The Impact of ZEV Adoption on California Transportation Revenue

Former California Governor Jerry Brown set an ambitious target for the state to reach five million zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) by 2030. The policy is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but progress toward this target will also affect future state-generated transportation revenues collected from vehicle owners and operators. A central concern for policymakers is to estimate the magnitude of the revenue impact. We used a simple spreadsheet model to project future transportation revenue in California through 2040 under two scenarios. The first scenario assumes that ZEV ownership continues at its historical rate of net increase, approximately 26,000 vehicles per year (the “low-adoption scenario”). The second scenario assumes that California reaches its goal of five million ZEVs by 2030 (the “high-adoption scenario”). The projections are for light duty vehicles and do not address the possibility that heavy trucks may over time also adopt alternative fuels

The Future of California Transportation Revenue

Stable, predictable, and adequate transportation revenues are needed if California is to plan and deliver an excellent transportation system. This report provides a brief history of transportation revenue policies and potential futures in California. It then presents projections of transportation revenue under the recently enacted Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. Those revenue projections are compared with projections of revenue should SB 1 be repealed by voters in the November 2018 election. State-generated transportation revenues will be higher under SB1 than if the act is repealed. For 2020, the mean projection is that the state will collect $10.4 billion with SB1 in place and$6.6 billion without it, a difference of $3.8 billion. Over time, changes in fuel economy and other factors will change annual revenue By 2040, the mean projection is that the state will collect$8.6 billion with SB1 and $3.4 billion without it, a$5.2 billion difference. The total of all state transportation revenue collected between 2018 and 2040, assuming no other revisions to transportation revenue programs during these years, will be about $100 billion less if SB 1 is repealed than if the law is retained. The final section of the report addresses public attitudes toward transportation tax and fee policies, since future any policy changes must be informed by public willingness to consider revenue increases and opinions about which taxes or fees would be most appropriate

Transportation for an Aging Population: Promoting Mobility and Equity for Low-Income Seniors

This study explores the travel patterns, needs, and mobility problems faced by diverse low-income, inner-city older adults in Los Angeles in order to identify solutions to their mobility challenges. The study draws information from: (1) a systematic literature review of the travel patterns of older adults; (2) a review of municipal policies and services geared toward older adult mobility in six cities; (3) a quantitative analysis of the mobility patterns of older adults in California using the California Household Travel Survey; and (4) empirical work with 81 older adults residing in and around Los Angeles’ inner-city Westlake neighborhood, who participated in focus groups, interviews, and walkabouts around their neighborhood

An Assessment of Performance Measures in the Transportation Development Act

"This report examines the performance measures requirements in California’s Transportation Development Act (TDA) of 1971. The TDA is an important source of funding for the state’s public transit agencies, representing approximately 18 percent of their total (2018) revenue between the TDA’s two funds (LTF and STA). Since the TDA’s passage in 1971, the transit operating environment in California has changed, in some cases dramatically. The state has nearly doubled in population (20.4 million in 1971 to 39.8 million in 2019), traffic has worsened considerably, climate change is now a central public policy focus, and many places around the state are investing heavily in making public transit a viable alternative to driving. Our research examined the TDA’s performance requirements and their effects on the state’s transit operators. We also considered alternative approaches to both transit finance and performance requirements, by studying transit funding programs in 13 other states that invest significant amounts of funding in transit. In brief, we find that the TDA’s use of performance measurements to allocate funding is unusual. The states we studied do not for the most part make funding contingent on performance, thereby avoiding the unproductive and difficult-to-implement “death penalty” (Taylor, 1995) of withholding subsidies for a much-needed public service. In several of the cases analyzed, by contrast, states guarantee specific levels or amounts of funding for transit service.To examine how the TDA’s performance measures are working, we conducted a survey of California transit professionals at agencies and at Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs). That California’s aspirations for transit have evolved over the years is reflected in the frequent loopholes and exemptions the legislature has added to the TDA to give struggling operators more latitude to receive funding in order to meet multiple goals and objectives while staying in compliance with a single cost-effectiveness goal. The extent and frequency with which these exemptions have occurred suggests that the larger aims for public transit, and indeed the goals for the TDA program itself, have evolved, and need to be re-thought holistically, rather than incrementally.Accordingly we offer six recommendations concerning transit performance assessment in the TDA.

Designing and Operating Safe and Secure Transit Systems: Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Abroad, MTI Report 04-05

Public transit systems around the world have for decades served as a principal venue for terrorist acts. Today, transit security is widely viewed as an important public policy issue and is a high priority at most large transit systems and at smaller systems operating in large metropolitan areas. Research on transit security in the United States has mushroomed since 9/11; this study is part of that new wave of research. This study contributes to our understanding of transit security by (1) reviewing and synthesizing nearly all previously published research on transit terrorism; (2) conducting detailed case studies of transit systems in London, Madrid, New York, Paris, Tokyo, and Washington, D.C.; (3) interviewing federal officials here in the United States responsible for overseeing transit security and transit industry representatives both here and abroad to learn about efforts to coordinate and finance transit security planning; and (4) surveying 113 of the largest transit operators in the United States. Our major findings include: (1) the threat of transit terrorism is probably not universal—most major attacks in the developed world have been on the largest systems in the largest cities; (2) this asymmetry of risk does not square with fiscal politics that seek to spread security funding among many jurisdictions; (3) transit managers are struggling to balance the costs and (uncertain) benefits of increased security against the costs and (certain) benefits of attracting passengers; (4) coordination and cooperation between security and transit agencies is improving, but far from complete; (5) enlisting passengers in surveillance has benefits, but fearful passengers may stop using public transit; (6) the role of crime prevention through environmental design in security planning is waxing; and (7) given the uncertain effectiveness of antitransit terrorism efforts, the most tangible benefits of increased attention to and spending on transit security may be a reduction in transit-related person and property crimes

