Public Transit: What Are Our Goals?

Published in the Goleta Valley Voice and in the Sierra Club Condor Call Newspapers

by Robert Bernstein

Bus service is a hot topic. Community members turned out en masse for a recent MTD board meeting to discuss how to deal with MTD’s bus service budget deficit.

On one side were commuters who have been leaving their cars at home and riding the bus. They were willing to accept an increase in fares if it meant maintaining or improving the quality of service. For these people, their time is worth far more than any reasonable fare increase.

On the other side are the transit dependent working poor who cannot tolerate any fare increase without having to give up food, clothing or other necessities.

As one speaker articulated, the real questions should be: What are the real goals we are trying to achieve? How much will it cost? Who should pay for this?

Under Sierra Club policy, there are several goals public transit should achieve.

Most obviously, to “provide everyone […] with adequate access to jobs, shopping, services and recreation.”

From an environmental standpoint, the goal is to “minimize the impacts on and use of land, airspace and waterways, minimize the consumption of limited resources, including fuel, and reduce pollutant and noise emissions”.

With the global consensus on the need to reduce global climate change, these environmental goals have an urgency that was previously ignored.

In order to achieve these environmental benefits, it is necessary to replace existing private motor vehicle use with transit. And that means providing a level of service that is competitive with existing private motor vehicle use in terms of time and money.

In terms of time, land use planning has a major impact on the feasibility of transit. Many people complain that they would ride the bus if only there were good bus service in their neighborhood. These people often fail to realize that they may be living in areas that are laid out in a way that makes transit impractical. Low-density suburban or exurban sprawl inherently creates a forced dependence on private motor vehicle use.

People individually can choose to live in less sprawling locations. And they can demand future development be concentrated along transit corridors. Sprawling land use can be altered in future planning with in-fill development along such corridors.

However, money also can be used to reduce time spent in public transit. Additional buses can be added to provide express service as well as to provide more frequent service and service later into the evening.

Even better, innovative “Bus Rapid Transit” (BRT) systems can provide almost taxi-level service with the cost and environmental benefits of conventional transit. But it takes money to make such a system happen.

In terms of money, private motor vehicle use is heavily subsidized in the US. Far more than public transit. Which also relates back to the question of how much we should pay to achieve the goals we agree upon. And who should pay to achieve these goals.

The MTD board hearing was pitting transit riders against each other for limited financial resources. But money is really limited by our priorities and by our framing of the debate.

Global climate change is forecast to result in trillions of dollars of disruptions. Passing peak oil is likely to cost comparable amounts without sustainable planning. Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent each year subsidizing private motor vehicle use in the US as documented on the Sierra Club web site.

And a system of forced automobile dependency strands tens of millions of Americans who do not have the option to drive. Their time and lives are given no value in the current system.

The question should not be whether to cut transit service versus increasing fares.

The question should be: Will we proactively spend the money to create a transit system that really works for everyone, so that no one is forced to depend on private motor vehicle use? And will we charge those whose behavior is unsustainable in order to fund a sustainable transportation system for everyone else?

Robert Bernstein is Environmental Justice Chair for the Sierra Club -- Santa Barbara Group