Stories of Philanthropic Leadership in Advancing Regional and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

REGIONAL OPPORTUNITYexpansion/service improvements, and a basis fordeveloping a fair fare policy; and• A fair fare policy that considers, among otherfactors, distance traveled, peak and off-peak use,and special discounts for seniors, students andthe disabled (that should maintain and improvethe existing bus-to-bus transfer policy andinclude free subway-to-bus and reduced-cost busto-subwaytransfers and expanded hours and useof student passes for public school students).Campaign activities focused on accessing theinformation that the MBTA had used to support itsfare increase decision through a public recordsrequest. Its main community organizing and advocacyactivities were petitions, a position paper, andparticipating in MBTA board hearings and otherpublic hearing opportunities. Combined, these effortsled the campaign into direct negotiations with theMBTA’s general manager, its chief financial officer,and the state Secretary of Transportation (who alsoserved as chair of the MBTA’s board of directors).In the end, the campaign achieved many of its goals,including:• A reduction in the proposed increase in bus fares(the rate was changed from $0.75 to $0.90, not$1.00 as originally proposed);• The creation of a Rider Oversight Committee(ROC) that will meet monthly with MBTA staffand quarterly with the state Secretary ofTransportation, as well as the MBTA’s generalmanager and its chief financial officer;• The inclusion of fare policy, fare structure, serviceimprovements, quality standards, and alternativefunding sources in the ROC’s mandate;• A fare freeze until at least January 2006;• The consultation and creation of a new farepolicy before Automated Fare Collection isimplemented;• A reduced price for bus-subway and subway-bustransfers with the Automated Fare Collectionimplementation; and• A better public process for future fare increases.BaltimoreSimilar to New York and Boston, Baltimore’s transitriders dealt with a transit agency’s proposed fareincreases. “Farebox Recovery,” refers to the percentageof a transit agency’s expenses generated by fares. PerMaryland law, the Maryland Transit Authority couldrecover 40 percent of its expenses from fares. But thispercentage was to sunset in 2004, increasing to a 50percent farebox recovery rate, forcing the MarylandTransit Agency to raise its fares.Based on its equity mission and extensive experience,the Citizens Planning and Housing Association(CPHA) spearheaded the community response. Forover 60 years, CPHA has dedicated itself to the beliefthat the united action of informed citizens is essentialto improve the quality of life for the people of theBaltimore region. In the past several years, more andmore informed citizens have made it clear that thequality of life must be addressed on both aneighborhood and a regional scale.The organization envisions a well-planned Baltimoreregion with equity among jurisdictions, wherecitizens respect diversity and have access toresponsive government and quality housing invibrant neighborhoods. Its vision is to mobilizeinformed citizen action by training and organizingcitizens and neighborhood leaders to be advocates onissues consistent with the vision, advocating forpolicies and actions that prevent sprawl and improvethe livability of existing neighborhoods, andconvening partners to address policy and planningissues of common interest to Baltimore City and itssurrounding counties.Due to the 2003 fare increase, the CPHA formed theMaryland Transit Coalition. The Coalition is a mixof transportation advocates like the ActionCommittee for Transit and the Transit Riders League;environmental groups such as the Chesapeake BayFoundation; social justice groups such as MarylandPublic Interest Research Group (MaryPIRG); andsmart growth advocates represented by theWashington Regional Network for LivableCommunities and Solutions Not Sprawl, amongothers. The Coalition worked to advance statelegislation—Senate Bill 282 and House Bill 282—tofreeze farebox recovery at 40 percent until 2008.With the Transit Riders League in the lead, Coalitionmembers wrote letters, sent e-mail, called theirrepresentatives, and testified at hearings, whichresulted in the near-unanimous approval of each Bill.On May 26, 2004, Maryland Governor Robert L.Erlich, Jr., signed the legislation, which extended the40 percent farebox recovery requirement forBaltimore-area transit riders until 2008.97Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities
