[Senate Hearing 113-12]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-12
IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL STATES AND TRIBAL AREAS UNDER
MAP-21
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
BANKING,HOUSING,AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING ISSUES RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MAP-21 AND THE NEED
FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN TRANSIT PROVIDERS AND SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES
__________
MARCH 28, 2013
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs
Available at: http: //www.fdsys.gov /
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
80-696 WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, Chairman
JACK REED, Rhode Island MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey BOB CORKER, Tennessee
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
JON TESTER, Montana MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon MARK KIRK, Illinois
KAY HAGAN, North Carolina JERRY MORAN, Kansas
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts DEAN HELLER, Nevada
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
Charles Yi, Staff Director
Gregg Richard, Republican Staff Director
Homer Carlisle, Professional Staff Member
Dawn Ratliff, Chief Clerk
Shelvin Simmons, IT Director
Jim Crowell, Editor
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2013
Page
Opening statement of Chairman Johnson............................ 1
WITNESSES
Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration,
Department of Transportation................................... 2
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Darin Bergquist, Secretary, South Dakota Department of
Transportation................................................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 34
Cosette Fester, Sioux Area Metro Paratransit Rider............... 13
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Lynne Keller Forbes, Executive Director, South Eastern Council of
Governments.................................................... 14
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Emma Featherman-Sam, Coordinator, Oglala Sioux Transit........... 16
Prepared statement........................................... 41
Barbara K. Cline, Executive Director, Prairie Hills Transit,
Spearfish, South Dakota........................................ 17
Prepared statement........................................... 44
Michael Cooper, Director of Planning and Building Services, City
of Sioux Falls, South Dakota................................... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 46
Sarah Jennings, State Director, AARP South Dakota................ 20
Prepared statement........................................... 47
(iii)
IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS IN RURAL STATES AND TRIBAL AREAS UNDER
MAP-21
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2013
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,
Sioux Falls, SD,
The Committee met at 2 p.m., at Carnegie Town Hall, 235
West 10th Street, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Hon. Tim Johnson,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN TIM JOHNSON
Chairman Johnson. Good afternoon. This hearing will come to
order.
Today, the Banking Committee holds its first full Committee
hearing on transit and transportation issues since Congress
passed a 2-year surface transportation bill, MAP-21, which
President Obama signed into law last July.
I have long recognized the importance of public transit in
South Dakota. Affordable and accessible transit gives people a
freedom and mobility that many of us take for granted, and I am
glad we can be here in South Dakota to talk about how public
transportation helps so many individuals and families get where
they need to go, whether they are commuting to work, buying
groceries, or visiting the doctor. Rural transit also helps
people stay in their communities as they age or travel to work
while saving money on gas.
As Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, I was proud to
work with both Republicans and Democrats last year to pass a
bipartisan transportation bill that strengthens highway and
transit programs and expands funding for rural States. I worked
closely with our Committee's prior Republican ranking Member,
Senator Shelby of Alabama, to develop the public transportation
portion of MAP-21. Our Committee approved its provisions with
unanimous bipartisan support, and the full Senate passed MAP-21
with a strong bipartisan majority.
MAP-21 does not solve all of the long-term issues facing
the Highway Trust Fund, but the law increases support for
public transportation and highways for 2 years. In fact, South
Dakota's transit formula funding is significantly boosted by
MAP-21, but even more funding is needed for bus replacement and
highway improvements. MAP-21 represents a solid Federal
commitment to transportation investment in a difficult budget
environment. The bill supports 10,000 jobs in South Dakota,
about 500 of which are connected to transit. I will continue to
build on the progress we have made and work to strengthen the
Federal commitment to transportation programs in our State.
South Dakota's total transit formula funding increases
significantly in fiscal year 2013, growing about 48 percent to
$14.8 million, up from $10 million in fiscal year 2012. This
increase in formula funds was designed to replace earmarks and
competitive awards previously used for bus replacement and
travel transit. Highway and transit formula funds were not
subject to sequestration, but some of FTA's programs, including
its administrative funding, were reduced. MAP-21 doubles
funding for the tribal transit program to $30 million annually.
Today, we are joined by some important leaders who helped
make MAP-21 a reality. The U.S. Department of Transportation
and the Federal Transit Administration share my belief in the
importance of transit options in rural America, and I am very
pleased to welcome FTA Administrator Peter Rogoff today.
This is Administrator Rogoff's second trip to South Dakota
since I took over as Chairman of the Banking Committee. He
accompanied Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on a visit to
Pierre last October where we all took part in the grand opening
of the newly expanded River Cities Public Transit Facility.
The State of South Dakota has also championed the Federal
role in transportation for both highways and transit. I thank
our Secretary of Transportation Darin Bergquist for joining us
today. And, finally, our second panel is made up of those who
understand public transportation best, representatives of the
users and operators of transit in South Dakota.
In a large, sparsely populated State like ours, transit
providers cover long distances, which puts increased wear-and-
tear on their vehicles and requires significant coordination to
stretch limited resources. They are rising to the challenge by
working hard to coordinate service with a number of Federal,
State, and local partners.
Transit has become quite meaningful for members of South
Dakota's tribes as well. It provides tribal members more
connections to jobs, better access to medical care, and easier
trips for shopping and school. In recognition of that growing
importance, the new formula funding I authored will bring
significant guaranteed funding to strengthen South Dakota
tribal transit providers.
Thank you to all of the witnesses for traveling here today,
and thank you for your commitment to improving transportation
for all Americans. With that, I would like to invite
Administrator Rogoff to begin his testimony. Peter.
STATEMENT OF PETER M. ROGOFF, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Rogoff. Thank you, Chairman Johnson, and on behalf of
President Obama and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, I am
delighted to be in Sioux Falls today to highlight the
Administration's support for public transportation in South
Dakota and across the Nation.
Mr. Chairman, we are very grateful for your leadership in
helping ensure the passage of our new 2-year public
transportation law known as MAP-21. Along with Members of this
Committee, you worked hard to achieve a true bipartisan victory
by securing passage of a good bill that will create and support
jobs when we need them most, while building a strong foundation
to bring more transportation choices to Americans everywhere,
including right here in your home State.
Secretary LaHood and I understand that in a State like
South Dakota it is important to invest in transportation
solutions that meet everyone's needs, from commuters living in
Sioux Falls to working families, seniors, and veterans living
in rural towns and on tribal lands. That is why FTA has sent
millions of taxpayer dollars to this State over the last 4
years to modernize, repair, and enhance transit service so that
everyone who needs a ride can find one, whether it is for
getting to work, to the doctor, to school, or to the grocery
store.
It is why we have awarded grants over the last 2 years to
help Pierre, Spearfish, Sturgis, and other communities ensure
that every military veteran or servicemember living in the
region has ready access to a reliable ride so they can
participate fully in their communities.
And it is why Secretary LaHood will soon award a $1 million
grant through the Department's TIGER 4 program to the Yankton
Sioux Tribe to build a new transit facility in Marty that will
result in more reliable bus service in a rural and economically
distressed Native American community where transit is a
lifeline, not a luxury.
MAP-21 allows us to continue making a difference for South
Dakota residents and their communities. For example, under MAP-
21, South Dakota can expect to receive an apportionment of $5.9
million for transit service in rural areas and on tribal lands.
This amount is 17 percent higher than what was received last
year, which I think we can all recognize was a direct result of
your leadership on boosting funding for rural transit.
In addition, MAP-21 doubles the funds available nationally
for tribal transit. That means 2 years of steady, predictable
funding for capital, operating, and planning needs that are so
important for connecting men and women of all ages with work,
with family, and with other opportunities.
Many tribal governments in South Dakota have developed and
implemented successful transit programs. Under MAP-21, FTA will
continue to help these tribes to provide thousands of rides and
put paychecks in workers' pockets. We have consulted with
tribal officials and others in an effort to finalize how these
formula funds will be allocated.
We are pleased that MAP-21 included a new transit emergency
relief program, first proposed by the Obama administration in
2012. It is a very long way away from South Dakota, but I can
tell you we have already put half a billion dollars to work on
repairs resulting from Hurricane Sandy, and it is because you
had authorized this emergency relief program for transit
nationally that we were able to move so quickly. This program
will also help States and public transportation systems,
including those in South Dakota, to pay for protecting,
repairing, and/or replacing equipment and facilities that may
suffer or have suffered serious damage as a result of an
emergency or natural disaster such as floods, hurricanes, and
tornadoes.
On the other end of the spectrum, under our Urbanized Area
Formula program, South Dakota receives about $3.6 million in
fiscal year 2013, a 16-percent increase over last year. And the
program tackles an ongoing challenge by expanding eligibility
for operating expenses among smaller systems based on fleet
size while preserving it for transit agencies in small cities
like Sioux Falls and Rapid City.
MAP-21 also folded a portion of our discretionary bus
program into a formula program focused solely on bus state of
good repair needs so every agency has a predictable stream of
Federal funds to maintain reliable, desirable transit that is
also safe.
South Dakota can count on $1.25 million in fiscal year 2013
to be used anywhere in the State to modernize and upgrade bus
service. Sioux Falls and other cities in South Dakota may be
eligible for these funds through the State's allocation.
Mr. Chairman, I have mentioned just some of the MAP-21
programs that will strengthen public transportation here in
South Dakota. In my view, MAP-21 can also be viewed as the
culmination of the priorities and policies that we have worked
for together and have implemented consistently since the first
day of the Obama administration.
Across the United States, MAP-21 allows FTA, for the first
time, to establish and enforce basic, commonsense safety
standards for transit. Many people did not know this, but FTA
has been specifically prohibited in law from implementing even
the most basic transit safety standards since 1964, and you
helped fix that for tens of millions of transit riders across
the country.
MAP-21 also establishes the Nation's first federally
funded, stand-alone program to repair and upgrade rail and bus
transit systems throughout the United States.
Last September, you joined Secretary LaHood and myself on a
tour of the revitalized River Cities Transit Facility, a great
project that highlights the value of reinvesting to bring our
systems into a state of good repair and meet the needs of
future generations. And in order to fulfill the President's
goals to reinvest in America on projects that not just create
jobs but also improve our quality of life for generations to
come, MAP-21 placed renewed emphasis on the successful Buy
America program. Buy America helps ensure that every Federal
transit dollar is spent right here at home, putting more
Americans to work as we revitalize domestic manufacturing and
promote American ingenuity, making the transportation systems
an American-made solution for American citizens with American
tax dollars. Since the Obama administration has taken office,
the number of waivers that we have granted to the Buy America
law has been reduced from more than 40 to 3.
So, in closing, Mr. Chairman, MAP-21 offers an opportunity
for us to work together to strengthen our transit systems
across the board. We at the FTA look forward to working with
you as Chairman of the Banking Committee on the next version of
MAP-21. The law already expires at the end of 2014. We know
that the Committee is beginning to gear up for thinking about
what the next law needs to look like. And let me just say
parenthetically, while we understand your recent decision
regarding your career, I think I speak for everyone across all
of public transportation across the entire country, expressing
our understanding but disappointment. All of public
transportation intends to work really hard for your last 2
years and get a reauthorization done before you retire.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Administrator Rogoff.
Secretary Bergquist, please begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF DARIN BERGQUIST, SECRETARY, SOUTH DAKOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Bergquist. Thank you and good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak before the
Committee today and to share some of our thoughts on Federal
investment in transportation in a rural State like South
Dakota. First I will comment on the impact of MAP-21 in South
Dakota and then address potential future transportation
legislation.
Mr. Chairman, our overall view of MAP-21 is positive. As
the Committee Chair, you had a key role in developing the
legislation, and we appreciate your efforts and the efforts of
all the South Dakota congressional delegation on passage of
this law. I would like to outline for you briefly why we have
such a positive view of MAP-21.
First of all, South Dakota's highway formula share was
preserved. With our State's long stretches of rural highway and
with few people to support that extensive road network, our
State has always received a higher share of Federal highway
funding than its share of contributions to the Highway Trust
Fund. MAP-21 maintained that higher share. This formula share
is correct on its merits, but we do not take it for granted. It
is an outcome you and others in our delegation worked hard to
achieve and preserve.
It was also important that South Dakota received an
increase in transit formula funding under MAP-21, as you
referenced, Mr. Chairman. As the Committee you chair has
jurisdiction over the transit program, we want to personally
thank you for your work to increase transit funding for South
Dakota, other rural States, and our tribes. Increased transit
funding will help transit providers meet the needs of senior
citizens, people with disabilities, and others in South Dakota.
MAP-21 also provided some program stability. Until MAP-21
became law, the South Dakota DOT operated under transportation
program extensions of just a few months. That created
administrative, planning, and funding challenges. MAP-21
provided stability by providing a 2-year program while
maintaining the funding level of South Dakota's highway program
and by improving our State's transit funding. During the MAP-21
debate, some in Congress proposed significant reductions in
transportation funding. We are certainly glad that did not
occur.
We are also pleased that MAP-21 requires steps to expedite
or simplify the environmental review process for projects. Yet
at the same time, MAP-21's provisions impose some new
requirements. We hope these new provisions will be implemented
in a nonburdensome way.
For example, Congress directed USDOT to develop performance
measures linked to State performance targets. These performance
management tasks could require considerable effort, especially
if USDOT is too prescriptive in development of the measures. We
hope these new requirements can be minimized.
Safety is always a priority for us, yet we hope MAP-21's
transit safety plan requirements will be properly scaled. Part
of the impetus for MAP-21 transit safety provisions resulted
from a tragic multiple-fatality crash on the Washington, DC,
transit system. In South Dakota, the one fatal accident
involving a transit vehicle in the last several years was
caused by a nontransit vehicle. We have a very good transit
safety record in South Dakota, so new regulations should not
impose complex requirements on our small transit systems and
providers that are more appropriate for metropolitan agencies.
We had the opportunity this morning--and Administrator
Rogoff was gracious enough to spend some time this morning with
our local providers--discussing these very issues. I was very
encouraged by the discussion that we had this morning and the
thoughts and comments of the Administrator in regards to these
issues. I am very optimistic, and I think that we can meet the
requirements of MAP-21 in the safety area while not developing
a program that is burdensome on our local transit providers.
I would also like to offer a few perspectives on the long-
term interests of South Dakota in the Federal Surface
Transportation Program. MAP-21 funding authorizations extend
only through September 30, 2014, which is not far in the
future. The potential for the Highway Trust Fund to run out of
money in the second half of 2014 and the uncertainty that
creates are cause for serious concern. If maintaining the
current transportation funding levels remains uncertain, DOTs
and contractors will take a cautious approach in letting
projects, hiring crews, and making equipment purchases. That
would mean fewer construction jobs and less support for people
in businesses using transportation. That is why it is so
important that, following the expiration of MAP-21, we do not
go through another period of multiple short-term extensions
like what was experienced following SAFETEA-LU and, as a
result, I join Administrator Rogoff and we are also hopeful
here in South Dakota that we can see passage of a new Federal
transportation bill before your time in Congress is done.
Finally, I want to emphasize why significant Federal
investment in highways in a rural State like South Dakota is in
the national interest. Rural highways serve as a bridge for
interstate truck and personal travel between States and through
South Dakota. They support agricultural exports and serve the
Nation's ethanol production, energy extraction, and wind power
industries, all located largely in rural areas. They connect to
scenic wonders like Badlands National Park, Mount Rushmore, and
Yellowstone National Park, and they are a lifeline for remote
and economically challenged citizens such as those living on
tribal reservations. Also, Federal transportation programs
create jobs, support economic efficiency and growth, and
enhance safety.
South Dakota has few people to support each mile of Federal
aid highway. Preserving this aging, nationally connected system
is expensive and remains a challenge. So far, Congress has
recognized the national interest in highways in and across
rural States. We hope that will continue.
Also, Federal investment must continue in public
transportation in rural States like South Dakota. To help us
meet current and future demand, operating as well as capital
costs should remain eligible uses for the Federal transit
program. Federal investment in rural transit helps ensure
personal mobility, especially for senior citizens and people
with disabilities, connecting them to medical appointments,
other necessary services, and employment.
In addition, rural transit helps sustain, as you mentioned,
Mr. Chairman, over 500 jobs across South Dakota. It allows
children to access school and other education opportunities
while their parents remain at work, adding to household
productivity and earning potential while supporting families.
And I would like, Mr. Chairman, just to share with you one
example of a success story in public transit in South Dakota
and how it is impacting people. I received a letter yesterday
from Officer Richard Bauman, who is a school resource officer
at Riggs High School, in Pierre, and Ms. Tynell Kocer, who is
the Native American liaison at Riggs High School. In Pierre, we
have a program where private funding using public transit
services provides rides to schools for some underprivileged
kids who may need to walk a significantly long distance of a
mile or more to get to school. Oftentimes, in the winter months
in particular, they were not getting to school at all. They
attribute the increase in graduation rates to the availability
of this program. I would like to quote from their letter.
``For the 2011-12 school year, the graduation rate of
Native American students who started the school year at T.F.
Riggs High School and graduated was 56 percent. The anticipated
graduation rate for the 2012-13 school year for Native American
Students who started the school year at Riggs is 81 to 86
percent.''
Mr. Chairman, this is just one example of the way that
public transit services are benefiting the people of South
Dakota.
But providing transit services in a low-population-density
State like ours meant meeting special challenges. Small buses
or vans usually provide rural transit service. Frequently, it
is on-demand service for the elderly or disabled, such as
nonemergency trips to the hospital or pharmacy. In very low
population density States, a one-way trip to a medical facility
for one or two riders can be 50 miles or more. But this helps
citizens stay in their homes, avoiding more expensive care.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, Federal surface transportation
programs and legislation must continue to recognize the
national interest in providing significant Federal investment
in highways and transit in rural States like South Dakota. That
recognition, combined with fewer program requirements and
rules, will allow the South Dakota DOT and our local transit
providers to address the transportation needs of South Dakota
and the Nation.
That concludes my testimony, Mr. Chairman, and I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you both for your testimony. I
appreciate the fact that--it is commendable that the rural
transit program in Pierre works closely with the tribes in
Pierre, Lower Brule especially, and I find that the
coordination is difficult, but it is well worth doing.
I now have some questions for each of you. Mr. Rogoff, you
have served as FTA's Administrator for nearly 4 years, How has
your service as Administrator shaped your view on the Federal
role in public transportation in large rural States like South
Dakota compared to other areas?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, Mr. Chairman, in my period as
Administrator, it has become increasingly apparent to us that--
we have an expression at the FTA that I use with increasing
frequency, and that is, ``If you have seen one transit agency,
you have seen one transit agency,'' because no two of them are
the same, no two face the same clientele, the same governance
structure, the same financing. And even between groups of
transit agencies, there is very little commonality between the
great challenges of a New York City MTA or a BART in San
Francisco versus the challenges that we face here in South
Dakota. And that is what makes it imperative that we tailor our
programs to meet local needs, to meet the unique needs that the
localities have.
I think MAP-21 goes a long way toward doing that in the
law, and now it is the FTA's challenge as we implement your law
to make sure that we do it in terms of the regulatory burden
and the rules that come with your new programs.
