association for commuter...

In This Issue:People on the Move

Measurably Increasing Your Marketing Effectiveness and Therfore Increasing Your Budget

Second Generation Carpooling

Issue 1, 2006

Association for Commuter Transportation

TDM Review • Issue 1, 2006 1

contentsdepartments

features

specials

A publication for the

Association for Commuter Transportation

Volume IV, Number I

Publisher:

Center for Transportation and the Environment

Editor:

Kevin Luten

UrbanTrans Consultants, Inc.

Washington, DC

Associate Editor:

Sara Hendricks

Center for Urban Transportation Research

Tampa, FL

Editorial Board:

Kay Carson

URS Corporation - MASS Rides

Boston, MA

Managing Editor:

Kevin Shannon

[email protected]

Design & Layout:

Kudzu Graphics

Advertising:

[email protected]

TDM Review.Volume IV, Number I. Published

quarterly for members of the Association for

Commuter Transportation (ACT) by the Center

for Transportation and the Environment.TDM

Review is an open forum for the free exchange

of opinions and information.The views

expressed within are not necessarily those of ACT,

ACT officers,ACT directors or ACT staff. Letters,

manuscripts and other submissions are welcome.

However,TDM Review accepts no responsibility

for unsolicited material.

Please contact ACT National Headquarters for any

additional information: 1401 Peachtree St., Ste. 440,

Atlanta, GA 30309.

Telephone: (678) 916-4940

Fax: (678) 244-4151

E-mail: [email protected]

Web site: www.actweb.org

All rights reserved. Copyright 2006 by the

Association for Commuter Transportation.

2 Editor’s Message

3 President’s Message

4 Washington Report

17 Chapter News

6 People on the Move

6 Members Make

Pilgrimmage to the Hill

15 Rethinking Carpool

Parking Discounts

8 Measurably Increasing

Your Marketing Effectiveness

and Therfore Increasing

Your Budget

12 Second Generation Carpooling

2 TDM Review • Issue 1, 2006

editor’s messageAssociation for Commuter Transportation

PresidentJon Martz,VPSI, Inc.

Vice-PresidentNicholas Ramfos, MWCOG

SecretaryRandi Alcott,ValleyMetro

TreasurerBrian Shaw, University of Chicago

Immediate Past PresidentElizabeth Stutts, FDOT

DirectorsRegion 1: Helen BermudezBill FairbairnBrooke Geer PersonVirginia GonzalezLynn Osborn

Region 2: Joan Cullen

Region 3: Lori Singleton

Region 4: Scott Miklos

Region 5: Monica Rhodes

Region 6:Angie Payne

Region 7: Sandi MoodyEric Carlson

Region 8: Mirza DoneganFrancine Waters

Region 9: John CiaffoneDonna Smallwood

At-Large Directors:Tammy FordElham ShiraziMicha StoneDavid Straus

Executive DirectorKevin Shannon

Member Services ManagerAndrea Beshear

Association for Commuter Transportation1401 Peachtree St., Ste. 440Atlanta, GA 30309(678) 916-4940(678) [email protected]

PO Box 15542Washington, DC 20003

Is it time for the TDM industry to getserious about global warming?

I believe the answer is “yes,” and thereason is “relevance.”

At the end of the day, organizations look-ing to produce travel behavior changeare concerned with the actions of their

customers and the sustainability of funding fortheir programs. In each case, success is linked torelevance, but not always for the same reason.

For example, federal funding for TDM is almostentirely linked to air quality, yet air qualityenhancement is rarely used as the primary mes-sage to motivate behavior change from individ-uals or businesses. TDM organizations knowthat this issue is not relevant enough to producebehavior change (beyond small market seg-ments). We have seen the opposite with risinggas prices, where the direct relevancy of theissue is producing measurable change.

Global warming, however, is reaching a relevan-cy “tipping point.”

As an issue, global warming is fundamentallybroader than air quality. Its impacts extend wellbeyond hazy skies and select health impacts (not to minimize these, of course) – into trulycrisis-level territory.

On the government side, global warming haspassed the national security relevancy test. In2003, the Pentagon published a report entitled“An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and itsImplications for United States National Security,”co-authored by a former Shell Oil executive,outlining the national and international implica-tions of global warming.

Recognizing the direct relevance to cities (par-ticularly post-Katrina), mayors from across thecountry have signed the Climate ProtectionAgreement, pledging to reduce global warmingpollution by 7% below 1990 levels, meeting thetargets set by the Kyoto Protocol. As of May2006, over 230 mayors representing 45 millionAmericans have signed the agreement. With themove, these cities join others in Europe, Canada,and elsewhere in committing to Kyoto targets.

Following the release of the Pentagon report,Fortune magazine noted, “The case for acting

now to address climate change, long a hard sellin Washington, may be gaining influential sup-port, if only behind the scenes. Policymakersmay even be emboldened to take steps such astightening fuel-economy standards for new pas-senger vehicles, a measure that would simulta-neously lower emissions of greenhouse gases,reduce America's perilous reliance on OPEC oil,cut its trade deficit, and put money in con-sumers' pockets.”

National travel behavior trends, however, arelargely eroding the advances of fuel economy(EPA chart).

With the transportation sector accounting for30% of our greenhouse gas emissions, the U.S.must reverse these travel behavior trends.

For that to happen, the impacts of global warm-ing must be relevant to people and businesses…in a way air quality is not. Media reports anddocumentaries (e.g., “Too Hot Not to Handle,”“An Inconvenient Truth”) are raising awarenessthat global warming will impact this genera-tion… not merely generations 50-100 yearsfrom now.

While the idea that the 10 hottest years evermeasured have all occurred in the last 14 yearsis frightening, positive behavior change will notcome from fear alone. People must believe thestakes are high enough and the benefits of indi-vidual behaviors large enough. We must believewe can reverse the trends.

The progression from the Wright Brothers flightto the moon landing took only 66 years. Thetime to get serious about linking TDM and glob-al warming is now.

Kevin Luten

Enter Global Warming


president’s message

Saber-Rattling and “Fear Premium” Gas Prices

ACT

ithout question, this is theworst political-risk year we’veseen for energy supplies since

1973,” said Dr. Ian Bremmer, President ofthe Eurasia Group, a leading global politicalrisk consultancy, referring to the year of thefirst Arab Oil Embargo. “The likelihood ofescalation from the two biggest threats outthere – Iran and Nigeria – remains verystrong. In both cases, the worst is still aheadof us.” New York Times, April 18, 2006

Only a fraction of our members were in theTDM profession in 1973… I am one ofthose old timers with vivid memories of thelong lines at the gasoline pump, odd-evenfueling days and gas rationing coupons(printed by the federal government, butnever distributed). Last summer’s and thisspring’s burst of activity in response to $3 agallon gasoline, are \ “gentle” reminders ofwhat happens when market speculationdrives prices up.

On May 2nd, U.S. Energy Secretary SamuelBodman said the market is worried about asupply disruption, and ‘‘there’s no doubt a(fear) premium’’ is reflected in today’s oilprices. Many economists are in agreementthat existing demand and supply conditionsare not behind recent rise in oil prices but,instead, anticipated future shortfalls in sup-ply are having a volatile impact on thefutures markets where oil is traded.”The war in Iraq and, even more, the saber-rattling around Iran has deeply spooked themarket. Analysts expect energy futures toremain high, as traders keep one eye onissues abroad - Iran’s nuclear program,rebels in Nigeria cutting off oil supplies, andthe possibility of terrorist attacks on oilfacilities (Al-Qaeda did try to attack SaudiArabia’s largest oil gathering center at

Abqaiq earlier this year.) - and another eyeon problems on the home front, notablytight U.S. gasoline supplies going into thesummer driving season.

In truth, there is bipartisan agreement thatthere is little Washington can do to lowergas prices in the short-term.Tax rebates areexpensive and difficult to implementbecause the money is dedicated to the trustfund for highway construction.The otheroptions may take months, if not years ordecades, to affect the price of gasoline,which is largely controlled by supply anddemand. The Energy InformationAdministration reported today that demand (9.3 million barrels per day) isgreater than a year ago at this time… despitehigher prices at the pump.

All sorts of Republican energy-related pro-posals are circulating around on Capitol Hill.In the Senate, the list includes price-gougingprotections, new tax breaks for hybrid vehi-cles and to expand refinery capacity, researchdollars for alternative fuels, and oil drillingin Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge orin the coastal waters of Florida, both highlycontroversial proposals that environmental-ists have succeeded in blocking for years.

