CA Transportation Choices Summit Tackles Policy Issues

The California Transportation Choices Summit, held in Sacramento this week, was an opportunity for sustainable transportation and public health advocates to spend the day learning about current state policies and legislation in the works to change them.

Christopher Cabaldon, Mayor of West Sacramento, discusses bike infrastructure on a pre-summit bike tour along the Sacramento River. Photos: Melanie Curry

This year’s summit was titled “2014: A Year of Opportunity.” The “opportunity” comes in the form of new funds from cap-and-trade and current discussions in the legislature about how to spend that money. As Streetsblog has reported, these funds are required to be spent on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which could include projects that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit.

The annual summit is hosted by TransForm and a long list of partners across the state including ClimatePlan, MoveLA, Circulate San Diego, the Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership, National Resources Defense Council, and the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network. In addition to discussing current policies, the learning day prepared attendees for TransForm’s “Advocacy Day,” in which participants meet with State Assembly members and their staff to talk about the issues that matter most to them and push for legislation.

Summit speakers laid out facts about funding, discussed trade-offs between spending on different programs, and urged everyone to share their personal stories about why their issue is important. “Let’s pull those heart strings,” said Elyse Lowe of Circulate San Diego, “so we can do a better job advocating for good transportation policies.”

Stuart Cohen, executive director of TransForm, created an “applause-o-meter” to gauge summit attendees’ views on trade-offs between funding categories. He asked participants to applaud for the categories of activities they thought were most important: planning; bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure; transportation demand management programs like shuttles, carpool programs, and guaranteed ride home programs; affordable homes near transit; and transit capital and operating costs.

The audience, mostly comprised of savvy transportation advocates, applauded for all of these categories, although there two clear “winners”: affordable homes near transit and transit capital and operating costs. These also were the most expensive categories, according to Cohen’s estimate of how much it would cost to fully fund needs in these areas: $6 billion for transit and $1 to $1.5 billion for housing.

Senator Kevin DeLeon delivers keynote speech at the Transportation Choices Summit.

Megan Kirkeby of the California Housing Partnership laid out the reasons this affordable housing near transit is so important. As demand for city living increases, especially areas in cities that are well-served by transit, low-income people are being priced out of them. “Low-income households that live near transit,” she said, “are four times more likely to take transit than well-off households. And they are five times less likely to own a car.” So, she argued, simply building denser housing near transit won’t be enough to help California meet its GHG emission goals under the Global Warming Solutions Act; affordable housing must be included in the equation. “By displacing low-income households from transit-oriented developments,” she said, “we risk losing the GHG reductions we seek.”

Other speakers explained the link between low-income groups and state transportation goals, including Vien Truong of the Greenlining Institute, who pointed out that more people die from transportation related pollution than from traffic crashes. It’s not just a matter of climate change goals, but simply of air quality, where the poorest in the state are subject to the worst air quality and are paying the price with their health.

Autumn Bernstein of ClimatePlan spoke about the amount of money currently being spent on transportation in the state every year, and wondered if it was being spent in the right ways. She estimates that the state plans to spend a total of $80 billion on highway expansion in the next ten years, an amount dwarfs the funds devote to transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and affordable housing combined.

“The question we need to ask is: how do we look for ways to solve congestion problems other than highway expansion?” said Bernstein. She referred to Caltrans’ 2010 report (neglected by the agency) “Smart Mobility,” which said that highway expansions should be seen as a last resort, after all other solutions have been tried, rather than a first response to traffic congestion.

Current legislation and policy discussed at the summit included:

  • S.B. 391, the Homes and Jobs Act, which would create a permanent source of funds for affordable housing. Megan Kirkeby pointed out that with the end of redevelopment and cuts in federal housing grants almost all funding for affordable housing has disappeared in the last few years. The bill passed the Senate last year and is currently in the Assembly appropriations committee file.
  • S.B. 1275 from Senator Kevin DeLeon, who was the keynote speaker at the summit. This bill’s goals are to increase low-income people’s access to incentives for replacing polluting vehicles with zero- and low-emission vehicles. It includes a “mobility option,” currently defined as rideshare or carshare, as a substitute for vehicle replacement. This bill is currently set for a hearing on April 30 in the Senate’s Committee on Environmental Quality.
  • Caltrans reform: Kate White, the California Transportation Agency’s Deputy Secretary for Environmental Policy and Housing Coordination, brought the summit to a close with an inspiring speech describing California’s future transportation system, with quick, easy, clean-energy connections across the state. Pointing out that car dependency is linked to health problems and poverty, she said “the stars are aligning” for Caltrans to become the agency that can lead the way to a sustainable transportation system, rather than the continuing to pursue its longstanding car-oriented priorities.
  • Joe Linton

    “Vien Truong of the Greenlining Institute, who pointed out that more people die from transportation related pollution than from traffic crashes” Hmmmm. I am curious to see the data/study that supports this. They’re both huge issues.

  • Melanie Curry

    I had the same thought. I will follow up on this

  • Eric Maundry

    How do you sell something in California? You tell the knuckleheads it will save the world. All of this nonsense is just a payoff to the development and realtor lobbies who have bought off our corrupt one party state government. Condos are not going to save the world. Neither are buses. This is all so idiotic it defies belief.

