Author: Cheryl Cort

CSG in the News: Let’s make our streets safer by putting the transportation people in charge of traffic cameras

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

Let’s make our streets safer by putting the transportation people in charge of traffic cameras

 

Opinion by Cheryl Cort, Coalition for Smarter Growth, in www.GreaterGreaterWashington.org

Here’s one of the changes proposed by DC Mayor Muriel Bowser in her budget to fix dangerous streets: Transfer photo enforcement from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) to the District Department of Transportation (DDOT). In the wake of so many tragic deaths on our streets, the mayor’s proposed transfer of photo enforcement to DDOT is one of a number of actions she can take to make our streets safer. Whether the DC Council will support this transfer will be determined in the next two weeks in the final budget deliberations and vote.

Traffic cameras can be an effective approach for discouraging dangerous behavior by drivers. By placing oversight of this tool with the agency responsible for managing our streets, automated traffic enforcement could more effectively improve safety. Traffic cameras are helping now, but they could be used much more strategically if DDOT is able to integrate them into its safety programs.

While there’s good precedent for Departments of Transportation administering automated traffic enforcement—New York City and Chicago are examples—DC Council Transportation and Environment Committee (T&E) chair Mary Cheh (Ward 3) is skeptical, and wants to keep photo enforcement where it is, with the police. We at the Coalition for Smarter Growth along with our partners think this would mean a missed opportunity to make our streets safer.

Why would street safety improve if DDOT manages automated traffic enforcement?

DDOT is uniquely positioned to use automated traffic enforcement to bolster its safety programs, like Vision Zero and traffic calming. Unlike MPD, DDOT can use photo enforcement to assess the safety performance of corridors and intersections and make changes that prevent dangerous behavior.

The city’s high number of traffic deaths this year point to the shortcomings to date in DDOT’s efforts to build safe roads, and better utilization of traffic cameras is no substitute for the essential work of street redesign. But bringing the powerful tool of automated traffic enforcement into DDOT’s toolkit is a part of the solution.

In addition to the opportunity to better integrate photo enforcement with DDOT’s other safety tools, the agency is also planning to deploy traffic cameras to enforce bus lane compliance. While DC lags far behind other cities in deployment of dedicated bus lanes, starting this year, the District will establish dedicated bus lanes on H and I Streets downtown as a summer pilot. We also hope to finally see the 16th Street bus lanes, and later the implementation of the K Street redesign with dedicated bus lanes.

But bus lanes need to be enforced, and DC’s record of enforcement hasn’t been great (e.g. 7th and 9th Streets downtown). Given everything on MPD’s plate, getting sufficient attention from MPD to deploy and fine-tune new automated traffic enforcement for bus lanes seems challenging at best. On the other hand, DDOT has a direct interest in using photo enforcement to ensure that bus lanes are successful, move more people, and improve accessibility in the city.

Critics of photo enforcement have often charged that cameras are more about revenue generation than preventing dangerous behavior. Vesting DDOT with the responsibility for using traffic cameras as part of their management of roadway safety gives us an opportunity to ask for greater accountability. With the transfer of traffic cameras sought by the Mayor, the DC Council can insist that DDOT use its data collection and photo enforcement results to act more quickly to fix streets and intersections that show risks outside the norm.

The traffic camera debate is playing out right now

The DC Council and the Bowser administration seek to make good on the promise of Vision Zero. That’s why the Washington Area Bicyclist Association, Coalition for Smarter Growth, and DC Sustainable Transportation, along with Councilmember Charles Allen (Ward 6), DDOT, and the mayor want traffic cameras shifted to DDOT to improve street safety. The debate is playing out right now in the final budget deliberations, and involves a split between two committee chairs.

Cheh wants the MPD to continue to administer automated traffic enforcement, and is not accepting the Mayor’s budget provision transferring automated enforcement to DDOT and under her committee’s oversight. Allen, who chairs the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, supports the transfer to DDOT and does not want to accept the funds back into MPD’s budget. This conflict between committees will need to be resolved by council chairman Phil Mendelson.

We hope Mendelson will support placing traffic cameras with DDOT so it can incorporate them in the coordinated approach known as the four E’s of street safety: engineering, enforcement, education, and evaluation. Under DDOT, there will be a better focus on safety to protect people who walk, bike, drive, and use transit in our city, and better enforcement of dedicated bus lanes to speed up buses, improve on-time reliability, and bring back riders.

See story here.

CSG in the News: A Controversial Solution To D.C.’s Housing Crisis: Help The Middle Class

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

From WAMU: A Controversial Solution To D.C.’s Housing Crisis: Help The Middle Class, by  Ally Schweitzer

 “As the District of Columbia and its suburbs grapple with a shortage of housing — particularly affordable homes — a new and controversial strategy has gained support among elected officials, the nonprofit sector and developers alike.