Conservation and congestion mitigationcontinue to be at the top of ACT’s legisla-tive agenda. And, we have been gettingsome positive feedback to some of our pol-icy proposals. It is an election year, howev-er, and politicking is thwarting our effortsto 1) provide state and local governmentswith expanded funding resources to createand expand carpool and vanpool programs,2) to gain parity between the parking ben-efit and the transit/vanpool benefit, 3)promote the expansion of telework, 4)amend the FTA Capital Cost of ContractingPolicy, 5) reinstate the vanpool investmenttax credit, 6) create an Employer TravelChoices Investment Stimulus Program and7) develop a national public service aware-ness campaign highlighting the benefits,programs and opportunities available toindividuals, employers, and governmentagencies related to commute alternativesand travel behavior.

Congressman Michael Capuano of Boston,who addressed our Patriot Chapter’s regionalconference early this year said, “If I don’thear my constituents calling me to complainabout gas prices, then I have to weigh theimportance of this issue against the otherissues they are calling me about… Today, this(gas prices) is not an issue.”

So, take the Congressman’s advice… If this isimportant to you, personally or professional-ly, let your legislators know (and ACT) … ofthe increase in demand for your services…how your community has been adverselyimpacted… and, consider giving your clientsand customers the tools to allow them tocontact their legislators directly to expresstheir concerns. If you don’t let your electedrepresentatives know of your concerns, theywill not be of concern to them.

“W

T he start of the New Year marked the midway pointfor the 109th Congress. In the first session thelong awaited transportation reauthorization legisla-

tion and a “comprehensive” energy bill were finallypassed into law.These pieces of legislation were highlycontroversial and a great deal of emotion was included inthe passage of each bill.

The year was also filled with partisanship and controversy.A number of top Republican officials fell victim to scan-dal, including House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-TX).Tom DeLay, otherwise know as “The Hammer,” successfulMajority Leader (or bully, depending on how you look atit) of the House GOP was forced to step down as MajorityLeader amid charges of money laundering in Texas relatedto the redistricting fight. Several other members of theHouse Republican leadership suffered as a consequence ofscandal. Congressman Duke Cunningham (R-CA), may bebest known as the pilot who the movie Top Gun, wasbased, was forced to resign after he admitted to allega-tions of bribery and corruption.

In the lobbying world, maligned lobbyist Jack Abramoffplead guilty to a variety of charges and implicated a num-ber of members of the House for bribery and corruption.

The President saw his once steady popularity plummetamid scandal and unpopular policy decisions including

the handling of Hurricane Katrina, FBI wire taps, the warin Iraq and port security among others.

As ACT prepares for a new year, Congress faces an uncer-tain future. How will the new majority leader, JohnBoehner (R-OH), handle Congress differently? What is ontap for 2006? And looking ahead, how will Congress han-dle lobbying reform? Also, looking ahead, how will all ofthese situations affect the 110th Congress?

NNeeww LLeeaaddeerrsshhiipp iinn tthhee HHoouussee

House Republicans were forced to choose new leadershipafter Tom Delay was forced to step down as majorityleader. House rules require that a member step down fromany leadership position if he or she is indicted on felonycharges. Ironically, Congressman DeLay was one of thosewho helped pass this rule. Originally, Congressman DeLayonly temporarily stepped down, however, as it becamemore apparent that the charges would not be dropped andthat the trial would be anything but speedy, and amongstpressure from a number of “rank-and-file” Republicans,Congressman DeLay stepped down permanently, forcing around of leadership elections.The initial front-runner wasCongressman Blunt (R-MO), the House Majority whipand number three man in the leadership. Mr. Blunt tem-porarily acted as Majority Leader and seemed to be a lockto be elected. Mr. Blunt was a DeLay protégé and was the


washington report

Beginning of the End of the 109th Congress,and Congress as we know it?

natural successor. However,Congressman John Boehner(R-OH) pulled off an upsetand beat Congressman Bluntin leadership elections, send-ing shock waves throughoutWashington. Many had neverheard of CongressmanBoehner before, however,Congressman Boehner was apart of the Republican revo-lution in 1994 and ran on aplatform of a more open andfair process. Liked by mod-erates and respected by con-servatives, the election ofCongressman Boehnerserved as notice that HouseRepublicans wanted tochange the way they handle legislating.

Lobbying Reform

The lobbying world was given a black eyewhen Jack Abramoff and several of his asso-ciates plead guilty to a variety of chargesthat involved bribery and corruption. As aresult Congress began to immediately lookinto lobbying reform. Some of the issueswhich are under a great deal of scrutinyinclude member/staff travel, gift rules, lob-bying disclosure, and the earmark process.Congress initially began the process of lob-bying form with a great deal of energy andbroad visions, however, the rhetoric hasbeen tampered by realism. Initial plans wereto ban all travel and to completely overhaulor eliminate the earmark process. After dis-cussions, many members came to the real-ization that these tactics would be neithereffective nor practical. Instead, it appearsthat lobbying reform will include moretransparency, meaning less of an opportunityfor things to happen in smoke filled roomsin the cover of night. Overall the proposalsbeing discussed will make it easier for asso-ciations like ACT to be effective on the Hill,the theory being that policy will no longerbe decided by who pays for the most freetrips to the Caribbean, instead by who hasthe best ideas.The changes themselves willhave no impact on ACT or how ACT or itsmembers interact on the Hill.

2006 Congressional Calendar

Over the past few years the Congressionalcalendar has been filled with major pieces oflegislation that Congress has worked to pass,(i.e. SAFETEA-LU, energy bill, health care

reform, tax cuts). However this year lacksany momentum to move on any major pieceof legislation.This is due in part to the parti-san environment, as well as uncertainty forthe future looking at the 2006 mid-termelections. Congress hopes to take up a broadtelecom bill as well as immigration reform,but many agree that Republicans don’t havethe ability to pass these pieces of legislationwithout making broad concessions to theDemocrats, something they are not willingto do in a mid-term election year.The WhiteHouse in large part has been marginalized inits ability to drive the legislative calendar byhorrible approval numbers. ManyRepublicans are now openly sparring withthe White House over a variety of issues. Anexample of the President’s inability toimpact the Congressional calendar was in hisState of the Union address, in which thePresident made several bold policy propos-als, none of which have been discussed onthe Hill. For the most part, I believe this willbe a fairly unpredictable, unproductive year,however this Congress has shown the abilityto react quickly (some say in a knee-jerkstyle) to issues that arise.

2006 Elections and Beyond

While it is still too early to predict the out-come of the 2006 mid-term elections, onething is for sure, the Republicans are on theropes.The conditions now are very similarof that to 1994 when the Republicans won alandslide victory.Those conditions includedan unpopular President (President Clinton’sapproval rating in 1994 were only slightlyhigher then President Bush’s current rating),

scandal ridden majority(Democrats were in the midstof the check writing scandaland several top Democrats werealso being investigated), postwar (Iraq), and complacencywith the majority party(Democrats had controlled theHouse and Senate for morethan 10 years). Similar circum-stances now exist, however atthis point the democrats don’thave a “rallying flag” like theRepublican “Contract withAmerica” - a contract whichmay have been amended with-out anyone telling the rest ofus. I will dive more into theelections in the next TDMreview, however, my point isthis, election years are almostalways odd legislative years, and

this year’s election has a lot riding on it, theDemocrats have a realistic chance of win-ning the House (very unlikely they will winthe Senate) and that will further exasperatewacky partisan behavior.

Regardless of the election outcome, twothings are certain: the reign of Bill Thomas(R-CA) Chairman of Ways and Means, willno longer be around to torment ACT and itspartners. Bill Thomas has been a steadfastopponent of many of the issues that ACTsupports, including the transit benefit.Yielding more power than any other Waysand Means Chairman in the past,Congressman Thomas has squashed severalefforts to increase the transit benefit andother tax issues. Chairman Thomas is termlimited as Chair of the House Ways andMeans Committee, and thus, he has decidedto retire. Republicans poised to take thegavel include Congressman McCreary (R-LA), Congressman Shaw (R-FL) andCongresswoman Johnson (R-CT).

Congressman Don Young (R-AK), leader ofthe House’s effort to reauthorize TEA-21 and Chair of the Transportation andInfrastructure Committee has also been termlimited and will step down as Chair of theCommittee.Those interested in leading thecommittee include Congressman Petri (R-WI) (currently highways and transit sub-committee chair, and friend of ACT) andCongressman Mice (R-FL).

2006 looks to be an exciting year, not onlyfor what it will produce, but how it willeffect the next several years.


ACT


O n January 17, President Bush announced his intention tonominate James S. Simpson, of New York, to be the FederalTransit Administrator at the Department of Transportation. Mr.