  • Ryanwiggins

    Angry much Eric? What was proposed there has nothing to do with buying anyone off and everything to do with addressing emissions and funding needed infrastructure that links people to jobs, reduces housing and transportation costs, and providing people with a transportation system that provides efficient and clean options to move around.

  • Eric Maundry

    Stop wigging, Wiggins. You don’t think Sacramento is corrupt? Do you ever read a newspaper? A lot of this so-called “smart growth” is really a payoff for the kinds of bribery that is very much a part of the way things get done in one party California. It’s all just the pay to play system at work, with the realtor and development crowd getting a chance to create a lot of crap SCAG housing that nobody would ever want to live in. Go take a trip to Rancho Cucamonga or San Bernardino sometime and see the disaster first hand. Oh, and here is another thought, Wiggins. What is the first thing any Californian would do with the money they save after moving into cheap government subsidized housing? Buy a car. Just because you plant someone next to a bus stop doesn’t mean they’re going to ride some smelly bus. People want cars. Nothing described in the above article will ever change that.

  • Ryanwiggins

    You’re wrong about that actually. There is a big demand for housing near transit. This is not an opinion, this is a fact backed up by a whole lot of concrete data. You’re making analogies based on your perception rather than grounding anything you say in what’s really going on. The market is now responding for pent up demand for transit-oriented housing and development as cities adapt their community plans to allow for it.

  • Ryanwiggins
  • So, Eric, I am curious what you are doing about all this beyond posting on blogs. Walking the corridors of Sacramento? Finding candidates for elected office who reflect your views? Holding meetings to organize? I think we are all eager to hear what you are doing that will address these alleged ills. Please enlighten us.

  • Eric Maundry

    Concrete data is usually kind of dense. But if you can supply some I’d be glad to look at it.

  • Eric Maundry

    None of that, actually, Gabby. How about you? Seize the property of any old people though eminent domain lately so you can build the condos that will save the planet?

  • It must be difficult to sleep at night when paranoia makes you see an evil developer behind every rock and tree. I’m just a guy who gets around on the bus, lives in an apartment near MacArthur Park on Wilshire and shares information via activism and writing an occasional post for this blog. BTW your stance isn’t supported by the latest research and statistics. Joel Kotkin, the king of your suburban mania, is now looking more and more out of touch.

  • Ryanwiggins
  • Actually, Eric, if you had bothered to read the article, many of us who attended the summit did just what Gabby asked you – we walked (literally, except for those in wheelchairs – I guess they “wheeled”) the Capitol in support of the bills.

    Update on the first bill listed, S.B. 391, the Homes and Jobs Act, which had a recent article in the LA Times about it.
    Unless I misunderstand, this bill aint moving :-(

  • Ryan,
    The Cal State Fullerton study quantifies costs of air pollution, but I didn’t see where it compares mortality figures between crashes and air pollution caused by transportation.

    Here’s a 2012 article from The National Health Service (NHS), the publicly funded healthcare system for England (on mortality in Britain):

    “Air pollution from exhaust fumes kills more than twice as many people as road accidents,” The Daily Telegraph has reported. The paper said that around 1,850 people die in traffic accidents annually, but that each year over 5,000 people will die as a result of heart attacks and lung cancer caused by vehicle exhaust fumes.”

    On a world-wide lever, Earth Policy Institute reports on SEPTEMBER 17, 2002:
    “The World Health Organization reports that 3 million people now die each year from the effects of air pollution. This is three times the 1 million who die each year in automobile accidents…..”

    Here’s a current WHO report stating that “Air Pollution Kills 7 Million Annually”


TransForm to Host Third Transportation Choices Summit in Sacramento

TransForm, an organization that advocates for sustainable transportation, smart growth, and affordable housing throughout California, will host its third annual summit next week to discuss the state’s transportation priorities. The Transportation Choices Summit will take place in Sacramento on Tuesday, April 22, and feature speakers from advocacy organizations including the Greenlining Institute, Move LA, and Safe Routes […]

CA’s Regional Agencies Tout Increased Ped Safety Funding in Sacramento

The Peds Count! 2014 Summit kicked off in Sacramento with a panel of top-level executives from regional planning agencies celebrating their accomplishments in improving conditions for pedestrians. The speakers represented an alphabet soup of major metropolitan transportation agencies in California: SANDAG, the San Diego Association of Governments; SACOG, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments; SCAG, […]

Coalition of California Advocates Headed to Sacramento to Save Transit

Members of a broad coalition hailing from throughout California are headed to Sacramento next week to push policymakers to save transit funding and enact sustainable transportation planning reforms. The Oakland-based transit advocacy group TransForm has amassed about 150 advocates to descend on the capitol for its two-day Transportation Choices Summit, the first known event of its […]

CA Sen. Steinberg Proposes New Spending Plan for Cap-and-Trade Revenue

Senate President Pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) announced a proposed plan to create a permanent spending strategy for cap-and-trade revenue [PDF] that prioritizes investments in affordable transit-oriented housing, transit expansion, and CA high-speed rail. Unlike the Governor’s plan for this year’s budget, Senate Bill 1156 also proposes investments in “complete streets” and transit operations. Calling the […]