Update: today, February 9, advocacy groups are urging Americans to call their Representative and ask them to oppose HR7. For help finding your Congressmember’s phone number, click here.

Advocates and officials have reacted with alarm after seeing portions [...]]]>

You can urge your member of Congress to vote down the House's transportation bill at T4America's website.

Update: today, February 9, advocacy groups are urging Americans to call their Representative and ask them to oppose HR7. For help finding your Congressmember’s phone number, click here.

Advocates and officials have reacted with alarm after seeing portions of a House surface transportation bill (HR7) that would imperil funding for public transit, pedestrian, and cycling projects. Like the Senate’s MAP-21 bill, the House version consolidates many current transportation programs into a smaller number of broad, flexible ones, but there are major differences between the bills.

Observers have objected most vehemently to the provision in the House bill that would end dedicated funding for public transportation. Currently, public transportation is funded by 2.86 cents/gallon of the federal gas tax, which is placed in the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund. Under the bill, both public transit and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program would be paid for out of an “Alternative Transportation Account” funded with general taxes. Instead of being placed in a secure lockbox, as it is today, public transportation money would be subject to the unpredictable annual budget process and could be cut at any time.

The House bill would also completely eliminate Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to Schools, which are dedicated pedestrian/bicycle funding programs that represent just 2% of federal transportation spending but pay huge dividends in mobility and safety. It would also gut the CMAQ program, which has historically funded projects that reduce dependence on automobiles. States would be able to use CMAQ funds to widen roads for single-occupancy vehicles, a previously ineligible project category, if they argued such projects would reduce congestion.

The House’s bill contains neither the environmentally friendly freight provisions, nor the strong incentives for road and bridge repair, that exist in various pieces of the Senate’s bill.

Many groups are also angry about the bill’s proposed funding sources. It would drastically expand oil drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and the continental shelves, which has angered environmental groups. Conservative think tanks have also assailed the bill for eroding the principle that transportation spending should be funded by dedicated fees, like the gas tax.

The T4America reform coalition officially came out against the bill on Monday. Urge your Congressmember to oppose HR7 at T4America’s website. House leadership hopes to vote on the bill by the end of next week, even as opposition continues to mount.

Meanwhile, In the Senate

Compared to the controversial House bill, the Senate’s transportation bill has encountered mostly smooth sailing and has moved forward with bipartisan support. The Senate’s Banking Committee passed the transit title of MAP-21 on a unanimous vote last Thursday. It contains a number of provisions that will boost public transit:

• It authorizes nearly $21 billion for public transit over two years, a small increase over current transit funding levels.
• It includes a $20 million transit-oriented development grant program, which would provide grants to localities that want to plan around their stations.
• It includes operating flexibility for transit agencies, allowing them to use some federal funds to avoid service cuts during economic downturns.

Senator Bob Menendez of NJ played a major role in shaping the bill as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development.

Yesterday, the Senate’s Finance Committee identified about $10 billion in revenue sources to fully fund the bill and passed its part of the legislation. Its piece  includes a provision to permanently increase the commuter tax benefit for transit riders to $240/month, which would restore parity between transit and parking benefits. This would take effect only if the surface transportation bill is signed into law.

The two Senate votes clear the way for the bill’s move to the floor of the chamber. Procedural votes could begin Thursday, with actual debate on the bill next week. Advocates will be working to ensure that key reforms — such as ensuring that local communities can access pedestrian/bicycle safety funding — make it into the bill.

Transit riders throughout the tri-state region are facing heavy financial burdens after the transit commuter benefit was rolled back on January [...]]]>

The rollback in the transit benefit impacts the highlighted NJ Transit stations, and then some (this image was cropped for space). Click to view all of the affected stations in PDF form.

Transit riders throughout the tri-state region are facing heavy financial burdens after the transit commuter benefit was rolled back on January 1.

Before the cut, Americans could spend up to $230 in pretax income on the public transit that gets them to work, but the figure is now $125. At the same time, an equivalent benefit for parking rose to $240 per month, which means that the federal tax code now incentivizes driving over public transportation.

A monthly pass between New York City and almost any station on NJ Transit rail, Metro-North, or the Long Island Rail Road costs more than $125. For someone who makes $50,000 annually and spends $230 a month on transit, the rollback is tantamount to a yearly tax hike of $400.

At CommuterBenefitsWorkForUs.com, workers can e-mail Congress in support of restoring the transit benefit.