So, for example, we were just meeting this morning with
many of the transit providers in the State. There are important
new authorities in the law about how we maximize the use of the
dollars. I gathered a lot of good and important notes that are
now informed by the details of the MAP-21 law to bring back to
Washington, DC, to the regulation writers to make sure that we
do not think that we can develop a one-size-fits-all approach
that will work as well for the tribes in South Dakota as it
will for the large urban providers. They have different
challenges, and they need to have different ways of fulfilling
the responsibilities of that law, because in the end our goal
is not just about bureaucracy and rules. Our goal has to be
about providing the maximum amount of service to the public
that the tax dollars will allow. And that is what we have--that
is what has really been driving us for the last few years, is
retooling our programs to get the maximum service to the
citizen, not the maximum amount of bureaucratic process.
Chairman Johnson. Secretary Bergquist, thank you for
joining us. Your testimony highlighted how large rural States
have unique transportation needs for highways and transit. Can
you talk about the economic importance of transportation
investment in South Dakota and describe further why having
long-term guaranteed Federal funding is important?
Mr. Bergquist. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. I
will try to answer that in two different parts.
In terms of the economic importance of transportation in
South Dakota, I think we all understand that a good
transportation network is a foundation for State economic
growth and personal mobility in South Dakota. As an example,
goods must be able to move from farm to market and across and
through the State, including to grain elevators and rail
transfer points. That is essential to our State being
competitive in the national and world economy.
I think we have seen examples here in Sioux Falls of just
how transportation investment can drive economic development.
Just two examples: the newly constructed interchange at I-90
and Marion Road. We know that development is planned to occur
there in the very near future as a result of that. We have
completed portions of South Dakota 100 on the east side of
Sioux Falls. We have seen tremendous economic development along
those sections of the road that have been completed.
Many businesses are looking at the possibility of coming to
South Dakota. They often cite that the availability of a good
transportation network and system is one of the top priorities
that they are considering when they look at a potential site.
So all those things indicate how important highway and
transportation investment is for South Dakota's economy.
As to public transit, it ensures personal mobility for
those that may not be able to drive personal vehicles, whether
due to age, infirmity, or lack of funds. These people are an
important part of our economy and our society. They have to be
able to get to work. They have to get to hospitals. They have
to get to jobs, schools, and other important destinations. So
continued investment in public transit in South Dakota is also
vitally important to our economy.
As to the second part of your question, Mr. Chairman, as to
the importance of guarantees, we will gladly take any long-term
Federal transportation funding guarantees that we can get. But
I want to be clear in making that point. As important as the
long-term guarantees are to us, it is really the substance of
the bill that is more important. Our formula share of the level
of funding in the bill is really key. All things being equal,
we would not want to get locked into a long-term bill that is
detrimental to South Dakota. A favorable bill and the longer
the term, the better for us in terms of our planning efforts.
It helps us. It helps us plan projects into the future. It
helps our contractors prepare for projects that are coming,
whether that be purchasing equipment, hiring more crews, those
type of things.
So, we are very glad to see the MAP-21 programs are largely
not subject to reduction under sequestration. We would like to
see continued protection of that transportation funding and a
program authorization of more than 2 years in the future.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. Rogoff, trips in tribal transit more
than doubled under SAFETEA-LU, and MAP-21's formula will
provide guaranteed funds for tribes. What challenges, if any,
do you foresee in continuing this program's success? Also, how
is FTA working to ensure that all eligible tribal miles are
being counted in the new formula?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, as you pointed out, tribal transit trips
have grown, but largely due to your leadership, Mr. Chairman,
the total funding for tribal transit under MAP-21 has doubled
for the next 2 years, and that is very good news. But it made
some important structural changes on how the program works.
Under the SAFETEA-LU period, the tribal transit program was
distributed as discretionary grants where applications were
sent to FTA and we were able to evaluate the strength of those
applications. That was at a $15 million a year level. MAP-21
boosted it to a $30 million a year level, but $25 million of
that will now go out by formula. And as you said, it will
provide a predictable stream of funding to these tribes.
I think there are a few challenges that come with that.
Some tribes have a great deal more technical capacity to launch
and run a transit program than others, and some of them are
going to need considerable assistance from the FTA or from
their neighboring transit providers to be able to stand up a
good, sustainable program that serves the tribal community
well.
I am also concerned that, as the formula spins out the
formula grants, certain tribes, especially those that have not
participated in the past, might get amounts that are so small
as to not let them really make meaningful progress in a short
period of time. But we are going to work to make this money
have, like everything else, the maximum impact for the maximum
number of tribal members in the most successful way.
You asked about tribal mileage. The mileage that was
reported in the past by the tribes was not so important because
the funds were not going out by formula. Now that we do have a
formula that is in part driven by mileage, making sure that
data is reported and reported accurately is going to be a
higher priority because it is going to drive the funding. And
we will be working with the tribes to make sure that that
works.
Chairman Johnson. How do you do that?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, first and foremost, you need to make sure
that the data is reported through what is called the National
Transit Data base. We need to make sure that the tribes that
want to participate are fully integrated in it and know how to
report their mileage. Here, again, it is about technical
assistance. It is about getting assistance from neighboring
transit providers in the area.
It is a hard one, I will tell you. For the size of the
grants and the amount of money that we have put out in the
past, the folks in FTA regional offices will tell you that they
have to put a great deal more technical assistance into getting
some of the tribal grants to work because it is a whole new
ball game to some of these tribes.
That said, the service is critically important in many of
these tribes. You have people who are isolated from work,
isolated from medical care, who are absolutely dependent on
services like this to get to medical appointments, to get to
training, to get to education, to get to jobs. So we will
double our efforts consistent with the doubling of your funding
to make sure it is a successful program.
Chairman Johnson. Secretary Bergquist, I am sure you are
following USDOT's implementation of MAP-21 closely. In terms of
freight, can you elaborate on how USDOT should address the
transportation of agricultural goods as MAP-21 is implemented?
And for transit, as FTA implements new requirements for asset
management, how far along is the State in monitoring the
condition of South Dakota's transit fleet?
Mr. Bergquist. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You are correct in
that we are very interested in monitoring USDOT's
implementation of designating a national freight network. At
this point, the MAP-21 legislation does not provide any funding
advantages for roads that are placed on that network, but
certainly is conceivable that it could change in the future,
and that is why we are so interested in it.
One of our big concerns is that high truck volumes will be
the main criteria used by USDOT to designate that network, and
there is no doubt there are high volumes of truck freight at
ports in metropolitan areas, for example, but much of that is
import cargo or local deliveries.
In South Dakota, we think it is also important that our
lower volume but equally important agricultural and resource
shipments by truck, because they generate exports and reduce
our trade deficit, receive equal weight in designation of a
national freight system.
We want to make sure that South Dakota's important
contributions to the freight system are recognized as part of
that network, particularly in the event that in future
legislation there are any funding benefits associated with
roads that are designated as part of the freight network.
As to our transit fleet condition, for years the transit
office at the South Dakota Department of Transportation has
worked with all of our small transit providers in the State and
also worked with the tribes that choose to do so, so that we
file data with FTA's National Transit Data base that the
Administrator referenced, and that data includes information
regarding the age of the buses and the vans, which is some of
the most critical information.
Our issue with managing our fleet in South Dakota, Mr.
Chairman, is finding resources to upgrade and buy more modern
buses. Your work has helped, but we can certainly hope for
more. We do not have a record keeping problem when it comes to
transit assets in South Dakota. Our records are already telling
us we need to update our fleet. We just need the resources to
be able to do that.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. Rogoff, what steps is FTA pursuing to
ensure that the new requirements for safety and asset
management are not burdensome on small agencies such as we have
in South Dakota?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, I think it is critically important, Mr.
Chairman, to recognize that whenever we talk about transit
safety, we first have to acknowledge that transit is a very
safe mode of transportation. You are infinitely safer getting
on a bus or a rail car than you are getting into your own
personal vehicle under any circumstances. So our challenge as
an agency, given the new safety authorities that we have been
given under MAP-21, which the Administration sought, going back
to 2009, is to make sure that we are adding value without
adding a great deal of cost of bureaucratic burden.
We believe that using a safety management system approach
is the way to do that. It has been very successful in other
agencies, and it is where we tailor the safety regime to the
unique circumstances of the individual transit provider. So
when we were focused on moving forward with the transit safety
bill, we were very focused on rail crashes and fatal accidents
involving Washington Metro, the T in Boston, the CTA in
Chicago, the rail operator in Miami, trolley operators in San
Francisco. It is certainly not accurate to say that our burning
safety concerns involve small bus operators, such as those in
your State.
That said, we think there are ways--and I think when we
start coming out with some of these products soon, we will put
a good deal of the anxiety over this at ease--where we will be
showing folks how to ask themselves the right questions, many
of which they are already asking themselves. This will be about
making sure that they put out safe trips every day, and
thankfully, currently they are putting out safe trips every
day.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. Rogoff, the transit providers in
South Dakota work hard to coordinate service with local, State,
and Federal partners in order to provide high-quality service,
particularly for seniors, vets, and persons with disabilities.
I applaud FTA's work to assist these efforts and FTA's funding
of mobility management projects. But barriers still exist at
the Federal level. GAO suggests that further action by the
Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility is needed.
What do you think is the next step at the Federal level?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, thank you for the question. As you know,
Secretary LaHood chairs the Coordinating Council on Access and
Mobility, and our focus in the first term was to get our
Veterans Transportation Initiative up and running, following up
on the First Lady and Dr. Biden's efforts to really make sure
that we are doing the best by way of our returning veterans.
Now, you make a very important point, Mr. Chairman, that in
smaller and rural States where we have a great many clients
spread out all over the State in need of mobility, coordination
is key. The taxpayers are paying for transportation services
through a variety of Federal programs, and we certainly should
not be duplicating efforts. And even collectively we do not
have enough resources to serve all that we need to serve, so
coordination is key.
You asked what the next step is. On my priority list, the
next step is an important sit-down with the folks at the
Department of Health and Human Services. The Medicaid program
puts out billions of dollars annually for transportation. I
think there is still a lot of upside opportunity for us to do
better coordination with Medicaid where there are actually
quite a lot of resources already going into transportation. We
need to maximize the Federal dollar in terms of the number of
clients we serve and the ability to serve them well.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you both for your testimony today,
and, Mr. Rogoff, thank you for traveling from Washington, DC,
to Sioux Falls for this hearing. I would like to excuse you
now.
I would now like to call on the second panel. Will the
second panel come forward?
[Pause.]
Chairman Johnson. Now I would like to introduce our
witnesses.
Ms. Cosette Fester is a Paratransit rider in Sioux Falls.
Mr. Mike Cooper is the Director of Planning and Building
Services for the city of Sioux Falls.
Ms. Barb Cline is Executive Director of Prairie Hills
Transit in Spearfish.
Ms. Emma Featherman-Sam is the coordinator for Oglala Sioux
Transit.
Ms. Lynne Keller Forbes is Executive Director of the South
Eastern Council of Governments.
Last, Ms. Sarah Jennings is the South Dakota State Director
for AARP.
Ms. Fester, please begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF COSETTE FESTER, SIOUX AREA METRO PARATRANSIT RIDER
Ms. Fester. Sixteen years ago, I had never heard of
Paratransit or even had a need to know about it. That all
changed in January 1997 when we were in a car accident which
severed my spine at T5. I was in the hospital for 6 months. I
have rods holding up my back so I can sit up and also rods
holding up my rib cage. Everyone in the hospital tried to get
me to sign up for Medicaid and all the benefits, but my family
said that I would be going back to work. At that time I was an
insurance adjuster specializing in workers' compensation. My
boss kept whispering in my ear that I would have a job waiting
for me when I was ready to come back.
In October, I started back part-time at first. My husband
was driving me back and forth, but that got to be a tiresome
job for both of us. My husband is older and has numerous health
problems of his own. I am not sure how I got signed up for
Paratransit, but my family called them and away I went. The
first day I made my husband follow me all the way to work and
back again. I cried all the way to work. My poor bus driver
kept asking me if I was all right, and I kept on crying and
shaking my head. On that day, I felt feelings of inadequacy and
dependency. My feelings have greatly changed since that day.
Paratransit has been my salvation. They pick me up at my
door and drop me off at my door. I am unable to open the doors
myself as I do not have the upper strength to do so. Also my
wheelchair does not allow me to get up close enough to a door
to open it by myself.
I think back at what people did before we had these
services. I am not a person that could just stay at home. I
need the interaction of people. I need to be useful and kept
busy. Before I went back to work, I sat home and cried and felt
sorry for poor me. I felt a burden to my family and was unclear
with what to do with my life. Paratransit is more than just a
way for me to get to work. It is another way for me to contact
and connect. I see so much good in the people that work there
as well. I once had a bus driver who wrote a poem for me. My
family and I cherish the words of this wise man, my Paratransit
driver. He wrote about how I was defined by me and not my
chair. The way I handle this life is not what matters most. I
need to make the best of it, for I will walk in the Promised
Land. So what you need to realize is that Paratransit means a
whole lot more than transportation to its riders. It is key to
our independence, and it enhances our self-worth through its
people and its services. Without this service and the special
people employed by our Government, I would be lost.
God has put a lot of different people on this Earth. I used
to consider myself average and just your average middle-class
working woman. However, that tragedy that occurred that night
in 1997 made me special--yes, with a disability but, most
importantly, I am special because, unlike many others, I now
see the good in so many people. I instantly recognize good will
and civility in ways that most average Americans fail to
recognize. I am very grateful for all of the good deeds that
are provided continually by Paratransit.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Fester. I personally
appreciate the complications of such a simple thing as getting
the door open.
Ms. Lynne Forbes.
STATEMENT OF LYNNE KELLER FORBES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOUTH
EASTERN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Ms. Forbes. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman Johnson,
for the opportunity to highlight our views on the new Federal
surface transportation law, MAP-21, and the transportation
investments the law provides, especially for our Nation's small
metropolitan and rural regions.
My name is Lynne Keller Forbes, and I am the executive
director of the South Eastern Council of Governments, which is
headquartered here in Sioux Falls and serves six of the
southeastern counties in the State. SECOG is also the fiscal
agent of the Sioux Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization,
which is the transportation planning organization for the Sioux
Falls urbanized area.
As the Committee examines the impacts of MAP-21 on public
transportation and transportation investments in rural States
like South Dakota, I respectfully submit the following
observations:
First, Mr. Chairman, it is important to note the benefits
of the law having rejected efforts to change the population
threshold for becoming and maintaining an MPO.
If MAP-21 would have included a provision to increase the
population threshold of MPOs to 200,000, as one of the draft
bills proposed, the Rapid City, Sioux City, and Sioux Falls
MPOs would have been three of the 220 of 385 MPOs potentially
eliminated, leaving the State of South Dakota with zero MPOs.
It is important to maintain MPOs in rural States like South
Dakota to ensure the input of the citizens and local elected
officials of small metropolitan areas are considered in the
transportation planning process. The populations of the
communities of the Sioux Falls MPO are increasing at record
rates, and the borders of these communities are continually
growing closer together. The cities of Brandon, Crooks,
Harrisburg, and Tea currently have borders approximately 1 to 2
miles away from the city of Sioux Falls' border. It is
estimated that the borders of these four communities will meet
Sioux Falls' border by 2035. The literal closeness of these
communities only emphasizes the importance of a local
transportation planning organization to ensure coordination
amongst the communities, to ensure the needs of the region are
met, and to ensure the voices of local citizens and the elected
officials are heard during the transportation planning and
programming process.
The Sioux Falls MPO transportation planning budget has been
just under $2 million for the past few years and has increased
to over $3 million for 2013. The regionally significant
activities accomplished with that funding include a
transportation planning study of 41st Street and the I-29
interchange to identify potential projects to improve traffic
flow on one of the busiest streets and interchanges in the
State. A similar study is also being completed by the MPO for
26th Street and the I-229 interchange, an area that experiences
significant traffic delays during the morning and evening
commutes. In addition, a recent impressive collaboration by the
Sioux Falls MPO communities resulted in the ``Sioux Falls MPO
Multi-Use Trail Study'' to identify corridors to connect the
trails of Brandon, Harrisburg, and Tea to Sioux Falls'
extensive trail system. Once implemented, pedestrians and
bicyclists will have a safe way to travel between the MPO
communities. Transit activities completed by the MPO include a
recently completed route study to improve the Sioux Falls
transit system and plan for future needs of the system. A space
needs study was also recently completed to plan for the
expanded needs of the transit system's office and storage
facility.
Additionally, Mr. Chairman, the continued increase of
Federal support for public transportation, as demonstrated by
MAP-21, is essential for the economic growth of rural States
like South Dakota and small metropolitan areas like Sioux
Falls.
In 2012, Sioux Area Metro, which is also known as SAM, the
Sioux Falls public transit system, provided almost 1.2 million
rides, which is a 3.1-percent increase from 2011. Additionally,
SAM employs about 95 people and has an annual operating budget
of around $3.5 million.
With the previously mentioned growth that the Sioux Falls
area has been experiencing, the transit service will need to be
expanded to reach the new employment and residential areas in
the community. The ``Transit System Analysis-Grid Network
Alternatives'' study completed by the Sioux Falls MPO just last
month concluded that an additional $1.2 million, or about one-
third of the current budget, would need to be added to SAM's
annual operating budget for the extended transit service needed
by year 2035. In addition, increased funding will be needed for
capital costs such as additional buses and transfer centers and
the expansion of the storage and office facilities. A recent
space needs study completed by the MPO estimated that a $13
million expansion of SAM's office, maintenance, and storage
facility will be needed to meet transit needs.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, we are encouraged by the support
for transportation planning and public transportation that is
demonstrated by MAP-21.
As you have heard, the transportation planning funding and
public transportation funding authorized by the transportation
bills is effectively utilized in the Sioux Falls MPO and
contributes significantly to the economy of the State of South
Dakota. MAP-21 expires on September 30, 2014. As work begins on
the next bill, sustained and increased support is needed to
ensure coordinated transportation planning and programming
activities among local citizens and elected officials are
continued on a regional basis in rural States like South Dakota
and to ensure the notable economic benefits of public
transportation are not lost by our State.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
testify today. I would be pleased to answer any questions.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Forbes.
Ms. Featherman-Sam.
STATEMENT OF EMMA FEATHERMAN-SAM, COORDINATOR, OGLALA SIOUX
TRANSIT
Ms. Featherman-Sam. Thank you. Euha chi cante wasteya nape
ceyuspa pi. I give you a heartfelt handshake. Thank you. Thank
you for inviting me to testify here before the Committee. I am
honored.
The people who have needed the most help with
transportation have accepted tribal transit systems across
Indian Country voraciously. Transportation on the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation via some type of vehicle is most often
either unavailable or, if a vehicle is available, is not in the
best working condition or the cost of operating the vehicle is
prohibitive. The safe, reliable services of Oglala Sioux
Transit have already provided a valuable addition to the
quality-of-life factors for the many residents of the Pine
Ridge Indian Reservation.
Oglala Sioux Transit has been operating since February of
2009. We have eight buses. We have three 22-passenger and five
16-passenger. We have a 12,500 square foot facility that has
been constructed with funds from Federal transit. We average
right around 1,800 miles daily. We have seven routes across our
2.7 million acre reservation. The seven routes go through 16 of
the main villages in our reservation, and the stops--there are
35 stops across our reservation that provide the general public
with access to college courses, employment, medical
appointments, business, and shopping services on the
reservation.
A lot of times, the stops are kind of out in the middle of
nowhere, and I think since we are rural, we do not really think
about ourselves as out in the middle of nowhere, but we do have
five bus shelters that have been constructed and erected on our
reservation at several of the more popular spots on the
reservation.
