To broaden its work to control Palo Alto’s traffic and parking woes, the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (TMA) on Thursday voted to expand its transportation management program to the California Avenue area.
The pilot expansion, which will be funded by $100,000 from companies Palantir Technologies and Facebook, would seek to shift low-wage workers’ mode of transportation through incentives and spreading the word. The money will fund mass transit, vanpool and shuttle programs for service workers in the area between Page Mill Road and Town & Country Village shopping center. The pilot would assess whether the programs can be replicated beyond a single geographical area. It would last three to six months beginning in January 2019, according to a letter submitted by Mila Zelkha, Palantir’s community ambassador.
Rob George, board chairman of Palo Alto TMA, said its programs in the downtown area have been successful. The organization is on target to reach its goal of providing 200 free monthly transit passes to service workers, having already supplied 150 passes and received another 49 new requests for September passes. The organization has taken a boots-on-the-ground approach by visiting downtown businesses door to door to engage employees and their managers. It has also hired a part-time employee who speaks Spanish to help with the outreach.
The employees can apply for a free Caltrain, VTA, SamTrans or Dumbarton Express monthly pass worth up to $1,800 per year. The program also offers up to $1,200 annual carpool rewards with Scoop or Waze and discounts for using Lyft for short trips to and from East Palo Alto, Redwood City, Menlo Park and Mountain View, according to a brochure in English and Spanish.
The TMA board also voted unanimously to raise eligibility for the transit-pass subsidy in both downtown and California Avenue to employees earning up to $70,000 a year. The new cap is still in line with the TMA’s funding agreement with the city of Palo Alto, which specifies the $120,000 in current funding it supplies must be used solely for low-income persons. The low-income threshold for a family of four is defined as $84,000 a year, directors noted.
The new cap is targeted toward shift managers, who are likely to become enticed by the program and then educate their employees, the directors noted. It also doesn’t overlap with the incomes of office workers make so higher-paid employees who are covered by company programs are unlikely to be eligible for the TMA program.
Zelkha said interest in the California Avenue area appears to be strong. In advance of proposing the expansion, Palantir queried more than 120 businesses in the target area to gauge interest. The company found much support among many.
Palo Alto City Councilman Cory Wolbach, who attended the TMA meeting, praised the expansion. “On behalf of the Council, it’s an important step,” he said.
But he — and Zelkha — stressed that as the program grows, the board must find funding for a permanent program.
“You need to be planning ahead for popularity and financial sustainability,” he said. Some ways might include bringing in representatives from Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Town & Country and the local dentist’s association as strong anchors, both on the board and as financial contributors. Another idea included running a shuttle from East Palo Alto to downtown or California Avenue, Wolbach said. If the city establishes paid parking, it could also provide a permanent funding stream to the TMA program, everyone agreed.
More information on the TMA’s programs, including the transit-pass subsidy, can be found at paloaltotma.org.
This sounds like a great idea. I’m curious, though, whether Palantir and Facebook also support encouraging their higher-paid employees to use public transportation. Given Palantir’s strong backing of PAF and Facebook’s bonus to employees who live nearby my guess would be no. Does anyone else know the answer?
I miss all the retail that used to be on Cal Ave. Now it’s mostly restaurants and places to exercise.
Won’t work. Cal Avenue transportation issues are just going to get worse. TMAs are just band-aids to cover up the wounds left by real-estate development exploitation of public assets, and Palo Alto city government is creating transportation problems faster than they are solving them.
^^^This. Most people given the choice, don’t like to ride a bus.
>I’m curious, though, whether Palantir and Facebook also support encouraging their higher-paid employees to use public transportation.
And let their Teslas sit in the garage? I think not. Besides, it is very difficult to take the bus for those extended/overpriced lunches.
@good idea – Tech companies like Palantir have very low rates of driving among their employees. The TMA survey found that tech companies had only about a third of their employees drive to work – much lower than the service workers that the TMA is targeting, or the office workers in the Stanford Research Park. Usually, this is because the downtown tech companies provide Caltrain GoPass to their employees.
Also, Palo Alto Forward is not supported by Palantir or any other business. Check the website: https://www.paloaltoforward.com/our_sponsors: “We are an all-volunteer non-profit organization, 100% funded by individual contributors. To date, we have accepted no money from any businesses.”