Lawmakers that attempted to extend the expiring commuter tax benefit at the end of last year have renewed their efforts in 2012. Senator Chuck Schumer said he would continue working to restore the benefit, New Jersey Senators Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez made similar pledges, and Connecticut’s Senator Richard Blumenthal and Representative Rosa DeLauro highlighted the issue at a press conference. All support the Commuter Benefits Equity Act (S1034/HR2412), which would permanently set the transit benefit equal to the parking benefit at $240/month. It has been co-sponsored by 10 senators, including all six from the tri-state region. The House equivalent currently has 62 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle.

When Congress debates the extension of a payroll tax cut, which will expire on February 29, legislators will likely have an opportunity to restore the benefit on a temporary basis. Commuters can e-mail Congress in support of restoring the transit benefit at CommuterBenefitsWorkForUs.com.

In the New York State Legislature, Senator Charles Fuschillo has introduced a bill to allow residents to deduct commuting costs from their state taxes as if the federal benefit had not been reduced. (State residents would still have a higher federal tax bill if Congress does not restore the benefit).

After the jump, TSTC maps show the rollback’s impact on Metro-North and Long Island Rail Road customers. NYC express bus riders, NJ Transit riders, commuter bus riders, and many whose commute involves multiple transit systems also have monthly transit costs that top $125.

Metro-North:

Click to view as a larger PDF.

LIRR:

Click to view as larger PDF.

While some in Congress indulge in end-of-year partisanship, it’s transit riders who will be hit by the hangover come January 1. Transportation For America reports that the transit commuter [...]]]>

Virtually all LIRR riders who receive federal transit commuter benefits will be hit with a "transit tax hike" next year. (Click to view larger.)

While some in Congress indulge in end-of-year partisanship, it’s transit riders who will be hit by the hangover come January 1. Transportation For America reports that the transit commuter tax benefit is essentially guaranteed to drop next year, from $230/month to $125/month, while the equivalent benefit for parking will rise to $240/month. This means the federal tax code will incentivize driving over public transportation.

The benefit rollback would cost commuters hundreds of dollars a year. According to a white paper produced by a coalition of benefit providers, someone who makes $50,000 a year and spends at least $230/month on transit will be hit with a “transit tax” of more than $400/year.

The majority of commuter rail monthly passes on NJ Transit, Metro-North, and the LIRR cost more than $125. (As shown above, it costs LIRR riders more than $125 for a monthly pass between any station in the system and New York City—including for trips within NYC). So do most monthly fares for the private and NJ Transit-operated commuter buses that travel into the Port Authority Bus Terminal. In New York City, express bus commuters typically pay at least $200/month (7-day Express Bus MetroCards are $50 each). Also affected would be commuters who ride more than one transit system, such as a person who pays $104 for a monthly MetroCard and $65 for monthly PATH fare.

According to TransitCenter, 15,000 companies in New York City offer the commuter tax transit benefit, and over a half-million employees make use of it.

The six senators from our region—Senators Schumer, Gillibrand, Lautenberg, Menendez, Lieberman, and Blumenthal—have sponsored legislation to permanently increase the transit benefit (S1034/HR2412), and were among a group of 22 senators that had worked to include an extension of benefit parity in the payroll tax extension bill. This ultimately did not happen; efforts to restore the benefit will continue when Congress resumes work next month.

This Friday is the deadline for municipalities to submit letters of interest for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign/One Region Funders’ Group’s Transit-Oriented Development community assistance grant program.

The program provides grants between $10,000 and $50,000 for municipalities interested [...]]]>

Municipalities interested in transit-oriented development: This could be you! (Photo of award ceremony at Stratford, CT.)

This Friday is the deadline for municipalities to submit letters of interest for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign/One Region Funders’ Group’s Transit-Oriented Development community assistance grant program.

The program provides grants between $10,000 and $50,000 for municipalities interested in pursuing equitable transit-oriented development. The grants can be used for planning and public outreach in southwestern Connecticut (Fairfield and New Haven Counties), northern New Jersey (the NJTPA region), Long Island, Westchester County, and New York City.

For more information, download the RFP (request for proposals) on Tri-State’s website or contact Steven Higashide (steven@tstc.org or 212-268-7474).

[Update: On Wednesday, the Senate's Commerce Committee voted to include much of the FREIGHT Act in its portion of the Senate's transportation reauthorization bill. More [...]]]>

A national freight program could help pay for port and rail projects that are central to the region's economy. Photo of Newark-Elizabeth Marine Terminal by Albert E. Theberge/NOAA.