The transit program is comprised of 17 employees--a
coordinator, office manager, maintenance support technician,
dispatcher, 12 bus drivers, and a bus mechanic. We also take
part in providing slots for TANF workers who provide the
receptionist, filing, and cleaning for our facility.
The Pine Ridge Reservation is comprised of approximately
2.7 million acres. It encompasses three of the counties of
South Dakota--Shannon, Bennett, and the southern half of
Jackson. You know, we talk about low density in South Dakota.
Shannon County has 6.5, Bennett 2.9, and Jackson 1.6 persons
per square mile, and these are all counties that are based
within the boundaries of the reservation. We have a population
through the data from the different tribal programs of 47,000,
of which 38,000 are enrolled tribal members. The 2010 census
shows 20,048, which is a massive undercount, for our
reservation. The Department of Housing and Urban Development's
NAHASDA population number is 43,146, and that is still a little
low. BIA Labor Force talks about our unemployment on our
reservation at 89 percent. Persons below poverty levels on the
reservation remain among the highest in the United States, with
the 2009 census data indicating 51 percent for Shannon County,
37.8 percent for Bennett County, and 31.6 percent for Jackson
County. So, you know, we are dealing with a lot of really low-
income, poverty-level people here on our reservation as we try
to provide transit services for them.
We are right now at a point where for the last 4 years we
have transported 27,703 passenger trips. You know, we are
traveling 400--actually, 1,746,000 miles, and the number--that
was just a number for the quarter--was 95,000 persons across
the reservation.
Tribal transits nationally, when we started back in fiscal
year 2006, there were 63 tribes in fiscal year 2012, 72 tribes
that have received tribal transit funds. With the new fiscal
year 2013, there are 71 tribes in South Dakota; five of those
tribes are receiving approximately $1.8 million.
Let me see. MAP-21, the provisions have represented a
significant improvement in the availability of resources that
tribes may access to assist with their public transportation
needs. We provided comment back in November for MAP-21 for the
tribal transits.
In closing, I would like to express my appreciation to you
for holding this hearing here and allowing me to represent some
of the tribal input into what is happening within the Federal
Transit Administration to provide public transit services out
in Indian country. Thank you for acknowledging the sovereignty
of tribes by providing direct funding on a Government-to-
Government basis to those of us tribes that have accepted that.
Congress, FTA, and Indian tribes can rightfully be proud of the
accomplishments made to this State and look forward to a
continued partnership for future gains.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Emma.
Ms. Cline.
STATEMENT OF BARBARA K. CLINE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PRAIRIE
HILLS TRANSIT, SPEARFISH, SOUTH DAKOTA
Ms. Cline. Senator Johnson, good afternoon. I am Barb
Cline, the executive director of Prairie Hills Transit located
in Spearfish, South Dakota. I direct a transit agency operating
within a 12,000 square mile service area and like to think that
I represent in large part many of the rural transit system
operators that provide much needed services to an array of
destination in rural and small town America daily.
I would sincerely like to thank you and FTA Administrator
Rogoff for supporting community and public transit. We
appreciate the increased formula funding in MAP-21 and the
ongoing dialog that you have permitted us.
Today I would like to discuss how the new surface
transportation law, MAP-21, is impacting rural transportation
operators and their constituents.
Prairie Hills Transit is a company that grew from a single
``old'' green van that was not lift equipped and operated 4
hours daily in Spearfish for seniors. A short 23 years later,
our company operates and receives local support in 15
communities located in 6 counties in the Black Hills of western
South Dakota. With 38 vehicles, 50 employees, and a brand new
transit facility, our growth has been solid and stable. With
your help Prairie Hills Transit can continue to grow and meet
the ever increasing transportation service requests.
You asked that we let you know our feelings regarding the
effect specific programs might have. Let me begin with the Bus
and Bus Facilities Program. The program is much smaller than
the version that existed under SAFETEA-LU. While the formula-
based bus funds are appreciated, ultimately that dollar amount
does not begin to touch the replacement needs of Prairie Hills
Transit or other agencies in our State. It is important for you
to understand that many of these vehicles consistently drive
100 to 200 miles daily for medical and employment.
Of the 38 vehicles Prairie Hills Transit operates, 22 are
2005 or older, and 17 of the 38 have 130,000 miles. A
significant commitment in the investment must be made in coming
years.
The safety and security requirements of MAP-21 are of real
concern. Both have been a long-standing commitment of Prairie
Hills Transit and the Community Transportation Association of
America even before MAP-21. We are currently pursuing a 3-year
accreditation by CTAA that meets the Federal Transit
Administration-endorsed standards. We would encourage that the
State DOTs be allowed to use the National Transit Data base as
a safety reporting mechanism rather than requiring each agency
to either have a part-time or full-time safety officer.
I believe that asset management plans could and should be
managed by the State Department of Transportation. Guidance
would make the State accountable for their sub-recipients, and
this information could be entered into the National Transit
Data base.
Over a year ago, we entered into a discharge contract with
the primary hospital in Rapid City to get their patients home.
This is a partnership that has worked extremely well for both
parties, and rather than sending their patients home in an
ambulance because transportation was not available, we are
providing that service. It takes out the ambulance service.
They can stay and do what they need to do.
Often these medical discharges require us to go long
distances or even across State lines in doing that. So we feel
that we are privilege a much needed service by working with the
health care industry and doing that.
Recent feedback from a spokesperson said that the
satisfactory really appreciates the collaborative effort, but
ultimately it is a win-win for the patients themselves.
As a Medicaid provider, we help young families with
children, individuals with disabilities, and a growing number
or wheelchair-bound persons residing in residential living
facilities, nursing homes, and assisted livings. The multitude
of other services that we provide are listed in our written
testimony, but they are significant and some are rather
creative and innovative, we like to think.
We must begin to place a definable value and measurable
outcomes for our critical medical needs. We must continue to be
innovative and diversify programs our transit systems already
work with.
Recently we took our youngest rider home, an 8-day-old
baby, with his parents to their home about 150 miles away from
Rapid City. The other end-of-life cycle is a 103-year-old lady
in Edgemont that uses transportation to get to the senior meals
program every day, and we think that is a great spread.
In closing, I would like to tell you a story that has been
very impactful for me. Just the other day, one of our drivers
came to me and told me about a trip that he had taken, a
gentleman going home from the hospital. And before he told me
this story, he said, ``I want you to know I told him I would
pray for him.'' He was taking this gentleman, who had just had
his leg amputated, back to his home in Eagle Butte. The
gentleman had been involved in a car accident where his
granddaughter died in the seat next to him. His wife died the
day before his discharge from complications of the accident. So
if anybody ever says all we do is provide transportation, they
are wrong. Public transportation provides the whole gamut of
services, all the way from getting people to home to being a
support mechanism when people have no one else to turn to.
I personally take great pride in the compassion our drivers
show every day and the humility it requires for us to make a
difference to our counties, cities, and State. We need your
help to fight the battle rural systems fight every day. Thank
you so much.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Cline.
Mr. Cooper.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL COOPER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING
SERVICES, CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA
Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and on behalf of the
city of Sioux Falls, thank you for hosting this hearing at our
Carnegie Town Hall.
I am Mike Cooper, Director of Planning and Building
Services for the city of Sioux Falls. Sioux Falls is fortunate
to have a high-quality public transportation system with our
Sioux Area Metro. In addition to the fixed-route system that
you have heard has now exceeded over 1 million riders for the
first time, our Paratransit system continues to provide quality
service for those who cannot ride the fixed-route system and
provides now on average almost 600 riders per weekday.
The total population growth of Sioux Falls during the last
year exceeded 2,500 people and is projected to continue that
rate well into the future. In order to ensure quality public
transportation services, the city of Sioux Falls and Sioux Area
Metro are planning for ways to maintain services to an
expanding and increasingly diverse population base.
As you have heard, in just the past year, the city of Sioux
Falls and the Sioux Falls MPO have completed studies to provide
a plan for the future of public transit service in Sioux Falls.
These studies have included the Transit System Analysis as well
as the Space Needs Study. Also, the city of Sioux Falls has
recently initiated a Fare and Operations Analysis to determine
some of the short-term and midterm changes that are required to
implement recommendations from the Transit System Analysis.
As a part of the Sioux Falls Route Analysis, three new
routes and five expanded and/or modified fixed routes have been
proposed to provide a higher level of service for the projected
growth of Sioux Falls. As a part of this plan for expansion,
Sioux Area Metro would need to add three new transfer stations
to improve route connectivity. Also, the Route Analysis
recommended adding cross-town routes to connect the new
transfer centers and improve regional connectivity.
This expansion would take place over the next 20 years and
would create the need for 10 additional fixed-route buses and
up to 18 additional Paratransit buses.
But before the expansion of these new routes is possible,
Sioux Area Metro needs a major expansion of our bus storage and
office facility at 6th Street and Weber Avenue. And as you
heard, the estimated cost of that is going to exceed in that
range of $12 to $13 million. This expansion was detailed in the
Sioux Area Metro Space Needs Study, which was completed last
year. The Space Needs Study recommends that expansion of the
bus storage and office facility is essential before any
expansion of our transit system can take place. As I am sure
you can appreciate, security, maintenance, and efficiency of
the buses is dependent on good indoor storage for our bus
fleet.
Expanding transportation opportunities and enhancing the
independence for people with disabilities is a high priority
for Sioux Area Metro. As you have heard already, the
Paratransit system is very successful in Sioux Falls and
continues to be a very important piece of our overall
transportation system. However, the fixed-route bus system is
very efficient and also provides opportunities for greater
transportation independence for all people within our
community. All of our fixed-route buses are fully accessible,
and bus stops throughout our service area continue to be
improved to be accessible for people with disabilities. In
fact, this year the city of Sioux Falls is looking at investing
additional capital improvement money to upgrade 88 bus stops,
and a proposal is currently being presented to the city council
for authorization. The city of Sioux Falls will continue to
find ways to improve the accessibility of our fixed-route
system so all citizens have an opportunity for economical and
quality transportation.
In closing, the full funding of MAP-21 for public
transportation and transportation investments is critical for
the Sioux Falls region. We look forward to working with you,
Senator Johnson, on providing more information about future
needs for public transit as we move forward with MAP-21.
Again, thank you on behalf of the city of Sioux Falls for
this opportunity to update you on Sioux Area Metro and discuss
our local community needs for quality public transportation.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Cooper.
Ms. Jennings.
STATEMENT OF SARAH JENNINGS, STATE DIRECTOR, AARP SOUTH DAKOTA
Ms. Jennings. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and there is less
wiggling going on in the room than I expected at this point
when I am last, but I will try to be concise.
But I want to first thank you and your staff for working
with our national office team during MAP-21. I heard nothing
but wonderful praise for how hard you worked to be really
responsive to the needs of seniors as you thought through how
you were going to reauthorize this legislation.
I put a lot of specifics in my testimony about what AARP
really is appreciative of regarding the formula changes and
some of the policy changes that really we hope will enhance how
planning works and will be even a more transparent way for
folks to get involved in the process and to make sure in terms
of coordination that that is really happening everywhere it
needs to.
I think now we are really looking forward at
implementation, and we want to be a partner with you and with
the Administrator on making sure that we take full advantages
of the different policies that are now in place.
You know, I think probably some people were surprised to
see AARP on the witness list here, and this is an issue for us
that we have worked on for a long time. It is an issue, as you
have heard some of these stories here, that really is about--
you know, AARP's mission is to ensure that people can age with
dignity and purpose, and that means something different to
everybody, whether it is getting to their job because they are
continuing to work or getting to a health care appointment
because they need to, seeing a grandkid or getting over to the
senior center to get a meal. I mean, all of that is critically
important to folks being able to age as they want, and more and
more we know people want to stay in their homes, and in our
State, you know, whether it is in Sioux Falls where you have
some options available to you which are really wonderful, but,
you know, whether you are in the most rural part of our State,
you should be able to live at home if that is something that
you want to do.
This is not a new issue, but we in AARP here in South
Dakota are getting more involved now. I have to give a shout
out to our State volunteer president, Dennis Eisnach, who has
been someone who has talked about this issue for a long time.
And I will be honest that for a while we could not figure out
how AARP South Dakota could really meaningfully contribute to
this discussion and hopefully kind of move the ball forward.
I think between that and then hearing from volunteers and
members and the public over the past couple years, more and
more when I ask people in their community, whether it is in
Rapid City or here in Sioux Falls or Hartford or up north in,
you know, Aberdeen, people talk about transportation as
something that they really are having challenges with, and it
is not because our providers do not want to provide this
service, because as you have heard here today and whenever I
talk to folks, no one wants to say no. But it is just that the
needs are great and the needs are growing greater all the time.
And so we really want to get involved with that.
You know, I referenced in my testimony that we had our
National Policy Council out here last summer, and, again, that
was largely due to Dennis Eisnach's tenacious advocating for
folks that they really needed to come out and see what rural
transportation is all about, because as we all know, when we
live in South Dakota, there are a lot of folks on each coast
who all they think about when they think of transit are subways
and city buses. And, you know, we really opened some eyes,
especially our folks from New Jersey and California when they
came out here and got to see some of the services that Barb is
providing. We took them to her facility. We were up in Pierre.
We went through some of the tribal lands, and we started here
in Sioux Falls. And we really were able to open eyes about what
the face of rural transportation is, who these people are that
need the services, and why it is so critically important.
There is also just so much happening in our State right
now, and as I said previously, our providers are so innovative
here, and they all want to say yes. And I would also say there
is a ton of volunteers out there that want to provide services.
I was at a meeting with Project CAR before I came here today,
and the services they provide here in Sioux Falls are really
second to none. And they also talked a lot about it is beyond
providing a ride. You know, this is helping ensure that we are
helping people battle isolation and having that connection to
the outside world, and it is critically important.
So we are moving forward and hoping that--you know, we have
the vision of someday here in South Dakota, we are a State
where no matter you are in your State, you can pick up the
phone, call a number, and get to where you need to go. And
whether that is a health care appointment, whether that is to
get groceries, whether that is to go see your grandchild, or
whether that is to go see a movie, we think it is important.
And we know that you are partner with wanting that, and I know
everybody here at the table is, too. And that is something now
that AARP South Dakota really wants to work on.
We know it is not going to be easy, but it is something
where we believe we can serve a role as a convener. We can
certainly educate people, because I also hear that, you know,
getting people to give up their car keys in South Dakota is not
easy. But having folks, you know, convincing them that getting
on a bus or accepting a ride from someone is a great thing to
do, and, you know, in a lot of ways it actually enhances your
independence, it does not hurt it.
And so we look forward to working--and also just on the
policy advocacy side, you know, we would love to work with you
as you go forward, and I loved the idea of making your last
year and a half really a busy one as we work to make sure that
rural transportation--you know, you have been a champion, and
we want to make sure that that continues. And we are on board
with working you hard and your team hard until your very last
day.
So thanks for your leadership on this, and I would be happy
to answer any questions, and I also look forward to working
with you.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Jennings.
Ms. Fester, you mentioned how Paratransit is a critical
link to you remaining in the workforce. Can you talk about the
logistics of working with Sioux Area Metro to ensure that you
get to and from work every day?
Ms. Fester. They are very good at getting me to work on
time and picking me up and taking me home. I have had very
little problems, and if I do have, I just call them up, and
they--we see what we can do.
Chairman Johnson. I do not want to have you speak for the
whole community of disabled, but commonly does Paratransit work
for everybody?
Ms. Fester. So the people I come in contact with, yes, I
think they try their best. You know, I think they get people to
where they can go. I do not know what you are looking for. Does
everybody's needs get met? Is that what you are----
Chairman Johnson. Across the board, is there general
satisfaction with Paratransit in Sioux Falls?
Ms. Fester. The drivers are wonderful. It takes a special
person to be a driver of Paratransit.
Chairman Johnson. Yes, good.
Mr. Cooper, can you discuss how the city of Sioux Falls is
preparing to meet the growing demand for Paratransit service
and service for seniors in the community?
Mr. Cooper. Sure. We are looking at a number of action
steps. One is that we continue to look at ways that we can
screen people that have a need for special transportation but
are still able to utilize our fixed-route system. As I
mentioned in my testimony, all of our fixed-route buses are ADA
accessible, and we continue to make strides in making our stops
ADA accessible. But there is no doubt that the use of our
Paratransit is the main increase. We are seeing that increase
by about 5 percent per year, and right now it consumes about 50
percent of our transit budget in terms of operational costs
while providing just under 15 percent of the ridership.
So we want to make sure that people that need it are able
to use it, but we also want to make sure that people that can
utilize the fixed-route bus system are able to use that.
Along with that, we want to continue to work with some of
our local nonprofit agencies because a number of our
Paratransit rides are going from housing to employment centers
in support of local nonprofit agencies. And we are going to
continue to look at ways that we can utilize services that they
currently have or the facilities that we have to make our
Paratransit ridership more efficient and expand the service for
more riders that really need it into the future.
Chairman Johnson. Ms. Cline, can you describe some of your
efforts to coordinate with other agencies around Spearfish and
provide one-call service to your riders? Also, how is the new
facility functioning? That is a softball question.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Cline. You know, every day is a blessing with our new
facility, Senator Johnson, and you were an integral part of
helping us get that. But it is just an amazing place to work.
We have a One-Call Center, which for every person that
needs a ride with us--and we do demand response, which means
every person that gets on our bus is either picked up from a
pick-up location at a home, daycare center, maybe a school, a
senior center. Everybody gets door-to-door service. So the
transit facility itself, every call comes into our One-Call
Center, our dispatch center. Every call then is taken by a
personal voice. It is logged on to the computer, and then it
goes out on a tablet. So our drivers actually are working with
a tablet every day to know who gets picked up and who gets
dropped off.
As you may remember, in the new transit facility we have a
licensed child care for 41 children. That is full. That is
perfect. And so they are doing the same thing there. A lot of
the parents that need to get their children to child care or
from child care to school are using our service, as well as our
employees who have access to the childcare center, which is
8,000 square feet of the new transit facility.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you.
Ms. Featherman-Sam, all too often people in Indian country
without access to a car find themselves walking along the
highway for long distances. Has the transit system helped to
improve the safety of travel on Pine Ridge?
Ms. Featherman-Sam. We have a deviated fixed-route system
on our reservation, and we have seen a lot less people
hitchhiking across our roads.
Chairman Johnson. Good.
Ms. Featherman-Sam. A lot of times, when the weather is
cold or if it is raining or snowing, we advise the bus drivers
just to pick up a passenger and ask them, you know, ``If you
have the fare, please pay the fare. If you do not, next time
you get on, if you could throw an extra dollar or two in, we
would appreciate it.''
And so I think that for us on our reservation, because we--
the communities are kind of few and far between, but there are
still homes between those little villages, and so a lot of the
people come out to the main highway where our bus routes are
and will flag a bus down to go someplace on a reservation.
We also transport--you know, one of the problems that we
have is we have a few people that still like to drink, and so,
you know, we try to transport those persons, and we have not
had any problems with transporting inebriated passengers,
mainly because when they first get on--the bus drivers know
just about everybody. I think anywhere in a rural area you know
all your passengers by their first name. And so our bus drivers
will inform them that they can get on, but if they pose any
kind of problems, we call the public safety in, and they will
take care of them. So we have just not had any problems with
anybody. We do not have that many passengers, but, you know, we
do allow them because we think that it is safer for them to be
riding with us than trying to walk along the road or trying to
get in a vehicle and drive.