Simpson is currently Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of VictoryWorldwide Transportation. Prior to this, he was the company's VicePresident. Earlier in his career, Mr. Simpson served as a Commissionerof the New York State Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Mr.Simpson received his bachelor's degree from St. John's University.

In March, President Bush nominated Richard Capka as the new FederalHighway Administrator. Mr. Capka has served as the ActingAdministrator since the resignation of Mary Peters last August. Capkawas appointed the Deputy Administrator of the Federal HighwayAdministration in August 2002. Prior to his appointment, Capka servedas Chief Executive Officer/Executive Director of the MassachusettsTurnpike Authority (MTA). Mr. Capka is a West Point graduate and alsoholds a master's degree in engineering from the University ofCalifornia at Berkeley as well as a master's in business administrationfrom Chaminade University of Honolulu.

The President has also nominated Tyler D. Duvall, of Virginia, to beAssistant Secretary of Transportation (Transportation Policy). Mr. Duvallcurrently serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.Prior to this, he served as Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary forTransportation Policy. Earlier in his career, Mr. Duvall was a businessand finance associate at Hogan & Hartson LLP. Mr. Duvall received hisbachelor's degree from Washington & Lee University and his JD fromthe University of Virginia.

The President nominated Roger Shane Karr, of the District ofColumbia, to be Assistant Secretary of Transportation (GovernmentalAffairs). Mr. Karr currently serves as Deputy Chief of Staff for theDepartment of Transportation. Prior to this, he served as DeputyAssistant Secretary of Transportation for Governmental Affairs. He also

served as Manager for Regulatory Affairs for the American Associationof Airport Executives. Earlier in his career, Mr. Karr served as LegislativeAssistant for American Airlines. Mr. Karr received his bachelor's degreefrom Texas Christian University and his master's degree from TempleUniversity. He went on to receive his JD from Georgetown University.

The President nominated Nicole R. Nason, of Virginia, to beAdministrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration atthe Department of Transportation. Ms. Nason currently serves asAssistant Secretary of Transportation for Governmental Affairs. Prior tothis, she served as Assistant Commissioner for the Office ofCongressional Affairs for the United States Customs Service. Ms. Nasonalso served as Communications Director and Counsel to RepresentativePorter J. Goss. Earlier in her career, she served as Governmental AffairsCounsel at Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Ms. Nason receivedher bachelor's degree from the American University and her JD fromCase Western Reserve.

People on the Move

In January 2006 ACT convened inWashington, DC for its annual “Day onthe Hill.” This year was highlighted by a

record number of ACT participants and arecord number of meetings over the four days that ACT members were in town.

ACT’s message was to thank members ofCongress for their work in the passage of“SAFETEA-LU” and to remind them that therewas work left to be done. In the meetings,ACTreiterated the importance of TDM in any trans-portation system. In light of recent energy issuesand lapses in emergency preparedness/response,

ACT also relayed the ability of TDM to play animportant role in energy conservation and emer-gency preparedness/recovery.

We were also pleased to meet with a numberof members of Congress while in Washington,including a very productive session withCongressman Jim McGovern (D-MA). Duringthis meeting, myself, Jon Martz, President ofACT, and David Straus, President of the ACTPatriot Chapter, discussed a number of issuesincluding the upcoming ACT InternationalConference in Boston and what needs to hap-pen in order to increase the transit benefit.

The event was culminated by a meet andgreet on the Hill with House staff andother important officials. More than fiftyHill staff, DOT officials, and others attend-ed this event. The event gave ACT membersthe ability to get to know the Hill staffthat represents them. Using this time tohelp build relationships is important notonly for the Association but for the indi-vidual members.

The annual Hill day continues to be aworthwhile event and will be continued inthe future.

Members Make Pilgrimage to the Hill

ACT

ACT

Measurably Increasing Your Marketing Effectiveness and Therefore Your Budget

T he local Metropolitan Planning Organization(MPO) put together a traffic congestion task force.There were about ten of us at the table and the

MPO was looking for recommendations to alleviate con-gestion on one particularly gridlocked road corridor.Theolder engineers in the room were still of the opinion thatthey could build their way out of gridlock even thoughthis particular road had already been widened twice in thelast ten years and no cost-effective right of way remained.

It probably comes as no surprise to many readers of theTDM Review, but some of the civil and traffic engineers atthe table thought that TDM was a waste of money.Theydecried TDM as “touchy- feely” and hard to measure.

As a passionate advocate of TDM, I challenged a crusty oldengineer who was arguing for tens of millions of dollarsworth of road enhancements. I asked, “What would bemore effective to enhance mobility on this corridor? Onemillion dollars spent on road construction or one millionspent on an aggressive campaign to market TDM solutionssuch as rideshare, transit, flex hours, and telecommuting?”

I thought I had them since $1 million buys precious little roadway but it’s certainly enough to promote andencourage TDM solutions that could make a real differ-ence. Nevertheless, the engineers who held the pursestrings agreed that the money would be better spent onroad construction.

The moral of the story is that the TDM profession needs todo a better job of quantifying accomplishments and meas-uring the effectiveness of our marketing and outreachefforts.We need to have ready answers to funding organiza-tions of what we accomplish with our present marketingbudgets and how much more we could accomplish withadditional funding.

How many cars could you get off the road with anadditional million dollars marketing budget? Howwould you spend it? Does it make more sense to useradio, television, web or direct mail, or commuterevents to tell your story? How much do you spendnow in marketing per rideshare application, per newvisitor to your Web site, per commuter who decides toswitch modes because of your advertising efforts?

Left and Righted Brained Marketing

This theory of psychology suggests that the two different sides of the braincontrol two different styles of thinking.

Left Brain Right BrainMathematical Creative

Logical IntuitiveAnalytical Artistic

Critical Thinker EmotionalLinear Holistic

Most people have a distinct preference for one of these styles of thinking.

My bet is that thepeople in power ofyour TDM budgetpurse strings tend tobe left brainedthinkers such as engi-neers, financial ana-lysts, and accountants.These people are gen-erally results-drivenand want to know exactly how cost-effectively your mar-keting efforts are achieving stated goals.They think interms of ROI (return on investment).

Meanwhile, I would venture to say that most TDM market-ing is produced by right-brained people such as your tal-ented marketing director or the creative director at youradvertising agency. Most art directors are geniuses atdreaming up images and creative copy to enhance yourimage. But how are they at crunching the hard numbers ofreturn on investment and convincing your funding organi-zations that your marketing efforts are making a difference?

TDM Marketing Questions

What sells better? A commercial that highlights the mathe-matic facts and figures about rideshare savings or a com-mercial full of attractive actors and actresses convincingyour audience that carpooling is a fun way to meet peopleand just maybe find a little romance? Or should you hitthem with energy conservation, quality of life,stress/health or environmental hot buttons?

“What would be more effective to

enhance mobility on this corridor?

$1 million spent on road construction

or $1 million spent promoting TDM?”


How much should you spend in marketingper new rideshare application, per phone call,per new visitor to your Web site, per newshuttle or vanpool rider?

Is radio a better marketing media for TDMthan billboards, television, newspaper, or directmail? Do newsletters and public relations makesense in terms of bang for the buck?

Does it really make sense to reach com-muters though their employers, or in thisnew world where 80 percent of people nowwork for small companies, does it make bet-ter sense to aim your marketing effortsdirectly at commuters?

Should we be staging expensive events andtrying to attract people to them, or are webetter off trying to attract them directly into ashuttle or vanpool?

Should we be rewarding people with incen-tives and promotional giveaways or is itmore cost effective to sell based on featuresand benefits?

If a TDM campaign worked well in New Yorkor San Francisco, how will it play in Peoria orin Kansas?

Marketing is All About Answering Questions

Most of us remember doing our scienceprojects back in the sixth grade where wetried to answer such profound questions aswhich brand of paper towel absorbs themost water or which fertilizer works best ontomato plants.

Large and successful Direct Marketing opera-tions employ scientific methodology. Oneclient was the National March of Dimes, forexample, who mails more than 30 millionfundraising letters each year. Believe me,when I say they have it down to an exact sci-ence, I mean this literally.

In a mature direct marketing operation, eachcampaign is designed with the controls andvariables of the most serious laboratoryexperiment. A statistically meaningful test atthat level was usually considered a mailing of50,000 pieces. For example, mailings arespecifically conducted to test whether thecolor of the envelope achieves a higherresponse rate or whether address labels willreap a better return on their investment thansomething else.With hundreds of millions of

dollars at stake, this systematic approach tolearning exactly what achieves the highestreturn on marketing investment is a veryexact science employing pure scientificmethodology.