This is one of the most important solutions to current traffic congestion, and I’m happy to see progress. Its much in line with our original city council colleagues memo from 2013 launching the Transit Management Association concept for Palo Alto. I grew up in south Marin, NOBODY considered driving to the office in their car across the Golden Gate Bridge. These are old school concepts, so lets keep improving public transit and our last mile travel from station to office with these TMAs so we can become mobile in Palo Alto again.
Thank you Facebook and Palantir for the funding and the TMA board for the vision.
Sue and Weekly, On behalf of our Board of Directors, thanks for covering our (hopefully) important work at the TMA. – Steve Raney, PATMA Executive Director.
@Nancy Shepherd,
Is the following an accurate history of the TMA relative to expanding to Cal Ave?
Former Mayor Nancy Shepherd along with Mayor Liz Kniss and former Councilmember Gail Price led an effort to create the TMA as an independent nonprofit. Mayor Shepherd led trips to visit other TMAs in the region and although no longer on the Council, it was her leadership that lay the groundwork for what we know as PATMA today.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2014/08/26/new-non-profit-to-manage-downtowns-traffic-problems
Their original vision was to create a city-wide TMA and they specifically advocated for having programs in the California Avenue area one day.
Their original 2013 colleague’s memo states:
“Recommendation: Direct staff to develop a comprehensive Transit Demand Management (TDM) plan for the California Ave and University Ave Downtown Districts and the Stanford Research Park with the goal of reducing solo car trips by at least 30% …”
A 2014 Staff Report reiterates the memo’s original intent:
“Background: In a colleague’s memo written September 16, 2013, members of the City Council suggested creation of a Transportation Demand Management strategy aimed at reducing overall single- occupant vehicle travel by 30% in the Downtown and California Avenue districts. The plan also asked for staff to consider hiring a third-party consultant to develop the TMA, as well as to deliberate on funding mechanisms for the TMA and potential organizational structures. The TMA, as a third-party entity working closely with City staff, would be considered an umbrella organization for many current and future transportation programs. The TMA could manage, market and brand these programs, develop data and metrics on transit use within the community and identify potential services and programs that could serve various Downtown constituents. The TMA would work closely with City staff’s parking management efforts to provide coordinated efforts that could complement one another.”
Thank you to Sue Dremann and the Palo Alto Weekly for this great story. As the TMA Board Chair, I appreciate the coverage of our organizations great work. We will continue to grow and support both the residents and businesses in Palo Alto. http://www.paloaltotma.org Contact me at rob.george@lemonadela.com or 408-838-6451 for more exciting news!
Almost @Steve, lets also shout out Council Member Greg Scharff for signing onto the memo, he was mayor at the time and were prospecting many options to divert overflow parking and traffic as alternatives to garages–as they would take years to build.
It was very informative to interview staff and experience the Contra Costa TMA which was started in the late 1980s when BART was expanding. Palo Alto can do this too, it’s not as easy since CCTMA was planned during the period of office building development, which were designed intentionally without enough parking spaces by 30%. Development funds were collected to initiate the TMA and subsidize BART commuters. Shuttles, taxi vouchers, carpools, and zip cars augment mobility and emergency needs. We rode around on the shuttle, had lunch, then returned via BART to the peninsula.
So glad this is really starting to launch! Thank you for your work.
I live in Downtown North and have been active in permit parking programs for University and California Avenue neighborhoods. Also I have attended almost all of the TMA meetings as a member of the general public.
We are fortunate that PATMA has this boost to prove the concept of reducing traffic and parking. Expansion of services for California Ave is a logical and necessary step. All start-up businesses need cash flow and economies of scale. Now city and TMA staff can reach more businesses and their employees with a first-class TMA and other city programs mitigating traffic and parking.
This will be a worthy challenge for all us who have stake in reducing traffic and managing parking in the commercial cores and adjacent neighborhoods.
It is quite amusing to see the major supporters of development now trying to mitigate the serious problems they created.
“Former Mayor Nancy Shepherd along with Mayor Liz Kniss and former Councilmember Gail Price,” and real estate lawyer Greg Scharff! Even developer supporter Cory Wolbach.
And Multi-Billion dollar Palantir, which occupies a huge proportion of office space downtown, more than any other company.
Thank goodness they won’t bother the higher paid people. Wouldn’t want to inconvenience these political donors.
This is the funniest story I’ve read in a while. I wish them success.
