Inclusive Public Participation in Transit Decision-Making (2023)

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.

37   Literature Review A P P E N D I X A Introduction Public engagement is an essenti part of the transportation development process, as it allows for decisions to be made in consideration of, and to benefit, public needs and preferences as well as promoting more informed decision-making and soliciting investment from the public. Inclusive engagement offers a means for the public to provide feedback, allowing for ownership of policies; be er decisions that are sustainable, supportable, and reflect community values; agency credibility; and faster implementation of plans and projects. When performed early in a project timeline, public engagement can guide research efforts that help determine what decisions and investments would most benefit the community. According to the Transportation Research Board’s TCRP Synthesis 89: Public Participation Strategies for Transit, public engagement in transit decision-making processes effectively establishes a line of meaningful, two-way communication, allowing for the collection of diverse input and ideas which can lead to unique solutions (Giering 2011). Inclusive processes allow the public to feel more ownership of the resulting policies and encourage the kind of community support that helps secure adequate funding. For transportation planners to devise optimal services and amenities, it is critical that they employ effective public engagement strategies. This literature review highlights the following key themes: • Although the transportation planning process requires some public engagement, the level of public engagement can determine the success of project implementation. • Engaging diverse groups of people results in be er representation of the community’s character, needs, and preferences, which can influence project support and implementation. • Transparent and collaborative communication between a community’s leadership and its citizens is critical throughout the public engagement process. • Planners should employ multiple strategies to effectively capture public feedback, as each form of engagement may produce different feedback or reach different groups. • Strategies and processes may need to be adapted to suit the communities, project types, and project goals.

38 Inclusive Public Participation in Transit Decision-Making What Are the Federal Requirements for Public Engagement? F ederal R eq uirements Public involvement in the transportation decision-making process is mandated by multiple federal laws. In 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, E cient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users called for public involvement before the adoption of plans or programs. In addition, considering public comments, providing the public with advanced notice, and ensuring public meeting locations are both accessible and convenient are required. Subsequent reauthorizations of the transportation funding act included the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act passed in 2012 and the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act passed in 2015. The most recent transportation funding, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act), was passed in late 2021. Funding will aid in the restoration of the nation’s roads, bridges, and rails, as well as help ensure access to high-speed Internet and address environmental justice. The National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), signed into law in 1970, requires projects with federal funding to evaluate the environmental, social, and economic effects of their proposed actions and plans. These evaluations must be included as part of all public review and comment opportunities on these plans and actions. While NEPA is implemented through multiple executive orders resulting in slightly d fferent requirements across United States departments, it consistently calls for public involvement at the initi tion of a NEPA analysis and when a document is published for public review and comment. Title VI and Environmental Justice Public transportation serves as a means to access social and economic opportunities. To ensure equal access, transportation equity should be a central focus of public engagement activities, particularly with underserved communities. Transportation equity focuses on fairness in mobility and accessibility regardless of race, gender, income, and disability. This principle is detailed and reinforced by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice). Environmental Justice (EJ) and Title VI are both rooted in the same basic principle that no person should bear an unfair share of the burden on account of their race, color, or national origin. At its core, Title VI requires recipients of federal funding to ensure that their programs operate in a nondiscriminatory manner. Indeed, the central tenet of environmental justice – those programs benefi ng a community as a whole not disproportionately allocate their adverse environmental and health burdens – flows directly from this underlying principle of Title VI. Executive Order 12898 directs federal agencies to include EJ as a component of their mission by identifying and addressing the effects of all programs, policies, and activities on “minority populations and low-income populations.” The Order targets all government agencies receiving Federal funding, requiring them to address the consequences of all their decisions or actions that might result in disproportionately high and adverse environmental and health impacts on minority and low-income communities. The Order requires that federal agencies work with state and local transportation partners to ensure that the principles of EJ are integrated into every aspect of their mission. The U.S. DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration summarizes the essence of effective EJ in the following three fundamental principles: 1. Avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority populations and low-income populations. 2. Ensure the full and fair participation by all potenti ly ffected communities in the transportation decision-making process. 3. Prevent the denial of, reduction in, or sign ficant delay in the receipt of benefits by minority and low-income populations. A Title VI civil rights complaint may raise EJ issues when challenging a funding recipient's activities. Some factors to consider in determining whether specific situations raise EJ concerns include whether individuals, certain neighborhoods, or tribes • Suffer disproportionately adverse health or environmental effects from pollution or other environmental hazards;

