Got Transit Troubles? The Problem Could Be the Chain of Command

Boston's MBTA enjoys unique consolidation, but that hasn't spared it from grave funding challenges. Photo: Eno
Boston’s MBTA consolidates the entire region’s transit network, but that hasn’t spared it from grave funding challenges. Photo: Eno

If you still have to juggle multiple farecards for the various transit systems in your area — or if urgent maintenance issues in the city core are going unattended while the suburbs get a shiny new station — the problem might run deeper than the incompetence everyone is grumbling about. The root of it all might be embedded in the very structure of the agencies that govern your transit system.

Last year, infighting among members of Chicago’s Regional Transportation Authority about how to distribute funds led the agency to seek outside help. A team of researchers, including the Eno Center for Transportation, came to try to figure out what the trouble was. “It soon became clear that RTA did not actually have a funding distribution problem,” Eno wrote in its report.

In fact, the authors concluded, RTA had a governance problem, which in turn had far-reaching consequences beyond funding battles: Governance issues impeded RTA’s ability to coordinate regional transit services and investments and contributed to “chronic underinvestment” in Chicago’s transit network.

The Chicago area is home to three major transit operators: the Chicago Transit Authority, Metra (a regional rail agency), and Pace (a suburban bus agency), all members of the RTA. While the RTA has the power to distribute funding, that’s about all it can do. Even those funding decisions are largely based on outdated formulas set by the state. When there is some money that RTA has the discretion to allocate as it chooses, bitter disputes ensue among the three agencies — disputes like the one Eno and company were called in to mediate.

The RTA doesn’t coordinate or steer Chicago’s transit providers, so all three essentially operate separate fiefdoms. “The inherent problem is that RTA occupies an ambiguous middle ground where it is powerful enough to create challenges and bureaucracy, but not powerful enough to be productive in pursuing regional goals,” reports Eno. The Chicago officials and transit experts Eno interviewed wanted to see RTA either strengthened or eliminated, but they agreed the status quo is not productive, leading to jurisdictional battles without building regional partnerships.

Meanwhile, the state is all but absent in Chicago transit governance, which Eno says is “shortsighted” when “transit has such a large impact on the economic success of the state.” Aside from helping with coordination and regional visioning, the state could be providing needed funds.

Intrigued by the findings in Chicago, Eno then partnered with TransitCenter to study five other cities to see how transit governance structures affect operations.

Here’s a cheat sheet before we go on:

Transit governance structures in the six cities studied by Eno and TransitCenter. Image: Eno Center for Transportation
Transit governance structures in the six cities studied by Eno and TransitCenter. Image: Eno Center for Transportation

Boston’s transit system is the only one of these five where everything is consolidated under one roof: the state-controlled Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA). State control works for Boston in a way it might not work for other cities, Eno says, since Boston is the only large metro area in the state and houses the great majority of its population and economic activity. The upside is a much greater level of coordination than in Chicago; the downside is that local governments are alienated from the process.

Dallas has the longest rail transit system in the country by mileage, but poor land use has prevented it from being a particularly successful system. Other Texas quirks also hinder Dallas/Fort Worth, like the state prohibition on local areas taxing themselves for transit, and the fact that the state has completely removed itself from any role in transit funding or planning. The effect of those limitations is that it’s almost impossible for new jurisdictions to decide to become part of the transit network, despite rapid population growth.

The powerful North Central Texas Council of Governments runs the show, enjoying a usually-cordial relationship with the DART transit agency. But NCTCOG isn’t planning for development and growth in ways that complement transit, and that will make it hard for transit to capture new residents. As a result, the region’s population growth is likely to lead to more driving and highway expansion.

Transit in Minneapolis/St. Paul, on the other hand, is guided jointly by the Met Council — which is unique in the United States in being both the regional planning agency and the primary transit operator — and the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB), which is the primary funder of transit expansion and improvement.

Combining planning with transit management at the Met Council has its benefits, since the agency can coordinate land use and transit initiatives. The Met Council also coordinates suburban transit operators that do exist to prevent redundancies.

CTIB was created by the state legislature after the governor vetoed a bill that would have increased surface transportation investment in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse and allowed counties to levy sales taxes to invest in fixed rail transit. The veto was overridden, and the legislature’s ensuing creation of CTIB was a direct challenge to Governor Tim Pawlenty’s authority over transit decisions. Even under more transit-friendly administrations, the CTIB governance structure has proven useful, insulates transit from the changing winds of state politics.

In New York, the governor’s outsized role has meant more attention to suburban areas and a chronic underfunding of core system needs, as Stephen Miller at Streetsblog NYC reported last week in his coverage of a panel featuring Eno’s Joshua Schank and TransitCenter’s David Bragdon.

A further challenge for a region that straddles New York, New Jersey, and the Hudson River is the inability to coordinate effectively over state lines. One lesson other regions can learn from New York, on the other hand, is that both the MTA and the Port Authority, which is jointly run by the governors of the two states, benefit enormously from operating tolled roads and bridges that cross-subsidize transit.