The entire new world of Internet and e-com-merce employs such methodologies. I wantto invite TDM’ers to think in terms of meas-uring their marketing returns in a meaningfulway.While none of us have the budgets for50,000 piece tests, the whole purpose of thislittle essay is to hammer home that the TDMcommunity would do well to incorporate abit more scientific methodology, along withall of our creativity, into answering our mar-keting questions.

Some of the basic steps in a scientificapproach to marketing TDM are:

AAsskk AA SSppeecciiffiicc QQuueessttiioonn:: We already men-tioned some valid TDM marketing questions.Most of these questions lend themselves wellto experimentation.

CCoonndduucctt RReesseeaarrcchh:: It really helps to see howothers have answered the same questions. ACTand CUTR are both great resources as is theTDM ListServ. Science only works best whencareful attention is paid to controls and vari-ables.What works in New York with its transitsystems may not work well in your market.Your job is to determine exactly what workswell for your programs.To see what hot but-ton argument for rideshare (save money,good for environment, stress, etc.) works bestin your market, consider posing the questionon your Web site or incorporate these kindsof questions in commuter surveys. Considerfocus groups.

MMaakkee aa HHyyppootthheessiiss:: Your best guess, basedon your past experience and that of others,might be that radio during traffic reportsworks best or that prospective rideshare can-didates respond better to emotional ratherthan statistical hot buttons. Use research tomake the most intelligent hypothesis.

M E A S U R A B L EM A R K E T I N G T I P S

• Target a Specific Audience.

• Use creativity to capture their

attention. Only if you have their attention

can you send them a message.

• Make the Audience an Interesting Selling

Proposition. What’s in

it for them to respond?

• Use emotion to provoke a response

(emotional arguments generally

outperform statistical arguments).

• Reward them for doing whatever

it is you want them to do… whether

it’s to ride the shuttle for the

first time, show up at your event,

or visit your web site.


DDeessiiggnn aann EExxppeerriimmeenntt:: Design a marketing campaign to testyour hypothesis. Remember your controls and variables, butbe creative and remember the end game is come up withwhich combination of marketing, advertising, outreach,and PR will achieve your most bang-for-the-buck inachieving your goals in your market. I STRONGLY RECOM-MEND SMALL SCALE TESTING. Only if something workswell in testing, should you bet your marketing budget onrolling it out.

CCoolllleecctt DDaattaa:: Design the campaign up for measurability.Every campaign should ask people to take a specific action.Make them an offer and set up a convenient way for themto respond with a “yes.” Set up a way to measure response.Examples of measuring response involve asking the targetaudience to call your 800 number, visit your Web site, showup at your event, or to accept your offer of a free shuttle ortransit pass. Count everything.Track hits to your site and besure everyone answers the phone asking how the caller heardabout your program.

AAnnaallyyzzee DDaattaa:: If you just spent $10k on billboards directing people toyour 800 rideshare application hotline and the billboards produced callsfrom ten people who change modes, you now know billboards cost$1,000 per mode change. If you tested the same marketing message bymail to 5,000 prospects for $5,000 and received a 1% response rate of 50people calling your hotline, now you know your cost per mode changeby direct mail is $100 each. If you spent $5,000 in advertising, outreachand free food to get people to come to an event, and 500 showed up and100 of these changed modes, now you know that this combination ofactions will achieve a result of $50 per mode change.

TTwweeaakk aanndd RReeppeeaatt:: Your job now is to design a cam-paign to beat the $50. If $50 per mode change works

well for your program and your funding organiza-tions, you might consider rolling out events on aneven wider, more aggressive scale.

Of course, the examples given here are a bit simplistic,but the methodology is sound.Thanks to technology and

especially the Internet, measurability has never been easieror made more sense. If your ads are designed to attract

visitors to your Web site, you can track responseexactly alongside your media buys. It’s possible to tellthat radio ads on XYZ station in the Monday morningpeak hour, using the cost savings hot button, outper-form other messages and other media.

If you take a systematic approach to your creativeadvertising, and you ascertain that you can take X cars off a particular road per marketing dollar spent,

it might come in handy with your funding agencies run by leftbrained engineers and accountants In fact, they might be soimpressed compared to their other options, that they might justincrease your marketing budget.

Denis Eirikis has taught a Crash Course in Measurable Marketing at CUTR and for ACT. He is President of Clear Liht CommunicationsInc., an entrepreneurial firm that provides measurable marketing and public involvement services for the transit and TDM communitiesthroughout North America. Check out www.clearlightPR.com or call 561.798.9633 to learn how their MARKETING OPPORTUNITIESAUDIT™ can help you achieve even better numbers. ACT


Incentives for carpooling have a lengthyhistory in this country. During WWIIwith gasoline rationing, extra gas was

available for people who carpooled to work.And if extra gas didn’t work, maybe govern-ment propaganda could accomplish theobjective.

But as with many of our current programs,these initiatives were intended to meet a spe-cific need only for a limited period of time.Fortunately, there is now increasing recogni-tion that the permanent promotion of car-pooling is an important national transporta-tion policy goal.

The thesis of this article is that we need toexamine the shortcomings of current car-pooling approaches and take advantage oftechnology that can move this discipline tothe next level.We begin by describing someuseful technology and then look at the impli-cations of this for several typical carpoolingprograms in place today, and how the flexibil-ity, verifiability, and capacity utilization ofthose programs could be increased. Finallywe conclude with some comments on taxcodes and verification issues1.

TTeecchhnnoollooggyy

Transponders that identify a vehicle and aregistered driver are now used widely on tollroads and bridges to avoid delays at the toll-booths.Typically one registers with the appro-priate agency and acquires a transponder thatuniquely identifies the registrant. When thatvehicle passes through a reading station thetransponder transmits a signal identifying theregistrant, and the administrative system thentakes care of billing for the toll.

Another technology widely used is the use ofRFID (radio frequency identification devices)to identify a piece of merchandise or a per-son. Exxon/Mobil have a small device thatyou attach to your keychain, and it can beused to quickly establish a payment protocol

at a participating service station.This device isbrought in proximity to the reader on thegasoline pump, the unique identificationcode is read, and the registered owner thencharged for the gasoline purchase.

The proposal here is simply to marry thesetechnologies2. It would work as follows: Theprogram administrator establishes what will

constitute a qualified ridesharing event (typi-cally involving an origin, destination, time ofday, and required vehicle occupancy level).Commuters interested in participating in theprogram register with the administrator.Thosewho anticipate driving receive a transponderfor their car, and everyone, whether they antic-ipate driving or not, receives an individual key-chain identifying device (hereafter called akeyID).At the onset of a commute, the driverand passengers bring their keyIDs in proximityto the vehicle transponder (probably mountedon the dashboard).That device – unlike thetransponders currently used in vehicles – hasthe ability to read keyIDs and store the codesread.When a keyID is passed by the transpon-der it beeps to indicate that it has recognized akeyID.As the vehicle transits the highway, itwill pass in proximity to one or more readersby the side of the road or mounted on over-heads, and these readers cause the vehicletransponder to transmit.The information trans-mitted identifies the vehicle registrant as wellas any occupants whose keyIDs have been read.That information is associated with the currentdate and time, and the information is thentransmitted to the central administrative systemfor processing and the distribution of whateverincentives are part of the program. Note thatthere is a database created of detailed commut-ing behavior (who commutes when andwhere), and that can be used administrativelyto fine-tune the program.

We will now examine a variety of programsthat provide incentives for carpooling andlook at how they could benefit by use of thistechnology.Typically these programs provide(i) a benefit of some sort for (ii) a specifictime period for (iii) a minimum specifiednumber of passengers.

EEmmppllooyyeerr PPrroovviiddeedd CCaarrppoooolliinngg BBeenneeffiittss

Consider an employer who provides a park-ing subsidy or cash payment for employees inthe employer’s company who carpool towork.The benefit is fixed and usually there

Second Generation Carpooling

Kalon L Kelley, PhD


would be a stated minimum number of car-poolers necessary to receive the benefit.Thelimitation of employer-based commutingincentive systems comes from their inabilityto promote carpooling when individuals whomight work for different employers form car-pools, and consequently these programs arerestricted to those larger employers thatmight have enough employees to form aviable carpooling population. But a regional-ly-based carpooling program could drawemployees across company lines, and the like-lihood of finding compatible riders (compati-ble in the sense of residence and work loca-tions and commute schedules) would bemuch enhanced. A regional program where

the incentives came from a regional entity(such as a transportation authority) wouldonly need to address verification and admin-istrative issues, and the new technology isdesigned specifically to do that. If incentivesare still employer-based, then while the veri-fication issue would be handled, the adminis-trative system would need to be able to dealwith incentive structures that potentially dif-fered from one employer to another.

