Sub-allocating FTA Section 5307 Funding Among Multiple Recipients in Metropolitan Areas (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5 the UZA. At that time, most UZAs only had one public trans- portation system; therefore, no sub-allocation of Section 5307 funding was required. For example, in St. Louis, Missouri, the Bi-State Development Agency (now known as Metro– St. Louis) was the only public transportation operator in the UZA and thus all of the funds determined by the formula went to that agency. This was the case in many other UZAs, including Atlanta, Georgia; Detroit, Michigan; Miami, Florida; Seattle, Washington; and Minneapolis, Minnesota. On the other hand, some areas have had a long history of sub-allocating Section 5307 funds, including several large UZAs such as the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the New York City Metropolitan Area. There have been multiple public transportation operators in these areas for many years. Other smaller UZAs also have had a history of multiple public transportation operators. One example is the UZA for Cincinnati, Ohio, which has the Southeast Ohio RTA and the Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky. Several changes have taken place in the nearly 40 years since the Urbanized Area Formula Program was created in 1974: (1) an increase in the number of public transportation operators in UZAs; (2) an expansion of certain UZAs, while at the same time, a consolidation of other UZAs by the U.S. Census; and (3) changes to the factors used to apportion FTA formula funds. Today, many large UZAs have multiple pub- lic transportation operators. In the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, the Southern Area Council of Governments serves as the Designated Recipient for FTA funds for several UZAs representing 14 million residents. The Southern Area Council of Governments distributes Section 5307 funding to 20 public transportation agencies, including large public transportation agencies such as the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Orange County Transportation Authority, and smaller public transportation agencies such as the city of Santa Monica Municipal Bus Lines and the Antelope Valley Transit Authority in Lancaster. In other large UZAs, there is still only one public transportation system; therefore, a sub- allocation is not necessary. Examples of these UZAs include: • Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota; • Denver, Colorado; • Las Vegas, Nevada; • San Antonio, Texas; • Orlando, Florida; • Indianapolis, Indiana; and • Columbus, Ohio. PROJECT BACKGROUND The FTA Urbanized Area Formula Program was created in 1974 and revised into its current overall structure in 1982. Urbanized Area Formula Funds (referred to in this report as FTA Section 5307 funds) are apportioned to each of the urbanized area (UZAs) in the United States, including Puerto Rico. A UZA is a contiguous urban area with a population of 50,000 or more that meets criteria administrated by the U.S. Bureau of Census. UZAs are redefined and new UZAs are created every ten years as a result of the decennial census. According to the 2010 Census, there were 486 UZAs in the United States, 11 in Puerto Rico, and none in the U.S. territo- ries and insular areas, for a total of 497 UZAs. Urbanized Area Formula Funds can be used for any public transportation capital expenditure defined in 49 USC 5302, as well as for planning, transit enhancements, operations in smaller UZAs, and preventive maintenance. The Urbanized Area Formula Program provides grants for public transporta- tion in UZAs and establishes distinct requirements and eligi- bilities for UZAs over and fewer than 200,000 in population. Table 1 summarizes the number of UZAs by population size. Funds for UZAs of 200,000 and more in population are apportioned directly to a “designated recipient,” which is a public agency selected by agreement of all appropriate govern- ment agencies in the UZA. Funds for UZAs with populations under 200,000 are appropriated to the governor for allocation to public transportation agencies throughout the state. When large UZAs (those of 200,000 or more in population) include multiple recipients of Section 5307 funds, the desig- nated recipient and the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) are responsible for determining the sub-allocation to the multiple recipients. Designated recipients within a region that contain multiple UZAs and/or multiple recipients must have a locally developed process for sub-allocating Section 5307 funds that best serve the needs of the region. As metropolitan areas and UZAs grow and change, the process of sub-allocating funds becomes more challenging. There is little documentation extant on how funds are allocated on a local level. When the Urban Mass Transportation Act was amended under President Nixon in 1974 to add operating assistance (National Mass Transportation Assistance Act of 1974), the initial formula for distributing urbanized area funds was established based on the population and population density of chapter one INTRODUCTION

