|
Last Update:
11/14/2006
| |
Public Transportation: A Quality of Life Issue
A Fact Sheet made possible by the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation March 26, 1998
By Sheila Holbrook-White
Public transportation is not merely an urban
nor a rural issue. It's a quality of life issue.
Nearly 700,000 Alabamians are defined as
"transportation-disadvantaged." (Highway Department data; Alabama House-Senate Joint
Committee on Rural Transportation, 1996.)
In 1996, according to the FTA, one in 14 rural
households was car-less. (Community Transportation Association of America, 1997; Federal
Transit Administration. (FTA) The Status of
Public Transportation in Rural America, 1996.)
Currently, 17 counties, with over a fourth of the
state's population, are not served by fixed route
transit systems. Most of these counties are rural,
but the list also includes Mobile, Montgomery,
and Tuscaloosa, which have city transit systems
that can't deliver residents to jobs outside the city
limits. (See Arise map, "Counties Without Fixed
Route Bus Systems.")  (Federal Highway Administration; Alabama Department of Public Health,
"County Profiles, Alabama Vital Events, Volume
4." December, 1997.)
Where public transportation is available in rural
areas, the populations using these services are
among those most at risk for poverty and isolation. According to the FTA, 62% of riders were
women; 36% were elderly (although the elderly
account for less than 18% of the total rural population); and 24% were disabled. (Community
Transportation Association of America, 1997
(CTAA); FTA. Status in Rural)
Rural transit providers surveyed by the FTA reported that employment and human service agencies were the leading destinations for rural riders.
One fifth of all trips were work-related; 17% provided access to human services, including nutrition programs; and 14% were connected to health
care. Providers reported that most passengers en
route to health care facilities were elderly or disabled. (CTAA, 1997; FTA Status in Rural )
47% of urban riders are "unable to drive" because
of "physical disability." (CTAA, 1997)
Primarily because of disinvestment and funding cuts, metropolitan transit systems are unable to serve many of their potential customers because of "spatial mismatch."
Because of a lack of coordinated service or limited
geographic reach for routes, a phenomenon known
as "spatial mismatch," many of those who need
transportation most urgently -- particularly to
commute to work -- are unable to use existing
services. The FTA estimates that two-thirds of
new jobs are in the suburbs, while three in four
welfare recipients and low-income families live in
rural areas or central cities, often without public
transit access. (S. 1173 National Jobs Access
Program Amendment, "Legislative Findings,"
September, 1997) Consider:
---In Birmingham, buses stop running at 6:00,
with no service on weekends and holidays.
---In Huntsville, buses run to limited areas within Huntsville's city limits, while employers --
also within city limits -- desperately search
for workers in the suburban high-growth,
high-tech corridors.
---Montgomery recently dismantled its fixed
route bus system, converting to a "DART
System." Requests for rides must be made 24
hours in advance; there is no guarantee of
arriving at one's destination on time.
A "free-market" valuation of fares is not an
adequate measure of the value of public transportation.
The American Public Transportation Association
estimates that 54.4% of trips on urban public
transit are for the "purposes of making a living."
(American Public Transportation Association.
December, 1994. "Americans in Transit: A Portrait of Public Transit Passengers.")
Nationally, only 6% of public assistance recipients have personal vehicles. The proportion of
Alabama TANF recipients with cars may be even
lower than the national average, as a family with
assets valued at more than $2,000, including a
car, did not qualify for assistance until recently.
(The new policy allows a family applying for
welfare to keep one car regardless of value.) (Surface Transportation Policy Project. (STPP)
"Access Is A Right." October, 1997; Alabama
Department of Human Resources. Assistance
Payment Manual, Chapter 1: "Eligibility Determination Process." 1001-C: 1-3.)
 The lack of public transportation contributes to
the poor air quality of Jefferson and Shelby Counties, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Birmingham metro area
is in "marginal non-attainment" for air quality and
must reduce its emissions by 9% by 1999. According to the pro-business Applied Research
Center of Alabama (ARCA), at least ten large
employers (including Toyota and Mercedes), representing an estimated 7,000 jobs, $2 billion in
capital investment, and other spin-off industries,
did not site in the metro area because of air quality concerns. ("Dirty Air in Jeffco, Shelby Inspires 'No-Zoner, 97' Outreach." Birmingham
News 5/20/97)
During a legislative hearing on February 4, 1998,
Ray Bass, Chief Engineer of the Transportation
Department, said that because fares only provide
20% of funds used for transit, market principles
prove public transportation to be a poor investment. Mr. Bass did not address the tremendous
subsidies -- generated through tax dollars -- that
highways have received for nearly 40 years. From
1956 until 1991, the federal government guaranteed 90% of funding from the federal fuel tax to
interstate construction. For much of this period,
little or no federal funding was available for public transportation. (STPP, 1997)
Providing money generated by use taxes to
public transportation is appropriate.
Must all gas taxes be spent on highways? It may
make sense to build roads with highway taxes, but
there are other legitimate ways to use this money
to improve transportation in Alabama.
What about our "crumbling infrastructure"? A
study by the Surface Transportation Policy Project and the Environmental Working Group found
that, according to the Federal Highway Administration, only 1.8% of Alabama's highways were
in "poor" or "mediocre" condition in 1996. By
contrast, 47% of Florida's highways, 42% of
North Carolina's, and 28% of Tennessee's highways ranked as "mediocre" or "poor." The argument that our "crumbling" highways require all of
the $440 million generated by use taxes is open to
challenge. Recently, the congressional proposal to
give Alabama another $200 million for highways
has reduced the pressure for in-state highway
spending. (STPP. September, 1997. Crying
Wolf. Washington, D.C.)
Previous Page
|