There are definitely some interesting aspects to this, but I would like to know if they are preparing some parking lots for the workers to use to get to their places of employment having parked remotely. Unless these shuttles are used as dedicated shuttles from parking lots I can’t see how it will help workers who are commuting in from places such as the coast.
Traffic and transportation are complex problems that require an array of solutions working together. A widespread TMA is a vital part of the solutions needed to address these problems.
TMA data for Palo Alto shows “lower-income service workers drive to work at a rate that’s about double that of high-income tech workers – around 80% compared to below 40%. Further analysis showed that there are sizeable numbers of workers who live near the Caltrain corridor but find price to be a barrier.”
http://www.greencaltrain.com/2016/11/whos-not-riding-caltrain-caltrain-board-wants-to-explore-opportunities-to-improve-equitable-access/
If you want to reduce traffic in Palo Alto, you should support the TMA to help make a difference on our local streets.
Thanks to Palantir and FB – but residents should also encourage the City of Palo Alto to step up their support of this program.
Our local TMA is widely considered to be a huge failure by residents striving to solve the parking crisis. The TMA holds meetings and gets lots of press, but refuses to evaluate itself by simple measures such as eliminating commuter parking in neighborhoods. Instead, one of its goals is how much positive PR it gets.
Consider that the TMA hands out transit passes and ride-sharing apps, but who knows if commuters receiving those were already using transit or ride-sharing anyway? So the TMA funding may be generating no true benefit.
Rather, the TMA seems crafted to tout its progress in reducing traffic and parking, when in fact little to nothing is happening. No doubt businesses and developers hope that swaying public opinion will engender more support for major high-tech growth in the city, as Palantir has called for.
The TMA should not get one more cent of public funding until it commits to substantial reductions in neighborhood commuter parking and city traffic, verified by independent means.
I’m pleased to see the TMA expand its influence down to Cal. Ave. Giving out free transit passes to lower income workers is a great way to alleviate traffic congestion and it makes a big difference to those who receive the passes. Kudos to the City Council and the TMA Board’s leadership on this issue. The shops and restaurants are so important to the quality of life in Palo Alto and deserve our support.
I think something like the TMA is the right approach — unbalanced business expansion is responsible for traffic and parking issues, so businesses need to contribute effort and money toward the solution, thereby rebalancing the economic incentives. I attended one TMA board meeting and left with a strong positive impression of the organization.
But I think the emphasis on service workers is misplaced, for two reasons.
First, the number of service workers is small compared to the number of office workers. The last Downtown survey (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/56092) showed they account for only 19% of workers (page 49). Sure, they drive solo at higher rates than office workers, but there are so many more office workers that a modest improvement in that group would yield better overall results than even a huge improvement in the service-worker group.
Second, service workers explain (page 51) that they drive solo because they have more complicated transportation needs — they have to drive their kids to various places, perform errands, make deliveries, and so on. This is exactly what you’d expect for people who often work multiple jobs and live far away from the places they work. I doubt that it’s fair to burden these people with more difficult commutes.
The TMA concept is viable and clearly needed to address worsening traffic issues. However, citing the number and cost travel passes given away is not a very useful metric. (How often are the passes used? Do commuters report using the passes daily, once a week, ??) The TMA Board needs to undertake the hard work of collecting actual data on how these travel passes change driver behavior and quantify any reduction in traffic attributable to the passes.
The TMA also needs to expand its targets beyond service workers since, as Alan Akin points out, they represent a small percentage of Palo Alto commuters.
We should celebrate TMA achievements thus far and support the pilot program for California Avenue Corridor. Any and all efforts we make to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles and provide practical and convenient alternatives are critical. We can learn from other communities who have initiated these programs and options and modify and expand creative ideas that will work here. Mobility, accessibility, and convenience will become a new standard that people will use and expect. Collectively we can create a healthier and sustainable community but we all need to make this work. Please begin or continue by using alternatives.. walk, bike, ride-sharing, all transit forms.. that are already available.
Are passes transferable? Need to get two for in-laws. They fall below income threshold could use them for shopping.
I drive Prius so no pollution involved. Also have city parking permit.
Quote “walk, bike, ride-sharing, all transit forms.. that are already available.”
Walk, bike, for the fortunate few who live close enough to work and don’t need their car to take children to daycare, etc.
Ride-sharing for those who live and work close by to each other, work identical hours, and don’t find themselves having to work later, which sometimes can’t be predicted in advance.