Literature Review 39 • Su er disproportionate risks or exposure to environmental hazards, or su er disproportionately from the e ects of past under-enforcement of state or federal health or environmental laws; or • Have been denied an equal opportunity for meaningful involvement, as provided by law, in governmental decision- making relating to the distribution of environmental bene ts or burdens. Where a federally funded program may be responsible for these harms, a Title VI investigation may determine whether the program has a discriminatory e ect on persons identi ble by race, color, or national origin. Low-Income Households Although low-income households are not protected under Title VI, Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice) is closely related to the Title VI equity analysis and is principal in the transportation planning process. To de ne low-income households, the FTA encourages communities to use their own locally developed threshold or a percentage of the median income of the area. MAP-21 states that a family with an income at or below 150% of the poverty line is considered a low-income household. Census tracts where at least 20% of individuals live at or below the poverty line are considered EJ areas. Racial and Ethnic Minorities Minorities are protected under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects people from discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in all programs or activities receiving federal funding. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s (U.S. DOT) Title VI regulations at 49 CFR Part 21 speci cally protect individuals participating in federally assisted programs. Periodic compliance reviews are required from recipients of federal funding to ensure compliance with the statute. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, any census tract where 30% or more of the population identi es as a non-white minority is considered an EJ area. Limited English Proficiency Since 2000, Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Pro ciency,” has required federally assisted programs and activities to provide opportunities for those with limited English-language pro ciency (LEP) to participate in decision-making processes. Additionally, the Executive Order requires agencies uti zing federal funding to develop an LEP plan. A notice on publications or signs should alert LEP individuals that materials and services are available in other languages. Agencies with large LEP populations may publish multi ngual/translated documents, use universal symbols or pictures, post language assistance services, provide interpreters at meetings and events, and/or have bilingual st . Persons with Disabilities The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) requires that persons with disabilities be involved in the development and improvement of public services and prohibits discrimination against anyone who has a mental or physical disability. In addition, public engagement meeting locations must be accessible and accommodations for individuals with vision or hearing disabilities must be provided. According to the ADA, the following participation activities are required, especially for paratransit plans: • Outreach—developing contacts, mailing lists, and other means to communicate with persons with disabilities • Consultation with individuals with disabilities • Opportunity for public comment • Accessible formats • Public hearings • Summaries of sign cant issues raised during the public comment period • Ongoing e orts to involve persons with disabilities in planning What Is ff tiv Publi Engag m nt? In 2019, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine published NCHRP Research Report 905 – Measuring the Effectiveness of Public Involvement in Transportation Planning and Project Development (Brown et al. 2019). The study identi ed a gap in the body of literature on measuring how successful various public engagement approaches can be.

40 Inclusive Public Participation in Transit Decision-Making Additionally, it identified that issues, desired outcomes, impacted populations, and engagement strategies are unique to each project. This is further complicated by the unique histories, conditions, and dynamics of each impacted community. The study resulted in a method to measure the effectiveness of public involvement using indices, surveys, and scoring tools tailored for transportation agencies. According to AASHTO, public engagement that is federally mandated has historically consisted of uti zing in-person outreach that included workshops, town hall meetings, and public hearings, with complementary use of mail and telephone communication. More recently, public engagement takes advantage of technologies such as email, social media, and other online tools to communicate with the public. The Federal Highway Administration’s Every Day Counts initiative promotes the uti zation of online public involvement, as virtual tools help to provide transparency and access to transportation planning activities, project development, and decision-making processes. The initiative stresses the importance of deploying virtual strategies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The U.S. Department of Transportation (2022) defines meaningful public involvement as a process that proactively seeks full representation from the community, considers public comments and feedback, and incorporates that feedback into a project, program, or plan. The impact of community contributions encourages early and continuous public involvement and brings diverse viewpoints and values into the transportation decision-making process. This process enables the community and agencies to make be er-informed decisions through collaborative efforts. Meaningful public engagement calls for grantees to engage in dialogue with the communities impacted by proposed initiatives and consider their feedback in the decision-making process where applicable. It does not mean that every concern raised by the community is resolved. A periodic review and evaluation of the effectiveness of the outreach strategies are necessary. Public engagement is not a uniform approach and agencies may uti ze and adapt various strategies depending on project goals and the available resources. While more traditional formal meetings are often required by law, innovative communication methods should be incorporated, and materials should be prepared for individuals with limited English proficiency. Not only does transportation planning engage the public (including both current and potential transit riders), but it also overcomes challenges such as a lack of awareness, time and mobility constraints, language barriers, social isolation, and distrust of government. It is crucial to engage with a group of people that equally represents the community (e.g., income, race, age, ethnicity, etc.) and to hear as many perspectives as possible from those both directly and indirectly impacted by the planning and decision-making processes. Inclusive and representative engagement processes help generate new opportunities and ensure equitable access. Strategies that effectively engage the public are as diverse as the communities that the planning agencies serve. Public involvement strategies and methods should evolve depending on the community, project type, and project goals. Some approaches to public engagement typically employed by transportation agencies include soliciting input through surveys (e.g., in-person surveys on transit vehicles, at gathering points such as transfer centers, or online using a dedicated application or page on the agency website), holding traditional or “open house”-style meetings at times and locations that are convenient and transit-accessible, and providing alternate means of communicating feedback, such as email, telephone, and postal mail to a empt to reach as many different types of community members as possible. The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) has identified five general modes of public participation which it has titled its Spectrum of Public Participation. The five modes promote a public participation process that informs, consults, involves, collaborates, and empowers. As displayed in Figure A-1, each mode aligns with a different public participation goal and reflects a d fferent promise to the public. These five goals and corresponding promises infer potenti l different measures of effectiveness for public engagement.

