Draft MTP/SCS Comments Received - sacog

from SHA to SACOG re MTP/SCS 2035
Letter
9, 2012
January
of the MTP/SCS, but not until 2020. P. 10-6. This, unfortunately, is opposite of the
years
of equity investment approach that SHA supports and recommends. SHA is
"front-loading"
that deferring investment into transit to late in the plan period will have a disparate
concerned
adverse impact on low-income communities, communities of color, people with disabilities
and
mechanisms through the MTP/SCS to address any adverse impact, including
Develop
Ensuring that decision regarding routes and times of services are
•
is a business approach to what is a social service. In times of
levels
resources, SACOG should prioritize the transit funding it has on
limited
Ensuring that the proceeds from Measure B in Sacramento County
•
in 2014 support transit operational and capital needs that
beginning
promote equity;
also
Ensuring that the anticipated shift of more than $2 billion of flexible
•
from road to transit over the planning period occurs in the
revenue
part of the remainder of the plan period;
earlier
to support systems expansion and restoration of routes and
revenues
times earlier in the plan period.
running
In collaboration with regional transit operators, transit users and equity
•
consider and analyze potential revenue generating measures,
partners,
road maintenance and
timing of transit such investment as compared to investments in
rehabilitation.
Draft MTP/SCS states that "the limited growth in transit services for the first ten
The
dueto revenue constraints" means that there will be more robust growth in the later
years
and other populations that are disproportionately transit-dependent.
Recommendations:
the impact that the timing of the Draft MTP/SCS' transportation
Analyze/measure
priorities will have on populations in the SACOG region protected under Title VI
investment
and related equity mandates, and if the impact is
disparate and negative, take affirmative
steps to avoid and/or mitigate such impacts.
determined by level of need--not level of ridership.
Using ridership
the communities who are in most need of reliable transit services.
.
Analyzing the potential for increased ridership, through lowering of
•
of limited income transit-dependent riders, to increase transit
fares
such as the City of Los Angeles' 30/10 Initiative, which would create a
revenue source to develop 12 key mass transit projects in
10 years,
rather than 30. This is consistent with the concept of front-loading
10
Page 161 of 165