Streetsblog Los Angeles

Yesterday, the Metro Board of Directors discussed the recently released FTA Report detailing Title VI Civil Rights violations at Metro.  The Source called the discussion “by far the liveliest part of the meeting,” but it also showed ongoing confusion about what the report means and what is the best way to meet the complaints.

Mayor Villaraigosa, whose plane from Asia had landed just over eight hours before the meeting began, spoke for the entire Board that they were “very concerned” about the report’s findings.  While other members expressed some particular issues with items raised in the report, the strongest complaints came from other non-white members of the Board.  City Councilman Jose Huizar complained about the lack of translated materials outside of English and Spanish and Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas was perhaps most blunt when he called the entire affair “rather embarrassing” in the Los Angeles Times.

Despite their concerns with Metro actions that led them to yesterday’s discussion, the Metro Board did back the basic plan to get the agency back on track.  While Metro staff has told anyone willing to listen that these are minor procedural complaints that will be addressed by March or April or June (depending who is speaking for Metro) of next year, critics with the Bus Riders Union and other civil rights groups protested Metro Headquarters throughout the afternoon.  Their message was simple, the FTA report is a big deal, and the BRU doesn’t trust Metro to do handle the complaints fairly without an empowered citizen oversight committee.

The Bus Riders Union has long argued that Metro should restore the over 1 million hours of service cuts from the past three years and restore fares to their 2007 levels.  They believe that the FTA’s report, coupled with strong civilian oversight of Metro’s response is the key to start making these positions a reality. Read more…

Yesterday, the Federal Transit Administration publicly released its Title VI Civil Rights Review of Metro that was completed earlier this year.  The FTA outlines a series of deficiencies in almost half of its twelve civil rights categories.  Metro insists these are minor issues that can be easily fixed while critics of the agency call the report “a crushing indictment of the MTA.”  The document is available as a word document off the FTA’s website and a pdf off Streetsblog’s Sribd Page.

The FTA identified deficiencies in five of the 12 requirements of the Title VI Circular applicable to urban transit agencies that receive federal funds.  The five deficient areas are:

• Notice to the Public of Rights
• Language Access to LEP Persons
• System-wide Service Standards and Policies
• Evaluations of  Service and Fare Changes
• Monitoring Transit Service

Despite the strong critique of Metro policies, the FTA report stops short of requiring that Metro roll back any of its recent fare increases or service cuts that led to the Bus Riders Union to call for a Civil Rights Review in the first place.  BRU spokespeople noted that the report doesn’t rule out making such a determination in the future, but for now the agency has time to answer the FTA’s complaints, create and implement a Civil Rights Corrective Action Plan, and fill in some gaps in its reporting.

For example, when a Metro policy is shown, by its own analysis, to have a “disparate impact” on a minority or disadvantaged community  Metro is required to prove that the policy is absolutely necessary and there is no other less discriminatory alternative available.  In the case of its 2009 and 2011 service cuts, the agency did show a “disparate impact” in over three fifths of its service changes, but didn’t show that cuts were a “business necessity” in its own documents explaining the cuts and there were no other “less discriminatory alternatives.”

In plain English, Metro didn’t sufficiently prove that its service changes, cuts and improvements, were a business necessity after determining that they had a systematic negative impact on minority and disadvantaged communities.

In addition to studying the impact of its fare policies, including the reduction in cost for the Metro Day Pass that went on the books this summer, Metro is required to do a study of the cumulative impact of the changes to bus service that have occurred since 2009.  But it’s not like Metro is just ticking off a series of studies that it has to do, pending the findings of these studies, the FTA could require changes, including a requirement to roll back past policies, service changes and fare changes once Metro concludes its reporting.

Some of the other findings in the report were just strange.  For example, by its own standard, Metro has to examine why there is a significant difference, 3% or more, in survey answers from different demographics when completing its bi-annual survey of riders.  However, when their rider surveys showed that difference, there was never any examination of why, just a blanket statement that: Read more…

On Friday, Metro abruptly announced that it would be suspending changes and cuts to its bus service originally planned to go into effect yesterday until further notice.  The about-face on the most recent round of proposed cuts and other changes happened so quickly that just the day before Metro announced the changes via press release and it didn’t have time to forewarn members of its local Service Councils that approved the service tweaks of the change in plans.