[Update: On Wednesday, the Senate's Commerce Committee voted to include much of the FREIGHT Act in its portion of the Senate's transportation reauthorization bill. More at T4America's blog.]

Among the changes introduced in MAP-21, the Senate’s version of the reauthorization bill which sets all federal surface transportation policy, is an unprecedented national freight program. With some changes, this program could fill the policy vacuum around federal investment in rail and port projects. This would make it easier for states to fund alternatives to long-haul trucks that aggravate congestion, damage roads, and lower quality of life in some residential neighborhoods. But if the program stays as is, it could end up becoming just another funding source for roads, and the tri-state region needs more than that.

Currently, poor connections between the national freight rail network and the northeast mean that 90% of cargo entering New York and Connecticut arrives via truck. Freight rail projects—such as the long-discussed Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel between NJ and NY, as well as smaller projects like those in New York’s State Rail Plan—would take some of these long-haul trucks off of the region’s congested roads, lowering emissions and reducing the heavy toll that trucks take on the region’s roadways  (one 18-wheeler truck causes as much road damage as 9,600 cars, according to the Government Accountability Office). Port projects are also critical, given how central the Port of New York and New Jersey is to both the regional and the national economy.

But while most federal transportation funds are distributed to states according to legislative formulas, no such program exists for freight rail or port projects. Instead, states have had to rely on earmarks (which are being phased out) and a handful of small grant programs. The proposed transportation bill would direct USDOT to designate a national freight network and, moreover, would create a $2.1 billion/year National Freight Program to fund state-level projects that make shipping faster.

In the current version of the Senate’s bill, however, only 10% of the freight program’s funds could be used for rail and maritime projects, and only if USDOT certified that such projects were more cost-effective than a road project. (The sign-off requirement would not apply to road projects). Although states would also be allowed to use up to 10% of another funding program in the bill for freight rail (the Transportation Mobility Program), they clearly wouldn’t have the flexibility they need to invest in the most critical freight projects.

New Jersey elected officials have proposed two fixes to the keep-on-truckin’ ethos. The first, an amendment to MAP-21 from Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), would remove the 10% cap on rail and port projects, remove the USDOT sign-off requirement, and require states to consider environmental impacts on communities when evaluating projects.  The amendment was first offered in the Environment and Public Works Committee, and could be reintroduced when MAP-21 is closer to a full Senate vote.

The second is the FREIGHT Act (S327/HR1338), which was sponsored by Sen. Lautenberg and Rep. Albio Sires. It would expand MAP-21′s freight provisions by:

• Establishing performance-based criteria to evaluate freight projects, so that federal policy incentivizes projects that improve shipping delays and safety, and reduce air, water, and noise pollution.
• Creating a competitive grant program for freight projects. (Read more about the FREIGHT Act on MTR and T4America’s blog.)

The Senate’s Commerce Committee, which handles freight issues, will meet Wednesday and is likely to debate the inclusion of the FREIGHT Act’s provisions in MAP-21.

In June, the NY State Legislature passed “transit lockbox” legislation to make it harder for Albany politicians to redirect money from dedicated transit funds, as has been done in recent years. Months later, [...]]]>

2010 MTA service cuts went into effect after hundreds of millions of dollars were diverted from the budget by Albany.

In June, the NY State Legislature passed “transit lockbox” legislation to make it harder for Albany politicians to redirect money from dedicated transit funds, as has been done in recent years. Months later, the bill (A6766/S4257) has yet to be signed into law — and many are worried that a worsening state budget picture means that dedicated transit funds are at risk again.

Last Monday, the state budget office announced that, due to the weak economy, a $350 million gap had opened up in this year’s budget, and next year’s budget gap had grown to at least $3 billion. Albany politicians set a bad precedent by diverting hundreds of millions of dollars in dedicated MTA taxes for the budget over the past three years. This was one of the factors behind the MTA’s 2010 service cuts — the deepest in decades — which saved the agency less than $100 million.

The lockbox bill would stop such “budget sweeps” by the executive branch. Because the taxes which fund transit (which include a petroleum business tax, real estate taxes, and a downstate payroll tax) are statutorily dedicated, only a constitutional amendment can make them truly ironclad. But the law also includes a disclosure requirement. If the legislature votes to divert transit funds, it must release a “diversion impact statement” that includes the amount of the diversion, the total diversion over the preceding five years, and an estimate of how transit service, maintenance, and security will be affected. This would make it easier for the public to hold elected officials accountable.

Photo: Transportation Nation.