6 According to the 2010 U.S. Census, 36 new UZAs were created and four UZAs (three in the United States and one in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) changed from UZAs in 2000 to urban clusters (a rural des- ignation) in 2010; a net increase of 32 UZAs from the 465 defined from the U.S. Census 2000 results. Of the 36 UZAs created in 2010, one was created when it no longer connected to a larger UZA of which it was a part in 2000, 12 were created from the connection of two or more urban clusters (areas of at least 2,500 and fewer than 50,000 individuals) from 2000, and 23 were created from the growth of a single urban cluster from 2000. SYNTHESIS OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY The purpose of this synthesis is to document the methodolo- gies and practices for the sub-allocation of FTA Section 5307 funds in UZAs of multiple types and sizes. This will help regions interested in developing a distribution practice and/ or altering their current method. New UZAs identified in the 2010 U.S. Census, in particular, could find this information useful. The synthesis will document, but not be limited to, the following: • Sub-allocation process, methodology, and results of the allocation process; • Decision-making process for approving the Section 5307 distribution; • Institutional roles, responsibilities, and relationships among the transit agencies, MPOs, state departments of transportation (DOTs), and other entities; • Administrative challenges and innovations; • Evolution of methodology and accommodation of change; • Financial and temporal costs of the process; and • Strengths and weaknesses of the process. Information presented in the synthesis was gathered from the following sources: • Literature searches of TRB’s Transportation Research Information Documentation (TRID) and APTA’s Resource Library. • Discussions with and documentation from representa- tives from FTA regional offices throughout the country. • Review of public transportation operating statistics from all agencies reporting to the National Transit Database (NTD) for the most recent two years. • A survey of organizations from 51 UZAs that are involved in the Section 5307 sub-allocation process. • Websites of the MPOs and public transportation agen- cies in the UZAs that sub-allocate Section 5307 funds. • Federal Register Notices and other information from the FTA website. • A survey of organizations in six UZAs selected for case examples, including the organization responsible for sub- allocating and smaller public transportation agencies in those UZAs. A review of the Federal Register Notice of January 11, 2012, revealed that there were 179 UZAs of more than 200,000 in population that received Section 5307 formula funding (as shown in Appendix A). Because this synthesis was about sub- allocating funds, it was important to identify those UZAs that sub-allocate so that the emphasis could be placed on identify- ing the agencies that were responsible for the sub-allocation process. Using the information gathered from the sources cited earlier, it was determined that 62 of the 179 UZAs of 200,000 or more in population (35%) sub-allocate Section 5307 funds. For those 62 UZAs that sub-allocate, a more detailed analysis was performed using the FTA, MPO, and public transportation websites; discussions with FTA regional staffs; and telephone and e-mail correspondence to organizations in the UZAs, and resulted in the list of organizations to which the survey was ini- tially sent. Documentation of this effort is found in Appen- dix B. This Summary Work Table also identifies those UZAs that do not sub-allocate FTA Section 5307 funds. A detailed survey was developed to obtain information about sub-allocating Section 5307 funds within the UZA. The 20-question survey was designed to determine: • Who is responsible for sub-allocating the funds (the lead agency)? • Who receives the funds? • What approaches/methodologies are used? • Who informs FTA of the agreed upon sub-allocation? • What non-quantifiable factors are used? The survey questionnaire utilized a web-based survey instrument, which was field tested with members of the TRB synthesis panel and the synthesis team staff. The question- naire is included as Appendix C. The survey was distributed by e-mail to 62 agencies (e.g., MPO, public transportation operator, or state DOT) that were determined to be an agency that played a key role in sub- allocating funds within each of the 62 UZAs, and 51 agencies successfully responded (respondents), a response rate of 82%. Following a review of the responses, six respondents from the survey were identified to be interviewed in more TABLE 1 2010 UZAs BY POPULATION SIZE Category 2010 U.S. Census No. of UZAs UZAs over 1 million 42 UZAs 200,000–1 million 137 UZAs 50,000–199,999 318 Total 497

7 President Barack Obama on July 6, 2012. Changes to the federal formula are discussed for a better under- standing of how the current FTA allocation process was developed. Changes in the number of UZAs and information on the number of UZAs that sub-allocate are discussed to get a better sense of the scope of this synthesis. • Chapter three presents the results of the survey. Each UZA of 200,000 and more in population is identified, along with those that sub-allocate FTA Section 5307 funds. The survey size and response rate is discussed and the results of the survey itself are quantified. • Chapter four presents the results of six case examples of UZAs that were selected from the survey for a more in-depth analysis. • Chapter five discusses the conclusions and suggestions for further research. detail as case examples using an interview guide included as Appendix D. The results of these discussions are presented in chapter four. REPORT ORGANIZATION The remaining sections of the report present the results of the study effort as follows. • Chapter two presents an overview of the evolution of FTA’s Section 5307 formula program. The history of the Federal Acts is summarized beginning with the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson as part of the Great Society programs, to MAP-21, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, signed into law by