Chairman Johnson. OK. Ms. Forbes, how would SECOG
transportation planning efforts change if the Federal
Government's commitment to transportation investment faltered,
especially if smaller metropolitan planning organizations were
eliminated?
Ms. Forbes. Sure. Obviously, everybody talks about working
well together in coordination and all of those kinds of things.
But coordination and planning cost money, and if that money or
that financial incentive were to go away, it is going to get
more difficult to bring people to the table to do that. And
lots of the examples that I gave you earlier today are studies
that need to be done. I believe that a lot of those studies
probably particularly in the city of Sioux Falls, which has
greater resources maybe than some of the outlying communities,
some of those studies will probably still be done. But it may
take some delays, and it certainly may not be as thorough a
study as what we are able to do right now. But I do think it
would certainly hinder the coordination and particularly some
of the planning efforts that are going on in some of our
bedroom communities that are still very important for the
transportation in the city of Sioux Falls, but certainly do not
have the resources probably to do as good a job on their own
without the Federal funding through the MPO.
Chairman Johnson. Ms. Jennings, AARP has stated transit
options for seniors in South Dakota. Can you offer some
additional examples of how better coordination of
transportation services improves the travel of our seniors?
Ms. Jennings. Sure. You know, I can think of a couple. The
first I would look that up from my testimony is just--you know,
when we had our National Policy Council here and we went to the
hospitals and had conversations with them about, you know, how
just the link between health care and transportation and how it
is such an important one. Hearing the stories when we were at
the Avera Cancer Center about how women who are traveling, you
know, hundreds of miles to the center for treatment are
choosing their treatment based on their transportation options,
or lack thereof. And, you know, that to me was a really eye-
opening statistic, that here in South Dakota we have more women
choosing to get a mastectomy simply because they cannot find
the transportation or do not want to deal with it because it is
much more complex than they feel like they can handle in their
lives. So they are choosing to undergo a much more--they are
choosing mastectomy over radiation, you know, not at the
suggestion of their doctor but simply because the
transportation options are not there.
And that same example, I was, you know, really impressed
with the staff team there because they have social workers
working with all these patients to figure out what the
transportation options are. But, again, it sort of, you know,
kind of occurred to me that I am like these social workers
should be, you know, working with the family to just get
through the stressful time and spending more time on that and
less time on figuring out how to coordinate a patient's
transportation. Again, that is why you come back to if there
was a place where these folks can call, the social worker can
make one call, and we would all figure it out on the back end,
and you would get those folks the care they need.
You know, here in Sioux Falls, we are blessed with we do
have a great system, but it does not meet every need, and you
do have folks who, you know, are trying to get from Point A to
Point B, and maybe they are not on a fixed-route, and so they
do get to--you know, and we do have a lot of organizations here
in town who will provide rides a lot with using volunteer
drivers. But in some cases, you know, I have heard the stories
of, ``Well, I did not quite qualify for that income
guideline,'' or, you know, ``they stop driving at 4, and I
needed to get there at 5.'' And there is just a lot of that
kind of thing, which, again, I think that the desire is there
to get everybody where they want to go, and I actually think
the people, the vehicles, everything is there here in Sioux
Falls, and we do have a Coordination Council here in Sioux
Falls that we are trying to get our arms around all these
issues as well.
But, you know, as you know, it is messy, it is complicated,
but, you know, I would give those as two examples here in the
State--you know, one in our big city and I think one that
really affects more of our rural residents, how if we had an
even better coordinated system, we could really improve the
lives of seniors.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. Cooper, what do you consider to be
the biggest challenge in maintaining and growing SAM transit
services going forward?
Mr. Cooper. I think the biggest challenge we have
identified in some of our analysis over the last year is that
because of the geographical expansion of our city, with
employment centers, with affordable housing locations, and with
a typically South Dakota kind of low-density population, even
though we are a bigger city, that as the need or the request
for those transit services come to us, in some cases it is
difficult to justify adding a route or amending a route. But we
are looking at that. We have identified some initiatives, as I
testified, that we could look forward to. But it is based on
funding ability in terms of our operation budget. We are going
to continue to look at that locally, how we can accommodate
that in the future by making our current routes more effective
and possibly freeing up funding that we can use for expanded
routes.
But then, in addition, we are going to be needing those
capital facilities involving the buses and the expansion of our
bus facility. And, again, we are hoping that we can provide
that through our Federal funding programs that are going to be
available.
Chairman Johnson. Ms. Cline, what is your biggest challenge
in a moderate-sized town to maintaining and growing services at
Prairie Hills?
Ms. Cline. Not having enough time to do everything I want
to do.
Chairman Johnson. Yes.
Ms. Cline. You know, I think with every challenge comes
rewards, and we always are trying to do more. And as far as the
coordination with that same piece, we keep trying to work with
more and more agencies, more and more organizations, and
oftentimes you need to wait until the leadership in a
particular agency or organization changes. There is oftentimes
a reluctance to put the people that we support on public
transit buses or, you know, I do not want my child riding with
Grandma and Grandpa.
So sometimes the littlest things take the most effort and
time, but all in all, I think, you know, every day is a great
day; we are able to meet.
Chairman Johnson. OK. Thank you.
Ms. Featherman-Sam, what level of ridership do you predict
in the coming years? And can you elaborate on the usage you
have seen from younger users like students or younger workers?
Ms. Featherman-Sam. Back in 2000, the 2000 census stated
that 51 percent of the population on the Pine Ridge Indian
Reservation was under the age of 16. So, you know, here we have
a whole group of people that are now in their 20s, and, you
know, I think in 2010, again, the population is even--or just
as high as it was back in 2010 for those young people.
We have a lot of students that ride our transit system,
either just trying to get from one class to another, we
transport college students because we have a decentralized
college on our reservation, so there is a college center in
nine of the different districts across the reservation. So we
have a lot of those kinds of students, whether they are, you
know, just out of high school, college students, or the older
college students that use our transit system.
I think that as we go through, probably our biggest
challenge in trying to get people to use the transit system has
been for them to learn how to use it. And now that it has been
surprising that we have had elders over the age of 60, we
have--27 percent of our riders are elders. And it is just
surprising because they are the ones, I think, you know, just
based on wanting to be independent, they just got out there and
learned how to do the transfers from one route to another to
get to different places. And, you know, they have really
surprised us because they are just willing to do what they have
to do to get to where they got to go.
We have one lady who comes in from an area called
Manderson. She comes in to Pine Ridge, and she goes to Martin,
to her bank, and all this is in the morning. She comes in in
the morning. And then she takes her check and gets her money,
and she heads back out to the casino, and she comes back. And
toward evening time, she catches that 4 o'clock bus back from
the casino, and she is ready--back when they used to have bingo
there in Pine Ridge, she was ready for bingo in the evening.
So, you know, that is the elders that are out there, and
they really surprised me at how much independence they have
gotten from a transit system like this. And I think they are
really influencing the younger people in using the transit
system. Every birthday we have--and thank you for your letter
on our birthday--we provide free rides all day long. And, you
know, if we could get as many riders that we get on our
birthday every day of the week, we would be really doing well.
This year we had 306 passengers on that 1 day, and, of course,
we had cake and ice cream and coffee. So I think that really
drew them in.
And, still, you know, the elders are there. They are always
coming in and sitting in our lobby and talking to other
passengers as they come through. So I think that is where, as
we teach more and more people how to use transit, we will be
getting more and more passengers.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. Rogoff, do you have any closing
comments or responses to give?
Mr. Rogoff. Well, thanks for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman.
I think what I have been hearing here is the services that we
have, the services that the current funding streams can afford,
are being deployed in an efficient way and people are thinking
about getting more bang for the dollar, more passengers served
for the available dollars. But what I have also heard is how
much upside potential there is.
And when you look at some of the demographics specifically
for South Dakota, Ms. Featherman-Sam talked about the elders on
the reservation, but it is also true that the elderly
population of South Dakota is expected to grow from about
something 15 to 16 percent now to almost 24 percent in the next
few years, and demand is only going to go up. And in order for
those people to have the maximum beneficial quality of life at
the least expense to the taxpayer, letting them be at home and
having transit services that enable them to be at home is going
to be critical. So that I think is probably the next big agenda
item for MAP-22 or whatever we are going to call it.
Thank you.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you.
I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here
today. This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:36 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Prepared statements supplied for the record follow:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF PETER M. ROGOFF
Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, Department of
Transportation
March 28, 2013
Thank you, Chairman Johnson, for the opportunity to appear before
you today to discuss how we can work together to improve access to good
transportation choices in rural areas, tribal lands, and urbanized
centers, including Sioux Falls and communities across South Dakota.
The Administration recognizes that public transportation in rural
areas functions not as a luxury but as a lifeline for low-income
working families, seniors, veterans, individuals with disabilities,
tribal residents, and others. Many people living in rural and tribal
communities can ill-afford to travel considerable distances to work and
other destinations. It is not surprising that, given these constraints,
demand for public transportation in these areas has been rising over
the last 4 years. Between 2008 and 2012, the number of rural transit
operators in the United States grew by nearly 6 percent, and 10 percent
more trips are being provided, totaling 142 million trips last year.
The Department's Federal Transit Administration (FTA) anticipates
that demand for rural service will continue to rise, and we need
legislative and policy solutions to deliver the transportation
solutions that rural America needs. On July 6, 2012, President Obama
signed the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
into law, reauthorizing public transportation and other surface
transportation programs through fiscal year (FY) 2014. MAP-21 enables
us to implement many bold new policies to strengthen and streamline
public transportation, including, importantly, bringing an additional
$1.2 billion to rural communities and Indian reservations over the next
2 years.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for supporting the passage of
MAP-21. You, together with other Members of the Senate Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, worked toward bipartisan and
bicameral agreement on this very important transportation bill because
you understood that its enactment would improve access to public
transportation and create and support jobs at a time when we need them
most.
MAP-21
Enactment of MAP-21 signals an opportunity for us to work
collectively to strengthen our transit systems and better serve the
American public. MAP-21, which took effect on October 1, 2012,
authorizes $10.6 billion in FY2013 and $10.7 billion in FY2014 for
public transportation. The law furthers several important goals in the
crucial areas of safety, state of good repair, emergency relief,
program streamlining, and program efficiency.
FTA has made a significant start toward implementation of MAP-21
within the law's first 6 months by applying key provisions and
providing guidance to States, metropolitan planning organizations,
transit agencies, including rural providers, and Indian tribes. We have
an active and engaged legislative implementation team and an aggressive
timetable in place.
More specifically, FTA has published considerable information on
its Web site that, among other things, address MAP-21 programs relevant
to public transportation providers in small urbanized areas, rural
areas and tribal lands. On October 16, 2012, we published in the
Federal Register, a ``Notice of FTA Transit Program Changes, Authorized
Funding Levels and Implementation of the Moving Ahead for Progress in
the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and FTA Fiscal Year Apportionments,
Allocations, Program Information and Interim Guidance''. On November 9,
2012, we published a Federal Register Notice regarding the FY2013
Public Transportation on Indian Reservations Program and we are
currently considering comments received from interested parties. FTA is
also working to implement MAP-21 through regulation where necessary and
by updating guidance through its circulars. FTA anticipates that it
will have updated the circular for the enhanced mobility of seniors and
individuals with disabilities as well as the rural area formula grants
circular during this fiscal year.
I would like to highlight the MAP-21 changes that will benefit the
rural areas and tribal lands like those in South Dakota, as well as
urban centers such as Sioux Falls and Rapid City.
Formula Grants for Rural Areas (Section 5311)
MAP-21 increases rural area formula funds by 29 percent, from $465
million to $600 million. (By comparison, under MAP-21, urbanized area
formula funds increased by 6 percent.) Funding increased for rural
areas because we recognize that public transportation in these areas is
urgently needed, especially for residents who do not have access to
personal vehicles. Public transportation is important for providing
links between workers and rural area employers, and encouraging rural
economic development. Further, public transportation in rural areas can
provide links to urban areas and provide access to opportunities found
in those areas.
As in prior authorizations, such as Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),
the Formula Grants for Rural Areas program continues to provide capital
and operating assistance to support public transportation in rural
areas, defined as areas with fewer than 50,000 residents, and on tribal
lands. In addition, MAP-21 now allows these program funds to be used
for planning activities, as well as for Job Access and Reverse Commute
program activities (JARC) for low-income individuals. Consolidating
JARC activities into the Rural Areas Formula program provides more
funding flexibility at the local level. Funding for the rural program
is based on a formula that uses land area, population, including the
number of low-income individuals residing in rural areas, and the
provision of transit service. MAP-21 provides total funding of $600
million in FY2013 and $608 million in FY2014. Subject to
appropriations, in FY2013, the State of South Dakota can expect to
receive an apportionment of $5.9 million for transit service provided
in rural areas and on tribal lands. This is 17 percent higher than the
amount apportioned to the State under this program in the last fiscal
year.
A State may use up to 10 percent of the amount apportioned to it
for purposes of administering the Rural Area Formula program and to
provide technical assistance to rural and tribal grantees. Technical
assistance includes project planning, program and management
development, coordination of public transportation programs, and
research the State considers appropriate to promote public
transportation service.
In addition, the Rural Transit Assistance Program (RTAP) provides
funds for technical assistance, training, and related support services
tailored to meet the needs of transit operators in rural areas and on
tribal lands. The program is funded with a 2 percent takedown from the
amount available to carry out the Rural Areas Formula program. From the
amounts made available for RTAP, FTA may use up to 15 percent to carry
out competitively selected projects of a national scope with the
remaining balance allocated to the States. In addition to the eligible
activities identified above, a State may use RTAP funds for special
projects that support its planning program for rural areas and tribal
lands. Similarly, a State may use its statewide planning funds to
support or supplement the technical assistance program it provides
through RTAP.
South Dakota will have $149,934 available for RTAP purposes in
FY2013, which is 37percent more than was available to the State for
this program in FY2012.
Tribal Program
The Administration understands that access to reliable, affordable
transportation is a high priority for Indian Country. We want to ensure
that every American Indian or Alaskan native who needs a ride to earn a
paycheck, attend school, see the doctor, visit sacred places, or buy
groceries has that opportunity. To that end, in December 2012,
Secretary LaHood announced the American Indian and Alaska Native tribe
projects that were competitively selected to receive $15.5 million in
FTA's Tribal Transit Program funds. The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, one
of 72 tribes selected to receive funds, was awarded $350,000 to
continue to provide public transit service to the growing number of
tribal members and the general public who use it to travel to
employment, education, medical care and other services in Eagle Butte
and surrounding rural areas.
MAP-21 doubles the funds available for the Tribal Transit program
from $15 million in FY2012 to $30 million in FY2013 and FY2014. Under
MAP-21, $25 million of the $30 million available for the program is
distributed by formula. The remaining $5 million is provided for a
discretionary grant program, and we encourage Indian tribes to apply
for this funding as well. This resource will improve tribal public
transportation in South Dakota and many other tribal areas throughout
the United States. Tribal Transit program funds may be awarded for
capital, operating, planning, job access and reverse commute projects,
and administrative assistance for rural and tribal public transit
services and rural intercity bus service.
MAP-21 States that Indian tribes providing public transportation
shall be apportioned funds consistent with formula factors that include
vehicle revenue miles and the number of low-income individuals residing
on tribal lands. Funds apportioned pursuant to the formula will provide
Indian tribes operating public transportation with a steady and
predictable stream of funding. FTA has actively reached out to tribal
and rural stakeholders to discuss the impact of proposed program
changes and funding priorities and is currently considering comments
before finalizing a formula allocation methodology. However, based on
an illustrative formula, South Dakota tribes are to receive
approximately $1.9 million in formula funds for FY2013 compared to
FY2012 when only $1.3 million in discretionary funds were available for
allocation. This represents a 29 percent increase in funds to the South
Dakota tribes in FY2013. MAP-21 also provided FTA with the authority to
determine the terms and conditions of grant awards under Tribal Transit
programs. As a result, FTA is also considering comments received from
interested tribal officials and other stakeholders regarding grant
requirements and building the technical capacity of tribal grantees. A
Federal Register notice will be issued soon to provide program
structure and guidance, final formula allocations, and terms and
conditions for the formula and discretionary programs.
In addition to the funds available to South Dakota residents and
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe for public transportation under MAP-21, the
Department of Transportation (DOT) also awarded $1 million in National
Infrastructure Investment funds to the Yankton Sioux Tribe in rural
Marty to construct a new transit facility. The award was made through
the fourth round of DOT's highly competitive Transportation Investment
Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant program. The facility will
expand transportation options in this underserved and economically
distressed Native American community. FTA will continue to work with
Yankton tribal representative to ensure the successful completion of
this project.
Formula Grants for the Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals
With Disabilities (Section 5310)
The Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities
program provides formula funding to increase the mobility of seniors
and persons with disabilities. MAP-21 merges the former New Freedom
program, which provided grants for services for individuals with
disabilities that went above and beyond the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), with this program. Enhanced
Mobility program funds are apportioned based on each State's share of
the respective target populations and are now apportioned to both
States (for all areas under 200,000 in population) and large urbanized
areas (with 200,000 or more in population). Projects selected for
funding must be included in a locally developed, coordinated public
transit-human services transportation plan; and the competitive
selection process, which was required under the former New Freedom
program, is now optional. At least 55 percent of program funds must be
spent on capital public transportation projects planned, designed, and
carried out to meet the access and functional needs of seniors and
individuals with disabilities when public transportation is
insufficient, inappropriate, or unavailable. The remaining funds may be
used for public transportation projects that exceed the requirements of
the ADA; public transportation projects that improve access to fixed-
route service and decrease reliance by individuals with disabilities on
complementary paratransit (a comparable service to public
transportation required by the ADA for individuals with disabilities
who are unable to use fixed route transportation systems); or,
alternatives to public transportation that assist seniors and
individuals with disabilities.
The State of South Dakota can expect to receive $624,500 in FY2013
to carry out this program. This is 5.8 percent decrease in the amount
of funds South Dakota received under the former Elderly Individuals and
Individuals with Disabilities (E&D) program and New Freedom programs in
FY2012. Under the former E&D program, each State was guaranteed a
minimum of $125,000. This is not the case under the MAP-21 formula,
which distributes 60 percent of the program funds to large urbanized
areas (over 200,000 in population), 20 percent to small urbanized
areas, and 20 percent to rural areas. South Dakota does not have any
large urbanized areas.
Coordinated Transportation
The South Eastern Council of Governments and City of Sioux Falls
prepared the ``Sioux Falls MPO Area Coordinated Public Transit--Human
Services Transportation Plan'' that was published on September 25,
2008. The plan, which is to be updated every 5 years, acknowledges that
the transportation stakeholders in the Sioux Falls MPO region ``have
recognized the benefits of transportation coordination.'' Ten to 15
years prior to the development of the plan, several agencies met to
develop strategies for making transportation services more efficient.
FTA applauds transportation entities that have long strived to serve
seniors, individuals with disabilities, and low-income individuals in
the Sioux Falls area. The plan also notes that transportation for these
targeted populations is provided primarily within the city limits of
Sioux Falls and, with minor exceptions, little transportation is
available to the residents of the MPO region's less populated areas.