All six of the region’s senators are standing behind legislation to avoid an impending “transit tax hike” that would affect many commuters. Under federal law, commuters can use up to $230/month in pre-tax [...]]]>

Sen. Schumer held a press conference at Grand Central Terminal this month in support of extending tax benefits for transit commuters.

All six of the region’s senators are standing behind legislation to avoid an impending “transit tax hike” that would affect many commuters. Under federal law, commuters can use up to $230/month in pre-tax income to pay for parking (this will rise to $240/month next year due to a cost-of-living adjustment). Since 2009, transit commuters have received a benefit of the same size. But the legislative language setting the benefits equal to each other is set to expire at the end of this year, dropping the transit benefit down to $125/month.

A bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Commuter Benefits Equity Act (S1034/HR2412), would permanently bring the transit benefit up to $240/month. It has been co-sponsored by Senators Gillibrand, Lautenberg, Menendez, Lieberman, and Blumenthal. It was introduced by Rep. McGovern (D-MD) in the House and has 45 co-sponsors, including many from the tri-state region.

“The last thing we should be doing in this economy is making it more expensive for New Yorkers to get to work,” Sen. Schumer said at a Nov. 7 press conference at Grand Central Terminal in NYC.

If the transit benefit drops to $125/month, it would affect many commuters who pay more than that for transit. These include:

• Many commuter rail riders on NJ Transit, the LIRR, Metro-North, and Shore Line East. For example, a monthly pass between Newark Penn Station and Metropark on NJ Transit costs $168, and a monthly LIRR ticket between Hempstead and New York Penn Station costs $223.
• Express bus riders in NYC, who pay $50 per 7-day unlimited MetroCard, or over $200/month.
• Many NJ bus riders on private and NJ Transit lines commuting to the Port Authority Bus Terminal. For example, a monthly bus pass between NYC and Cresskill, NJ (in Bergen County) is $183.
• Those using multiple forms of public transit, such as a Jersey City resident who pays $65/month for the PATH rail system and also needs a $104 monthly MetroCard to commute to work in NYC.

Human resources departments throughout the region have already begun receiving notices that they should begin planning for the expiration of the benefit. TransitCenter has launched a website, CommuterBenefitsWorkForUs.com, where citizens can contact members of Congress on the issue.

Photo: Natasja Sheriff/Transportation Nation.

Today the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and the One Region Funders’ Group announced they would accept proposals for a second round of their community assistance [...]]]>

Stratford, CT was awarded $50,000 in the initial TSTC/One Region grant program in spring 2009. It was able to build upon that grant, winning a $250,000 state grant this year.

Today the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and the One Region Funders’ Group announced they would accept proposals for a second round of their community assistance grant program to help municipalities develop more equitable, sustainable, and transit-friendly communities. (Download the Request for Proposals here.)

The program intends to encourage transit oriented development, or mixed use development within a half-mile of a train or bus station, by offering financial support to municipalities ready to address the linkages between affordable housing, energy efficiency and equitable development near transit stations. Up to ten small grants will be awarded to communities in downstate New York (specifically Westchester County, Long Island, and New York City), Connecticut (with a preference given to municipalities in Fairfield and New Haven Counties), and northern New Jersey.

The grant initiative builds upon an initial set of philanthropic investments awarded by the One Region Funders’ Group in the spring of 2009. Several projects awarded funding in that initial round of grants have been able to leverage additional state and federal funds. In 2011, Wyandanch Rising (Babylon, NY) received a $2 million federal transportation grant, and Ronkonkoma Hub (Brookhaven, NY) was endorsed by U.S. Senator Charles Schumer. Both were also named “transformative” projects by the Long Island Economic Development Council, and will compete for state economic development funds. Stratford, CT received a $250,000 state TOD grant this year.

Representatives from many of the foundations which make up the One Region Funders’ Group expressed excitement about the program and hope that the successes of the first round would be repeated.

“We’ve seen during this recession that having to rely on a car can cause financial hardship and even price residents out of their neighborhoods,” said Karen Brown, vice president for programs at the Fairfield County Community Foundation. “This grant program will help build places where residents have affordable, convenient housing and transportation choices.”

“Equitable transit oriented development is an integral tool to combat suburban sprawl and stop the destruction of open space,” said Helen Chin, program officer at the Surdna Foundation. “These grants will help create diverse neighborhoods that offer convenient access to jobs, stores, schools, and services for people regardless of their income, race, age, or ability.”