Funder InterestThe Straphangers Campaign receives funding from avariety of sources (local foundations, dues,fundraisers), but their largest source of fundingcomes from the Alfred E. Sloan Foundation.According to the Sloan Foundation’s programdirector, Ted Greenwood, the Foundation wasinterested in the Straphangers’ focus on theperformance of the New York City Transit System.The Straphangers had demonstrated an ability toobtain, analyze, and review the data produced by theMTA, using this data to produce reports on theperformance of different subway lines. Also, theStraphangers would couple MTA data with their owndata collection efforts (e.g., rider surveys), andproduce yearly reports which allowed for informedadvocacy concerning the transit system and itsresponsiveness to community needs.The Sloan Foundation made its initial grant to theStraphangers in 1996. At that time, the Straphangerswere the only kind of transit advocacy group doingthis kind of analytical work on a meaningful scale. TheStraphangers organization was well-established andwas ready to take its work to a more comprehensivelevel. The Sloan Foundation was impressed with staffskills, the volunteers’ commitment, the organizationaltrack record, and its future agenda. These future plansled the Foundation to conclude that the Straphangerscould be an exemplar organization.Supporting the Transit Riders Union in Boston andthe Transit Riders League in Baltimore is theCatholic Campaign for Human Development(CCHD), among other funding sources. Accordingto Andy Slettebak, Baltimore field representative, andRandy Keesler, Boston field representative, CCHD’sinterest in these efforts is based upon supporting anyactivity that brings low-income, disempoweredpeople together where they may establishrelationships with each other and together find theirown voice to participate in decisionmaking thataffects their daily lives.The Catholic Campaign for Human Development’sgrant decisions are made at the local diocese levelwhere diocese members are regularly involved inissues affecting low-income people and are familiarwith groups which are consistently doing meaningfulwork. For the Baltimore diocese, there existed a goodfit between the Transit Riders League and theCommunity Organizing Grant program criteria,which was further reinforced by the well-establishedreputation of the Citizens Planning and HousingAssociation. In Boston, the Beat the Fare Increasecampaign application met CCHD’s grant criteria andfurthermore, CCHD was attracted to the TransitRiders Union’s participation in the broader On theMove Coalition.Regional/Neighborhood Equity ImpactsA comprehensive transit system is a basic part ofregionalism—whether it uses buses, streetcars,subways, light rail, shuttles, or a combination ofsome or all of thesemodes. Increasingthe system’s reach,accessibility, andridership supportsregional goals likereducingautomobileimpacts, combatingsprawl, andestablishingcompact,pedestrian/transitorienteddevelopments.These goals dependon successfullyencouragingautomobile driversto make a differenttransportationA comprehensive transitsystem is a basic part ofregionalism—whether it usesbuses, streetcars, subways,light rail, shuttles, or acombination of some or allof these modes. Increasingthe system’s reach,accessibility, and ridershipsupports regional goalslike reducing automobileimpacts, combating sprawl,and establishing compact,pedestrian/transit-orienteddevelopments.choice: to get out of their cars and trucks fromtime-to-time and use transit for theirtransportation needs.Equity issues can arise when low-incomecommunities and people of color in urban areasreceive less than their fair share of a regional transitsystem’s benefits and receive a greater share of aregional transit system’s negative impacts. Theseinequities take many forms, such as:• Disproportionate investments—Nearly allregions spend comparatively more money onhighways than transit. Plus, they typically spendmore transit money to construct light rail lines,new stations, and bus shelters in suburban areasthan they do on buses and shelters in transitdependentinner-city communities. Further, theseinner-city riders contribute more revenue to theREGIONAL OPPORTUNITYPart III: Section 3: Connecting to Regional Opportunity 98