Last but not least, the San Francisco Bay Area has an enviably well-maintained system and a nearly universal fare card. Eno suggests that these benefits were derived largely from having one regional agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), with enough planning and funding authority to make good decisions for the entire region.

“For a region with 26 operators and a spectrum of transit needs, MTC appears to be effective at coordinating and distributing funds for capital investments and operations without causing major political disruptions,” Eno writes.

MTC is also one of the few regional agencies in the countries to effectively use performance metrics to govern funding decisions, and like New York, it uses its surplus toll revenue to fund transit. While Eno notes that the state role could and should be stronger, the MTC has done an impressive job managing an unwieldy transit network.

It’s hard to draw many hard and fast conclusions from case studies so varied. Clearly, no region is run perfectly, but several have developed aspects of governance that help deliver better transit and development.

And as much as the structure of an agency matters, Bragdon told the crowd at last week’s panel, leadership matters even more. “The right people can make a flawed structure work, but the wrong people can ruin a perfectly good structure,” he said. “Good governance can increase the probability of good governing, but it’s certainly no guarantee of it. We need to be recruiting and constantly training leaders who make those structures work, whatever those structures are.”

  • Wait, the SF Bay Area’s hodgepodge of 26 transit orgs actually works BETTER than other major U.S. metro regions??

    And here I complain about the lack of point-of-use Clipper card vending and refill everywhere but in BART stations… (Seriously, why don’t even Caltrain and/or VTA light rail stations have Clipper vending/refill machines? “Go to a nearby Walgreens” is not an acceptable solution.)

  • Seeing NE Illinois’ so-called “Transit Agencies” in action, is like watching the beloved “Three Stooges” in an exceptionally silly and stupid short comedy clip.

  • Ian Turner

    Regarding SF’s fare card, it’s worth noting that the MTC spent over $100 million developing the system.

  • Anne A

    Yes, the same silly and stupid clip repeated many times over the course of decades, to the point where it stopped being funny a long time ago.

  • S M A R T Lady — W O W !

  • Eric S

    Dallas has the longest rail transit system in the USA – what? Maybe the longest light rail system, but not the longest rail transit system.

  • dk12

    Boston desperately needs expanded subway service in the southern and southwestern part of the city (would solve several efficiency problems in one neighborhood in particular) – but since these areas have the least amount of clout in the statehouse, it hasn’t been seen as a priority – even though this expansion has been on the books since the 1940s, and this expansion might help with the housing crisis.

    Other big issue in Boston is that several different agencies control roadways (DCR, MassDOT, MBTA, and the city – which can also be up to three different departments) – trying to coordinate between all the agencies can be very painful, and unless a handful of the main ped/bike advocacy groups are involved and guiding the process, you often will end up with horribly dated and dangerous road design.

  • Little Nipper

    LMAO – how your comment defines the reality of NE Illinois “Transit Agencies”

  • Anne A

    Are you always a jerk, or is this a special occasion?

  • WHY am I a jerk, I said she was smart – you have a problem with that?

  • SuperQ

    The point of the study is that with 26 transit orgs, having clipper at all is amazing. The cost of clipper, and the implementation details are a little crap, but it’s still better than not having clipper at all.

    Then again, if the bay area didn’t have 26 transit orgs, and was more centrally run, the clipper card wouldn’t have been done so badly.

    Lemonaid from lemons is the phrase I’m thinking about here.

  • neroden

    Cambridge and Somerville are also in need of expanded rail service yesterday — though the Green Line Extension is finally happening, after an *over-20-year* delay. The state unfortunately has prioritized outer suburbs.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Eno: Stop Obsessing Over the Gas Tax and Change How We Fund Transpo

|
Twenty years ago, Japan’s electoral reform redistributed power, giving urban constituencies a greater voice. One result: Japan eliminated its version of the Highway Trust Fund, which urban voters saw as satisfying the interests of the construction lobby, not their own. If city-dwellers had a greater voice in the United States, would the same thing happen? […]

Today’s Headlines

|
Transportation for America on Trump Transit Cuts: “This Is Not a Big City Thing” (Next City) Atlanta Transit Could Lose Out on $3 Billion If Trump Cuts New Starts and TIGER (AJC) Self-Driving Buses: Cool, But Not Yet Cheap (or Tested) Enough to Be a Real Solution (Eno) When It Comes to Access to Transit, Poorer Parts […]

Funding Mass Transit Security After Bin Laden

|
The demise of Osama Bin Laden has transit officials across the country preparing their agencies for possible retaliatory attacks. In Washington, Mayor Vincent Gray informed constituents via Twitter that “users will see an increase in # of officers throughout [Metro] system (trains & buses).” In New York, a spokesperson announced MTA had “increased security at […]

Six Lies the GOP Is Telling About the House Transportation Bill

|
The transportation-plus-drilling bill that John Boehner and company are trying to ram through the House is an attack on transit riders, pedestrians, cyclists, city dwellers, and every American who can’t afford to drive everywhere. Under this bill, all the dedicated federal funding streams for transit, biking, and walking would disappear, leading to widespread service cuts […]