Congress considers a reauthorization of our nation’s surface transportation programs, which will allocate significant federal funds to transportation infrastructure, civil and human rights advocates have an opportunity to advance public health through participation in the transportation policy making process. Related stories:
Getting Home: Transportation Equity and Access to Affordable Housing
“Getting Home: Transportation Equity and Access to Affordable Housing,” is the third in a series of reports by The Leadership Conference Education Fund examining the key roles transportation and mobility play in the struggle for civil rights and equal opportunity. The reports highlight critical issues and make recommendations for policymakers as they draft a reauthorization of the nation’s surface transportation programs, which will allocate hundreds of billions of federal dollars for transportation projects that will have a profound impact on every person in our county. Transportation policies have a direct impact on the availability of and access to affordable housing.
Transportation decisions often contribute to economic and racial segregation. When a segment of a metro area lacks public transportation or safe walking/biking alternatives, people who cannot afford automobiles or lack the ability to drive cannot live there—even if their housing costs are within their means. But our transportation policies have contributed to sprawling metropolitan areas organized around major roads and highways. Policies that prioritize highways and new suburban home ownership have created a landscape where truly affordable housing is difficult for many Americans to obtain.• Families with means and access to vehicles have flocked to new suburban housing developments while low-income families—predominantly minority—lacking transportation options or locked out of certain neighborhoods by discriminatory real estate practices have remained in the under-resourced urban core. • Homebuyers in search of affordable housing and renters often are pushed into far-flung areas with higher transportation costs, driving up the overall cost of living.Related stories:
Where We Need to Go: A Civil Rights Roadmap for Transportation Equity
“Where We Need to Go: A Civil Rights Roadmap for Transportation Equity,” is the first in a series of reports by The Leadership Conference Education Fund examining the key roles transportation and mobility play in the struggle for civil rights and equal opportunity. The reports highlight critical issues and make recommendations for policymakers as they draft a reauthorization of the nation’s surface transportation programs, which will allocate hundreds of billions of federal dollars for transportation projects that will have a profound impact on every person in our county. What is transportation equity? It means a transportation system that works for everyone. At present, the promise of our civil rights laws to open doors to opportunity rings hollow for people who are physically isolated from jobs, schools, good housing, stores that sell healthy food, and health care providers. As we consider how to rebuild and rethink our transportation policies, we must make decisions with civil and human rights considerations in mind. As policymakers discuss such important issues as how best to rebuild and repair our nation’s roads, bridges, railways and ports, and where and how to prioritize investments in public transportation and in creating good jobs, it is vital that they take into consideration the needs of underserved communities and populations. Transportation investment to date has often excluded or inadequately addressed the needs of low-income people, people of color, people with disabilities, seniors, and many people in rural areas. The cost of car ownership, underinvestment in public transportation, and a paucity of pedestrian and bicycle-accessible thoroughfares have isolated urban and low-income people from jobs and services. Similarly, seniors, people with disabilities, and people in rural areas often have limited transportation choices.
Related stories:
Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America
Source:
The Brookings Institution 
Public transit is a critical part of the economic and social fabric of metropolitan areas. Nearly 30 million trips are made every day using public transit. Almost all of these trips occur in the nation’s 100 largest metro areas, which account for over 95 percent of all transit passenger miles traveled. People take transit for any number of reasons, but one of the most common is to get to work.
However, when it comes to the question of how effectively transit connects people and jobs within and across these metropolitan areas, strikingly little is known. With governments at all levels considering deep budget cuts, it is increasingly important to understand not just the location and frequency of transit service, but ultimately how well transit aligns with where people work and live. To better understand these issues, the Metropolitan Policy Program developed a comprehensive database that provides the first comparable, detailed look at transit coverage and connectivity across and within the nation’s major metro areas.
Related stories:
The Bus Riders Union Transit Model
In the bus versus rail debate, some ask, “Why can’t we have it all?” In principle, bus and rail are public transportation modes that can be complementary. But in actual practice over the past twenty years, we have seen rail too often play a regressive role. Urban planner Ryan Snyder has taken on the bus versus rail debate since the reincarnation of rail in Los Angeles over twenty years ago. His thesis: if rail fails to meet the most basic planning thresholds to warrant its construction in Los Angeles—the most auto-centered, sprawling city in the nation—then it cannot work in any other similar urban setting. The preponderance of the evidence calls for a major investment in bus capital and bus operations funds, and the dramatic reduction of funds for constructing new rail and highways. In the case of L.A., we believe a moratorium on rail and highway expansion is warranted. In other cities we support a complete moratorium on highway construction alone and urge organizers, advocates and scholars to consider moving toward a clean-fuel bus-centered system.
Related stories:
