Joel Ramos, policy director for TransForm, a Bay Area transit advocacy group, who grew up in Pittsburg when the nearest station was in Concord. “I know what it’s like to feel you were promised something. But that time of being able to build beyond our resources is long gone.”
The light-rail-like buses would use toll lanes on I-580 to ensure they never reach speeds of less than 55 or 50 miles per hour, said Joel Ramos, regional planning director for TransForm, a transportation advocacy nonprofit.
And it could get built right away, he said. “You can’t add a room to your house if your foundation is cracked and that’s essentially what BART is trying to do,” Ramos said. “If you want relief now, we need to go with the bus rapid transit.”
A speaker from TRANSFORM echoed his sentiments. He pointed out that the money is available to fund the bus rapid transit now. Funds are getting more and more scarce. He predicted that funds would not be available for such a poorly performing project as a full BART extension.
“These concessions will likely reduce the risk of backlash we feared when we imagined eight-story buildings springing up in single family home areas,” wrote TransForm’s Stuart Cohen, in a detailed analysis of the bill modifications.
As bicycling, pedestrian and transit advocates prepare to drum up support for Regional Measure 3, a $3 toll bridge increase coming to voters in June for transit, highway, bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure, it’s imperative voters know their money will be spent the way its being presented to them, said Edie Irons, the communications director for TransForm, a transportation advocacy nonprofit.
“We, the voters, need confidence that commitments to projects, or at least the general uses of voter-approved funds, will be respected after the spotlight of an election passes,” she said. “It’s very troubling those commitments can be so dramatically revised after the fact.”
Questions of equity plague transit, even — or perhaps especially — in democracies. BART’s fare model, which charges riders more to travel greater distances, makes sense according to a strict miles-per-passenger calculus. It’s also palatable in a society where affluent, often white, suburbanites pay more than lower-income urban-dwellers, often people of color, who travel within the region’s core. But the 2010s population boom in central U.S. cities has upended that uneasy arrangement, and higher transit costs are an auxiliary injustice of displacement. Transportation-policy nonprofit TransForm addresses these concerns in a 2017 report called “Crossing Together — Equity Considerations for a Second Transbay Crossing.”
Displacement can be direct — knocking down your house to erect a ventilation shaft — or it can be indirect — making your neighborhood so desirable that you can’t live there anymore. Constructing new tunnels and stations tends to affect poor people quite visibly, but indirect displacement may be more insidious. It’s the carbon-monoxide poisoning to direct displacement’s fire.
Clarrissa Cabansagan, who studies urban mobility and inequality at the advocacy group Transform, said a local tax on ride-hailing services is a worthy idea, but that it's important for local policy makers to first determine what problems they're trying to solve with a tax instead of just imposing it to raise money. "Is it that we want this Robin Hood effect of taxing the rich and giving it back in ways that are meaningful for people who rely on public transit systems like AC Transit?" asked Cabansagan.
Clarissa Cabansagan, Mobility Policy Director of Transform, a non-profit transportation and planning organization, says studies on such taxes are pretty clear. "It depends on how much it costs. It will take a lot, by way of a tax, two to five dollars like New York is talking about, for it to actually impact the number of rides," said Cabansagan.
“We know that fare evasion is a significant revenue issue for BART, but it’s also a serious equity concern, especially given BART’s problems with over-policing and profiling,” wrote Edie Irons, spokesman for TransForm, in an email. “While it’s clear BART has tried to craft a balanced approach, there are still ways this policy could have a negative impact on peoples’ lives that vastly outweigh the severity of the crime.”
The ordinance also provides the option of doing community service rather than paying a fine. But Irons would like to see more: “What if, on top of their citation or community service, every young fare evader got a loaded Clipper Card that was half the value of the fine, along with information about BART’s new youth discount program?”
Ann Cheng of Transform, a transit advocacy group, supports zero-parking projects, particularly next to transit hubs. Building Kennedy's project with zero parking next to BART will generate an estimated 3.3 million fewer miles traveled by cars a year compared to building the project in the average location in the Bay Area, she said.
Not building 361 parking spaces would also save around $17.5 million, she said.
Cheng acknowledged that the project faces political hurdles. "The people who drive there have built their lives around access to West Oakland BART," said Cheng. "That's going to be the pain point."
Cheng would like the city to consider creating a "parking benefits district" in West Oakland. In those districts, which have been tested in other parts of Oakland, residents pay a lower parking toll while commuters and visitors pay a higher fee to fund local community benefits.
“TransForm has been calling for more housing near transit for over twenty years now, and we’re glad to see all the conversation this bill has inspired,” says Joshua Stark, state policy director at TransForm, a social justice-focused transportation and land use advocacy nonprofit. “This bill has the potential to really benefit people, if it can also ensure gains for affordability and the climate. For example, it could include provisions to support affordable housing and transit benefits that help reduce driving and vehicle ownership.”
Regional Planning Director Joël Ramos was quoted extensively in this article. Here is a sample:
Ramos defended RM-3, pointing out that it is asking motorists to pay for a huge amount of transit. “When you do the math and look at how much transit is being funded, it’s something for TransForm to feel good about. It would have been very difficult to fund a more aggressive measure … this was politically the best that we could get.”
He added that RM-2 funded Safe Routes to Transit and Safe Routes to School at $20 million. “Now that line item is increased to $150 million. There were some real wins.”
He also was happy about the $50 million allocated for improving the Clipper system, which he sees as a necessary step towards fully harmonizing and integrating fares on different transit agencies around the Bay Area. “If we’re going to get that, we need to get a new system. That’s the kind of technology we’re hoping to implement with that $50 million.”
Another pro-transit group supporting the measure is Transform, based in Oakland. I happened to run into their director, Stuart Cohen, last Friday. We were both at an event where BART was rolling out the first car in their new fleet.
STUART COHEN: We’re very supportive of the increase. It’s going to be funding a number of critical projects, including new BART cars. We’re celebrating the approach of these new cars today. And there’ll be $500 million to get more cars. and there’ll be lots of funding for Muni, there’ll be money for bike trails. It’s critical that we get this funding.
ELI: He also said that higher tolls would cause some people to carpool or take public transit instead, and therefore improve traffic.
COHEN: The truth is the bridges are so backed up that we have to start pricing them in a way that makes sense.
Transform’s Joshua Stark finds reason to like what’s in the budget so far, in part because it would invest more in public transportation, walking, and biking than any previous state budget.
The gas tax is expected to raise over $4.6 billion in its first year for transportation projects, with over $800 million of that directly invested in transit and active transportation projects, according to Stark:
- $330 million for the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP)
- $355 million for the State Transit Assistance Program
- $100 million for the Active Transportation Program (to a total of around $220 million)
- $36 million for commuter rail and intercity rail
“In particular,” writes Stark, “the increase to the TIRCP results in dedicated investments for equity — a first for California’s traditional transportation funding programs.”
The Ford GoBike program surpassed a key milestone in late December, with more than 500,000 rides taken since launch in June 2017. In another milestone, the number of Bay Area residents who have signed up for discounted memberships has nearly tripled since September 2017, thanks to vigorous efforts to inform low-income communities about the Bike Share for All discount program...
The ongoing outreach effort for Bike Share for All has been spearheaded by local nonprofit TransForm, which partnered with the Bay Area’s three largest bike coalitions — the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, Bike East Bay and Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition — and grassroots community-based organizations, with the goal of increasing awareness of Ford GoBike’s discounted memberships.