There is some history of regional programsthat provide incentives for carpooling.Typically they have been put in place for alimited period of time, either because theyare trial programs or because they were insti-tuted to address a problem of limited dura-tion (e.g., construction on a major freeway).As limited programs, validation has been typ-ically minimal involving unverified individualclaims.This casualness would not be accept-

able in a more permanent program involvingmeaningful incentives.

A regionally-based commuting incentive pro-gram would use an expanded matchlist systemfor matching drivers and riders with compati-ble schedules.This system would serve toadminister benefits as well as create carpools.That the system accumulates data on qualifyingcarpooling events has some innovative conse-quences. Consider, for example, a regional sys-tem that provided cash incentives for carpool-ing. Periodic statements could be sent (elec-tronically one would hope) that showed thecommuting events that took place and relatedthose to calculated cash savings obtained

through sharing vehicle expenses.This wouldbe a form of direct marketing that is tied toactual behavior, and the statements couldrather clearly point out further savings possi-bilities (e.g., you carpooled 12 times lastmonth, and if you had been able to do this 21times you would have saved an additional $X,or if you added one additional person to your2 person carpool here is an estimate of theadditional money you would save).Along thatsame vein, the administrative system couldpick up on the fact that a carpool that has hadfour people in it now consistently has onlythree, and suggest to those carpoolers somecandidate names to expand their carpool. Inaddition the matchlist system could use itsknowledge of an individual’s commuting prac-tice to provide more focused possible matches.For example, if the system sees that driver Aconsistently picks up rider B, then it is plausi-ble that riders in either A or B’s neighborhood

or along the route between them would becandidates for an expanded carpool.

CCaassuuaall CCaarrppoooolliinngg

There are some places where carpools areformed on the spot. For example, driverscrossing the San Francisco Bay Bridge duringcommute hours can pick up passengers atdesignated locations and take them across thebridge thereby avoiding bridge tolls andwaiting lines. With the use of this new tech-nology, the concept of casual carpooling cantranslate rather easily to other environments.Consider a regional program that provided acash incentive to carpool drivers. A casualcarpooler could register with the programadministrator and obtain a keyID. Whenpicked up by a driver with a registered vehi-cle transponder, the keyID is read by thetransponder, and then at one or more pointsalong the road the carpooling information isread and transmitted to the administrativesystem that then provides for the distributionof the carpooling incentive. Essentially whatthis does is to extend the application of casu-al carpooling beyond toll roads or tollbridges to many other environments withincentive programs.

It is also worth noting that because of theidentification of driver and passengers inher-ent in the system, personal safety (always anissue when a driver picks up unknown pas-sengers) should be improved: unacceptablebehavior by any party would be deterredbecause of the lack of anonymity.

HHOOVV LLaanneess

Among the least flexible ways of providing acarpooling incentive are freeways with anHOV lane. Consider a freeway with a HOVlane restricted to vehicles with 2+ peoplebetween the hours of 7 and 10 a.m. All of thecomponents are fixed: the benefit is access tothe HOV lane; the time period is between 7and 10 a.m., and the minimum number ofoccupants is two.While some tinkering mighttake place over time (e.g., change in hours),this is a pretty fixed, inflexible system, andcertainly not one that is responsive in anyreal-time way to traffic congestion conditions.

There are a couple of ways utilization of thenew technology could improve operation ofHOV lanes. If utilization of an HOV lane wasrestricted to registered participants in a com-muting program (i.e., those who had regis-tered vehicle transponders), the use of the



lane as an incentive to create carpools amongregistered drivers commuting to work wouldbe enhanced. Because of the typical broadly-defined eligibility requirement (e.g., anyvehicle with 2+ occupants), some number ofvehicles currently qualify for use of the HOVlane without that having ever served as anincentive to carpool. For example, a family onvacation motoring through an area during aHOV-restricted period gets to use that lanewithout it having served in any way as a pro-motion or incentive for carpooling.Tightening the definition of who can qualifyfor use of an HOV lane enhances the abilityof that lane to serve as a carpooling incentive.Possible restrictions that could be consideredwould be that a carpool contains some num-ber of occupants all of whom are licenseddrivers, or all of whom are commutingto/from work.The rationale for wanting toimpose additional restrictions on utilizationof an HOV lane arises if the current eligibilityprovisions allows too many vehicles in thelane resulting in an unacceptably degradedlevel of service (LOS).

Verification would be another area where thenew technology could be helpful. If the HOVlane was restricted to registered participantswith transponders, then a roadside reader toverify compliance with the lane restrictionscould interrogate any vehicle using that lane.Transit of a vehicle that failed to transmit asignal indicating an appropriate number ofpassengers could result in a signal to anenforcement official.

Full use of the capacity of an HOV lane is anobjective not easy to accomplish. Ideally onewould like the lane to be used by as manyvehicles as possible subject to attaining atleast a desired LOS. More vehicles than thatdegrades the LOS, while fewer vehicles thanthat represents wasted capacity. Inasmuch asthe new technology would allow for real-time measurement of HOV lane utilization, itwould be possible to dynamically alter theconditions for qualifying use of the lane. Forexample, electronic message boards mightdisplay a qualifying requirement of 3+ per-sons during peak hour periods, and thendynamically change to 2+ when the trafficload decreased below a threshold level.

FFiinnaanncciiaall IInncceennttiivveess ffoorr CCaarrppoooolliinngg

It is not the intent of this paper to discuss inany detail incentive programs.These willvary by region, congestion mitigation goals,

funding sources, and alter-native transportationmodes. But a few generalcomments are in order.Thetrip reduction tables pub-lished by the Institute ofTransportation Engineersand the Department ofTransportation3 along witha fairly lengthy history ofregional or employer-basedincentive programs showthat it does not take a lot ofeconomic incentive tocause a significant shift inbehavior away from SOVsto carpools. It is as thoughat some level people appre-ciate how much in theirself interest it is to carpool,and a little incentive is allthat is needed to overcometheir inertia. This is borne out by the obser-vation that carpooling tends to persist evenwhen incentives are removed4.This observa-tion, by the way, suggests a possible strategyto control costs by reducing incentives aftera period of carpooling with the expectationthat this would cause only a limited reduc-tion in actual carpooling.

Carpools with more riders are proportionatelymore effective in eliminating SOVs than thosewith fewer riders. It will take two carpools eachhaving two persons to get four people to work,but only one carpool of four people.With thenew technology that captures these details, it isperfectly possible to create an incentive struc-ture that disproportionately rewards larger car-pools over smaller ones. In fact, this suggests animplementation strategy for a new program:define a qualifying rideshare initially as involv-ing 2+ people.Then, as the program gainsmomentum over a period of time, shift thedefinition to require 3+ people (and still later,4+ people)5. Such a strategy would cut in halfthe cost to remove a vehicle.

Also possible would be the creation of anincentive structure that disproportionatelyrewarded off peak-hour commuting, thiswhere demand leveling was a policy goal.For example, a program could provide anincentive for carpooling from 7 to 9 a.m., butonly half that incentive for the period from7:30 to 8:30 a.m.

Inherent in any program using the new tech-nology is the ability to endlessly experiment

to create the most efficient incentive structureto accomplish the program goals while at thesame time minimizing costs.The programadministrator could run small scale experi-ments (e.g., changing the definition of aqualified ride-sharing event for a subset ofthose involved in the program) to determinethe implication such changes would havewere they broadly implemented. It would bea delightful environment for experimentationby any program administrator.

TTaaxx CCooddee

It has been an ACT policy recommendationthat the Commuter Benefit Program (nowlimited to employees using public transporta-tion or vanpools) be expanded to include,among others, those who carpool.The rec-ommendation has not been adopted in partbecause of the difficulty in verifying carpool-ing practices. In addition, knowing the esti-mated cost of a carpooling event is relevant inestablishing a commuter benefit, as the gov-ernment would not want to provide a taxbenefit for individuals who, say, carpool onlyone block to work.With the use of new tech-nology, both of these concerns would beaddressed.There would be an electronicrecord of carpooling events, and costs couldbe systemically estimated based upon infor-mation in the data base about residence andjob locations along with frequency of car-pooling events. It would now be timely torevisit this Commuter Benefit Program andmake the case to our legislators why the ben-efit should be extended to carpoolers (wherethe carpooling event has adequate verification

continued on page 20


M any cities establish transportationgoals that they hope will improvethe quality of life and economic

vitality of its business core. These include:

1. Improved access and mobility,2. Minimum use of automobiles, especially

single occupant vehicles (SOVs),3. Reduced traffic congestion, air pollution,

street maintenance and repair,4. Increased availability of short term

parking, and5. Achieving these goals in the most

cost-effective manner that provides a general net benefit.