“Investing in our downtowns and around transit hubs keeps dollars on Main Street and keeps the cost of public services low,” said Nicole Chevalier, program director at the Emily Hall Tremaine Foundation. “This program will fund projects that are smart both for the environment and for Connecticut communities’ bottom line.”

“More and more communities have learned that strong downtowns with good transit access help quality of life, and are especially attractive to young people and empty nesters,” said Catherine Marsh, executive director of the Westchester Community Foundation. “This program will strengthen and revitalize our important town centers.”

“These projects form the foundation of the funders’ collaborative work to promote sustainable and equitable development around transit hubs throughout the region,” said Pat Jenny, program director for Community Development and the Environment at the New York Community Trust. “We are interested in repeating the success of the first round of grant in promoting diverse and walkable residential communities.”

“We were proud to award grants to Wyandanch Rising and Ronkonkoma Hub during the first round of grants, two transit oriented development projects that can be game changers for the Long Island region,” said Sol Marie Alfonso-Jones, program officer at the Long Island Community Foundation.  “It is encouraging to see local leaders build upon this investment by winning state and federal grants and endorsements.”

The RFP and press release are available on TSTC’s website.

Image: Stratford, CT.

The 2-year transportation reauthorization bill released by the Senate’s Environment and Public [...]]]> [Update: The reauthorization bill was adopted by the EPW Committee today on an 18-0 vote, with one package of amendments adopted. Importantly, the CMAQ "reserve fund" that is a (more-or-less) dedicated source for bike/ped funding can no longer pay for road projects.]

The 2-year transportation reauthorization bill released by the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee late Friday night includes several promising reforms that would help focus State DOTs on repair and safety, and for the first time would dedicate money to a freight program. It appears to maintain the conventional 80/20 split between roads and public transit. But the bill, which is known as MAP-21, would cut bike and pedestrian funding by 30% and as currently written would allow states to transfer bike/ped funding for wetlands mitigation. The EPW Committee began work on the bill today.

The Senate's transportation reauthorization bill would greatly consolidate programs. (Click to view larger version of graphic on T4America's website.)

The bill, known as MAP-21, completely eliminates earmarks and consolidates federal transportation programs from 90 to 30 (a summary is available from T4America). There would be five core programs:

• National Highway Performance Program ($20.6B/year) – Focused on the National Highway System. Importantly, it includes performance measures to incentivize road and bridge repair. Sixty percent of funds would be required to be used for repair. States not meeting federal road and bridge standards would have to use an additional 30% for repair or face financial penalties.
• Transportation Mobility Program ($10.4B) – the successor to the Surface Transportation Program, this would be a highly flexible program for roads, transit, bike/ped, and (for the first time) freight rail.
• Highway Safety Improvement Program ($2.5B) – This existing program is intended to improve safety. It requires states to collect extensive crash data and develop strategic safety plans.
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality ($3.3B) – This existing program, focused on reducing air pollution, would become the new home for a smaller bike and pedestrian fund; see below.
• National Freight Program ($2.1B) – This new program would pay for road projects with a freight focus; up to 10% could go to freight rail and ports.

The bill would essentially cut bike and pedestrian funding by 30%. It would do away with the dedicated Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School, and Recreational Trails programs. Instead, those uses would be paid for by a “reserve” or “Additional Activities” fund under the CMAQ program. This fund (which pays for all three of those programs) would be $833 million, the same size as Transportation Enhancements alone in 2009.

Furthermore, Transportation Enhancements could be used to pay for certain types of wetlands mitigation. This expensive use could crowd out spending on bike and pedestrian improvements. The bill would also allow states to “opt out”; by not spending reserve funds for 18 months, a state could then use the funds for other CMAQ projects.

In addition, the bill expands the TIFIA innovative financing program to $1 billion a year and includes some measures to speed up project delivery.

Several amendments to the bill are expected to be offered today on topics including bike/ped funding, freight, and passenger rail. None are expected to pass, but they could reappear later if the bill reaches the Senate floor.

It may be some time before that happens. The Senate’s EPW Committee has jurisdiction over road, bridge, and bicycle and pedestrian funding. If the committee passes a bill, it would then go to the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, which deals with public transit. The Commerce Committee would complete the bill by writing the parts on freight rail, passenger rail, and USDOT’s “discretionary” programs like the innovative TIGER grant program. And paying for the bill is up to the Finance Committee, which has not yet found a way to do so. Beyond that, the House wants to pay for its 6-year transportation bill with oil-drilling fees, a proposal with little shot of passing the Senate.

Graphic: Via Transportation for America.