Senior and medical transportation is vitally important to the
Nation's growing senior population and citizens suffering debilitating
illnesses and chronic diseases. In South Dakota, 14.6 percent of the
population is 65 or older and this segment of the population is
projected to grow to 23.1 percent by 2030. We need to support seniors
who want to continue living in communities they call home. This
requires human services policies and programs that work for the
traveling public, including seniors, individuals with disabilities, and
all those seeking medical care. Moreover, transportation services
focused on these populations are often fragmented, underutilized, or
difficult to navigate, and can be costly because of inconsistent,
duplicative, and often restrictive Federal and State program rules and
regulations. And, in some cases, narrowly focused programs leave
service gaps and the available transportation services are simply not
able to meet certain needs. We are working to determine how best to
integrate the full range of mobility needs, which include ADA
paratransit, transportation for seniors, and medical transport
programs, with public transportation operations and plans. This means
focusing on the customer and coordinating the best solutions with
public and private operators and volunteer programs in the mix, was
well as coordinating with other Federal agencies that fund
transportation for these targeted populations.
MAP-21 continues the requirement that, to the maximum extent
feasible, FTA should coordinate activities funded under the Enhanced
Mobility program with similar transportation activities provided by
other Federal agencies. In addition, and as recommended by United
States Government Accountability Office last summer, the Federal
Interagency Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM), chaired
by the Secretary of Transportation and including representatives from
11 Federal agencies, has developed a Strategic Action Plan to promote
human services programs. The CCAM Strategic Plan builds on our progress
to cooperatively improve mobility and community accessibility for
seniors, individuals with disabilities, and low income persons and
families. The Plan encourages the creation and growth of coordinated
transportation networks that provide simplified access to health and
wellness, jobs, and community services. One of the objectives of the
Plan is to improve the health outcomes of Americans by enhancing
transportation service coordination to improve access to health and
wellness resources and reduce risks of institutionalization. Another
objective is to stimulate local business, economic and transportation
organizational partnerships to help dislocated workers and others
seeking to rejoin the workforce get the transportation options they
need to reach job opportunities and training. The CCAM centerpiece is
the Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative, which
complements the Obama Administration's Joining Forces initiative led by
First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden. It addresses the
Administration's challenge to all Federal agencies to harness program
resources and expertise to improve the quality of military family life
and to help communities more effectively support military families. The
Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative is an
innovative, federally coordinated partnership that will make it easier
for U.S. veterans, active service members, military families, and
others with disabilities to learn about and arrange for locally
available transportation services that connect them with work,
education, health care, and other vital services in their communities.
Through this initiative, FTA has made $63.6 million in discretionary
funds available to local governmental agencies to finance the capital
costs of implementing, expanding, or increasing access to, and
coordination of, local transportation resources. Of this amount, South
Dakota received approximately $1.2 million over the last 3 years.
Meeting these objectives will help to ensure that the needs of
disadvantaged individuals are addressed in current and future Federal
programs. In furtherance of this goal, the Department and its partners
at the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and
Education support a range of technical assistance initiatives for
coordinating human service transportation. Programs and centers are
charged with providing training, resources, and direct assistance to
communities and States interested in enhancing the mobility and
transportation options for all citizens, including older adults,
individuals with disabilities, and people with lower incomes.
FTA will continue to work through interagency partnerships to
coordinate transportation needs to help increase the quality of life
for older citizens, individuals with disabilities, and people with low
incomes.
Grantee Safety Plans (Section 5329)
Secretary LaHood has stated that ``safety is our highest priority
and we are committed to keeping transit one of the safest modes of
transportation in the Nation.'' FTA is pleased that MAP-21 includes
important safety provisions for rail and bus-only operators, and
requires all recipients of FTA funding to develop agency safety plans.
FTA will work to adapt its comprehensive safety approach to all modes
of public transportation within its safety authority. Specifically, we
will work to ensure that the bus segment of public transportation, upon
which millions of riders depend every day, receives the resources,
tools and technical assistance it too will need to ensure the safety of
the riding public. Also, because we recognize that one size does not
fit for all transit operators, the safety plan for rural recipients and
small public transportation providers or systems may be drafted or
certified by the State.
FTA looks forward to implementing the new safety law in
consultation with the transit industry and our Transit Rail Advisory
Committee for Safety (TRACS), which has been working to help guide this
effort since September 2010.
State of Good Repair Grants (Section 5337)
The Administration supports a groundbreaking commitment not only to
expand transit options for Americans, but just as importantly, to
maintain the Nation's transit systems in a state of good repair. For
example, last September, Secretary LaHood and I, together with State
and local officials, toured a significantly modernized and expanded
River Cities Transit Facility, constructed in part with a $5 million
grant from FTA. River Cities Transit ridership grew more than six-fold
between 2008 and 2012, making the upgrades to the system more important
than ever before. This system has a service radius of 100 miles, and
that means a service area of bus and transit vans covering more than
31,000 square miles, serving people living in 11 counties in central
South Dakota, including seniors, people with disabilities, veterans and
the Cheyenne River Sioux and Lower Brule Sioux tribes.
Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, South Dakota
received approximately $11.5 million in formula funds of which 70
percent were for rural areas in the State and were used for critical
infrastructure replacement and expansion needs. Recipients in South
Dakota also received over $6 million from FTA's FY2011 and FY2012 State
of Good Repair Initiative. River Cities Public Transit also received a
total of $319,200 in FY2011 and $369,200 in FY2012 and Prairie Hills
Transit received $213,680 through FTA's Veterans Transportation and
Community Living Initiative to improve transit scheduling and outreach
to transit-dependent veterans.
Consistent with the President's request, MAP-21 establishes a new
grant program to maintain public transportation fixed guideway and high
intensity bus systems in a state of good repair. According to the
statute, once a final rule implementing the State of Good Repair
program is issued, projects must be included in a transit asset
management plan to receive funding allocations. MAP-21 authorized $2.1
billion in FY2013 and $2.2 billion in FY2014 for this program. Funds
will be apportioned consistent with a new statutory formula program,
which includes a new tier for high-intensity bus.
Asset Management Provisions (Section 5326)
Asset management was a priority for FTA long before MAP-21. The $78
billion repair and maintenance backlog that FTA's research identified
in 2008 has likely increased by as much as 10 percent in recent years.
FTA recognizes that, while a sustained Federal contribution to our
state of good repair needs is in the interest of our Nation's public
transportation systems, this problem cannot be solved by Federal action
alone. Tackling this problem requires a concerted effort by Federal,
State, and local resources in a coordinated, strategic manner. That is
why FTA is establishing a national Transit Asset Management System. The
new section 5326 Transit Asset Management program established under
MAP-21 is vitally important to carrying out these infrastructure
investments effectively and responsibly. MAP-21 requires FTA to define
the term ``state of good repair'' and create objective standards for
measuring the condition of capital assets, including equipment, rolling
stock, infrastructure, and facilities. Based on that definition, FTA
must then develop performance measures under which all FTA grantees
will be required to set targets. This innovative program requires all
FTA funding recipients to adopt a structured approach for managing
their capital assets and be accountable for leveraging all available
resources to bring their systems into a state of good repair. FTA will
support this effort through technical assistance, including the
development of an analytical process or decision support tool that
allows recipients to estimate their capital investment needs.
FTA has reached out to stakeholders to determine ways in which
transit asset management systems can be tailored to small operators
that typically provide service in small urbanized and rural areas as
well as on tribal lands, and we will continue to do so. Most recently,
FTA organized a focus group conference call with small operators in
conjunction with the Community Transportation Association of America
(CTAA). We also hosted an online dialogue in which more than 700
stakeholders participated, contributing more than 200 ideas and
comments, and providing nearly 1,500 feedback votes on the ideas and
comments that were submitted. The next step in our outreach efforts
will be a rulemaking on Transit Asset Management. FTA strongly
encourages small transit operators to provide comments on the rule once
it becomes available.
Emergency Relief Program (Section 5324)
Nowhere has FTA made more aggressive progress in implementing the
provisions of MAP-21 than in the area of emergency relief. The
President's Budget first proposed in FY2012 a new emergency relief
program for the FTA to parallel a similar capability in the Federal
Highway Administration. The Budget proposed this program to strengthen
the agency's authority to provide disaster assistance to transit
agencies in the wake of major natural disasters and other emergencies,
and the program was authorized by Congress in MAP-21. The authorization
of this new program arrived just in time for Hurricane Sandy, which was
the worst public transit disaster in the history of the United States.
Hurricane Sandy devastated transportation systems in the hardest-hit
parts of New York and New Jersey--which together represent more than
one-third of our Nation's transit ridership--and triggered a very rapid
implementation path for the program. More generally, however, this
program helps States and public transportation systems pay for
protecting, repairing, and/or replacing equipment and facilities that
may suffer or have suffered serious damage as a result of an emergency,
including natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes.
It will be available to the Sioux Falls transit community should the
need arise.
Urbanized Area Formula Grants (Section 5307)
The largest of FTA's grant programs, this program provides grants
to urbanized areas to support public transportation. Funding is
distributed by formula based on the level of transit service provision,
population, and other factors. MAP-21 provides total funding of $4.9
billion in FY2013 and $5 billion in FY2014. The program remains largely
unchanged with a few exceptions. Job access and reverse commute
activities providing services to low-income individuals to access jobs
have been consolidated into this program and are now an eligible
expense. MAP-21 expanded eligibility for operating expenses for systems
with 100 or fewer buses in urbanized areas with populations of 200,000
or more. Operating assistance remains an eligible activity for small
urbanized areas, such as Sioux Falls and Rapid City. Based on the
apportionment formula, South Dakota will receive approximately $3.6
million in urbanized area formula funds for allocation to its small
urbanized areas in FY2013. This is a 16 percent increase over the
amount apportioned to the State for those areas last fiscal year.
Bus and Bus Facilities Program (Section 5339)
MAP-21 followed the Administration's request to fold the
discretionary bus program into a formula program. This capital program
provides funding to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and
related equipment, and to construct bus-related facilities. MAP-21
authorized $422 million in FY2013 and $428 million in FY2014. Each
fiscal year, each State will be allocated $1.25 million and each
territory (including DC and Puerto Rico) will receive $500,000. The
remaining funds will be distributed by formula. Funds are available to
eligible recipients that operate or allocate funding to fixed-route bus
operators. Eligible subrecipients include public agencies or private
nonprofit organizations engaged in public transportation, including
those providing services open to a segment of the general public, as
defined by age, disability, or low income.
In FY2013, South Dakota is projected to receive a statewide
allocation of $1.25 million under this program. These funds can be used
anywhere in the State, including for projects in rural areas and on
tribal lands. South Dakota's urbanized areas are projected to receive
$385,882 in bus funds. These funds are allocated to the State and the
State can distribute them among the urbanized areas based on a locally
determined process.
We at FTA look forward to working with our stakeholders to address
the challenges laid out for us by Congress and the President in MAP-21.
I will be happy to answer questions.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF DARIN BERGQUIST
Secretary, South Dakota Department of Transportation
March 28, 2013
Chairman Johnson, I am Darin Bergquist, Secretary of the South
Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT). Thanks for this
opportunity to appear before the Committee. Today, I'll begin by
commenting on the Federal surface transportation authorization
legislation enacted last summer, ``MAP-21'' (the ``Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act''). However, as MAP-21's funding
authorizations extend only through September 30, 2014, I'll also
comment on the next highway and transit authorization bill.
Mr. Chairman, our overall view of MAP-21 is positive. As a
Committee Chair you had a strong role in the development of the
legislation and we appreciate those efforts. We also deeply appreciate
the efforts of the entire South Dakota congressional delegation on this
law. Let me outline why we have a positive view of MAP-21.
Key Provisions of MAP-21 for South Dakota
Very Importantly, South Dakota's Highway Formula Share Was
Preserved Under MAP-21. With our long stretches of highway helping
connect the Nation, and with relatively few people to support that
extensive network of Federal-aid highways, our State has always
received a higher share of Federal highway apportionments than its
share of contributions to the Highway Trust Fund. That result is in the
national interest, but we don't take it for granted. Maintaining the
State's highway formula share helps the SDDOT respond to transportation
needs and provide quality transportation options to our citizens and
businesses. In addition, buses and vans deliver all of South Dakota's
transit services, and good highways are essential to support those
services.
Also Importantly, South Dakota Received an Increase in Transit
Formula Funding Under MAP-21. The increase in South Dakota's share of
the transit program is a very good result--and, again, a meritorious
one. As the Committee that you chair, Senator, has jurisdiction over
the transit program, we want to express our particular appreciation for
your work on MAP-21 to increase transit funding for South Dakota, other
rural States, and tribes. Transit is not just for big metropolitan
areas. It is important in rural States as well. MAP-21's transit
funding provisions will help provide more effective options to South
Dakotans by enabling transit providers across our State to better meet
the needs of senior citizens, people with disabilities, those who can't
afford personal vehicles, and others.
MAP-21 Provided Some Program Stability. By providing authorizations
through September of 2014, MAP-21 supplied some stability for
administration of transportation programs. Until MAP-21 became law, the
SDDOT and others were operating under Federal transportation programs
funded through short-term extensions of a few months. This created
administrative and funding challenges, as our Department inevitably had
to focus on short-term projects needing only small funding amounts.
MAP-21 also set overall funding levels for the highway and transit
programs at approximately the levels of immediately prior authorizing
legislation and improved our State's transit funding. Transportation
infrastructure funding provides jobs during construction and
facilitates long-term economic growth after construction by improving
efficiency and personal mobility. As you know, Mr. Chairman, at various
times in the debate over what became MAP-21, some discussed significant
reductions in surface transportation funding. We are pleased that did
not occur. Let me be clear, if funding could be increased, we could put
those funds to good use efficiently in South Dakota. But, under the
circumstances, we consider the overall program levels in MAP-21 to be a
positive result for this 2-year period. However, as I will discuss in a
moment, we are concerned that highway and transportation programs face
funding uncertainty again, this time for the years after Federal Fiscal
Year (FFY) 2014. We need to continue to look for funding stability and,
at a minimum, maintain current funding levels.
Improved Environmental Review Process Is Welcome. We are also
pleased that aspects of MAP-21 require administrative action to
expedite or simplify the environmental review process. USDOT is
directed to provide categorical exclusions from NEPA review for, among
others: projects within an ``operational right-of-way''; and projects
with a Federal contribution of less than five million dollars. Many of
SDDOT's projects should benefit from these two provisions.
Program Consolidation and Flexibility Is Helpful. Many elements of
the Federal highway program have been modified and combined into a
smaller number of programs. This helps simplify the program. More
importantly, significant transferability between programs has been
maintained. In addition, MAP-21 increased the percentage of the overall
highway and transit programs distributed by formula--a positive change.
Collectively, these features mean State DOTs will have reasonable
flexibility in programming Federal funds.
Looking Ahead--New Legislation and MAP-21 Implementation
In formulating the next highway and transit authorization it is
critically important to achieve a good funding solution. I have already
noted that, in crafting MAP-21, Congress found a way to avert large
cuts and essentially continued funding levels for highways, transit,
and highway safety.
Yet, as we meet here today, the transportation community is already
discussing the importance of avoiding a catastrophic drop in funding
for these programs due to the decreasing balances in the Highway Trust
Fund and the fund's projected inability to support current funding past
FFY2014--and maybe not even until the very end of FFY2014.
While the highway program was largely (though not completely)
exempted from sequestration, transfers into the Highway Trust Fund
authorized by MAP-21 were subject to a reduction, increasing the risk
that the trust fund may not be able to support MAP-21 funding levels
through the end of FFY2014.
In short, what is needed is a stable funding situation going
forward, with funding at least at current levels, if not higher, as
there are substantial needs for transportation investment here in South
Dakota as well as elsewhere. We can't let highway program funding
levels fall off a cliff after FFY2014.
Before turning to other issues, let me mention that the debate on
the next authorization bill could have some impact on the real world
even before Congress acts on such legislation. For example, our
contractor partners in the private sector construction industry have
important decisions to make regarding acquisition of equipment and the
sizing of their workforce. If the uncertain future funding is not
addressed, it will impact those decisions next year, in 2014.
Similarly, it will impact our fall 2014 project lettings and plans at
South Dakota DOT regarding the program for FFY2015 and later. We want
to remain hopeful of a good outcome, but all concerned will have to
watch and plan accordingly.
Beyond funding, while I have noted positive features in MAP-21,
some provisions of the legislation impose new requirements, or require
USDOT to develop new requirements. We are hopeful, but not certain,
that new provisions will be implemented in a nonburdensome manner.
For example, Congress tasked USDOT to develop a number of
``performance measures'' and to require States to set targets for
performance based on those measures. These and other ``performance
management'' initiatives in the law (such as asset management
requirements) could require considerable attention and effort,
especially if USDOT is too prescriptive in implementation.
Similarly, new provisions regarding freight transportation may
result in additional data collection, planning, and consultation. Last
fall USDOT issued interim guidance for State freight plans, setting
forth steps that a State should take to qualify for a reduced non-
Federal match on certain projects. The interim guidance unfortunately
included many elements in addition to those required in statute.
Moreover, we encourage USDOT freight planning efforts to go beyond
issues such as container movements in and out of ports (those are
predominantly import moves). Any national freight planning efforts must
recognize that moving agricultural and natural resource products from
farms and extraction points in States like South Dakota to national and
world export markets is an important national freight concern.
However, whether the issue is freight planning, performance
measurement or something else, the key point is that if new Federal
requirements can be minimized, SDDOT will be able to spend relatively
less time on administrative compliance and will be better able to focus
on improving transportation for South Dakota's citizens and businesses.
Safety is always a priority for us and MAP-21 includes new transit
safety provisions. However, we are hopeful that implementation of the
new Federal transit safety requirements in MAP-21 will be properly
scaled to the problem at hand. In South Dakota, in the last 7 years the
one fatal incident involving a transit vehicle was caused by the
nontransit vehicle. We are hopeful that new regulations will not impose
on our small transit systems complex safety or asset management
requirements that are more appropriate for large city transit systems.
Frankly, we think an efficient performance-based system would impose no
new requirements, or only very few requirements, on small transit
systems, as they are already experiencing safe outcomes.
In any event, I want to assure you and those in the South Dakota
transportation community that the SDDOT is working closely with small
and tribal transit providers and other interested parties in
implementing MAP-21.
Looking Further Ahead--South Dakota's Continuing Interests in the
Federal Surface Transportation Programs
Before closing, let me offer a few perspectives on the long-term
interest of South Dakota in the Federal surface transportation program.
These are concepts that warrant attention as we work to improve
transportation in South Dakota and the Nation in future legislation.
Funding--Federal Transportation Investment in Rural States Benefits the
Nation
The national interest requires significant Federal surface
transportation investment in rural States. Consider truck movements
from ports in the Pacific Northwest to Chicago or other heartland or
eastern destinations. These and other movements across States like ours
benefit people and commerce in the metropolitan areas at both ends of
the journey. The Federal-aid highways in rural States provide many
national benefits. These routes:
serve as a bridge for truck and personal traffic between
other States, advancing interstate commerce and mobility;
support agricultural exports and serve the Nation's ethanol
production, energy extraction, and wind power industries, which
are located largely in rural areas;
connect portions of rural America underserved after the
abandonment of many branch rail lines;
provide access to scenic wonders like Yellowstone National
Park, Badlands National Park, and Mount Rushmore;
serve as a lifeline for remotely located and economically
challenged citizens, such as those living on tribal
reservations;
enable people and business to access and traverse vast
tracts of Federally owned land; and
facilitate military readiness.
In addition, the Federal-aid highway program enables enhanced
investment to address safety needs on many rural Federal-aid routes.
The investments supported by Federal highway and surface transportation
programs create both direct and indirect jobs and support economic
efficiency and growth.