Because they are more likely to achieve thesegoals when commuters use non-motorizedmodes of transportation or the highest occu-pant vehicles available, many cities offer andpromote transportation options and incentivesthat often include discounted parking pro-

grams for carpools. But if you think carpoolparking discounts are effective at increasingtheir use, you might want to think again. Notonly can such programs be expensive toadminister and difficult to enforce, they mightnot achieve the goal you expected and actuallymight be counterproductive.

For over twenty years the City of Seattle hasoperated a discounted carpool parking pro-gram for commuters to its Central BusinessDistrict (CBD). The idea is straight-forwardenough; provide reserved parking spaces to

qualified carpools at a discount as an incentiveto reduce commutes in single occupant vehi-cles (SOVs). Yet, except for a brief period(1999-2000) neither the City’s public carpoolparking program nor those operated in privatebuilding garages were registered to capacity.

There have never been more than 1,500 car-pools registered in the CBD programs, in spiteof there being more than 5,000 reserved park-ing spaces available on any given weekday at a30 percent (or greater) price discount; yetbiennial surveys conducted since 1992revealed that between 7,000 and 9,000 indi-viduals (3,500—4,500 carpools) could befound carpooling into the CBD on any givenweekday. These and other observations raisedquestions about the effectiveness of discountprograms at reducing the number of com-mutes in single occupant vehicles and theadded value of operating such programs.

In 22000000, staff at theCity of Seattlereceived more than900 responses to asurvey of individu-als who were par-ticipating in dis-counted carpoolparking programs ateleven high-risebuildings located inthe CBD. The studyfound 9955 ppeerrcceennttwweerree iinn ttwwoo--ppeerrssoonnccaarrppoooollss of which5566 ppeerrcceenntt oorriiggiinnaatt--eedd ffrroomm tthhee ssaammee

hhoouusseehhoolldd.. One disappointing piece of dataemerged: 4499 ppeerrcceenntt rreeppoorrtteedd tthhaatt tthheeyy wweerreeuussiinngg ppuubblliicc ttrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn up until theyobtained the discounted carpool parking per-mit. While 51 percent reported that they weredriving to work before receiving a discountpermit, the study did not tell us if respondentswere driving alone and were “converts” fromSOVs or if they already were sharing a ride.

In 22000022 the City revised the questionnaire andsurveyed the same population.Again more than90 percent were two person carpools, half of

whom lived at the same address, but this time welearned that 50 percent were already commutingtogether before they obtained their carpool park-ing permit. The program had not converted anySOV drivers. Rather, preexisting carpools simplywere taking advantage of discounts. Another dis-appointment--again, half of the carpoolersreported that before receiving a discounted park-ing permit they had been taking the bus.To helpour understanding of this, we compared the costof various carpool commutes to correspondingtransit commutes and found that for many com-muters a parking discount made carpool com-mutes less costly than taking transit.

That year we also obtained zip code data,which revealed another troubling statistic: 5555ppeerrcceenntt ooff tthhee ccoommmmuutteess ssttaarrtteedd aanndd eennddeedd iinnSSeeaattttllee,, where bus service is frequent and reli-able. And, in response to a new question, ““IIffyyoouu ddiidd nnoott rreecceeiivvee tthhiiss ddiissccoouunntteedd ccaarrppoooollppaarrkkiinngg ppeerrmmiitt,, hhooww wwoouulldd yyoouu ccoommmmuuttee ttooaanndd ffrroomm wwoorrkk,,”” forty-three percent said theywould drive alone. This sparked some opti-mism that perhaps the discount was indeed afactor for converting SOV drivers. But this wasshort-lived.

In 22000044 we developed a new questionnaire.This one was designed to elicit in more detailthe reasons why people carpool and therebydetermine if and how best to expend resourcesto promote this mode of commuting. Thistime the City surveyed approximately 1,800carpoolers, received more than 1,550 respons-es, an 8866 ppeerrcceenntt rreessppoonnssee rraattee, and found thatrreecceeiivviinngg aa ppaarrkkiinngg ddiissccoouunntt, a parking subsidyor a preferential parking location were the rea-sons given for carpooling only 33 ppeerrcceenntt oofftthhee ttiimmee..

The top three reasons given for carpooling were:1. “I share a common route to work with some

one I already know personally”was among the top three reasons given 5577 ppeerrcceennttof the time and was the number one reason given 2277 ppeerrcceenntt of the time.This is consistent with the answer givento the question, “How did your carpool form?” where 8877 ppeerrcceenntt said that they already knew the people they ride with.” It is also consistent with the

Rethinking Carpool Parking Discounts


ACT

fact that 7711 ppeerrcceenntt of these carpools were comprised of only ttwwoo--ppeerrssoonnss,,5599 ppeerrcceenntt of whom sshhaarree aann aaddddrreessss..

2. “Transit is available,but carpooling just works better for me/us” was second, appearing among the top three reasons 4499 ppeerrcceenntt of the time. It was the nnuummbbeerr oonnee rreeaassoonn 3344 ppeerrcceenntt of the time.

33.. RReeaalliizziinngg aann oovveerraallll ccoosstt oorr ttiimmee ssaavviinnggss ooff 5500 ppeerrcceenntt was among the top three reasons given about 30 percent of the time.

The data was rich, and the results wereinformative.The idea of providing discountsfor carpooling was a well-meaning but mis-guided attempt to increase HOV use.The priceof parking is of little importance to carpool-ers; they already share the costs, and realizebenefits that they value more.

Management and Enforcement andDiscounted Carpool Parking Programs

Parking managers in both the public and pri-vate sector cited abuse of parking discountprograms. Setting the price of parking forcarpools below market prices was an incentivefor SOV drivers to try to obtain discountedparking permits.The most common violationfound was misrepresenting information onapplication forms. Because the penalty forabuse was minor (loss of the permit), individ-uals would engage friends, relatives, or co-workers to complete and sign car-pool park-ing applications, enabling those who drovealone to acquire parking discounts. Parkingmanagers complained that they could notmonitor or enforce abuse effectively withoutincurring significant costs.

Over the years some private parking managerseliminated this problem by restricting dis-counted permits to participants who work inthe buildings where parking attendants couldobserve their driving into and out of thebuilding and could verify easily the employ-ment of participants with tenants. This wassomewhat less costly, but by limiting carpoolpermits to building tenants seriously also lim-ited ride-match opportunities and effectivelyeliminated vanpooling as an option altogether.

Conclusion and What Cities Can Do:

While eliminating discounted parking pro-grams is an obvious conclusion, how does acity do that without generating a perception itdoes not support carpools? Following are

some options for eliminating discounts grad-ually and replacing them with more effectiveTDM elements and incentives that are moreconsistent with their goals,

1. Cities that offer parking discount programs can increase carpool parking rates gradually.

2. Offer short term, “try it, you’ll like it,”discounts for newly formed carpools.

3. Give preference for parking and greater (short term) discounts to higher0 occupant vehicles.

4. Replace discounts for carpools with free parking to registered vanpools.

5. Where demand for parking is highly inelastic and costly, a tax on commercial parking would generate considerable revenue with little effect on demand.Used the revenue to support effective TDM efforts and public transportation facilities. This would contribute to keeping costs relatively low to low-income populations and is a means for extracting revenue from non-resident commuters who use a city’s resources without directly paying for them.

6. Lobby the federal government to equalize the tax incentives for employers who provide transit subsidies with those they now receive for providing employee parking.

7. Lobby the federal government to eliminate incentives for providing employee parking.

8. Continue to promote carpooling as a viable alternative to those who do not have transit available to them by requiring buildings to reserve priority parking and provide other incentives andamenities.

9. Require property developers to:• Provide free parking for registered

vanpools instead of discounts for carpools.• Construct shower facilities for cyclists

and secured parking for their bicycles.• Construct or fund links from their

properties to urban bike trails.• Equalize hourly parking rates; so that

shoppers and other short term parking isnot penalized.

• Reserve parking spaces for hybrid car-share vehicles and make them available for mid-day appointments to tenants andemployees who do not drive to work.

10. Redirect the staff time spent registering,certifying, and enforcing carpool parkingto tasks like:

• Improving the collection, quality and dissemination of transportation and mode use data

• Promoting TDM and related commute trip reduction efforts and disseminating commute options information.