Page 1 and 2:
Stories of Philanthropic Leadership
Page 3 and 4:
Signs of Promise:Stories of Philant
Page 5 and 6:
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth
Page 7 and 8:
(II. B.)(II. C.)Turning Neighborhoo
Page 9 and 10:
PART I:IntroductionThe Purpose of t
Page 11 and 12:
social justice issues as they relat
Page 13 and 14:
PART II:Perspectives on Advancing R
Page 15 and 16:
peer work, we can reestablish a sig
Page 17 and 18:
Annie E. Casey FoundationBaltimore,
Page 19 and 20:
neighborhoods into healthy ones—g
Page 21 and 22:
Charles and Helen Schwab Foundation
Page 23 and 24:
Section 1:Promoting Equitable Publi
Page 25 and 26:
I. A. BUILDING POWER AND GIVINGVOIC
Page 27 and 28:
policy advocates. In 2002, Milwauke
Page 29 and 30:
in Los Angeles, Ford’s Anthony no
Page 31 and 32:
I. B. PROMOTING COALITIONSTO ADVANC
Page 33 and 34:
Yet the interpersonal dynamics of c
Page 35 and 36:
guidelines. “Many of the member o
Page 37 and 38:
Funder InterestThe EPA supported th
Page 39 and 40:
I. D. DEMONSTRATING THESTRUGGLE FOR
Page 41 and 42:
Richmond, Calif.The second regional
Page 43 and 44:
through policy reform at the local
Page 45 and 46:
I. E. BUILDING COALITIONTHROUGH KNO
Page 47 and 48:
organizing project, the Connecticut
Page 49 and 50:
and businesses are quantified in a
Page 51 and 52:
I. G. REVITALIZING WHILEASSURING DI
Page 53 and 54: In the late 1990s, the city of Albu
Page 55 and 56: I. H. A TRAVEZ DE LA FRONTERA:LAND
Page 57 and 58: The International Community Foundat
Page 59 and 60: I. I. MOBILIZING ACTION FORREGIONAL
Page 61 and 62: To meet all of these objectives, th
Page 63 and 64: efforts. And with each public plann
Page 65 and 66: pattern of disproportionate transpo
Page 67 and 68: Clinica de la Raza identify this cr
Page 69 and 70: Contact PeopleCarl AnthonyActing Di
Page 71 and 72: Section 2:Making All Neighborhoods
Page 73 and 74: II. A. REACHING BEYONDHOUSING TO IM
Page 75 and 76: A local resident receives the keys
Page 77 and 78: East Baltimore community and the Jo
Page 79 and 80: example, adjacent to the EBDI area,
Page 81 and 82: II. C. YIELDING REGIONALBENEFITS TH
Page 83 and 84: is using transit-oriented developme
Page 85 and 86: financing and innovative, forward-t
Page 87 and 88: The Row House Community Development
Page 89 and 90: II. E. COUNTERING THE PERFECTSTORM:
Page 91 and 92: funded community programs, includin
Page 93 and 94: housing developments and commercial
Page 95 and 96: owned enterprises, totaling $8.5 mi
Page 97 and 98: LOAN GUARANTEESSection 3:Connecting
Page 99 and 100: III. A. MAKING HOUSING ANOPPORTUNIT
Page 101 and 102: A new report from the National Hous
Page 103: The Straphangers Campaign was found
Page 107 and 108: or increase poverty. Whether direct
Page 109 and 110: The Regional Plan Association then
Page 111 and 112: multi-stakeholder effort composed o
Page 113 and 114: director with LISC. No one set of s
Page 115 and 116: 12 western Louisville neighborhoods
Page 117 and 118: III. E. UNITING THREE STATESFOR ONE
Page 119 and 120: increased their personal wealth by
Page 121 and 122: summary evaluation of MSDI found th
Page 123 and 124: method alone was strong enough to m
Page 125 and 126: consistent body of work. The Counci
Page 127 and 128: 3) Issues Need to be ConnectedThe f
Page 129 and 130: PART V:Glossary of TermsThe terms d
Page 131 and 132: Regional and neighborhood equity. A
Page 133 and 134: Tijuana River Reserve, California:h
Page 135 and 136: Sargent Shriver National Center on
Page 137: 1500 San Remo Avenue • Suite 249
show all

Stories of Philanthropic Leadership in Advancing Regional and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?