Moreover, in our State and many other western States the percentage
of truck traffic on the highways that does not either originate or
terminate within the State exceeds the national average. Rural freight
will become increasingly important as the world population of
approximately 7 billion people expands by over 1 percent per year or
approximately 70 million people. South Dakota agriculture will need
transportation improvements to remain competitive in serving those
markets. So, investments in highways in rural States are clearly
serving interstate and national interests.
Yet, a State like South Dakota faces significant transportation
infrastructure funding challenges. We can't provide all these benefits
to the Nation without Federal funding leadership. We:
are geographically large, including large tracts of Federal
lands;
have an extensive highway network; and
have low population density.
This means we have far fewer people than the average State to
support each lane mile of Federal-aid highway--and preserving and
maintaining this aging, nationally connected system is expensive. Yet,
citizens from South Dakota and similar States contribute to this effort
significantly--the per capita contribution to the Highway Trust Fund
from rural States exceeds the national average. Further, with our low
population and traffic densities, tolls are not a realistic option for
funding transportation needs in rural areas.
Fortunately, in MAP-21 and in prior legislation, Congress has
consistently recognized it is in the national interest to provide
significant Federal funding to support highways and transportation in
and across rural States like ours. For reasons such as outlined above,
future legislation should continue that approach.
Federal Investment in Public Transportation in Rural States Is
Warranted
Public transportation is not just for big metropolitan areas.
Transit plays an increasingly vital role in our State's surface
transportation system. Federal funding for it is absolutely necessary.
Our two largest metropolitan areas, Sioux Falls and Rapid City,
receive direct apportionments from the FTA, as do some tribal
governments. Our more rural areas and smaller cities and some of our
Indian reservations also have needs for public transportation. We have
22 small transit providers in our State receiving Federal transit funds
indirectly through the SDDOT, under the rural transit program (the so-
called 5311 program).
Federal investment in rural transit helps ensure personal mobility,
especially for senior citizens and people with disabilities, connecting
them to necessary services and employment. Transit service is an
important, often vital, link for citizens in small towns to get to
medical appointments, including dialysis and cancer treatments, as well
as to work, educational opportunities or other destinations. South
Dakota's population is aging and people want to age in place and stay
in their homes and communities. For people that can no longer drive,
transit plays a vital role in supporting this choice. As the population
ages, there will be increased demand for transit services.
So, there are considerable demands for transit service in our State
from seniors and people with disabilities. The funding for transit for
South Dakota under MAP-21 is helping address these challenges. In
addition, it is important that operating as well as capital costs
remain eligible uses of the Federal transit program. Capital investment
in buses is important but any lapse in the ability to operate would
adversely affect our transit users.
Not only does rural transit sustain over 530 direct jobs across
South Dakota, it allows children to access preschool and other
education opportunities while their parents remain at work,
strengthening their productivity and earning potential while supporting
their families. Clearly, Federal public transportation programs must
continue to include funding for rural States.
In addition, we consider it highly appropriate that MAP-21
increased the percentage of overall transit formula funds going to the
rural transit program and, within the rural transit program, slightly
increased the share of funds for very rural States. This is warranted
because of the special transit challenges facing a very low population
density State like ours.
Rural transit is usually provided by small bus and van service.
Frequently, it is on demand service for the elderly and disabled, such
as nonemergency trips to the hospital, pharmacy, or clinic, or trips to
a grocery store. This is especially challenging in the very low
population density States, where the one-way trip to a medical facility
for one or two riders can be 50 miles or more.
There are some basics needed for transit service regardless of
population or traffic density. Service requires a qualified driver. It
requires a well-maintained and well-equipped bus or van. It requires
vehicle parts. These elements are essential whether a bus is carrying
only four people and has to travel 50 miles (big State, low density) or
is carrying 15 or more people over short distances in towns with a
population of 45,000.
In short, providing essential public transit connectivity can be
particularly challenging in extremely rural areas. In MAP-21 (and in
SAFETEA-LU as well), Congress appropriately has begun to respond to the
challenges of providing public transportation service in a very rural
State like ours by increasing funding for the 5311 program and
adjusting its formula to give greater funding weight to a State's
having a large land area.
Additional Considerations
Before closing, let me turn to a few additional considerations
regarding the Federal program. We strongly favor a flexible approach
that will increase, not limit, State discretion and reduce regulations
and program requirements. We also hope Congress will continue to
distribute the vast majority of program funds by formula. That formula
approach, with fewer, not more regulations or program complications,
will enhance the ability of the SDDOT to effectively provide
transportation options while also generating jobs, facilitating
commerce, and enhancing personal mobility and the quality of life of
our citizens.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is essential that Federal surface transportation
programs and legislation continue to recognize that significant Federal
investment in highways and transit in rural States is, and will remain,
in the national interest. We are pleased MAP-21 meets that test. So
must future legislation. The citizens and businesses of our Nation's
more populated areas, not just residents of rural America, benefit from
a good transportation network in and across rural States like South
Dakota. With such legislation, combined with fewer, not more program
requirements and rules, the SDDOT will be better equipped to address
transportation needs to the benefit of South Dakota and the Nation.
That concludes my testimony. I'll be happy to respond to any
questions you may have.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF COSETTE FESTER
Sioux Area Metro Paratransit Rider
March 28, 2013
Sixteen years ago I had never heard of paratransit or even had a
need to know about it. That all changed in January of 1997 when we were
in a car accident which severed my spine at T5. I was in the hospital
for 6 months. I have rods holding up my back so I can sit up and also
rods holding up my rib cage. Everyone in the hospital tried to get me
to sign up for Medicaid, etc., but my family said that I would be going
back to work. At the time I was an insurance adjuster specializing in
Workmen's Comp. My boss kept whispering in my ear that I would have a
job waiting for me when I was ready to come back to work.
In October I started back part time at first. My husband was
driving me back and forth but that got to be a tiresome job on both of
us. My husband is years older, and has numerous health issues of his
own. Am not sure how I got signed up for paratransit but my family
called them and away I went!!! The first day I made my husband follow
me all the way to work and back again. I cried all the way to work. My
poor bus driver kept asking me if I was alright and I just kept on
crying and shaking my head. On that day, I felt feelings of inadequacy
and dependency. My feelings have greatly changed since that day.
Paratransit has been my salvation. They pick me up at my door and
drop me off at my door. I am unable to open the doors myself as I do
not have the upper strength to do so. Also my wheelchair does not allow
me to get up close enough to the door to open it myself.
I think back at what people did before we had these services. I am
not a person that could just stay at home--I need the interaction of
people. I need to be useful and kept busy. Before I went back to work I
sat home and cried and felt sorry for poor me! I felt a burden to my
family and was unclear with what to do with my life. Paratransit is
more than just a way for me to get to work--it is another way for me to
connect. I see so much good in the people that work there as well. I
once had a bus driver who wrote a poem for me. My family and I cherish
the words of this wise man, my paratransit driver. He wrote about how I
am defined by me and not my chair. The way I handle this life is not
what matters most, I need to make the best of it, for I will walk in
the Promised Land. So, what you need to realize is that Paratransit
means a whole lot more than transportation to its riders. It's key to
our independence, and it enhances our self worth through its people and
its services. Without this service and the special people employed by
our Government--I would be lost.
God has put a lot of different people on this earth. I used to
consider myself average and just your average middle-class working
woman. However, the tragedy that occurred that night in 1997, made me
special yes, with a disability but most importantly, I am special
because unlike many others--I now see the good in so many people. I
instantly recognize good will and civility in ways that most average
Americans fail to recognize. I am very grateful for all of the good
deeds that are provided continual by Paratransit.
The Poem:
Though my body is all crippled God has blessed me with my mind,
and the will to be productive more than most you'll find. This
chair is but a transport of the gifts God gave to me
intelligence, compassion Love of Life is what you'll see. My
faith has made me whole and life is precious everyday, a belief
in all that's positive perseverance is my way. So, if all you
see is crippled then your eyes are truly closed, for everything
BUT handicapped is what my spirit shows. My mind is free from
worries all my troubles in his hands, through my faith my
life's forever and I'll stand in the Promised Land!
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LYNNE KELLER FORBES
Executive Director, South Eastern Council of Governments
March 28, 2013
Thank you, Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Crapo, and Members of
the Committee, for the opportunity to highlight our views on the new
Federal surface transportation law, Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act (MAP-21), and the transportation investments the law
provides, especially for our Nation's small metropolitan and rural
regions.
My name is Lynne Keller Forbes and I am the Executive Director of
the South Eastern Council of Governments (SECOG), headquartered in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and serving the six most southeastern
counties of the State. SECOG is also the fiscal agent of the Sioux
Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO); the transportation
planning organization for the Sioux Falls urbanized area.
As the Committee examines the impacts of MAP-21 on public
transportation and transportation investments in rural States like
South Dakota, I respectfully submit the following observations:
First, Mr. Chairman, it is important to note the benefits of the
law having rejected efforts to change the population threshold for
becoming and remaining an MPO.
If MAP-21 would have included a provision to increase the
population threshold of MPO's to 200,000, as one of the draft bills
proposed, the Rapid City, Sioux City, and Sioux Falls MPOs would have
been three of the 220 of 385 MPOs potentially eliminated; leaving the
State of South Dakota with zero MPOs.
It is important to maintain MPOs in rural States like South Dakota
to ensure the input of the citizens and local elected officials of
small metropolitan areas are considered in the transportation planning
process. The populations of the communities of the Sioux Falls MPO are
increasing at record rates and the borders of these communities are
continually growing closer together. The Cities of Brandon, Crooks,
Harrisburg, and Tea currently have borders approximately one to two
miles away from the City of Sioux Falls' border. The borders of these
four communities will meet Sioux Falls' border by 2035. The literal
closeness of these communities only emphasizes the importance of a
local transportation planning organization to ensure coordination
amongst the communities, to ensure the needs of the region are met, and
to ensure the voices of local citizens and elected officials are heard
during the transportation planning and programming process.
The Sioux Falls MPO transportation planning budget has been just
under $2 million for the past few years and has increased to over $3
million for 2013. The regionally significant activities accomplished
with that funding include a transportation planning study of 41st
Street and the I-29 interchange to identify potential projects to
improve traffic flow on one of the busiest streets and interchanges in
the State. A similar study is also being completed by the MPO for 26th
Street and the I-229 interchange, an area that experiences significant
traffic delays during the morning and evening commutes. In addition, a
recent impressive collaboration by the Sioux Falls MPO communities
resulted in the ``Sioux Falls MPO Multi-Use Trail Study'' to identify
corridors to connect the trails of Brandon, Harrisburg, and Tea to
Sioux Falls' extensive trail system. Once implemented, pedestrians and
bicyclists will have a safe way to travel between the MPO communities.
Transit activities completed by the MPO include a recently completed
route study to improve the Sioux Falls transit system and plan for
future needs of the system. A space needs study was also recently
completed to plan for the expanded needs of the transit system's office
and storage facility.
Additionally, Mr. Chairman, the continued increase of Federal
support for public transportation, as demonstrated by MAP-21, is
essential for the economic growth of rural States like South Dakota and
small metropolitan areas like Sioux Falls.
Public transportation contributes to economic growth not only by
connecting people to jobs, health care, businesses, and tourist
destinations, but also by reducing the cost of transportation and
creating jobs. According to a recent report completed by the South
Dakota Department of Transportation entitled ``Costs and Benefits of
Public Transit in South Dakota'' the transit riders' out-of-pocket cost
savings totaled $10.3 million in 2010 in South Dakota. This out-of-
pocket cost savings added $7.6 million and 70 jobs to the State's
economy. The report also indicated that three jobs are created in the
State for every 10 public transit jobs created. In 2010, public transit
capital and operating expenses sustained 460 jobs and contributed $38.5
million to the State's economy. The combined economic impact is
estimated at $46.1 million annually.
The ``Costs and Benefits'' report concluded that for every dollar
invested in public transit, there is $2.07 economic and social benefit
in the urbanized areas of the State such as Sioux Falls. MAP-21
authorized a slight increase in funding for transit programs from
$10.458 billion in FY2012 to $10.578 billion in FY2013 and $10.695
billion in FY2014. The increased funding allows for better
transportation planning and will continue to contribute to the economic
growth of the State and Sioux Falls area. Sioux Area Metro (SAM), Sioux
Falls' public transit system, provided almost 1.2 million rides in
2012, a 3.1 percent increase from 2011. Additionally, SAM employs about
95 people and has an annual operating budget of around $3.5 million.
With the previously mentioned growth that the Sioux Falls area has
been experiencing, the transit service will need to be expanded to
reach the new employment and residential areas of the community. The
``Transit System Analysis--Grid Network Alternatives'' study completed
by the Sioux Falls MPO just last month concluded that an additional
$1.2 million, or about 1/3 of the current budget, would need to be
added to SAM's annual operating budget for the extended transit service
needed by year 2035. In addition, increased funding will be needed for
capital costs such as additional buses and transfer centers and the
expansion of the storage and office facilities. A recent space needs
study completed by the MPO estimated that a $13 million expansion of
SAM's office, maintenance and storage facility will be needed to meet
transit needs.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, we are encouraged by the support for
transportation planning and public transportation that is demonstrated
by MAP-21.
As you have heard, the transportation planning funding and public
transportation funding authorized by the transportation bills is
effectively utilized in the Sioux Falls MPO and contributes
significantly to the economy of the State of South Dakota. MAP-21
expires on September 30, 2014. As work begins on the next bill,
sustained and increased support is needed to ensure coordinated
transportation planning and programming activities among local citizens
and elected officials are continued on a regional basis in rural States
like South Dakota and to ensure the notable economic benefits of public
transportation are not lost by our State.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, for the
opportunity to testify today. I'd be pleased to answer any questions.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF EMMA FEATHERMAN-SAM
Coordinator, Oglala Sioux Transit
March 28, 2013
Euha chi cante wasteya nape ceyuspa pi (I give each of you a
heartfelt handshake). Thank you for inviting me to testify before the
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Field Hearing.
I am honored.
The people who have needed the most help with transportation have
accepted Tribal Transit systems across Indian Country voraciously.
Transportation on the Pine Ridge Reservation via some type of vehicle
is most often either unavailable or if a vehicle is available--is not
in the best working condition or the cost of operating the vehicle is
prohibitive. The safe, reliable services of Oglala Sioux Transit have
already provided a valuable addition to the quality of life factors for
many residents of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.
1. Oglala Sioux Transit
After an extensive planning process, the Oglala Sioux Transit
Project received funding from the Federal Transit Administration and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs to construct a 12,500 sq. ft. transit
facility and purchase buses (three 22 passenger and five 16 passenger).
The Transit Facility was completed October 2008. Vehicles were
purchased and delivered September 2008 and January 2009. Transit
services began on February 3, 2009, as a deviated fixed route system
covering approximately 1,806 miles daily with the main route being 111
miles one way (from the village of Wanblee on the eastern side of the
Reservation to Prairie Wind Casino on the western side). Unlike urban
areas, the Pine Ridge Reservation's communities are widely separated
and located along rural roads that were not designed for efficient
transportation. The seven (7) routes travel through sixteen (16) of the
main villages on the reservation with 35 stops providing the general
public with access to college courses, employment, medical, business
and shopping services on the reservation. The Program has been actively
considering expanded transit services for a 24 hr/day, seven days/wk
schedule across the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and a 3 times/day, 3
days/wk scheduled route to Rapid City, SD. The Oglala Sioux Tribal
Council will shortly be considering its input into these decisions and
we anticipate a final determination in the near future. The increased
levels of service will greatly enhance the Transit system's capacity to
address the transit needs of a much broader portion of the client
population.
The OST DOT Transit Program is comprised of seventeen employees
(Coordinator, Office Manager, Maintenance Support Technician,
Dispatcher, Bus Drivers (12), and a Bus Mechanic. We also take part in
providing slots for TANF workers that provide the Receptionist, filing
and cleaning of the facility.
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is comprised of approximately 2.7
million acres of land (4,200 sq. mi.) that encompass three counties of
South Dakota--Shannon, Bennett, and the southern half of Jackson. There
are 6.5 (Shannon), 2.9 (Bennett) and 1.6 (Jackson) persons per square
mile within the boundaries of the Reservation. Based on Tribal program
data the population of the reservation is approximately 47,000, of
which there are 38,000 enrolled tribal members. The 2010 US Census
shows 20,048 (a massive undercount) and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development's NAHASDA population numbers of 43,146. The Pine
Ridge Indian Reservation is extremely rural, with an underdeveloped
economy and infrastructure. According to the U.S. Bureau of Indian
Affairs, unemployment on the Reservation is 89 percent. (BIA Labor
Force Report, 2005). Persons below poverty levels on the Reservation
remain among the highest in the United States with the 2009 Census data
indicating 51 percent for Shannon County, 37.8 percent for Bennett
County and 36.1 percent for Jackson County.
Due to the extreme poverty of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation,
many residents do not have access to private automobiles and, in the
absence of Oglala Sioux Transit, must often pay another individual to
transport them to their destination. Many of these travelers are the
elderly and disabled. A transit study/survey conducted for the OST
Short Range Transit Plan (December 2002) indicates that the lack of a
public transportation system hinders individuals on the Reservation in
accessing employment, medical appointments, conducting business,
shopping, and attending college classes. Oglala Sioux Transit is
increasingly meeting the needs of many of these persons as the program
has matured and become more widely known.
a. Transit Passengers
The Transit Program provides transportation in handicapped
accessible vehicles (buses and vans) as a deviated fixed route rural
transit system. In order to serve the widely dispersed communities on
the Reservation, the Project has established routes with bus stops
convenient to the local residents that provide this access for
transportation to their destination. Many have stated that they would
like to just go visit relatives in another district. Hiring and
training tribal members for the project has provided residents with
safe, reliable transportation to their destination.
The types of passengers that ride the transit range in ages from
infant to senior citizens that are 60+ years old. Based on the total
for the 4 full years of operation, seniors comprise an average of Year
1--20 percent to year 4--26 percent of passenger trips. Students are
designated as anyone in attendance at an academic institution from
Kindergarten through College. Some of the Student riders could be
considered as Adults or Senior citizens, but a passenger can designate
themselves as a student if they have an Identification Card (i.e.,
college students) so they can receive the $1.00 off the fare.
The following table provides a brief summary of the Program's
operational benchmarks and illustrates increased usage by the
membership.
b. Routes/Fares
The Transit Project recognizes the limited financial resources of
the Tribal membership and has strived to provide its services at a cost
the client population can afford. Our fares range from $1.00 to $5.00
one way and $2.00 to $8.00 round trip. The Project faces the constant
challenge of providing affordable Transit services over this huge
geographic area.
c. Local Support
Transit services are coordinated with many of the Tribal programs
that have limited budgets for client transportation (Oglala Lakota
College Centers (9), Community Health Representatives, Anpetu Luta
Otipi, Transitional Living Program, Domestic Violence Shelters,
Childhood Programs, SD Department of Social Services, Oglala Sioux
Tribe District Service Centers, Oglala Nation Tiospaye & Advocacy
Center, etc.). We expect increased usage by these clients as program
budgets tighten in coming years.