• Improving the process of administering and monitoring the effectiveness of transportation management programs.

• Improving survey and reporting processes.

Finally, cities can exercise caution whenadopting and implementing transportationprograms and related policies so that incen-tives and options work for them and not inopposition to their ultimate goals.

Kathleen Anderson is a Senior TransportationPlanner with the Seattle Department ofTransportation. She has managed the City ofSeattle’s Commute Trip Reduction Plan and theCity’s Carpool Parking Program since 1993.She has a B.A. in Economics and an M.S. inPublic Affairs from the University ofWashington. She collected data and per-formed the research between 1999 and 2005.To obtain copies of the survey instrumentsand data tabulation, contact her at [email protected]

Chesapeake ChapterOn January 1, 2006 a new board took effect.Officers elected were: Chris Arabia, President(Virginia Department of Rail and PublicTransportation), Darlene Nader, (NorthBethesda TMD), Sharon Affinito,Treasurer(Loudoun County Office of Transportation),and Lisa DuMetz, Secretary (UrbanTrans).

The chapter’s annual awards ceremony washeld on December 2, 2005.The chapter hon-ored Peggy Schwartz for her four-year serviceas chapter president. Newly-elected chapterpresident, Chris Arabia presented Peggy with aplaque thanking her for her service, leadershipand valuable contributions to the ChesapeakeChapter.AAA Mid-Atlantic director of publicrelations, Lon Anderson was the keynote speak-

er at the awards ceremony. Mr.Andersonaddressed high occupancy toll (HOT) lanestudies and proposals being discussed inMaryland and Virginia, and commented on thecurrent state of financing for the Washington,DC region’s transportation system, includingroads and transit.The award winners were:Board of Directors Award – Chris Hamilton;Outstanding Employer Program – MerchantLink; Outstanding Transit Program – TransITServices; Unsung Hero Award – Laura Chin;Outstanding Marketing Campaign –Commuter Connections; Outstanding TDMProgram – RideFinders and North BethesdaTDM; and James Bautz Award for outstandingcommitment to the TDM industry – KarlIngebritsen and Sue Bethke.

Christopher ArabiaChesapeake Chapter PresidentVirginia DRPT(703) [email protected]

Great Lakes ChapterThe Great Lakes chapter hosted two seats forthe netconference, “Making TDM Boom withBoomers.”We had one at the Ann ArborTransportation Authority in Ann Arbor, MI andone at the Mid-Ohio Regional PlanningCommission in Columbus, OH.

We launched the second issue of our chapternewsletter, Great Lakes ACTion, which includeschapter member highlights and happenings,Question of the Quarter, NationalTransportation Week, a welcome to new mem-bers and colleagues, resources, membershipmatters, and calendar notes.

Our chapter sponsored breakfast for twoCommuter Challenge CoordinatorWorkshops. The workshops were held toeducate company representatives about amajor construction project in SoutheastMichigan, what a Commuter Challengeentails, and available commuting options.Through this effort we’ve introduced anumber of companies and colleagues to ACTand the importance of transportationdemand management as a congestion miti-gation component during construction proj-ects. The chapter board is developing a spon-sorship program that will allow other mem-bers this opportunity.

Our chapter public policy committee andprograms committee are in full swing.Thepublic policy committee is working with amember on an issue regarding vanpool taxa-tion.The programs committee is planning atechnical program in conjunction with theupcoming netconference on 511 programs.

For a copy of Great Lakes ACTion or addi-tional chapter information contact CeciliaCannon, chapter secretary at 313-227-6501or [email protected].

Great Lakes Chapter PresidentDonna NorfleetSEMCOG(313) [email protected]

Mid-Atlantic ChapterThe Mid-Atlantic Chapter has had a very busyend and beginning of the year. In December2005 we hosted our first ever chapter confer-ence and awards ceremony in Pittsburgh, PA.Allen D. Biehler, Secretary of Transportation,Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was thekeynote speaker, and Jim Lokay, KDKA's trafficand Transportation Reporter, moderated. Sevenawards were given in the areas of movingmobility.The winners were:

Moving Mobility Individually:• Jane Downing, Pittsburgh Foundation• Vanpool Drivers (37 groups)• Chris Zema, Orrick Global Operations

Moving Mobility into the Community:• Cranberry Township

Moving Mobility into the Workforce:• iDL• FedEX• University of Pittsburgh

This event was followed in January 2006 up byour eastern conference in King of Prussia, PA.The conference was kicked off by Anne Canby,President of the Surface Transportation PolicyProject (STPP). Ms. Canby challenged mem-bers, specifically Transportation ManagementAssociation (TMA) professionals and partners,with leading the course in addressing regionaltransportation issues. Ms. Canby stated, “Yourepresent key business partners, both publicand private, through your association member-ship and work with ACT.”

chapter news

Newly-elected chapter president ChrisArabia honors immediate past president

Peggy Schwartz with a plaque at theannual awards ceremony.

PA DOT Secretary of TransportationAllen Biehler addressed the crowd at

the first ever Mid-Atlantic Chapterconference and awards ceremony.


Other speakers included Pat Hintz of WyethPharmaceuticals in Pennsylvania and GVFTransportation partner, who discussed hercompany’s commute program “GreenWheels,” in addition to Dan Blevins of theWilmington Area Planning Council (WILMAP-CO) who shared the Council’s work in devel-oping and utilizing Delaware’s CongestionMitigation Process.

The conference also recognized three award winners:

• Category: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Business Leader / Public Sector Winner - DART First State, Delaware

• Category: TDM Business Leader / Private Sector Winner - Tammy Ford,TMA Delaware

• Category: Mobility Friendly Business Leader Winner - Upper Merion Township, PA

For more information on the chapter log onto www.midatlanticchapter.com.

Mid-Atlantic Chapter PresidentRob HenryGreater Valley Forge TMA(610) [email protected]

Patriot ChapterSpring 2006 Update

The ACT Patriot Chapter continues to experi-ence a buzz of activity. We held chapter elec-tions in November, continue to recruit newmembers and remain focused on planning the2006 ACT International Conference.

The newly elected chapter officers held theirfirst meeting on January 11, 2006 to establishthe ground work for an exciting and busyyear. The 2006 chapter board members are:

- President - David Straus,ABC TMA- Vice President – Meredith Schuft,

CAMTA- Secretary – Lauren Grymek,

Seaport TMA- Treasurer – Denise Begley, Neponset

Valley TMA

Since November six new members have joinedthe Patriot Chapter.We are pleased to introduceand welcome them to our Chapter and lookforward to their participation:

Susan Tordella MetroWest/495 TMA,Waltham, MA

Marc Kwiatkowski MBNA, Belfast, MEGreg Nazarow Vital Communities,

White River Junction,VTAdam Brophy ZipCar, Cambridge, MAScottGriffith ZipCar, Cambridge, MAKate Driscoll TransitWorks, Boston, MA

The ACT Patriot Chapter has been workingdiligently on the 2006 ACT InternationalConference which will be held in Boston,August 27 – 30, at the Fairmont Copley Hotel.This year’s “TDM Party” promises to havesomething for every TDM professional with avariety of guest speakers, new session topics,and activities that highlight the best ofBeantown! Here is a sneak peak of what’s instore for the 2006 Conference:

- Sessions topics on University/College TDM, Parking Demand Management,and Promotion of Healthy Lifestyles

- Special Boston sightseeing tours of Fenway Park, Historic Salem, and Boston Harbor

- Annual TDM Awards Luncheon hosted by Jimmy Tingle a leading political and social satirists

The planning committee continues to meet ona monthly basis and subcommittees meet reg-ularly. Our chapter members have contributedsignificantly to the planning process, volun-teering their time and expertise to help devel-op a stimulating and fulfilling program for thebenefit of all ACT members and we hope thatyou will be able to join us.

For additional information on chapter activities, member’scontact information, news, and details about the upcomingconferences, please visit our web site a atwww.abctma.com/pcact.htm

Patriot Chapter PresidentDavid StrausArtery Business Committee TMA(617) [email protected]

Southern California ChapterThe Southern California Chapter has elected its 2006 Board of Directors:

President: Virginia GonzalezVice President: Devon DemingTreasurer: Helen BermudezSecretary: Astrid LoganDirector: Brooke Geer-PersonDirector: Rebecca Granite-JohnsonDirector: Rita LinseyDirector: Donna Blanchard

In February, the Southern California Chapterheld its annual general membership meeting.The event featured a special legislative presen-tation from Larry Robinson, SAAQMD, updat-ing status on 2005 California legislation, andcovering proposed 2006 legislation.After tak-ing care of chapter business and introducingcommittees, the meeting moved into a festivemood.The chapter recognized the efforts ofthe 2005 ACT International ConferenceCommittee members, and all the SouthernCalifornia people who worked so hard tomake last year’s conference a smashing success.Southern California sponsors and exhibitorswere also recognized for their generous contri-butions.A special gift was awarded commem-orative of the wonderful event.

