This report was commissioned by the Greater Baltimore Urban League (GBUL) to the Graduate Program in City and Regional Planning and the National Transportation Center at Morgan State University. The purpose of the report is to answer two broad research questions: (a) How does the public participation process in transportation reach, empower, and take into account low-income and minority communities and their needs, problems, and aspirations? And (b) how are equity and environmental justice data and concerns incorporated into the decision- making process? The research employed multiple methods. These included a literature review; qualitative interviews with transportation planners, practitioners and policymakers, and other stakeholders in transportation planning and policy; a focus group; and a survey. Our primary analytical framework was drawn from critical ethnography and studies of practice and discourse in public policy.
Environmental Justice in Transportation Planning and Policy: Some Evidence From Practice in the Baltimore-Washintgon DC Metropolitan Region.
Morgan State Univ., Baltimore, MD. National Transportation Center.
Product Type: Technical report
NTIS Order Number: PB2005-101330
Page Count: 56 pages
Date: Nov 2004
Author: S. Sen, L. M. Azonobi
The purpose of the report is to answer two broad research questions: (1) How is environmental justice in transportation addressed and implemented to take into account low-income populations and minority communities and their needs, problems, and aspirations; and (2) how are environmental justice data and concerns incorporated into the transportation decision-making process. The research employed multiple methods. These included a literature review; qualitative interviews with transportation planners, practitioners and policymakers, and other stakeholders in transportation planning and policy in the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area; and a focus group in Baltimore. Our primary analytical framework was drawn from critical ethnography and studies of practices and discourse in public policy. Three different views of environmental justice emerged from this study of the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Most private consulting firms in the area are engaged in environmental justice, because it's a source of job and contracts. Most public officials in the region are engaged in environmental justice and public participation because it's a federal regulation and requirement. However, most citizen and advocacy groups in the region environmental justice and its implementation as part of the agency's mission. The lack of uniform standards regarding environmental justice issues, coupled with scarcity of information as well as the complexity of the issues, are all obstacles to implementing and enforcing environmental justice principles. Access to information is an important issue for community organizations, advocacy groups, low income and minority groups. Public agencies often hold meetings at places that are not easily accessible, or at times difficult for transit dependent, low-income, and minority populations to attend. We recommend that transportation agencies in the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area take a proactive stance in involving low-income and minority communities in the transportation policy and planning process.
Civil Action No. 88-1275
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10895
August 9, 1990, Decided
August 14, 1990, Filed
Deborah Harris, Esq., Irv Acklesberg, Esq., COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES, INC., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
ALL DEFTS EXCEPT ROBERT J. THOMPSON, David P. Bruton, Esq., Michael Kubacki, Esq., DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
JUDGES: Daniel H. Huyett, 3rd, United States District Judge.
OPINION BY: HUYETT
OPINION: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this civil action, plaintiffs n1 allege that the means utilized by defendants n2 to allocate federal subsidies received pursuant to the Urban Mass Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. §§ 1601-13, has a discriminatory impact upon the black community of Philadelphia in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. SEPTA has filed a motion for summary judgment, and oral argument was held on October 3, 1989. At the time of oral argument, it appeared that the parties wished to discuss an amicable resolution of this dispute. Therefore, I stayed disposition of SEPTA's motion for summary judgment pending the outcome of settlement negotiations. After several months, the parties advised that negotiations had proved unfruitful and sought disposition of the instant motion. For the reasons stated below, I will now grant SEPTA's motion for summary judgment. [*2]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
935 F.2d 1280; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 12485
February 1, 1991, Argued
May 29, 1991, Filed
RULES OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA; (D.C. Civil No. 88-01275); District Judge: Hon. Daniel H. Huyett, 3rd.
JUDGES: Sloviter, Chief Judge, Nygaard, Circuit Judge, and Barry, District Judge. *
* Honorable Maryanne Trump Barry, United States District Judge for the District of New Jersey, sitting by designation.