The Transportation and Land Use Coalition (TALC), formerly Bay Area Transportation and Land Use Coalition, was founded in 1997 to bring local, regional, and state groups together to promote sustainable transportation and land use in the Bay Area. In 1998, one of our first campaigns was to help shift $375 million towards transit, most of it coming from highway expansions. About 50 organizations, from the Sierra Club to homeless service providers, got up in front of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and asked for the same policy recommendation, even though each had different reasons. We were able to get all 17 commissioners to vote against the staff recommendation and in favor of one put forward by our coalition. This campaign really launched TALC. It made people realize that if we all worked together—environmental, social justice, housing advocates, and others—we could influence policy at MTC.

At the same time we were bringing groups together at the regional level, a 1998 Alameda County sales tax measure split the progressive community: social justice groups supported it because of significant funding for bus service, but it was opposed by the Sierra Club and Greenbelt Alliance for a number of highway projects. When that measure failed, TALC formed an umbrella to bring these groups together to create a joint environmental/social justice platform. The goals was to improve the plan enough so that we could stand together to support it-–and by doing so have it get the two-third vote. By working together, leaders of environmental and social justice groups achieved a $186 million increase from the 1998 plan for transit, bicycle, pedestrian facilities, and paratransit. With that increase, all of the groups supported the measure in 2000. With this consensus, it ended up getting 81 percent of the vote, a 23 percent increase. Clearly, by pulling together those that are interested in sustainability and social justice, we can achieve more of our goals than if we continue to fight over the crumbs left behind by highway and BART expansion lobbies.

Because TALC was originally set up as an ad-hoc collaborative that was really just formed to influence the 1998 regional transportation plan, we didn’t have a strong decision-making apparatus. That worked fine when we were new, and had decided on a couple of clear, focused campaigns. Once the coalition started gaining power, that informal decision making became a problem. Everyone wanted the coalition to promote his or her particular viewpoint.

We went through a six-month planning process to develop transparent, democratic decision making. Now, our 45-member groups each have a vote on policy direction and on particular initiatives (the 46 affiliates do not vote). We need to get at least 3/4 in favor of any particular recommendation, so if people don’t understand an issue and need more clarity, the coalition doesn’t take it on. This process has constrained our ability to take positions, but it has made the coalition stronger and more accountable. We can get strong agreement on moving ahead without being weighed down by consensus, like some organizations.

TALC has not yet voted as a whole on the ferry plan. So far, reaction from our member groups is surprisingly positive. Members were nervous (some of them outraged) at the original ferry vision put forward. One major concern with the original 120-boat plan was that it was so grand it would require tremendous subsidies, which would eat into existing transit service. Another was that several routes would parallel existing transit, so we might get competition where no transit remained cost-effective. Then there were the environmental concerns about air quality, wakes, and related issues.

In my opinion, the revised plan focuses on terminals that have either proven themselves to be effective or those that could be effective because there isn’t parallel transit service. In that respect, and because Water Transit Authority (WTA) is only going after “new” revenue sources, the overall plan gets a “thumbs up.”

WTA is trying to fund this with a small piece of the bridge toll, sales tax initiatives in Contra Costa, Solano, and San Mateo counties, and local matches from some of the cities that will get the benefit of the development. That’s exactly the right way to go, and the way to make sure that transit advocates aren’t scared about cannibalization of operating subsidies.

Finally, WTA is also taking a leadership role in looking toward alternative fuels, at least in the first phase—low emission ferries. There are some lingering concerns that the added weight will just result in increased CO2 emissions. (The cleaner ferries have added equipment that increases overall fuel consumption, and therefore CO2 emissions.) But even with those concerns, WTA seems to be at the forefront of trying to get a clean fleet out there, and has even pleased its watchdogs, Bluewater Network and the Sierra Club, in this regard.

The role of TALC is likely to focus on the land-side connections, getting transit-oriented development instead of massive parking lots, and ensuring good bicycle and pedestrian access. I think there will be a continued trend of increased transit ridership, and the ferries are going to play a small but important part in it.

Our regional models didn’t show much ferry ridership, but WTA added an experiential component, where they found that some people just like the ferry experience more, and the only way to get them out of their car is with ferries. If this model is validated by strong ridership it may impact how transporation planners consider the customer experience instead of just time savings.

How are we going to get people out of their cars? We can offer all the transit in the world—better buses, trains, and ferries—and we will have a limited impact on ridership unless we deal with pricing. One of the most important things we can do is to have parking charges. I would love gas taxes to put the cost at $3-4 per gallon, with the funding going back to improving transit. However the political will is so low in our society for an increased gas tax, we are only likely to get another 10, 20, or possibly 30 cents in the foreseeable future. I think bridge tolls should be significantly higher. What we would like to see is congestion pricing, with a lifeline toll for low-income users. Ideally, right now it would go up to $4 peak and $2 off-peak. For low-income individuals driving at peak hours, it would stay at $2. Once Fastrack is more widely used, people quickly forget about the price of the toll. It’s just one small line item on a very crowded credit card bill.

I got interested in transportation when I was in upstate New York. (I grew up in New York and received an undergraduate degree in Psychology from the State University of New York at Albany. I organized a Greenpeace chapter on campus.) When I graduated, I worked for the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), similar to CALPIRG out here. It’s a great group—by far the largest advocacy organization in New York State. I moved to Manhattan to work for NYPIRG, and my commute was like a video game—bicycling everyday through Manhattan from one side to the other, trying to avoid swerving taxis. I realized how cars had such an incredible impact on our culture, our physical infrastructure, and our quality of life. That’s when I became a promoter of alternative transportation.

I did regional and statewide organizing for NYPIRG for five years, then came to the East Bay and got my Master’s degree in Public Policy from Cal. Three years of successful navigation by bicycle in Manhattan without a single scratch, and my third week in Berkeley, I got “doored,” went flying through the street, came out okay, but said, “This is crazy!” In some ways, it’s more dangerous here because the drivers are not paying attention. They’re not as alert as they are in New York. So I cofounded the Bicycle Friendly Berkeley Coalition.

Our first campaign was to create access to the waterfront-–a pedestrian bridge to go over I-80. If you didn’t want to drive, you were cut off from the waterfront. You had to go up a long flight of steps and over three highway on-ramps or off-ramps, carry your bicycle up 20 steps and risking your life. Knowing I was going to be raising kids in Berkeley and knowing I wasn’t going to be schlepping them over three highway exit ramps, our first campaign at the BFBC was for that bridge. The City Council passed it the first year of our campaign, and after five years it has finally opened.

It’s just great. In fact, this morning I got to sit on the rocks at the marina, with my three year old on my lap and the waves gently splashing our feet, laughing and appreciating the incredible Bay. All possible from a small investment in alternative transportation.