In spring of 2005, the Maryland Transit Administration introduced a plan to restructure the region’s bus system for implementation in the the fall of 2005. Named the Greater Baltimore Bus Initiative (GBBI), the plan primarily called for expanded service for cross-town and core routes while eliminating or reducing local and commuter routes serving outer areas.

MTA hoped its sweeping plan, which included changes to 50 of 54 local routes, would streamline the system and make it more reliable. Specifically, MTA sought to simplify routes, increase frequency of service, provide improved connections to other modes of mass transit, address changing market-trends, and shorten travel time for more of its users.

Few questioned that the region’s bus system was in need of an overhaul. The last comprehensive restructuring of the system occurred more than 30 years earlier. However, at closer scrutiny, MTA’s plan would also reduce transit access to employment centers throughout the region. Such a move could have had a negative effect on local efforts to stimulate economic development.

"When you talk to corporate site selection experts, they will tell you that a leading criterion for recruiting a new business is the availability of public transportation," Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith wrote in a message to a community group after the plan was released.

Howard County Executive James N. Robey, who served as Chair of the Baltimore Regional Transportation Board (BRTB), expressed similar concerns to The Baltimore Sun: "It is vitally important that we expand access to suburban employment opportunities throughout the Baltimore region."

In addition to concerns about economic development, MTA asked BMC, Morgan State University, and the Baltimore Urban League to review its plan because some community leaders believed the plan might disproportionately hurt minority and low-income neighborhoods.

With these critical issues and concerns emerging about MTA’s plan, the BMC Board immediately acted and asked the state to extend the deadline for public comment as well as allow for more study of the regional impacts
of the proposal.

In a letter to Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, the BMC Board encouraged "further dialogue and public discussion regarding the Greater Baltimore Bus Initiative."

Governor Ehrlich agreed, and a week later ordered an extension of the public comment period for the state’s plan. Additional time "will allow more people to help us shape the future of bus transportation around Baltimore," he said in a statement thanking citizens who had attended public hearings.

During this time, a team of BMC staff began studying MTA’s Bus Initiative more thoroughly. BMC maintains a complex multi-modal travel demand forecasting model of the region’s transportation network. The staff used this model, socio-economic datasets from the Census, and GIS mapping software to better understand the effect of GBBI on the region.

Gene Bandy, Assistant Director for Transportation Planning and Technical Services at BMC, who led the team, explained the process. "In addition to doing a route-by-route analysis, we added MTA’s proposed plan to our transportation model and began the process of measuring potential effects on ridership, accessibility and travel-time," Bandy said.

In late July, as BMC staff was completing its draft report, the state announced that GBBI would not go forward as originally proposed and revised the scope of its plan.

State Transportation Secretary Robert L. Flanagan told The Baltimore Sun, "The public hearings have really worked in the way they should work," citing community input as what led the state to revisit its plan.

According to BMC’s Draft analysis, the original GBBI plan would have decreased daily ridership by almost nine percent, eliminated service to a large number of suburban employment centers, and worsened service during peak hours while off-peak service would generally improve.

The analysis found no specific evidence of bias against low-income and minority communities. However, it made clear that the service area of the existing system is "highly correlated" with predominately African-American communities. Therefore, changes to the system will "show the most pronounced effects--gains or losses--on that community."

By the end of July, MTA re-introduced what it called "Phase I" changes to the bus system, which were primarily comprised of the less controversial aspects of the original plan.

BMC staff reviewed Phase I using the same travel demand forecasting model, socio-economic datasets from the Census, and GIS mapping tools as before.

Maryland Congressman Elijah E. Cummings, said recently he believed BMC’s analysis of Phase I "provided some of the most insightful and complete information on the Initiative."

"Importantly, BMC analyzed not just individual route changes but also the likely impact these changes would combine to have on mobility in our community, including access to jobs, services, and educational centers," Congressman Cummings added.

The Phase I analysis estimated a slight decline in bus ridership (from 289,100 to 281,000 daily riders). Again, the analysis found service would worsen during peak hours while off-peak service would
generally improve.

Unlike the original proposal, Phase I did not include the cuts in service to a large number of regional employment centers and did not eliminate any of the existing peak commuter express services.

However, BMC board members continued to be troubled by the estimated decline in ridership. In an August letter to State officials the BMC Board encouraged greater cooperation and collaboration in evaluating any of the state’s future plans to change the system.

MTA’s Phase I changes went into effect on October 23, 2005, after drivers underwent training for the new routes.

In early January 2006, MTA announced that it would make additional changes to more than twenty routes to be implemented in June. The state said it would make these changes without conducting additional public hearings.

MTA’s bus restructuring effort will continue to be a controversial issue throughout 2006, as some elected officials, including Congressman Cummings, BMC board members, and State legislators are now urging the state to conduct public hearings on "Phase II" changes.

To be continued…