“All transit forms.. that are already available.” The bus is readily available? Seems to me it doesn’t go that often and for the most part nowhere near where the a majority of people people live or work. Anyone who finds it convenient to ride the train probably already does.
Lyft and Uber? Driving around looking for clients and clogging up the streets, taking up parking while waiting. Better to have one car parked all day and reduce the traffic.
The initiative will hopefully lead to more data (short term) and with time help lessen congestion on our streets, we ought to be supportive of this good faith effort.
Simply put, this move would “incentivize” poor workers to take public transportation at the benefit of the higher paid workers. While poor workers will have to take longer times to commute, the wealthier workers will benefit from less congested streets. Talk about equality guys!
With all the diversity propaganda in Palo Alto,is this truly an environmental action or a subverted act of opportunism?
Simply sickened by the flawed liberal agenda that is simply a republican agenda sugar coated with hypocrisy.
Fray Junipero Serra has really pulled back the veil on this whole scam, but I would take it further.
The whole gentrification of the Cal Ave area is really pro-business republican thinking dressed up to appeal to low-information left of center voters.
The real beneficiaries of all of this gentrification are wealthy real-estate developers and the handful of people that own most of the commercial properties on Cal Ave. Struggling residents and low wage workers lose affordable retail and efficient transportation which is replaced with the fool’s gold of TMAs and BMRs.
Your elected officials, past and present, paying back the real-estate industry for their generous campaign contributions.
> this move would “incentivize” poor workers to take public transportation at the benefit of the higher paid workers. While poor workers will have to take longer times to commute, the wealthier workers will benefit from less congested streets.
>With all the diversity propaganda in Palo Alto,is this truly an environmental action or a subverted act of opportunism?
Of course Dick Tracy. Which is why there is going to be a large parking garage erected on California Avenue…to accommodate the rich folks in their fancy cars while the poor folks (with their free transit passes) stand out in the rain waiting for a bus.
>>The whole gentrification of the Cal Ave area is really pro-business republican thinking dressed up to appeal to low-information left of center voters.
Liberal-minded ‘do-gooders’ are so clueless at times.
Is Wolbach aware there are several bus lines running from EPA to downtown Palo Alto? Build on that and add a line to CalmAve? The previous EPA shuttle failed because it was competing with the bus lines. How dumb is that?
Getting to Cal Ave requires a transfer to VTA. Better coordination between SamTrans, VTA, AC Transit, and the cities would be a great idea.
The Dumbarton bus lines were significantly expanded several years ago, but they could be promoted and improved much more. For example. Weekend service.
One problem with this issue is that many Palo Altans are ignorant of current services and where the gaps are that need to be filled.
Subsidy, subsidy, subsidy.
When the subsidies stop, it’s back to driving one’s own vehicle. It will be electric but it’ll be on the street and needing a parking space.
Even with the subsidy, people are not fully using their subsidized pass.
It is just academic speak to have people think it is “innovative” and “smart” and whatever buzz word is a fad.
TMA and TDM is a joke! So is car light/free projects! Joke, joke, joke.
How about asking the actual low income workers what would help them?
Perhaps they have some ideas of what might make a difference to their commute? Many low income workers are working unsociable shifts involving late nights and early starts? We (and the CC) may have no idea of what might help them most so asking them seems like a good way to start to me.
I think anything that can be done to reduce transportation costs for people who spend most of their income on housing is important and that it rewards them for getting around in an environmentally friendly manner is even better. Rich people don’t take the bus and it makes no sense to try to make them.
The use of rickshaws for maneuvering about the California shopping district would eliminate pollution, automotive gridlock and mass parking problems.
It would also provide jobs for low-income individuals and allow them to become independent business people…a low maintenance/low investment Uber of sorts.
Most people walk along California Avenue anyway so there would no proliferation of these alternative modes of travel. If anything, the rickshaws could pick-up and deliver riders at specified parking sites + they would be of great assistance to seniors and/or those with disabilities.
I have seen these in action overseas and in many instances, they get you to your destination faster than a car with less hassles (e.g. parking, stop & go traffic, stopping for pedestrians etc.).
We can oftentimes learn from and improve our daily lives by taking a step backewards.
Aaahh so Steve Raney, a leading crusader in the sanctimonious War on Cars, heads the Palo Alto TMA. How fitting.