The Impact of the COVID-19 Recovery on California Transportation Revenue: A Scenario Analysis through 2040

The COVID-19 public health emergency has affected every aspect of life in California, reducing social and economic activity. Less activity translates to less travel, and less travel leads to less revenue generated from taxes on motor fuels. As California emerges from the COVID-19 crisis and returns to more normal levels of activity, the state must plan transportation system operations and maintenance in the context of deep uncertainty regarding future revenue. To help decision makers navigate that uncertainty, we used spreadsheet models to estimate the impacts of different economic recovery scenarios from the COVID-19 pandemic on state-generated transportation revenue. Because it is not possible to anticipate future economic conditions, travel volumes, and vehicle markets with certainty, we created six potential economic recovery scenarios and projected future transportation revenue in California through 2040 under each. Scenarios cannot foretell which conditions will predominate in future decades, but scenario analysis helps state officials assess the impact of different economic futures and policy choices, including policies to change the rates of adoption of alternative-fueled vehicles. Key findings include: The projections from the six scenarios demonstrate that California transportation revenue by 2040 could range widely, from as little as $6.5 billion to as much as$10.9 billion, if the assumptions and conditions used to create particular scenarios are realized over time. The cumulative revenue raised between 2020 and 2040 varies by more than $40 billion across the scenarios, from$153 billion to $195 billion. In 2020, taxes on fuels will generate roughly three-quarters of state-generated transportation revenue. By 2040, however, taxes on fuels will generate a much smaller percentage of overall revenue. For example, in four of the six scenarios they generate less than a quarter of revenues

Do Equity and Accountability Get Lost in LOSTs? An Analysis of Local Return Funding Provisions in California’s Local Option Sales Tax Measures for Transportation

This study explores how local return provisions of local option sales taxes (LOSTs) for transportation are allocated and spent to meet local and regional transportation needs. Local return refers to the component of county LOST measures that provides funding directly to municipalities in the county to be used to meet local needs. Local return has become a fixture in LOSTs; 58 LOST measures placed on the ballot in California (as of 2019) that have included local return in their expenditure plan have an average of 35% of revenues dedicated to local return. Local return provisions in the ballot measures often contain guidelines on how a portion of the money should be spent. The allocation of local return funds to localities has rarely been discussed in research, and spending decisions have to our knowledge never been analyzed. This paper conducts a mixed-methods analysis of all LOSTs with local return, relying on ordinances and other public documents related to local return expenditures, and supplemented with interviews with officials in six counties. Findings indicate that local return provisions are crafted to balance the needs of the county across different dimensions, including trying to achieve equity between urban and rural residents, investment in different transportation modes, and meeting both local and regional policy needs. Moreover, significant accountability mechanisms provide regulations to ensure that funds are distributed to and spent by jurisdictions as promised by the measures. Overall, this research finds that local return is a vital part of LOST measures in California, allowing cities to meet local needs ranging from maintenance of local streets to funding for special programs, while simultaneously aligning local investment with regional priorities

Differences in ride-hailing adoption by older californians among types of locations

Ride-hailing services such as Lyft and Uber can complement rides offered by family, friends, paid providers, and public transit. To learn why older adults might wish to use ride-hail, we conducted an online survey of 2,917 California respondents age 55 and older. Participants were asked whether they would value four features hypothesized to be benefits of ride-hailing. We specified binary logit models and used market segmentation to investigate whether there were location-based differences in the use of ride-hailing. Our analysis showed that women, city dwellers, persons with disabilities, and those who rely on others for rides were more open to ride-hailing. Women in suburbs or small town/ rural settings were more likely to ride-hail than their male counterparts for reasons of independence, fear of being lost while driving, or getting help with carrying bags. Urban women, in contrast, were less likely than their male counterparts to ride-hail for these reasons. High-income individuals in suburbs or small town/rural locations were more likely to ride-hail than low-income respondents, while high-income urban residents were less likely to ride-hail. Adoption of ride-hailing services and the reasons for doing so showed strong variability by location even among respondents with similar socio-demographic attributes

Will Ride-Hailing Enhance Mobility for Older Adults? A California Survey

Ride-hailing services such as Lyft and Uber offer a potential mobility option for the growing numbers of aging Californians who risk social and economic isolation if they cannot drive for health or financial reasons. They could also serve older adults who currently have mobility options but would prefer a ride-hailing alternative for at least some trips. This study addressed whether and how older Californians use ride-hailing, as well as the potential of this travel mode to meet the needs of older adults now and in the coming decade. An online survey was completed by 2,917 California adults aged 55 and older. This age range was chosen to include both current seniors (age 65 and older) and individuals who will soon be entering that age group (age 55 to 64). The survey explored whether older Californians who have access to the internet used ride-hailing, how comfortable they were with ride-hailing service features that might present barriers to usage, whether they would value potential new ride-hailing service features designed to improve safety, accessibility, and payment options, and what reasons (if any) they saw to use ride-hailing. We also collected data on various factors hypothesized to influence ride-hailing use and behaviors, such as use of the internet and online banking. Key survey findings indicated that 44% of respondents 65 years old and older had experienced ride-hailing and 27% had booked a ride themselves via phone or using the app. Also, the potential new ride-hailing service features that appealed to large numbers of today’s and tomorrow’s seniors include having a driver trained to help older passengers and the option to pay with a ride-hailing card that is not linked to a bank account or credit card. Results also indicated that there were fewer large variations by personal characteristics than we anticipated would influence ride- hailing behavior and attitudes, such as gender, age, and regular use of technology. However, there were some clear differences by population subgroups, most noticeably by income, education, community type (e.g., urban vs. rural), and use of public transit