Anyone wondering why the change of plans happened so suddenly had to wait only for a couple of hours.  Late Friday afternoon, The Source wrote that the Federal Transit Administration will announce this week that, “that Metro did not fully follow federal regulations and guidance when the agency made service and fare changes. The review dates back to 2009.”  The FTA has been reviewing Metro’s policies and decision making processes as the agency has scaled back its bus fleet in the past couple of years.

Not surprisingly, the Bus Riders Union was thrilled with the dual announcements.

“Metro’s decision to suspend another round of service cuts is clearly an indication this agency is treading carefully and is feeling the heat of the FTA civil rights review, which has been in progress since the summer,” writes Sunyoung Yang of the Bus Riders Union in a press statement.  ”We hope that it’s the start of a new direction for this agency, with a renewed commitment to civil rights and first class service for its low income majority Black, Latino, and Asian riders. We eagerly await the findings of the FTA report and a robust plan on how Metro will clean up its civil rights act.”

But it appears that the BRU’s hopes for major policy changes at Metro will be dashed.  The Source article calmly states, “It is important to note that the compliance review does not call for any service changes or fare changes to be rescinded,” and a statement from Metro spokesman Marc Littman ends with a promise that the proposed changes will occur soon.

“The bus service changes suspended for Sunday were mostly minor but there were some significant improvements planned that the community sought.  Consider Line 30,” writes Littman.  ”The suspended service changes should go into effect within a few weeks once we do analysis on a couple of lines.”  Part of the service changes included a large expansion of service on bus line 30 serving West Hollywood and the Pico/Rimpau area along San Vicente Boulevard. Read more…

Every year, the Metro Board combines its December and November meetings into one giant meeting in mid-December.  One item, passed by the Board’s Safety and Operations Committee in November is already raising concern from bus advocates and riders who are worried that a change in bus’ headway times could lead to more crowded conditions.

The innocuously titled Agenda Item 45: Update Metro Service Standards and Policies proposes to increase the maximum headway time for rapid bus service to 20 minutes for peak service and 30 minutes for off peak service.  This doesn’t mean that there will suddenly be a thirty minute wait for all rapid buses in the middle of the day, but it gives Metro the flexibility to altar time tables for bus service on rapids and other lines that it doesn’t have at the moment.

“The new standards are unequal and biased, allowing buses to have slow 60 min headways versus 10-12 minute headway cap for rail service.  If these kinds of service standards get applied more buses can be slowed down and trip thinned by the MTA.  Bus riders will have to bear additional wait times and this will kill ridership on the buses,” explains Sunyoung Yang, an organizer with the Bus Riders Union.  ”If the same headway standards applied on any of the rail service even the Red Line, no one would ride it—imagine waiting 30 min to an hour for the next train to go to Union Station.”

For its part, Metro staff says that Agenda Item 45 is as innocuous as its title.

“We’ve been using 20 minute frequency for evaluating Rapids over the past few shakeups, so the standards are consistent with our informal guidelines,” writes Dave Sotero from Metro’s public relations division.  ”The original planning guidelines for Rapids were 10 minute peak/20 minute base.  We were required to operate Rapids at this level for a period of one year from each line’s implementation.  Read more…

Tomorrow morning, the Bus Riders Union and a large coalition of sponsoring organizations will host a “Transit Justice Town Hall on MTA Cuts to Bus Service Lifelines.”  The event begins at 9:30 A.M. at Immanuel Presbyterian Church, 3300 Wilshire Boulevard in Koreatown.  The “Town Hall” will feature both a chance for community members to testify about the impact that recent bus service cuts and fare hikes have had on their lives.  You can read the BRU’s press release, here.

Combined with the surprising news that bus benches are disappearing around the city, BRU Organizer Esperanza Martinez claims, “From bus benches to bus lines, people are being stranded at the bus stop.  This is their chance to tell their story.”

In addition to the public testimony portion of the event, there will be a panel discussion featuring BRU leadership, public health experts and Dr. Robert Bullard, hailed by Newsweek as one of the top 13 environmental activists in the country and the “Father of Environmental Justice.”  A full list of panelists and short bios can be found at the end of the article.

Coming on the heels of the Federal Transit Administration’s visit to Los Angeles to conduct a civil rights audit of Metro; the Town Hall’s goal is not only to shine a light on the impact of Metro’s bus policy in recent years, but to place the local struggle of bus riders in a national context.

Yesterday, Transportation Nation reported that 80% of transit agencies across the country are experiencing hardships as a result of the national budget crisis.  At the same time, 700,000 Americans live in families without cars or access to transit. Read more…

Flanked by allies, transit advocates showed a united front in the battle to bring the Wilshire Bus Only Lanes to West Los Angeles in front of the Veteran’s Administration hospital on Wilshire Boulevard earlier today.