2. Tribal Transits Nationally
A few Tribes across the U.S. have been accessing FTA funding
through the States but more are now beginning the process of developing
full blown rural transit systems as funds have become available through
the Section 5311(c)(1), in FY06, 63 Tribes awarded approximately $8 mil
and in FY12, 72 Tribes were awarded approximately $15 mil. Each fiscal
year's Notice of Funding Availability from FTA has seen many more
proposals submitted for more funds than are available. Many of the
Transit systems are beginning to fully understand the processes and
regulations required by the FTA funds and are beginning to develop
their transit systems into longer term endeavors. The new MAP-21 funds
will enable some of the Tribes to purchase vehicles and construct
facilities to enhance their services, many Tribes had begun their
Transit services out of their Department of Transportation's Road Shops
or shared offices with other Tribal Programs.
Most issues on reservations commonly experienced by Tribal Transit
Managers are long routes, high mileage, lack of facilities, finding
local consultants with transit expertise with tribal knowledge, etc. It
has also been mentioned at the Tribal Transit conferences that direct
contact between FTA regional offices and Tribes would be beneficial in
terms of funding and services. Several Tribes have met and formed a
National Tribal Transit Association to represent and advocate for them
on tribal transit issues. The organization is in its infancy stage and
just beginning to collect data and coordinate issues for Tribal transit
systems across the Nation.
3. MAP-21
Tribal Transit provisions of MAP-21 represent a significant
improvement in the availability of resources that Tribes may access to
assist with their public transportation needs. If tribal transit
programs are to be successful, FTA funding must be adequate,
predictable, and stable. It is my view that the Formula distribution of
$25 million dollars is a significant improvement over prior years.
While I recommend that annual appropriations be increased in future
years due to inflationary factors and increased transit program
development by more Tribes, Tribes may now rely upon a funding
distribution process that has objective criteria that should minimize
``feast or famine'' funding decisions. Tribes should be able to plan
upon likely future funding levels (two, three, or more years later)
with a reasonable degree of certainty. Facilities, equipment, routes
and schedules can now be established on a long term basis that riders
can become familiar with and rely upon.
With the above discussion in mind, I would like to make the
following points about tribal transit policies:
1. I am in substantial agreement with the funding formula factors
set forth in MAP-21;
2. I agree that funding distribution should include both annual
formula-based awards and separate competition-based grants;
3. I disagree with any ``matching funds'' requirement as a factor in
qualifying for or receiving FTA funding. Many Tribes simply do
not have either an adequate resource base nor sufficient taxing
authority to provide matching funds on an ongoing basis. These
facts are particularly true for many of the poorer Reservations
located in remote and isolated areas of the country.
4. There has been considerable discussion about establishing a 10
percent cap on indirect costs. Many tribal transit programs
think a 10 percent cap of Indirect Costs is a reasonable
compromise between the need of Tribes to receive adequate
contract support and the funding needed for delivery of direct
transit services.
5. With respect to the Request For Comments published in the Federal
Register on November 9, 2012 (see II b), I am concerned that
some limitation is needed to prevent potential formula
distortions. It is appropriate for Tribal Transit Programs to
interface with off-reservation communities and even to provide
direct public transit services under certain circumstances.
However, I recommend a more extensive consultation process with
Indian Tribes before FTA moves forward with its II b proposal.
In closing, I would like to express my appreciation for the Senate
Committee holding this field hearing. I am excited about the progress
made by Indian Tribes and the FTA in providing public transit services
on an equitable basis to one of the most underserved segments of the
United States population. The Congress, the FTA, and Indian Tribes can
rightfully be proud of the accomplishments made to this date and look
forward to a continued partnership for future gains.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF BARBARA K. CLINE
Executive Director, Prairie Hills Transit, Spearfish, South Dakota
March 28, 2013
Senator Johnson, good afternoon. I am Barb Cline, the Executive
Director of Prairie Hills Transit located in Spearfish, SD. I direct a
transit agency operating within a 12,000 sq. mile service area, and
like to think that I represent in large part many of the rural transit
system operators that provide much needed trips to an array of
destination in rural and small town America daily.
I would like to sincerely thank you and FTA Administrator Rogoff
for supporting community and public transit. We appreciate the
increased formula funding in MAP-21 and the ongoing dialog you have
permitted us.
Today I would like to discuss how the new Federal surface
transportation law, MAP-21, is impacting rural transportation operators
and their constituents.
Prairie Hills Transit is a company that grew from a single ``old''
green van that was not lift equipped and operated 4 hours daily in
Spearfish for seniors. A short 23 years later our company operates and
receives local support in 15 communities located in 6 counties in the
Black Hills of western South Dakota. With 38 vehicles, 50 employees and
a new transit facility our growth has been solid and stable. With your
help Prairie Hills Transit can continue to grow and meet the ever
increasing transportation service requests.
You asked that we let you know our feelings regarding the affect
specific programs might have. Let me begin with the Bus and Bus
Facilities Program. The program is much smaller than the version that
existed under SAFETEA-LU. While the formula based bus funds are
appreciated, ultimately that dollar amount doesn't begin to touch the
replacement needs of PHT or other agencies in our State. It is
important for you to understand that many of these vehicles
consistently travel 100-200 miles daily for medical and employment.
Of the 38 vehicles Prairie Hills Transit operates 22 are 2005 or
older and 17 of the 38 have 130,000 miles or more on their odometers. A
significant commitment in the investment must be made in coming years.
The safety and security requirements of MAP-21 are of real concern.
Both have been a long standing commitment of Prairie Hills Transit and
the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) even before
MAP-21. We are currently pursuing a 3 year accreditation (Community
Transportation Safety and Security Accreditation) offered by CTAA that
meets the Federal Transit Administration endorsed standards. I would
encourage FTA guidance to use a common sense approach so an undue
burden wouldn't be placed on smaller agencies. State DOT's could easily
use the National Transit Database (NTD) as a safety reporting
mechanism. Guidance should not require a safety officer at each agency
nor should a part time or full time safety officer be required. Perhaps
planning funds could be used to complete the safety plan training
implementation.
I believe that asset management plans could and should be managed
by the State Department of Transportation. Guidance would make the
State accountable for their sub-recipients and this information could
be entered into the National Transit Database. Having each recipients
report on the condition of their system/systems would be particularly
burdensome for smaller agencies.
Meeting the Current Needs
Nearly 2 years ago the major healthcare company in our area came to
us and initiated discussion regarding a discharge contract for patients
at their primary hospital in Rapid City. This partnership has been
working extremely well for over a year and is a model that could and
should be emulated with any transit agency. With every challenge comes
an improved way of providing high quality transportation service to
patients who need hospital discharge transportation.
Often medical discharges are trips that travel long distances with
patients crossing State lines to be returned to their homes. Previously
these people who didn't have transportation were sent home by ambulance
incurring bills they could not afford to pay. If transportation was not
available longer stays in the hospital often took beds and rooms that
were needed for new patients. Recent feedback from a spokesperson at
the major hospital in our area says ``The staff very much appreciates
the collaborative partnership that has been developed with you and your
team. Ultimately, the patients benefit the most.''
Nonemergency medical transportation is one of the fastest growing
services we provide. There is a vital role we all must play in
healthcare transportation. It ultimately impacts our South Dakota
residents who are a proud and independent population who won't ask for
help but will take it if it is offered. The impact of outpatient
services in relationship to hospitalization or patients being
readmitted because they have no transportation to follow up care is
monstrous. As a Medicaid provider we help young families with children,
individuals with disabilities, and a growing number or wheelchair bound
persons residing in residential living facilities, nursing homes, and
assisted livings. Many are fiercely independent and take great pleasure
in having Prairie Hills Transit and its drivers as their ride of
choice.
Daily needs being met:
National Guard van pool taking employees to their jobs. The
route begins in Spearfish and ends in Rapid City.
Transport minimum security prisoners from Rapid City to
Custer for employment.
Dialysis appointments and cancer treatments--between
communities
Job Access routes for mentally and physically challenged
adult-between communities-multiple agencies
Hospital discharges--daily and with destinations often in
other States
Children from daycare and schools allowing parents to
remain at work
Disabled children integrated with
Seniors to nutrition sites, social outings, medical, hair
appointments
Essential public transportation in every community
Medicaid, Medicaid, Medicaid
Advocacy for our riders and their unmet needs.
Veterans receiving medical transportation and assuming
volunteer roles
We must begin to place a definable value and measurable outcomes
for our critical medical needs. We must continue to be innovative and
diversify programs our transit systems already work with. How do we
measure and meet the need of a small community with a 40 bed nursing
home filled with Medicaid residents that is 153 miles from the closest
major medical center? Even more importantly how do we fund their
transportation, provide a vehicle and ensure residents a quality of
life?
Proud To Note
Recently we logged our youngest rider at 8 days old. The other end
of the life cycle is 103 year old Helen who rides daily to the senior
meals program in a town of 600 people. Helen has averaged over 35 rides
a month getting her out of her home, allowing her an independent
lifestyle and making sure she receives a well balanced meal each day.
In Closing
The Prairie Hills Transit system represents high professional
standards, excellence in safety and security of passengers, and
organizational quality and commitment. We exemplify a business persona
that the public respects and recognizes as consistently and
continuously meeting the needs of all communities in its service area.
We strive to serve as a reflection of every other small rural agency in
the Nation. No one can deliver transportation options better than rural
transit.
Just this week we were called to take a man from the hospital to
his home town. He had been involved in a car accident where his
granddaughter, the driver, died in the seat next to him. His wife
passed away the day before his discharge from complications of the
accident. I personally take great pride in the compassion our drivers
show every day and the humility it requires for us to make a difference
for our cities, counties, State, and country. We need your help to
fight the battle rural systems fight each day. Thank You.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL COOPER
Director of Planning and Building Services, City of Sioux Falls, South
Dakota
March 28, 2013
Sioux Falls is fortunate to have a high quality public
transportation system with Sioux Area Metro (SAM). This past year the
fixed-route system exceeded over 1 million riders for the first time.
The paratransit system continues to provide quality service for those
that cannot ride the fixed-route system and provides on average almost
600 rides per weekday. Also, the total population of Sioux Falls added
2,500 people last year and is projected to maintain that growth into
the future. To maintain quality public transportation services, Sioux
Falls and Sioux Area Metro are planning for ways to maintain services
to an expanding and increasingly diverse population base.
In just the past year, the City of Sioux Falls and the Sioux Falls
MPO have completed studies to provide a plan for the future of public
transit service in Sioux Falls. The studies have included the Transit
System Analysis and the Space Needs Study. Also, the City of Sioux
Falls has recently initiated a Fare and Operations Analysis to
determine some of the short-term and mid-term changes that are required
to implement recommendations from the Transit System Analysis.
As a part of the Sioux Falls Route Analysis, three new routes and
five expanded and/or modified fixed routes were planned to provide a
higher level of service for the projected growth of Sioux Falls. As a
part of this plan for expansion, Sioux Area Metro (SAM) would need to
add three new transfer stations to improve route connectivity. Also,
the Route Analysis recommended adding a few cross town routes to
connect the new transfer centers and improve regional connectivity.
Before expansion is possible, Sioux Area Metro (SAM) needs a major
expansion of their bus storage and office facility, at 6th Street and
Weber Avenue. The cost of this facility will exceed $12 million. This
expansion was detailed in the Sioux Area Metro Space Needs Study
completed in 2012. The Space Needs Study recommends that expansion of
the bus storage and office facility is essential before any expansion
of the system can take place. As I am sure you are aware, security,
maintenance, and efficiency of the busses is dependent on good indoor
storage for our bus fleet.
Expanding transportation opportunities and enhancing the
independence for people with disabilities is also a high priority for
Sioux Area Metro. The paratransit bus system is very successful in
Sioux Falls and will continue to be a very important piece of the
system. However, the fixed-route bus system is very efficient and
provides opportunities for greater transportation independence for all
people. All fixed-route busses are fully accessible and bus stops
throughout our service area continue to be improved to be accessible
for people with disabilities. In fact, this year the City of Sioux
Falls will be investing $46,000 in CIP money to upgrade 88 bus stops.
The City of Sioux Falls will continue to find ways to improve the
accessibility of our fixed-route system so all citizens have an
opportunity for economical and quality transportation.
The full funding of MAP-21 for public transportation and
transportation investments are critical for the Sioux Falls region. We
look forward to working with the Committee on providing more
information about the needs for public transit and transportation as we
move forward. Thank you for this opportunity to provide information.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SARAH JENNINGS
State Director, AARP South Dakota
March 28, 2013
Good afternoon, Chairman Johnson. I am Sarah Jennings, State
Director of AARP South Dakota. I appreciate the opportunity to testify
on a topic of critical importance to millions of older Americans in
rural communities--how public transportation can help them maintain
their independence, health, and quality of life.
Aging in Place
Rural America is becoming increasingly older. South Dakota's senior
population, for example, comprises 14.3 percent of South Dakota's total
population, a greater share than for older persons in the U.S.
population as a whole (13 percent). Indeed, as younger people relocate
away from rural areas, often in search of work, the remaining older
population (age 65 and above) has become a larger presence in rural
America, now constituting 14 percent of all rural residents nationwide.
Among the total population of people age 65 and over, one-fifth live in
nonmetropolitan areas.
Our research indicates that nearly 90 percent of persons age 50 and
above prefer to remain in their homes as they age; and 95 percent
prefer to remain in their communities. When older persons do move, they
tend to move within the same county.
In rural America, the greater distances between homes and essential
destinations, such as health care, grocery stores and shopping,
exacerbate the transportation challenges of older nondrivers.
Nationally, over one in five older persons, 8 million people, does not
drive. These individuals often rely on family and friends, who provide
more than 1.4 billion trips per year, according to the 2009 NHTS.
Older persons living in rural areas risk their ability to live
independently if they do not drive. A 2006 study published in the
American Journal of Public Health found that nondrivers in their semi-
rural sample of older adults were four times as likely as drivers to
end up in long-term care, not necessarily because they needed long-term
care services, but because they could no longer function independently
without transportation. Over half of older nondrivers stay home on a
given day which puts them at greater risk of isolation due to the
inability to access needed services and the loss of connection to their
community. This can lead to unforeseen and significant costs as social
isolation is associated with an increase in serious health conditions
and depressive symptoms.
The population is also aging on our Nation's Indian reservations.
Based on Census data presented in a 2007 report by the Small Urban and
Rural Transit Center (SUTC), the population age 60 and above is
somewhat higher in tribes in the lower 48 States than in the Nation as
a whole (17 percent versus 16.3 percent nationally). Further, 31 tribes
have older populations that are at least 20 percent of the total. South
Dakota's tribal population age 60 and over is approximately 14 percent.
The SURTC report, ``Tribal Transit Demographic Need Indicators'',
places five South Dakota reservations among the top 25 reservations in
the lower 48 States in mobility dependent populations (defined as older
adults, persons with disabilities, low income, school age, and
households without a vehicle) on a percentage basis. These tribes are
the Crow Creek Sioux, Oglala Sioux, Lower Brule, Rosebud Sioux, and
Cheyenne River.
Need for Transportation Services in Rural America
Public transportation services are often very limited in
nonmetropolitan areas. Indeed, two-thirds of South Dakota residents age
50 and older reported in a recent AARP South Dakota survey that it
would be difficult for them to get where they wanted to go if they were
no longer able to drive. Further, 56 percent said that public
transportation is simply not available in their community. This is a
particular concern for the nearly two-thirds who reported that
transportation services are extremely or very important to help people
remain in their own homes as they age.
The number of U.S. counties served by the Federal nonurban transit
program (Section 5311) has been growing, yet 23 percent of counties
still lack service. Where service is available, however, rural transit
is a lifeline that helps older adults and persons with disabilities
stay connected to their community and remain independent in their
homes. The dispersed geographic character of rural America makes fixed
routes less effective for serving the general public. Indeed, over 80
percent of rural transit providers offer demand-response service,
according to a 2012 report by the Small Urban and Rural Transit Center.
Older adults and individuals with disabilities depend on these
services and represent a disproportionate share of ridership in rural
areas. In fact, persons age 60 and older make 31 percent of all rural
transit trips, and people with disabilities, 23 percent.
The need is especially pronounced in tribal areas as many
reservations are extremely rural with less than 5 people per square
mile and one-way travel distances may be well over 100 miles to the
nearest regional center. Many tribes have high rates of extreme poverty
making prohibitive the cost of gasoline and other costs of car
ownership.
Importance of MAP-21 Federal Investment in Public and Specialized
Transportation
Federal transit investments have played a critical role in rural
and tribal areas. In fact, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is
the primary funding source for 81 percent of rural transit vehicles.
Specialized transportation, funded through FTA and other Federal
agencies, is a lifeline for older nondrivers and their families.
According to the 2009 National Household Travel Survey, senior
nondrivers take 228 million trips per year on specialized
transportation (in all geographic locations), comprising nearly two-
thirds of all their public transportation trips.
Funding
FTA funding has contributed to the tremendous growth in the number
of tribal transit services in the past decade, from 18 in 1999 to
nearly 120 in 2011, covering about 20 percent of tribes. That the
Tribal Transit program requires no Federal match has encouraged its
growth. However, demand for new services remains very strong. From
fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2010, the high number of funding
requests and amount of funds requested for Tribal Transit far exceeded
the ability to satisfy demand. Existing systems provide about 1.2
million rides annually.
Under MAP-21, formula grant programs affecting small town and rural
communities received significant increases. For example, the Section
5311 nonurban transit program is funded at nearly $600 million in
fiscal year 2013, up from $465 million in fiscal year 2012, and will
increase to approximately $608 million in fiscal year 2014. Tribal
Transit funding is a takedown from Section 5311 and the amount
dedicated to it is doubled to $30 million in both fiscal years 2013 and
2014. Twenty-five million dollars of this amount is distributed by
formula grant, with the balance distributed by competitive grant.
Funding was also increased for the revised Section 5310 program,
Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Disabilities, above the total fiscal
year 2012 levels for Section 5310 and New Freedom combined. (The
revised program merges these two programs.) Funding is increased by 13
percent above fiscal year 2012 levels in fiscal year 2013, for a total
of $254.8 million, and by 15 percent above fiscal year 2012 in fiscal
year 2014, for a total of $258.3 million.
Planning
MAP-21 established several policy enhancements to Federal transit
programs affecting rural areas. Planning is a vital component of high
quality service delivery and is now an eligible activity for Section
5311 funds. In addition, under the statewide planning program, there is
a new State option to create regional transportation planning
organizations (RTPOs) to address the needs of nonmetropolitan areas for
planning, coordination, and implementation of long-range plans and
Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs. The law also requires
States to cooperate with nonmetropolitan local officials (or if
applicable, through RTPOs) in planning activities covering
nonmetropolitan areas, including the development of the Long-Range
Statewide Transportation Plan. Finally, States are required to develop
a consultative process for nonmetropolitan local official involvement
(including through RTPOs) that is ``separate and discrete'' from the
public involvement process.
For the Section 5310 transit program for the elderly and
individuals with disabilities, the law retains the requirement for a
connection between projects and the locally developed coordinated
public transit-human services transportation plan. This is discussed
further below.
Program Features
The Section 5311 program has a new eligibility, the Job Access and
Reverse Commute program which links low-income workers to job
opportunities. This eligibility also applies to the Section 5307 large
urban program.
Intercity bus service provides a critical link to local
transportation services in rural areas and may offer the only access to
distant medical centers for many rural residents. MAP-21 continues the
requirement that States spend at least 15 percent of Section 5311 funds
for intercity bus transportation. A new provision of the law allows the
costs of private intercity bus operations to be treated as a match for
the MAP-21-funded operating costs of rural intercity bus feeder
service, providing greater flexibility for securing the Federal match.
