Sam Tepperman- Gelfant Public Advocates Inc. October 18, 2013 ENVISIONING EQUITABLE AND SUSTAINABLE REGIONS

1.History and Context – Sprawl and Inequity 2.San Francisco Bay Area – Envisioning and Advocating for A Better Future 3.Tools for Linking Transportation and Land Use OVERVIEW 2 2

 Challenging the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination since  Strengthening community voices and achieving tangible legal victories  Advancing SOCIAL EQUITY in areas such as:  Education  Housing  Transit PUBLIC ADVOCATES INC. Vital building blocks of thriving communities 3

1 SUSTAINABILITY AND SOCIAL EQUITY: HISTORY & CHALLENGES 4 4

Legislative goals:  Decrease sprawl  Increase TOD/Infill  People drive less  …decreasing GHG emissions SB 375: SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND CLIMATE PROTECTION ACT OF

 Calls for GHG reduction targets  Integrates disjointed regional planning processes  Regional Transportation Plan  State Mandated Affordable Housing Plans, Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) …to create Sustainable Communities Strategy SB 375 SCS Transit Housing 6

7 History shows us that climate change, sprawl, and social equity issues share common origins 7

BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION 8

WHITE FLIGHT TO SUBURBS 9

DISMANTLING OF LOCAL TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE 10

CREATED UNSUSTAINABLE PATTERNS... 11

... THAT PERSIST TODAY 12

A HISTORY OF INVESTMENT... WITH DISPLACEMENT

DISPLACEMENT TODAY 14

 Median home price = $555,000 (on the way back to $700k+)  5+ minimum wage jobs needed to afford 2-bedroom apartment in most SF neighborhoods  Oakland lost 1/3 of African American population between 1990 and 2010  7 out of the 10 cities with highest African American population % are in in suburbs & exurbs  Marin County: 80% white (region: 52.5% white) SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: HOUSING 15

 Fare hikes and service cuts in transit  Households earning $20-50k devote 63% of budget to housing & transportation (highest % in U.S.) SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: TRANSIT 16 Subsidies and Race of Riders

2 ADVOCATING FOR SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE REGIONS 17

 28-Year Transportation (RTP) and Land Use Plan  $292 Billion in Transportation Investments  2.1 Million Projected New Residents  Planning Process Began in 2010; Plan Adopted July 18, 2013 THE BAY AREA’S SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY 18

6 BIG WINS FOR SOCIAL EQUITY 19 Community Power Investment Without Displacement Affordable Housing Economic Opportunity Healthy & Safe Communities Local Transit Service 19

 Leading with Social Equity  Embracing a Range of Issues as Interconnected  Marrying Grassroots and Policy Organizations  Tackling Regional Systems, both Regionally and Locally STRUCTURING FOR SUCCESS 20

Photo credit: Paloma Pavel

 Distribute Housing Growth Equitably: Increase quality affordable housing options in both urban areas and suburban job centers  Protect against Displacement: Ensure that lower-income communities are not displaced by TOD by regional grant incentives (OBAG)  Improve Local Transit Service: Fund more of the local transit service on which low- income riders of color depend COMMUNITY VISION: POLICY PRIORITIES 22

LOW-INCOME IN-COMMUTERS 23

regionalchange.ucdavis.edu/jo bshousingfit20 11 JOBS- HOUSING FIT 24

 Investments and incentives strengthen and stabilize communities vulnerable to gentrification and displacement  Plan based on community-identified needs  Protect existing tenants and apartments  Build new affordable housing  Link economic development to local workforce capacity & development  Strengthen local public transit  Promote and protect neighborhood-serving retail and services  Track key indicators to detect gentrification and displacement before it’s too late investment-without-displacement ACHIEVING INVESTMENT WITHOUT DISPLACEMENT 25

LOCAL TRANSIT: THE LIFE BLOOD OF TRANSPORTATION 26

TRANSIT OPERATIONS:CO-BENEFITS 27 Every $10 million in transit operating investments yields $32 million in increased business sales. $1 dollar in service cuts resulting from operating deficits yields $10 in local economic harms, from lost wages and productivity and increased transportation costs. Taking public transit instead of driving on a 20-mile round trip work commute saves 4,800 lbs CO2/year – 10% of annual GHG emissions for a two-person two- car household. 27

INEQUITABLE TRANSIT INVESTMENTS

SUSTAINABLE PLANNING FOR WHOM? 29 Low-income households will be spending over 74% of their incomes on H+T 36% of households in “communities of concern” will be at high risk of displacement. 29

2012: STUDYING THE EEJ 30

 Strongest shift to non-auto travel  165,00 more transit boardings per day  83,000 fewer cars on the road  3.5 million fewer miles of auto travel per day  Greatest reduction in GHG and toxic air pollutants  1,900 fewer tons of CO 2 emissions per day  568,000 fewer tons of GHG emissions per year  Energy savings equivalent to 600,000 gal. of gas/day  Better for working families  42% lower risk of displacement  Lower H+T cost  Shorter commute times 2013: EEJ DECLARED THE “ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE” 31

Education and Advocacy Day Broadening Support DATA + ORGANIZING = CHANGE Media & Communications Turnout & Testimony

KEY IMPROVEMENTS WON  Improvements to One Bay Area Grant program to link to local affordable housing and anti-displacement policies and reward local affordable housing approvals.  Commitment to inclusive regional public process to allocate Cap & Trade Revenues with at least 25% going to benefit disadvantaged communities  First ever commitment by MTC to develop a “comprehensive strategy” to focus on funding transit operations and maintenance  Studies of labor policies and best practices 33

 Progressive groups provide strong organizing and political mobilization in face of vocal right-wing anti- planning contingent  Substantial equity problems remain  Housing growth concentrated in low-income areas  Insufficient funding programmed to maintain (or expand) local transit HIGH LEVEL OUTCOMES 34

3 TOOLS FOR LINKING TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE 35

 Weighting Social Equity Factors in Allocation of Transit Expansion Funds  The Land Use rating factor includes the proportion of existing “legally binding affordability restricted” housing within 1⁄2-mile of proposed station areas to the proportion of “legally binding affordability restricted” housing in the counties through which the project will travel.  The Economic Development Effects factor includes “plans and policies to maintain or increase affordable housing” in the project corridor.  The Mobility Improvements rating factor assesses the number of incremental trips taken on the proposed project, and assigns additional weight to “transit-dependent persons.” FTA NEW STARTS CRITERIA, AUGUST

 The Challenge: how to work regionally on advancing local policies  One solution: use regionally administered funds to incentivize local jurisdictions to enact equitable and sustainable policies BUILDING A BETTER CARROT: THE ONE BAY AREA GRANT PROGRAM 37

 The Implementation: The One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) program  $320 Million over 4 years ($14.6 billion over 28 years)  HCD-certified Housing Element required  50-70% of funding to Priority Development Areas  Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization policies used as evaluation criteria  Project selection and funding done at the county level REQUIREMENTS & INCENTIVES: THE ONE BAY AREA GRANT 38

 Tying regional competitive funds to local affordable housing and anti-displacement policies incentivizes a race to the top  In the first round of OBAG funding, local grants were contingent on local adoption of a state-certified housing element  Relatively small amounts incentivized the worst actors in the region to adopt affordable housing plans OBAG Lessons and Next Steps 39

Sam Tepperman-Gelfant Senior Staff Attorney, Public Advocates Inc. Facebook: PublicAdvocates THANK YOU! 40