“We’ve been fighting for a Wilshire Bus Only Lane for the last six years,” explains Sunyoung Yang, the lead organizer for the Bus Riders Union.  “We want the full project that we’ve been promised.  This promise was already made to the federal government when the MTA applied to the federal government.”

Last year, the Bus Riders Union spoke at a press conference organized by rail expansion backers calling for more federal transit funding.  That was surprising, given the BRU’s opposition to the Measure R transit tax in 2008.  Today, Southern California Transit Advocates Board Member Joseph Dunn closed the press conference.  That is almost shocking, considering the long-standing grudge held between the two transit groups.  The “kumbaya” moment between the two groups underscores a message made loud and clear: transit experts are united on how far the Wilshire BOL lanes should go: as far as they possibly can.

“Have a backbone about it!” urged Dunn, “Don’t let the Brentwood people and Beverly Hills people throw you around!”

Both the Metro Board of Directors and the Los Angeles City Council are expected to vote on a route for the Wilshire Bus Only Lanes project, which would convert the far right lane on both sides of Wilshire to “bus only” at rush hour.  The press conference called on Council and Board Members to support the originally proposed 8.7 mile route rejected by the Metro Board of Directors last winter which would connect Downtown L.A. to Santa Monica, excluding Beverly Hills.

Metro staff is now proposing a 7.7 mile route which would also exclude the area just west of the 90210, leaving two bus only portions, one from Downtown L.A. to La Cienega Boulevard for 5.4 miles and another 2.3 miles in Brentwood.  Westside Councilman Bill Rosendahl is seeking to stop the project at the 5.4 mile mark and hold off on the Brentwood section until other Westside communities including Beverly Hills and Santa Monica, are on board.

Seeking to preserve their funding, and reputation, Metro staff now claim they can use the entirety of the funding regardless of the project route selected.  Money from a truncated project could provide more transponder upgrades and curb lane street repairs between the Downtown and La Cienega, leaving Westsiders in the odd position of arguing for less funds for street repair that come with the BOL project.

For Rosendahl, the issue isn’t just about mobility from the Downtown going west, but about the gridlock from Santa Monica to the 405 entrance that isn’t far from the V.A. Read more…

For part two of our interview, click here.  Or, see all our video from the event at our YouTube page.

If there’s any doubt that housing and how the city grows will be a dominant issue in transportation and development circles, a new alliance of the Bus Riders Union and The L.A. Human Right to Housing Collective have joined forces to work for increased access to public transit and affordable housing in Los Angeles.

As Los Angeles continues to grow, it will grow around its transit hubs, both those that will be new and those already existing.  Many of those living in communities that will soon be served by rail transit or BRT are worried these new developments could change the character of the existing community and make it unaffordable to current residents.  Martinez, in the video above, explains:

Transit Oriented Development, historically, has meant housing for more affluent communities whether they be white or communities of color, but people that have more resources.  We have seen that affordable housing gets left out.  Public Housing is being completely done away with and we’re concerned about that.

The two civil rights organizations celebrated the 55th Anniversary of the Montgomery Bus Boycotts with a raucous rally and dance concert in front of Metro Headquarters in Downtown Los Angeles.  For those needing a history lesson, the Montgomery Bus Boycotts lead to an end to racial segregation on Alabama’s bus system and was one of the first victories of the Civil Rights Movement.  Wikipedia has a pretty good summary for those wanting more history.

Whether you’re a fan of the BRU or not, you have to admit they have a certain style.  This rally featured the normal chanting, march and “call response” that BRU rallies are known for.  But this one also featured a prayer ritual and performance from an Aztec dance troupe to cleanse the area and call for greater freedom in Los Angeles.

More videos, of the Aztecs and the rally, can be found after the jump.

Read more…

Westsiders like to complain that for years their part of the city has been left out when it comes to transit expansion.  Now that Metro is proposing three high-profile transit projects, a rampant strain of NIMBYism is endangering all three in one form or another.

The most recent example is the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)project.  At yesterday’s meeting of the Metro Board Planning and Programming Committee, County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and Mayoral Appointee Richard Katz grilled staff on whether the one mile stretch of Wilshire Boulevard from Selby Avenue to Comstock Avenue needs to be a part of the project or could be exempted from the project altogether.  Currently, the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project,  proposes to install rush hour bus lanes in the curb lane of 8.7 miles of Wilshire Boulevard, mostly in the city of Los Angeles.

