1

Policies Related to Service PlanningAdded Requirements Under FTA Title VI Circular 4702.1B

October 17, 2013

RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM 13

2

Title VI - What is it? Law prohibiting agencies that receive federal funding from intentional or unintentional discrimination as follows:“No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

42 U.S.C § 2000d, et seq

3

Previous Agency Requirements• FTA TITLE VI CIRCULAR 4702.1A

‒ FTA direct grant recipients that operate 50 or more fixed route vehicles in peak service and serves a population of 200,000 or greater.

‒ At the planning stage of any fare change and any major service change, NCTD must conduct a Service Equity Analysiso Requires the establishment of a threshold to define a “major service

change”. Twenty-Five percent (25%) under former SANDAG Policy 18 -

Regional Transit Service Planning and Implementation Proposed NCTD Board Policy No. 30 will retain the major service

change threshold at twenty-five percent (25%)

– Requires analysis of low-income populations

4

Added Agency Requirements• FTA TITLE VI CIRCULAR 4702.1B

– Draft policies that include thresholds that define:oDisparate impact (minority population) oDisproportionate Burden (low-income

population)

‒ Hold public hearings to engage the public in the decision-making process to develop Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden Policies

– Apply policies to when conducting Service Equity Analyses

5

Key Definitions• Definition of Disparate Impact

– Facially neutral policy or practice that adversely affects members of a protected class identified by race, color, or national origin;

• Definition of a Disproportionate Burden:– Facially neutral policy or practice that

disproportionately affects low income populations more than non-low income populations

6

Proposed Disparate Impact and Disproportionate Burden Policies• Proposed Board Policies set a threshold

determining when a change is deemed materially different on protected populations– Disparate Impact Policy sets the threshold at 10% between the

effects on minorities compared to impacts borne by non-minorities

– Disproportionate Burden Policy sets the threshold at 10% between the effects on low income populations compared to impacts borne by non-low income populations

– Differences to be applied using system-wide demographics and ridership information, and/or survey data on routes individually and collectively

7

Assessing a Disparate Impact• Disparate impact assessment:

– A comparison between the proportion of minority persons adversely affected by the service change and the proportion of non-minority persons who are affected by the service change exceeds the threshold

• If a disparate impact is determined:– The transit agency must determine whether there are one or more

alternatives that would serve the same legitimate objectives, but with less disproportionate effect on the basis of race, color, or national origin

• If no other options are identified…– The transit agency must have a substantial, legitimate justification

for making the service change

8

Assessing a Disproportionate Burden

• Disproportionate burden assessment: – The comparison between the proportion of low income persons are

adversely affected by the service change and the proportion of non- low income persons who are affected by the service change exceeds the threshold

• If a disproportionate burden is determined:– Steps should be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts where

practicable. – Alternatives available to low income passengers affected by the

service change should also be described and provided.

9

Illustrating The 10% Threshold• Example of Disparate Impact on Minority

Population

43%

≥ 53%

% of Minority Population Impacted =

Burden

10%

≤ 33%

% of Non- Minority Population Impacted =

Benefit

0% 100%

Average Minority % of

NCTD Population

10%

10

Next Steps• Held two public workshops

– October 10th: Vista, 3 attendees, 1 comment– October 16th: Oceanside, 1 attendee, 1 comment

• Request Board to hold public hearing during Board Meeting on November 21, 2013

• Upon approval of Board Policies, submit to SANDAG for upload into Regional Title VI Program

• Apply Board Policies as necessary with major service changes

11

RecommendationStaff recommends that the Board open a 30-day public hearing for draft Policies 30 through 32

12

Questions?