Restrictive legislation. Being forced to compete with larger systems for funds. Sacrificing new technology just to stay afloat. Playing guessing games with fuel prices. Coping with growing paratransit demands. Transit systems serving small populations are by no means off the hook when it comes to challenges.

Low revenues, few grants
Yakima, Wash.'s Yakima Transit, which serves about 110,000 residents, is located in a rural part of the state and relies heavily on grants to replace vehicles, but has seen those opportunities dry up.

"Grant funds haven't been out there as much," Kevin Futrell, project planner, Yakima Transit, says. "Part of me thinks a lot of the funding goes to the bigger cities, because [with] a lot more people there, congestion is a lot more noticeable, obviously."

Dave Kilmer, executive director, Red Rose Transit says his agency is also having a more difficult time obtaining grants.

"Before, it was a matter of having members of Congress that understood the game and would go after earmarks," he explains. "Now, it's challenging writing grant proposals to go after discretionary funding and competing with every other system that has just as many needs, particularly the larger systems."

Futrell adds the combination of the convenience of the service and a low tax base make it hard to continue to provide service at a level that will help it reach its potential as the city grows. Necessary infrastructure — buildings, bus pullouts, bus shelters, etc. — have to be overlooked because there are other more pressing issues, such as replacing an aging bus fleet. State and federal agencies awarding funds also consider the population being served and often pass over smaller agencies in support of large systems that serve a much greater number of people.

Kilmer agrees that it is difficult for small systems to obtain the amount of capital funding needed  to tackle large projects, such as facility expansions or renovations of older facilities.

Additionally, Yakima Transit has experienced resistance from taxpayers to justify the service, because it is mostly used by low-income residents.
"Smaller service areas tend to be more conservative, and as a result, focus on reducing public services to reduce taxes," Futrell says.

Street congestion in the area isn't noticeable, he explains, so public transportation isn't considered as an alternative to driving. As a result of having fewer passengers, there are fewer buses on routes and fewer trip options available, making the service seem unnecessary or inconvenient.

Voters aren't likely to vote for sales tax increases for public transportation when they have that feeling, Futrell adds. With a large area to cover and a low tax base, it is harder to have the funds to replace vehicles, and to some extent, continue service at levels that would make the service convenient.

There's also the difficulty of planning service levels year to year, especially when agencies are operating on continuing resolutions and extensions, rather than having a full reauthorization program in place, Kilmer says. States are consistently getting socked with lower revenues because of the economy, and the trend seems to be to shift the responsibility down to the local level, which has just as many revenue issues, but fewer options for raising them.

"Unfortunately, I do see things getting increasingly more difficult for funding public transit as Congress and state legislatures continue to focus on politics and not policy," Kilmer says. "I always want to feel optimistic that one day we will actually have an energy policy that really understands the benefits of public transit for reducing dependence on foreign oil and makes transit a priority rather than using the automobile."

Kilmer adds that Red Rose plans to deal with the instability by continuing to advise customers and local funding agencies of the level of service it can sustain and let them decide how much service the community is willing to support.

"We will continue to focus on reducing operating costs as best we can, but in the end, fare increases and service cuts will rule the day," he says.[PAGEBREAK]

Hyannis, Mass.-based Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority recently switched operations to MV Transportation, restructured its dial-a-ride fare system and started a multimodal committee to become more efficient.

Hyannis, Mass.-based Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority recently switched operations to MV Transportation, restructured its dial-a-ride fare system and started a multimodal committee to become more efficient.

Legislation obstacle
In an effort to get more budget wiggle-room, transit agencies in small- and medium-sized cities have introduced legislation to federal lawmakers to change part of a law in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) — Title 49 — that restricts how they can use federal grants if they grow too large.
The policy states that federal transit dollars can no longer be used for operating costs, only capital costs, when an "urbanized area" grows past the 200,000 population threshold. The restrictions will force some communities to reduce service by 15% to 30%.

To counter the law, members of the 100 Bus Coalition and other advocates have proposed the Transit System Flexibility Protection Act of 2011 (HR 3545). The act would provide small transit systems more flexibility in using their federal funds.

HR 3545 would let small transit systems with 75 vehicles or less — which reflects about 99% of all the 100 Bus Coalition members — use 50% of its federal 5307 funds to operate bus service. Those with 75 to 100 buses could access 25%, and those with over 100 would not get to use the funds. As agencies get larger, they get to tap more funds from the preventive maintenance category to make up for the loss of operating funds.

On Dec. 1, 2011, Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-PA) introduced the bill amending Title 49, and it was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Senate Banking Committee plans to use the same language in their corresponding bill.

Some coalition member agencies have already been impacted by their population growth as demonstrated by the 2010 Census results, including his own, says Kilmer.

"Our biggest issue is we don't operate enough vehicles or facilities to justify enough money under the preventive maintenance category to make up for what we lost in operating," Kilmer says.

As a result of the most recent Census, there could be another 86 transit agencies serving populations that could rise over 200,000, but may not be able to get operations funding, Kilmer adds.

When the law was introduced in 1996, the original theory was that transit systems in urbanized areas with populations over 200,000 should be able to get all their operating assistance from local sources. However, the average size of systems currently in the category run only, on average, 34 peak buses, Kilmer explains.

"Congressman Pitts, a very conservative Republican, led this charge every time we've needed him to," Kilmer says. "He believes if we're going to give them federal money, let them decide how best to use it."

"We're not asking for more money. We just want the flexibility to use what we already get," Kilmer adds. "We always make the argument that we'll be able to buy buses, we just can't operate them. Now, all of our money will have to go to the capital and...if I cut service by 20%, obviously I won't need as many buses."

"We're saying 50% of those funds are all we need, or less, in most cases. Everybody seems to be in agreement with that," says another 100 Bus Coalition member agency head, John Wilson, GM, Citibus, based in Lubbock, Texas.

Citibus is currently limited to 50% of the 2002 5307 allocations for operations, which equals $969,714.

"When they do a reauthorization bill, if this language is not in there, we would lose that and would have to cut service drastically," Wilson says.

"Without this operating assistance, we would have a lot less service than we have today. A lot of passengers would be without the service they depend on to get to work, school and everything else they need transportation for."
If the legislation is passed, Lancaster, Calif.'s Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA) would have more flexibility to spend 50% of its $4.5 million in federal 5307 funds. Currently, the agency can use about $1.1 million of these funds to pay for operating expenses, but even this option will go away eventually if the legislation is not passed.

"HB 3545 is in dire need of co-sponsorship by a California Representative and it is gratifying to know we are strongly supported," says Julie Austin, executive director, AVTA.

Agency officials recently met with Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA) to encourage him to be the first California Representative to co-sponsor the legislation.

To view agency profiles and more, click here.

About the author
Nicole Schlosser

Nicole Schlosser

Former Executive Editor

Nicole was an editor and writer for School Bus Fleet. She previously worked as an editor and writer for Metro Magazine, School Bus Fleet's sister publication.

View Bio
0 Comments