The idea? Invest in housing for the middle class.

…Why has the mayor’s proposed workforce housing fund sparked controversy? 

Mainly because there’s deep skepticism that middle-income people should be a priority when D.C. residents on the bottom of the economic ladder are much worse off.

The top 20 occupations in D.C. by employment totals, 2017. (Includes D.C. residents and commuters.) From a Coalition for Smarter Growth analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

First, the Coalition for Smarter Growth has criticized the city’s definition of “workforce,” saying it’s out of step with reality. According to a report published by the urbanist think tank, eight out of the city’s top 20 professions pay an annual median wage of less than $49,000, or 60 percent of AMI. For example, nearly 16,000 city workers are employed as janitors or cleaners — jobs that pay an annual median wage of $29,000, per CSG’s analysis. Meanwhile, teachers, social workers, and first responders don’t crack the top 20.”

Read CSG’s report and recommendations here.

CSG Testimony on DC FY2020 Budget for Department of Housing & Community Development

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

CSG Testimony FY20 Budget Hearing for DHCD

Testimony before the Hon. Anita Bonds, Chair, Committee on Housing & Neighborhood Revitalization, Council of the District of Columbia

RE: FY2020 Budget Oversight Hearing for the Department of Housing and Community Development and Housing Production Trust Fund

By Cheryl Cort, Policy Director

April 23, 2019

Good afternoon, my name is Cheryl Cort and I am the policy director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth (CSG). The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization working locally in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan region dedicated to making the case for smart growth. Our mission is to promote walkable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities, and the land use and transportation policies and investments needed to make those communities flourish.

We want to commend the Mayor for proposing a substantial increase to the Housing Production Trust Fund to $130 million and an increase in the Affordable Housing Preservation Fund to $15 million. D.C. continues to lead the country in its commitment to local funding for affordable housing, along with its use of important policy tools like TOPA and DOPA, and the administration’s innovations in the New Communities Initiative. These investments, policies, and programs are critical, but much more is needed to preserve and build affordable housing in a city that is rapidly becoming unaffordable to its low-paid workforce and many long-time residents.

The District continues to experience strong demand to live here, which drives up housing prices. In addition, the city’s economy has a large and growing gap between wages earned at white-collar jobs and the earnings of workers who provide essential services to many of the businesses upon which the high-paid professionals rely for day to day needs. To address the needs of low income residents, including the workers who fill 8 of the top 20 occupations in the city, we need deeper and more strategic investments. And we need stronger policies. The FY2020 budget can be more a part of the solution.

Workforce housing – make strategic investments for low wage workers to live in the city

We appreciate the administration’s attention to the housing needs of D.C.’s workforce. Helping workers live near their work has many family, community and environmental benefits. We are disappointed, however, that the income targeting proposed for the new $20 million “workforce” housing program, from 60% to 120% AMI, will miss providing assistance to the working households who most need it to stay in the city. The need starts at 50% AMI, and goes down from there.

Last month, we released a study on D.C.’s workforce housing needs (see attachment). We found:

  • 8 of the most common 20 occupations pay less than $48,000 a year (e.g. administrative assistants);
  • 5 of the top 20 jobs pay below $30,000 per year, which is considered extremely low income for a two-person household (e.g. janitors and cleaners);
  • Not a single one of the most common 20 occupations in the District was between 50% and 80% AMI.

Many of the fastest growing service jobs in the District, such as home health aides, food preparation, and waiters/waitresses, earn extremely low incomes. At these income levels, most working households face severe housing cost burdens, paying more than half of their income to housing. In contrast, rarely does a household earning 80% AMI or more face severe housing cost burdens.

These data show that the District’s critical workforce housing needs are with those earning well below 80% AMI, let alone 120% AMI. But the income targeting for the Mayor’s workforce housing fund would target assistance for earners at 60% to 120% AMI, or $112,500 per year for a 2-person household. For higher earners at this range, we should focus on policies that make the housing market work better, to produce more moderately-priced homes in more neighborhoods. For the expenditure of scarce funds, we must be strategic. Based on our research, we recommend the follow to address affordable workforce housing needs:

  1. Establish a workforce housing policy for income targeting based on need using earnings data and severe cost burdens. We ask the Council to approve funding for the new workforce housing program using income targeting no higher than 60% AMI for rental and 80% AMI for ownership. In fact, based on our research, we recommend that the focus for workforce housing go to rental assistance at 30% and 50% AMI.
  2. Recommit the city (especially through DHCD and Office of Planning) to its obligation to comply with the Fair Housing Act’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule. The D.C. Council can address this in part through the Comprehensive Plan update bill. The Comprehensive Plan should be revised to unlock the potential for less costly, mixed-income housing throughout the city. This is an important way to better address workforce housing needs up the income scale. The Comprehensive Plan should significantly expand the potential for creating new housing, including inclusionary zoning units, especially in high opportunity neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan must also ease restrictions on building housing, especially affordable and public housing, like the Park Morton/Bruce Monroe plan to replace deteriorated public housing.
  3. Greatly expand the Local Rent Supplement Program (LRSP) to provide rental assistance to help low-paid workers, especially through tenant-based LRSP. The FY20 budget proposes modest increased support for targeted affordable housing and project-based rental assistance. However, the budget proposed no additional tenant-based rental assistance. We urge the Council to add funding to tenant-based LRSP. In the long term, we should greatly expand LRSP and pair it with our fair housing efforts to bring more deeply affordable housing to high opportunity neighborhoods. These actions are a key way to address our workforce housing needs, and breakdown a legacy of discrimination which cuts off access to opportunity and choice.

 Thank you for your consideration.

_________________________________

Attachment: Making Workforce Housing Work, a new report by Coalition for Smarter Growth, March 2019

CSG Testimony on FY20 DDOT budget

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

We are excited to support the FY20 budget proposals to implement 16th Street dedicated bus lanes, the K Street Transitway, and the summer H and I Streets rush hour bus lanes pilot. These investments are a great start to a new era of delivering a priority bus system that gets hundreds of thousands of D.C. residents and visitors where they need to go, safely and efficiently. Building on this budget, we ask the Council and DDOT to jumpstart the District’s new priority bus system by accelerating implementation of dedicated bus lanes, and the other improvements we need to make this transit service faster and more reliable.

Read the full testimony here: CSG DDOT FY20 Budget Oversight_3-11-19

Making Workforce Housing Work for D.C.

Making Workforce Housing Work for D.C.

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

Making Workforce Housing Work: Understanding Housing Needs for D.C.’s Changing Workforce

D.C.’s workforce is growing and changing. After years of decline, the city is now a leading jurisdiction in population and job growth.  Increasingly, more people working in D.C. want to live in D.C., though the city still has a net influx of commuters to fill jobs each workday. This growth dynamic offers the District new opportunities, but also continued housing affordability challenges that must be addressed strategically to make the lives of working households better, and foster a healthy economy.  D.C. can and should affordably house more of its workforce.  To accomplish this, the District must deploy two broad strategies:

  • Make the housing market work better by changing land use policies to provide the housing supply necessary to keep pace with demand from working households who could pay for housing if it were more available and less costly.
  • Use subsidies and a full set of public policy tools to bridge the remaining gap where housing costs are too high and wages too low. The District should dramatically increase funding for the Local Rent Supplement Program and Housing Production Trust Fund. It should also leverage Inclusionary Zoning, Planned Unit Developments and other zoning tools to produce more housing that is affordable. These investments and policy tools must make homes affordable for workers who are filling common occupations but face severe housing cost burdens. This essential part of the workforce earns half or less of the region’s median household income.

This paper focuses on the latter issue: specifically, the need to target public resources and policies to addressing the needs of the large share of the workforce that earns 50 percent or less of area median income. These workers represent 8 of the 20 most common occupations in the District of Columbia, and 5 of those 8 occupations pay wages that amount to 30 percent or less of area median income.

View full report at: Making Workforce Housing Work

Flexible commuter benefits bill reintroduced in DC

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

On February 19, 2019, D.C. Councilmembers Charles Allen and Mary Cheh reintroduced the parking cash-out bill, B23-148. This bill will require employers that subsidize parking for an employee’s commute to offer a transit benefit of equal value, or provide cash. It doesnt impose a cost or a new benefit, it simply lets an employee choose to use an employer-provided commute benefit for something other than driving and parking.

What’s the next step?: voting it out of the Transportation & Environment committee and into the full Council. Councilmembers Todd (Ward 4), and McDuffie (Ward 5) have not yet said if they will support the bill. If you are a business owner or constituent, let your councilmember know you support this sensible bill to let an employee use an employer’s parking benefit for an alternative commute.

Here are the options an employer can provide as an alternative to employees for a parking-only subsidy:

  • transit benefit of equal value to parking subsidy
  • cash of equal value to parking subsidy
  • increased health coverage benefit
  • cease to offer parking subsidies
  • Transportation Demand Management Plan that helps achieve the moveDC plan goal of under 25% commute trips by car or taxi

The bill has one major change: it exempts parking that is owned — rather than leased or paid for — by an employer. While we are disappointed in this exemption, we still believe the bill covering employers that lease or pay for employee commuter parking will have important benefits.  These benefits include: reduced traffic congestion (especially in downtown); increased bus speeds; increased transit, walk, and bike commutes; reduced greenhouse gas and other pollutant emissions; and fewer traffic crashes. View the factsheet here, or learn more about the campaign here.