Federal subsidies of public transit, particularly transit operations, are declining and the responsibility for supporting transit isfalling increasingly on states and localities. In california, the transportation development act (tda) has become the state's principalsource of transit operating subsidies. It is found that the strict per capita allocation formulas of the tda strongly favor lightly patronized suburban transit service over more heavily patronized service in the central cities. Transit riders in san francisco, for example, receive a tda subsidy of $0.13 Per trip, whereas the tda subsidy to transit patrons in suburban livermore is over $5.00 Per trip. Thebuilt-in suburban bias of the tda is the result of partisan compromises made to secure passage of the act in 1971--compromises to assuage a republican governor opposed to new taxes--and to include the interests of rural and suburban counties. The result has been a proliferation in california of new, well-funded, and expanding suburban transit operators that attract few riders whereas older, heavily patronized central city transit operators are forced to cut service because of funding shortfalls. This paper concludes by proposing a more efficient and equitable method for allocating tda funds than the current formula, which, in the name of equity, provides all californianswith a "fair share" of public transit whether or not they use it. This paper appears in transportation research record no. 1297, Publictransit research: management and planning 1991.
Samenvatting