The Southern Chapter’s annual report was dis-tributed, outlining the state of the chapter andhighlights from the 2005 ACT InternationalConference in Anaheim.This report also liststhe chapter’s many 2005 activities; presentsupcoming events for 2006; provides currentand new members a brief introduction to ouractive committees; introduces chapter boardmembers; and includes the 2005 chapterfinancial report.

Once again, the Southern California chapterwill be conducting its Annual Tribute to TriciaPrice Excellence Scholarship in April. A luckychapter member will win a paid registrationand hotel stay for the 2006 ACT InternationalConference in Boston.

The Chapter is looking forward to severalworkshops in 2006 for our members:March 23 – “Taking the Wheels,” Planning andMarketing Your 2006 Bike ProgramsApril 19 – Public Policy Workshop, featuringJason Pavluchuk, Government Relations Inc.


chapter news continued


June 22 – Professional Marketing WorkshopJuly 20 – Panel Discussion on Alternative Fuel VehiclesSeptember 21 – Leadership Development TrainingNovember 2 – ETC Bootcamp

Southern California Chapter PresidentVirginia GonzalezKaiser Permanente(909) [email protected]

Southeast ChapterNEWLY ELECTED BOARDSEACT is proud to announce it’s newly elected board members:

President: Jeff Horton, the MarketingInstitute & Commuter Services of

North Florida (Tallahassee)Vice-President: Kathy Molin, French Broad River MPO and City of Asheville, NCSecretary: Aaron Gaul, UrbanTransConsultants (Atlanta)Treasurer: Rosalind Blanco Cook,New Orleans RTAImmediate Past-President: Sandi Moody,Bay Area Commuter Services (Tampa)

2006 SOUTHEAST TDM SYMPOSIUM Mark your calendars (MAY 24 - 26, 2006) andjoin us in beautiful Asheville, NC for hands-on,interactive training that will enhance the pro-fessional development and skills of both newand seasoned transportation demand manage-ment professionals.The symposium will beheld at the beautiful Crowne Plaza Resort inAsheville, NC – one of the country’s premiereliving and vacation destinations. Room ratesfor attendees are $89 (+tax)www.ashevillecp.com. For more informationabout the symposium or Asheville, please con-tact Kathy Molin of the City of Asheville at828-232-4564 or [email protected].

A MESSAGE AND UPDATE FROM OUR COL-LEAGUES IN NEW ORLEANSNew Orleans Regional Transit Authority’s street-cars are back on track in the hurricane-damagedcity of New Orleans. Currently, the historic PerleyThomas streetcars that graced St. Charles Avenuebefore the Hurricane Katrina are operating on theRiverfront line and a portion of the Canal Streetline.Through a generous loan of a portable elec-tric substation from the Massachusetts BayTransportation Authority, these streetcars will soonbe running the entire length of Canal Street.

RTA is also operating about 50 percent of itspre-Katrina bus routes throughout the city.Service on several routes started as early asOctober 2, 2005.Through an extension to thecontract with the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA) and the FederalTransit Administration (FTA), public transitpassengers will be able to ride buses andstreetcars for free through June 30.

“RTA has worked very hard to get public tran-sit service back on the streets and tracks ofNew Orleans. Ridership is increasing and weare starting to see progress.We will move intotrailer office space at our A. Philip Randolphfacility, and shortly later the trailers at ourAlgiers Park and Ride will be available to houseour operators and staff,” said Rosalind BlancoCook, spokesperson for the RTA.

RTA is also helping to relieve traffic congestionin the Baton Rouge area by partnering withCapital Area Transit System (CATS). In the wakeof Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the BatonRouge area experienced a tremendous growthin its population, creating overcrowding on theCATS system. In order to meet the increasingdemand for public transit in the area and easethe pressure on the local transit agency, RTA issupplementing service and supplying buses aswell as experienced operators.Additional busesfrom other public agencies throughout thecountry are on loan to the two agencies toassist in adding buses to already existing routesand the starting of new lines, including a shut-tle from Ascension Parish to Baton Rouge.

Southeast Chapter PresidentJeff HortonThe Marketing Institute and Commuter Services of North Florida(850) [email protected]

Rocky Mountain ChapterMembers of ACT’s Rocky Mountain Chapter have had a busy year so far!

In January, RMACT member TransportationSolutions hosted The Road Ahead: EnvisioningLocal Connections in Denver.Transportationvisionary Charlie Hales of Portland, Oregondiscussed how cities across the country areturning to streetcars to move people withinurban areas. Produced annually byTransportation Solutions, this year’s presenta-

tion drew more than 100 elected officials,transportation industry and real estate profes-sionals, developers and neighborhood leaders.

In February,Aspen, Colorado hosted the ESPNWinter X Games, drawing thousands of specta-tors into the Roaring Fork Valley. Several ACTpartners including the City of Aspen and Cityof Glenwood Springs collaborated to success-fully apply TDM strategies to this major event.The result: over a four day period, more than177,000 passengers were carried to X Gamesevents via transit!

In April, RMACT member The Transit Alliancehosted Metro Denver’s New P.O.P. Culture:Making our new spaces People OrientedPlaces.The session, attended by elected offi-cials, builders, developers, and business lead-ers, helped uncover key tools for creating com-munity spaces with heart & soul.Internationally famed planner Jan Gehl ofDenmark served as the event’s keynote speaker.The Transit Alliance followed this event withthe production of a white paper on how toincorporate the human dimension into TransitOriented Developments.Visit www.transital-liance.org/POPCulture for more information.

Rocky Mountain Chapter PresidentLynn RumbaughCity of Aspen(970) [email protected]

chapter news continued


ACT

1 The program described herein has not yet been implemented, andthe creation of one or more pilot programs in different regionswould be welcome.2 There is a patent pending on the proposal described here.

3 See the TDM Encyclopedia athttp://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm41.htm4 An Atlanta, Georgia trial carpool program paid $3/day to encour-age carpooling. 9 to 12 months after the program stopped, fully 2/3of those who started carpooling were continuing even in the absenceof subsidies. Seehttp://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/22355 With possible exclusions for cars with front seats only.

ernment would not want to provide a taxbenefit for individuals who, say, carpool onlyone block to work.With the use of new tech-nology, both of these concerns would beaddressed.There would be an electronicrecord of carpooling events, and costs couldbe systemically estimated based upon infor-mation in the data base about residence andjob locations along with frequency of car-pooling events. It would now be timely torevisit this Commuter Benefit Program andmake the case to our legislators why the ben-efit should be extended to carpoolers (wherethe carpooling event has adequate verificationmechanisms in place).

VVeerriiffiiccaattiioonn IIssssuueeaa

The principal concern as it relates to theintegrity of the system is that a person andhis or her keyID not be separated. It wouldnot be acceptable if a driver could collectkeyIDs from others and use them to indi-cate a level of carpooling that in fact wasnot taking place.

Possible verification mechanisms can be cate-gorized as external or systemic, and theywould be specific to the type of rideshareprogram being monitored. External verifica-tion would, as with HOV lanes currently,involve an enforcement official actuallyobserving car occupancy levels.That officialcould have a transponder reader and be ableto interrogate a passing vehicle as to whatwas being claimed for occupancy, and thenact on that information appropriately when avariance was noted. Since there may be somemeasure of ambiguity in a visual observation,a form of predictive logic is recommendedwherein observations are categorized as con-firming, disconfirming, or ambiguous. Asobservations are collected over time itbecomes easy to flag patterns of seemingincongruous behavior, and enforcementactions can be weighted toward more fre-quent observation of potential rule breakers.

Systemic validation can occur through thedevelopment of heuristics to mine the richdatabase of ridesharing events that are accu-

mulated each day.There are far too many per-mutations to outline in this article, but if onethinks about the information potentially avail-able for validation (e.g., the time at which akeyID is first read by the vehicle’s transponderalong with residential and employmentaddresses of riders) as well as the possibilitiesof incorporating employer affirmation ofclaimed employee commuting behavior, it isclear that the likelihood of any pervasive andconsistent gaming of the system can be madevanishingly small.

continued from page 14

association for commuter...

Documents