MAP-21 also creates a new formula-based program to increase public
transportation access for residents within the Appalachian region. This
program, a set-aside from the Section 5311 program, provides States $20
million per year.
The new law made several changes to the Section 5310 program,
foremost among them being its merger with the former Section 5317 New
Freedom program. AARP is pleased that the Committee and Congress did
not advance full consolidation of the FTA specialized transportation
programs. The purposes and goals of these two programs align well.
The new program retains the designation, ``Section 5310,'' as well
as the purposes of the original programs: to make grants for public
transportation projects to meet the special needs of seniors and
persons with disabilities when public transportation is insufficient,
inappropriate, or unavailable (Section 5310); and to make grants for
public transportation projects that exceed the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (New Freedom). Newly established grant
purposes include, (1) public transportation projects that improve
access to fixed route service and decrease reliance on paratransit;
and, (2) alternatives to public transportation for seniors and persons
with disabilities.
Under the new program structure, a minimum of 55 percent of funds
must be used for the original purpose of Section 5310, as described
above. The balance of the funding is reserved for the remaining
purposes, described above.
Importantly, operating assistance (with a 50 percent Federal match)
is now an eligible expense under the Section 5310 program. This
rectifies the long-standing discrepancy in which Section 5310 was the
sole small transit program prohibited from using funds for operating
expenses. This new eligibility will assist providers in paying the
costs of gasoline, insurance, salaries, and other expenses necessary to
put vehicles on the road. The allowance continues for funds from other
(non-DOT) Federal programs to make up the local share of program costs.
States continue to receive funding for the 20 percent of 5310 funds
designated for rural areas, and the 20 percent designated for small
urban areas. However, under MAP-21, 60 percent of funds is now
allocated directly to large urban areas. Program subrecipients continue
to include nonprofit providers. The competitive selection process,
which was formerly required for the New Freedom program, is now
optional.
Coordination of Human Services Transportation in MAP-21
Mobility management remains eligible as capital expense under MAP-
21. The mobility management approach offers a single point of access
that navigates multiple provider services to meet individual travel
needs. Mobility managers may serve several functions, including helping
communities develop coordination plans, brokering transportation
services, and working with human service agencies that coordinate their
clients' travel.
As mentioned above, MAP-21 retains and strengthens the requirement
that funds be contingent on the locally developed coordinated public
transit-human services transportation planning process. The law
specifies that projects must be ``included in'' (rather than ``derived
from'') the coordinated plan. In addition, States and designated
recipients must certify that transportation services are coordinated
with those assisted by other Federal departments, including any carried
out by a recipient of a grant from the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Significantly, the law makes newly explicit the requirement for
participation by seniors and people with disabilities in the
development and approval of the locally developed, coordinated public
transit-human services transportation plan.
AARP Board Charge on Transportation Coordination
In 2011, the AARP Board of Directors tasked the National Policy
Council (NPC) with examining approaches to strengthen the coordination
and delivery of transportation services to older adults and to make
policy recommendations. Recognizing that the lack of transportation has
particularly acute consequences in rural locations, the board charge
paid particular attention to the challenges of serving rural older
adults. In pursuing this charge, the NPC conducted three site visits
and heard from a diverse array of over 60 experts, stakeholder
organizations, and AARP representatives in the States. One of the
Council's site visits was to South Dakota where they met with
stakeholders in Sioux Falls, Pierre, Rapid City, the Cheyenne River
Indian Reservation, and the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The Council
met with leaders from major hospitals and transit agencies, the
Secretary of Transportation and other State transportation officials,
tribal leaders, chairs of the South Dakota House and Senate
Transportation Committees, academics, and staff from the State's
Congressional delegation.
The Council observed that social networks are shrinking in many
small, rural agricultural communities. In 1900, the typical farm was
less than 200 acres. Today in South Dakota, it is not uncommon to find
farms of 40,000 to 50,000 acres in size. Fewer people are needed to
sustain an agricultural economy, thus many small rural communities are
dying. The older population that remains has fewer younger relatives
and neighbors to assist with transportation. Local budgets are
shrinking as well, and cannot easily fill the gap. It was noted that
one rural community chose to invest in public transit when it realized
that its older residents were packing up and leaving for urban areas
(and taking the tax base and their consumer expenditures with them)
when the challenge of transportation became too great.
The South Dakota site visit offered many positive examples of
coordinated transportation services. The State DOT has long worked with
human service agencies, such as the area agencies on aging (AAAs), to
eliminate duplication of efforts. AAAs negotiate contracts with the
local transit providers to obtain transportation for their clients.
Section 5310 funding is almost entirely directed to local transit
providers.
River Cities Transit, based in Pierre, is an exemplar of a transit
provider that has expanded coordinated transit services. It now serves
11 counties, two Indian reservations, provides express service to
hospitals and clinics in Sioux Falls, service to the airport, and
coordinates its service to link customers to other transit providers in
North Dakota. It is the transportation provider for all local YMCAs,
employment training centers, and schools. RCT operates 24 hours a day,
7 days a week, a remarkable level of service for a rural transportation
provider.
The South Dakota DOT's efforts at coordination predate and go
beyond Federal requirements. In 1996, the Governor created the
Transportation Planning and Coordinating Task Force comprised of
representatives from the State departments of Transportation, Social
Services, Health, and Human Services, and the Coalition of Citizens
with Disabilities. The task force is charged with providing cost-
effective and efficient transportation services and reducing
fragmentation and duplication of services. The intent of coordination
is to increase vehicle use and ridership, thereby helping local
agencies combine resources to better meet the mobility needs of the
community. The DOT enforces Federal coordination requirements by tying
FTA's specialized transit funding to the development of a coordinated
public transit human services transportation plan. A regional
coordinated plan must be in place for any eligible agency in the
community to receive FTA specialized transit funding.
In South Dakota and beyond, the Council was struck by the fact that
many older people were simply unfamiliar with transit and needed help
in getting started using it. Consumer education and outreach, such as
transit travel training for prospective older riders, could overcome a
number of cultural barriers to greater transit use.
The Council also found that rural towns that are slowly dying could
be helped by locating senior-friendly affordable housing in central
areas of the towns thereby retaining the economic investments that flow
from older residents. This would enhance access to transportation and
medical care while allowing continued connections to social supports,
such as family and churches.
Discovering the Health and Transportation Connection
The Council learned that transportation is an essential service for
access to health care and to enable older people to live independently.
The changing nature of health care delivery presents its own set of
challenges for rural residents as health care facilities locate in more
centralized locales, increasing the travel distance required to obtain
medical care. The shift from inpatient to outpatient medicine,
particularly for dialysis and cancer treatment, is also placing
increasing demands on transportation systems. In addition, findings
from the National Health Interview Survey indicate that the lack of
access to nonemergency medical transportation is a critical barrier to
the management of chronic illness and disabilities. The Survey found
that approximately 3.6 million adults living in the community fail to
obtain health care due to a lack of transportation and these
individuals are more likely to be older, minority, and female. They are
also more likely to report multiple medical conditions and impairments
that make transportation difficult and often cause them to miss
critical medical appointments.
The Committee's visit to the Avera Cancer Institute in Sioux Falls
demonstrated that the coordination of health and transportation
services is essential to providing quality patient-centered care. Avera
staff noted that the lack of convenient and reliable transportation is
the top barrier to care for their patients. Sixty-eight percent of the
Institute's patients live outside of the Sioux Falls area traveling up
to 255 miles from locations in South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota.
Cancer treatment typically involves regular, at times daily or weekly,
visits to medical facilities, presenting a serious challenge for
patients who are too weak to drive after treatment or who lack the
human or financial resources to find other means to get to and from
lifesaving treatment.
Avera assigns patient navigators to identify barriers to treatment
and to make referrals. Social workers at the Center assist patients
with transportation needs, working closely with the medical staff and
transportation providers to accommodate treatment to transportation
resources. Fragmented service patterns, long application and waiting
periods, and lack of transportation resources are major barriers. Avera
attempts to bridge gaps in transportation resources through donations
from its Foundation and employees to pay for taxi vouchers.
South Dakota's high rate of mastectomies also illustrates how the
lack of transportation impacts patient care. Avera staff noted that
many women will choose a treatment based on the number of visits
required and because of transportation concerns will favor those with
less time required for radiation.
As part of Board Charge study, the Council also learned that
Medicaid is the largest public payer of nonemergency medical
transportation (NEMT) services for older adults and people with
disabilities. NEMT may include, for example, transportation to doctors'
appointments, dialysis, and chemotherapy. While data on total Medicaid
spending for transportation is not collected, estimates range from
close to $1 billion to slightly more than $3 billion annually, dwarfing
expenditures by many Federal transit programs.
Currently, CMS does not track nonemergency medical transportation
(NEMT) expenditures in a way that facilitates rigorous analysis and
development of solutions to better coordinate and improve services.
Under current reporting guidelines, those transportation costs that are
classified as an administrative expense (rather than a medical service)
are not itemized within the larger category of administrative expenses,
thus the full amount of Medicaid spending on transportation services is
unknown. According to a 2002-2003 survey by the National Consortium on
the Coordination of Human Services Transportation, 13 States reported
that they classified transportation services to be paid as an
administrative expense. Another 12 States classify transportation
expenditures as both administrative and a medical service (for which
transportation expenses are tracked and reported).
States may qualify for full Medicaid Federal match reimbursement if
they bill NEMT as a medical expense and meet other requirements, such
as a transportation brokerage system. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2006
allows States to contract with brokers to manage NEMT services, which
are required to be cost effective, and for which providers must be
selected through a competitive bidding process. As of 2009, 38 States
used brokers to contain NEMT costs and ensure quality of service.
In addition to Medicaid, Federal funding for transportation
services is also provided through other programs of HHS, most notably
Title III-B supportive services and the services for Native Americans
under Title VI of the Older Americans Act (OAA). Under Title VI, the
OAA provides funds to American Indian and Alaska Native elders for an
array of supportive services, including transportation. No local
matching funds are required. In fiscal year 2008, Title VI provided
roughly 1 million rides to meal sites, medical appointments,
pharmacies, markets, and other essential destinations for elders.
The Council also learned that the Affordable Care Act has placed a
priority on reducing the high cost of unnecessary hospital
readmissions, improving care coordination and transitions of care, and
supporting community-based care. Transportation is essential to each of
these care goals.
Key findings from the AARP National Policy Council Board Charge on
Transportation Coordination include the following:
A ``bottom up'' approach is effective in strengthening the
coordination of transportation services and developing new
partnerships to expand services. Strong local leadership is
critical for success, but coordination should be fostered at
all levels to strengthen the transportation network. A case
study of River Cities Transit is included in a forthcoming
report by AARP's Public Policy Institute that highlights local
providers from around the country that demonstrate successful
coordination of funding sources to provide quality
transportation services.
Coordinating health services and transportation is
essential to quality, patient-centered care. Staff at the Avera
Cancer Institute in Sioux Falls, SD, told the Council that the
lack of convenient and reliable transportation is the greatest
barrier to care for their patients. South Dakota's high rate of
mastectomies illustrates how the lack of transportation impacts
patient care: Studies find that many women choose a treatment
based on the number of visits required and favor those with
less time required for radiation because of transportation
concerns.
Due to severe fiscal constraints on States, Federal funding
for transportation, including from human service agencies is
more essential than ever. Sustaining and making more efficient
use of transportation-related funding is essential as most
States are unlikely to be able to significantly increase
contributions to transportation services. The Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is the largest public
payer of nonemergency medical transportation services to older
adults and persons with disabilities.
Additional funding for mobility management would strengthen
coordination and increase the quality of transportation
services. The inclusion of dedicated funding for mobility
managers through the U.S. DOT and other Federal agencies would
strengthen the coordination and quality of services.
Technology has a significant role in improving the
efficiency and quality of transportation services. Ride
scheduling software and other technology enable ``one call''
transit services and are key elements in achieving the goal of
efficient use of transportation assets and improving the
quality and coordination of services.
AARP South Dakota Works To Advance Transportation Coordination
AARP South Dakota is committed to addressing the transportation
challenges and opportunities in our State. Dennis Eisnach, our
volunteer State president, provides incredible leadership on this issue
and feels passionately that a resident of our State should have access
to transportation choices regardless of where they live and that AARP
South Dakota must address this issue or many older South Dakotans will
not have the option to age in their homes.
After hearing from volunteers and members from across South Dakota
regarding the transportation challenges they face on a daily basis,
AARP South Dakota has prioritized working on transportation
coordination in 2013 and beyond. Our long-term goal is to work with our
partners in our State to implement a one call system that will allow
our residents to be able to make a single call to receive a ride at any
time for any need.
Thanks to Ron Baumgart with River Cities Public Transit, Barb Cline
with Prairie Hills Transit and Northern State University's Dr. Jim
Seeber and the Northeast South Dakota Regional Aging Council, much work
has already been done in this area with much more left to do. AARP
South Dakota also appreciates Bruce Lindholm and the South Dakota
Department of Transportation's efforts to work with us on this issue.
AARP South Dakota, along with many other leaders in our State, know
this solution won't come quickly but the work over the long term will
provide the results we want.
Looking Ahead in South Dakota
According to the 2010 South Dakota DOT Long Range Plan, the State
population is shifting from rural to urban communities. For the first
time in South Dakota history, the urban population was found to be
greater than the rural population. One consequence of this development
is that persons with disabilities who live in these more densely
populated communities and do not drive will need to rely on costly
complementary paratransit services if they are unable independently to
access a bus stop due to missing or broken sidewalks, an inaccessible
bus stop, or other road obstructions. Well-constructed and maintained
sidewalk networks can result in great savings for paratransit services.
Economic conditions can be strengthened by increasing coordination
between separate funding resources, thereby amplifying the impact they
would have independently. This approach is underway through an effort
by the Oglala Lakota Tribe on the Pine Ridge Reservation and the
Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation with assistance from a
HUD Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant. Agencies including
the reservation's Housing Authority, Environmental Protection Program,
Chamber of Commerce, and Health Administration will collaborate on the
development of the regional plan that seeks to integrate housing, land
use, economic development, transportation, and infrastructure
investments across a wide southeastern swath of South Dakota. Residents
will be involved in all stages of the planning process. Success in this
approach for such an economically challenged community could
demonstrate the valuable benefits that can be achieved, perhaps with
more ease, by those communities that are less challenged.
Human Services Transportation Coordination
Status of Federal Efforts
The Government Accountability Office has examined the status of
human services transportation coordination many times beginning as far
back as 1999. The GAO has stated that it cannot determine the total
amount spent on transportation because agencies often do not separately
track transportation costs from other program costs. It has also noted
that most Federal departments on the Federal Interagency Coordinating
Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM) do not have an inventory of
existing programs or related expenditure information for transportation
services. (Council member agencies include DOT, HHS, Education,
Veterans Affairs, Labor, Interior, and HUD.)
In its March 2011 report, the GAO recommended that Federal agency
members of the CCAM identify and assess their transportation programs
and related expenditures. It also called on the agency members to work
with other departments to identify potential opportunities for
additional coordination, such as the use of one-call centers,
transportation brokerages, or shared resources. In addition, the GAO
has advised that Federal departments develop and disseminate policies
and guidance to their grantees on coordinating transportation services.
Many of these grantees, for instance, are unclear about cost sharing
and vehicle sharing among programs.
In its June 2012 report, GAO noted that the Coordinating Council
leadership has not met since 2007 and that momentum has stalled. It
further shared the observations of agency officials that the absence of
activity from leadership contributes to a lack of buy-in from program
officials and may affect how coordination is treated at the State and
local levels. Further, the CCAM is missing a strategic plan with roles
and responsibilities, measurable outcomes, or required follow-up.
One notable demonstration of progress, however, is the Veteran's
Transportation & Community Living Initiative, launched in July 2011. As
part of the Coordinating Council's Veteran's Affairs working group, the
Departments of HHS, Labor, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs
developed the initiative. The FTA has made over $30 million in Bus and
Bus Facilities grant funding available to local governmental agencies
to finance the capital costs of implementing, expanding, or increasing
access to local One-Call/One-Click Transportation Resource Centers.
This funding is complemented by training, technical assistance,
outreach, and social media technology investments provided by FTA and
other agencies, including the Departments of Veterans Affairs and
Labor. HHS and the Department of Defense are also lending critical
support.
Recommendations
AARP supports the GAO's recommendation that agencies
identify their transportation-related expenditures. For
instance, the Medicaid program could increase its transparency
regarding transportation expenditures by requiring States to
itemize both their administrative and medical NEMT expenses on
CMS Form 64. Data collection systems should be designed to
report expenditures on NEMT, as well as emergency
transportation, and transportation funded through waivers, both
in the aggregate and by State. Information on State Medicaid
NEMT programs and service delivery, such as use of brokers,
should also be available.
AARP also endorses the GAO's recommendations that the
Coordinating Council complete and publish a strategic plan, and
report on the progress of the Council's recommendations in a
report to the President in 2005. These recommendations included
seeking mechanisms to require human service transportation
programs to participate in coordinated planning, promote
vehicle sharing, develop allocation principles to enable cost
sharing, and develop reporting and evaluation methods. In
addition, Federal agencies should develop guidance to their
grantees regarding participation in coordination efforts at the
local level.
Funding should also be increased for mobility management
activities which would advance coordination significantly.
These activities should include the acquisition of advanced
technology for routing and scheduling trips. Such technology
has been found to reduce operating costs.
Data should be collected and reported annually regarding
program information for the Section 5310 program, including at
a minimum the number of trips, vehicles, vehicle age, trip
purpose, and number of clients. The authors of the Rural
Transit Fact Book note that a number of rural transit providers
receive funding under the section 5310, but that national data
on their programs is not available since there is no
requirement to report to the National Transit Database.
Integrate and streamline Federal grant applications and
reporting requirements. A balance should be struck between
solid data and burdensome administrative requirements.
Encourage State coordinating councils on human services
transportation in the 23 States that do not have them (as of
December 2011). South Dakota has demonstrated that high quality
services can be fostered through this approach.
Additional Transportation Recommendations
Funding should be increased for Section 5310, the nonurban
transit program, and the Tribal Transit program. These services
are vital to maintaining independence, and in rural areas are
lifelines. Demand already far exceeds supply and is growing.
Expand and improve the quality of the larger public
transportation program, including increased funds for capital
assistance and operating subsidies. Promote the use of public
transportation by older people and people with disabilities
through transit travel training.
Remove the barriers for participation in volunteer driver
programs by increasing the charitable standard mileage
reimbursement rate to that for business-related driving.
Programs in rural areas are losing volunteers who cannot absorb
the high cost of gasoline to travel long distances.
Ensure that transportation agencies routinely design and
operate the entire right of way to enable safe access for all
road users of all ages and abilities, including drivers,
transit users and vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. This
will allow people with disabilities to safely access public
transportation, and will create safer roads to address the
alarming pedestrian fatality rate among older people, currently
higher than that for any age group.
Facilitate the ability of local communities to employ
Federal funding in a way that allows transportation and housing
investments to support each other. Authorize funding for
competitive planning grant programs to enable communities to
develop comprehensive regional plans that incorporate
transportation, housing, community and economic development. In
addition, funding for grants to implement comprehensive
regional plans should also be authorized. These projects will
help communities create and preserve affordable housing and
multimodal transportation near housing. Seniors are able to age
more successfully in such places where destinations are close
by and where they have transportation options by which to reach
them.
Thank you, Chairman Johnson, for this opportunity to testify before
you today. I welcome any questions you may have.