Urging the Board Members on are a group of residents who live along that corridor who have paid for their own traffic study that shows, surprise surprise, that the BRT project would do more harm than good for traffic patterns.  What a shocking development, that a study paid for by a community trying to obstruct a project for well over a decade shows that the project does more harm than good.

Ultimately, the committee moved the BRT study and Locally Preferred Alternative recommendation to be considered by the full Metro Board at their December 9 meeting.  However, they added the caveat that staff come back with more information about the impact of removing the so-called Condo Canyon corridor between Selby and Comstock at the Board Meeting.

During the public comment period for the project this summer, the City Councilman for the area, Paul Koretz, wrote a letter asking that this same stretch be exempted from the BRT project because of the “unique character” of this stretch of Wilshire.   However, if removing the project was a non-starter with staff, then he was asking that the curb-cuts and street parking in the area be preserved and that the road undergo a diet to make room for the bus-only lanes.  No, he didn’t use the words “Road Diet.”  You can read his full comments, here. Read more…

The long-term impacts to transportation funding as a result of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) civil rights compliance probe
of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) won’t be clear for
some time, but the action by the federal administration has
transportation policy circles buzzing. Experts in civil rights and
regional planning policy couldn’t point to
another instance of a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) like the
MTC being required to submit to similar scrutiny from the FTA, while
social justice
advocates felt vindicated for their longstanding contention of
discrimination in transportation funding.

The FTA probe stemmed from a complaint by Public Advocates, a civil rights law
firm in San Francisco, over BART’s failure to properly analyize
the equity impacts of its fare policy for the controversial
Oakland Airport Connector (OAC) as required under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. As a result of the
complaint, the FTA denied BART $70 million in federal stimulus funds
for the project. Because the MTC channels significant federal funds to
BART and because it continually approved motions to send stimulus funds
to an agency that ultimately failed its responsibility to comply with
Title VI, the FTA turned its eye on MTC.

According to Thomas Sanchez, chair of the Urban Affairs and
Planning Department
at Virginia Tech and
a Brookings Institution fellow, the FTA’s action against BART was
unprecedented and perked up the ears of transportation policymakers
around the country.

On the other hand, Sanchez said he wasn’t necessarily surprised
with the action at the MTC because of a previous lawsuit by Public
Advocates, Darensburg v. Metropolitan Transportation Commission,
which provided significant evidence in his mind that the MPO wasn’t
fulfilling its Title VI requirements. Sanchez said the commission had
been asked numerous times by advocates like Urban Habitat to conduct an equity analysis of its funding practices in general, and had grown quite vocal with OAC complaints.

"I personally think it’s a positive from a standpoint of
accountability and transparency and holding these organizations
accountable for a fair amount of federal money they are getting," said
Sanchez.

Read more…

Looking over the agenda for the Metro Board meeting Thursday I see no sign of any items being included relating to the impending fare increase and/or the holding of any public hearings to consider a delay or rescinding of same.

I'm sure many of you are aware the Bus Riders Union has engaged in a full court press these past few months demanding such a hearing and further that the fare increase not be implemented.

The May 27th Board meeting ground to a halt with a contingent of BRU supporters mounting a noisy demonstration.

Now with the increase due to take effect July 1st and no sign of any support for their demands among from the members of the Metro Board (I think it is fair to say their tactics have eroded whatever support the BRU may have had at one point from a few sympathetic Board members offended at the repeated BRU accusations of racism), one reads the BRU leadership's outlining of next steps from their monthly meeting agenda as an indication of if anything their intention to escalate their confrontational tactics at this month's Board meeting. I don't see any other way of reading "...what we need to do is have a deeper strategy conversation about what we are willing to do from here on out. We must continue to be in the faces of our key targets and build a broader citywide force that lets them know that 'we have had it up to here' and business as usual will not continue as long as justice is not served."

Metro's Board last month had two BRU protesters eventually arrested and the rest of the BRU supporters decamped when the Board chair decided enough was enough after the protest dragged on for hours, preventing the Board from considering any agenda items.

I don't see a reversal of course by the Board capitulating to BRU bullying is in the cards. So I think it is fair to anticipate things might get a little ugly this month. And while hordes of BRU supporters being dragged from the room screaming under arrest may make for a lively picture, it will achieve zero to stop the fare increase.