I remember reading articles written by this guy, about how confounded he was that more people don’t use public transit??? (hint: human beings value privacy) Maybe having 3-person or 4-person carpool lanes was the solution, he wondered!
I think people like Steve Raney spend more time in insulated academic spheres studying social engineering transportation theory and less time commuting, driving, or doing any real work.
How else can you explain all these half-baked ideas and initiatives that never get people out of their cars, and only make congestion worse?
The people who make these decisions and wield the power to regressively transform our roads are insulated, clueless bureaucrats.
No amount of “bicycle encouragement” or “free transit passes for low-income workers” justifies reducing service for cars and making unbearable congestion infinitely worse.
Stop wasting money and stop experimenting!
I agree with Allen Akin and John Guislin, especially about incentivizing higher paid employees. Imagine the positive impact of Lead By Example if those higher on the pay scale did not drive solo to work. If the school principal, company president, HR manager, Mayor, City Council members, Supervisor, etc used some form of alternate transportation to commute others who can would, I think, be more inclined to do the same.
Maybe we need a trophy for this. Seriously. Just as there is a coveted “Best Places to Work” designation there could be a “Low Percentage of Solo Drivers” designation that companies can earn if they can prove that their owners and employees have met certain targets.
Plea to critics: c’mon! At least give this a chance. If it fails, it fails. But 3 – 6 months of trying TMA programs is a worthwhile experiment that could result in some changed behaviors. Isn’t every single ride reduction a good thing that benefits everyone?
Annette writes:
“… give this a chance. If it fails, it fails. But 3 – 6 months of trying TMA programs is a worthwhile experiment …”
The TMA has been running for over three years. It is way past the 6 month point. It has failed, and failed, and failed. We’re doing CPR on a cadaver.
If you want success, stop gifting public tax money to a business-run group and instead fund true environmentalist and civic-oriented non-profit groups based on measurable and meaningful reductions in parking and traffic. That is, provide money to groups who truly want to reduce commuting and only for actual results, not for feel-good PR.
Uber/Lyft mentioned above.
What I notice: often clueless rideshare drivers paying attention to their gps on their devices AND pulling over at odd locations, blocking the street, etc. it ‘aint great for the rest of us drivers, pedestrians (I don’t know about cyclists).
If these ideas were acted on properly 40 YEARS AGO, we would not be having transit problems today. One of my several contracts involved a Denver business on the 16th Street Mall. There was plenty of “ early bird “ daily parking with a much lower daily rate. From there, I could just walk to the 16th Street Mall AND TAKE THE FREE SHUTTLE ON THAT MALL to get to the business building where the problem was to be fixed. My specialty; fix a problem to keep the customer happy. Then, I just had to retrace my steps. One end terminated at a Union Station travel hub , with access to the Amtrak California Zephyr and the DIA shuttle. The other end was to the transportation hub for all the RTD system of buses and light rail. THIS SYSTEM WORKS! For several years it has worked! No more money sent on trains to nowhere “btht is the VTA which puts out a newsletter but nothing to help resolve Santa Clara County transit problems. While money is spent on “ traffic consultant “, just give them a bus ticket and let these types see a actual transit system that works! California street is a no brainer: a duplicate Mall complete with high density transit hubs at both ends; a bicycle share end and other mass transit at the other. Specialty shops become the storefronts and even low rise business buildings.
Stop consulting to death, start building now! Any problems, CALL RTD to see how they fixed them. All your transit problems should have fixed 40 years ago. Ever heard of Eminent Domain? If that was used 40 years ago, SP may have given the non profit producing land and BART would be running on elevated tracks and the boondoggle Caltrain would not exist.
Yeah, PA needs a coolie class to add to the lower class wage slaves it has already set up. The real problem: I-80, the escape from low wages and crazy housing prices. This is simply a business decision. The same wage with lower housing costs never can be seen on the West Coast. As rents go up in anticipation to the influx of California refugees, regular renters get thrown out, a ripple effect across the USA. Add a working transit system, the commute is car-less and saves everyone in the process. Save the car for week end play if desired. Bahstan ( that is how the name is pronounced by the residents ) has the MTA, which I used when there. Every other place has had solutions to mass transit problems. If that includes bicycle solutions, that is a part of what has worked. There were chances to fix the transit problems but PA blew them off. From being a leader to people sleeping in their cars.
For heaven’s sake, do something before your wage slaves leave to go to better places that cost less to live.