Literature Review 41 Figure A-1. IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation. Source: IAP2 International Federation 2018. Senior Citiz ens A balance of needs across all generational groups within a community should be reflected in transportation plans and designs. In rural communities, a generational divide is prominent, with younger individuals moving away from these communities, leaving behind aging populations. Baby Boomers and Generation X are the most likely to be engaged with transportation projects, which can present challenges because of generational differences and the whole community not being represented in public engagement activities. Younger Millennials’ and Gen Z’s preference for more public and green transportation projects may not be well supported in the (rural) communities. Multiple strategies should be employed to encourage all generations to provide their input with confidence. Seniors may experience a “digital divide” as they may not have access to the Internet or not know how to use it. This can be a barrier when uti zing virtual engagement as a means of public outreach. R ural Communities Effective public engagement in rural communities can help to educate agencies on any potenti community-spec fic inequities and determine solutions that would best meet the community’s needs. However, ensuring that public engagement is inclusive can be a challenge in rural areas. When it comes to mobility issues, federal and state governments have historically placed more focus on urban communities. Rural communities face several barriers that could hinder participation in engagement opportunities, including technology and geographic location. Spec fically, social media can be effective in connecting broader demographics, but the lack of consistent Internet and cell phone coverage in rural areas can be problematic. Strategies used to engage urban communities may not work as effectively in rural communities because of these barriers. Transparency and open communication are vital in rural communities from the outset of a project. They increase trust and make citizens feel that their participation has a meaningful impact. Gaining support from community leaders and elected o cials can help to garner this public trust, leading to successful engagement efforts and project implementation. However, rural planning agencies are usually small, often with only a handful of st ff members. With limited resources, engagement can

42 Inclusive Public Participation in Transit Decision-Making often be viewed as non-essenti in comparison to the mandatory functions of the agency. Region Transportation P nning Organizations (RTPOs) assist with pub c participation and co boration and can he p garner the trust of a rura constituency. Effective Strategies to Solicit Participation from Underserved Communities A variety of strategies shou d be emp oyed to maximize pub c education and inc usion. The fo owing st is not comprehensive and stra egies continue to evo ve, as evidenced by techno ogic advancements as e as adaptions during the COVID-19 pandemic: • Estab sh oca commi ees comprised of oca government representatives and ffec ed citizens. Estab shing oca commi ees or sta eho der groups can he p in securing oca support and he p to receive adequa e funding. Engaging with oca eadership can he p them become informed about the community’s identity and needs, which may shape the project and engagement ear y in the process. • Project eadership shou d engage organizations and/or stakeho der groups that represent the community. For effective engagement to occur, project teams need to understand how communities view themse ves, which can be done best through representative organizations or groups that are invo ved in many aspects of a community. These organizations and/or groups can he p to garner community support for a project and spread the word. • Use RTPOs and other oca governments as a resource and communication channe . RTPOs work to identify oc transportation needs, assist oca governments, and conduct oca p nning activities. RTPOs great y assist with gathering regiona and oca input. They can he p coordina e oca p anning, and use, and economic deve opment. Loca governments can be a means of communication be ween project teams and the community. Loca government tends to be more invo ved in the community and can therefore he p to increase egitimacy and trust in the project. • Create a project websi e. Project ebsi es offer transparency and can be an inexpensive, one-stop-shop to educate and promote a project, as e as a means of communication between project eaders and the community. Feedback from the pub ic can so be gathered through a variety of on ne too s embedded in the project website. Uti izing these sites for virtu or hybrid town h s can offer community members more opportunities to be a part of the process and give their feedback. • Uti ze oc newspaper and print media, as e as oca ne s channe s and community representatives. Uti zing both print and digit media can he p to target diverse audiences. Whi e o der community members may sti receive the newspaper, younger generations may on y uti ze socia media. These forms of media are so great avenues to share a ot of information, even mu tip e times, and in mu tip e nguages. • Create a project em and a phone hot ne for feedback. Uti zing project em s and phone hot nes shou d be comp ementary to using radio, newspaper, socia media, and oc news media. From surveying a pane of experts, the Tennessee DOT recommends using emai and text a erts to advertise meetings and share information. • Uti ze a ba ance of on ne pub ic invo vement and in-person approaches to ensu e a diverse representation of the community. Re b e Internet access varies across communities, making it critica to engage the community through both on ne and in-person approaches. Wh e soc media and on ine pub c invo vement have a broad reach and a big impact on urban communities, rur communities tend to evo ve at a s ower pace, and many re y on their community to shape their opinions and share information. In rura communities, the Tennessee DOT suggests se ecting we -known and easi y accessib e venues and recommends uti zing pub c braries for in-person events, as they can function as a p ace to network and share and advertise information.