Lawsuit calls for SEPTA cuts to be reversed for harming low-income Philadelphians

Consumer advocates and two SEPTA riders sued the transit agency on Wednesday seeking to stop service reductions, arguing that the cuts unlawfully place a greater burden on people of color and low-income communities.

Philadelphia lawyer George Bochetto filed the complaint in Common Pleas Court on behalf of consumer advocate Lance Haver and two SEPTA users in Philadelphia who say they have been harmed.

The plaintiffs are asking for the court to order SEPTA to reverse the service cuts, which began Sunday.

The transit agency projects a $213 million deficit in its operations budget this fiscal year, which began July 1, and says the shortfall will continue each year without a stable source of state funding.

SEPTA chose to eliminate 32 bus routes and shorten 16 others first while leaving Regional Rail service largely intact until a second round of cuts scheduled for Jan. 1, if needed. The suit argues this violates the equal protection clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution and civil rights statutes.

“The result is a stark inequity: minority and low-income bus users bear the heaviest cuts while wealthier regional rail riders are protected,” it says.

» READ MORE: SEPTA’s proposed cuts are ‘catastrophic,’ say Philly leaders

The suit also claims that SEPTA created a fake fiscal crisis using passengers as “hostages” in “political theater” to force the legislature to give it more state funding, though it had the ability to maintain service while awaiting a completed state budget.

SEPTA did not adopt a budget with honest projections, as it is obligated to do, when it decided to assume for the first time it would get no money from Harrisburg, the suit alleges.

The Regional Rail system “is used predominantly by wealthier, suburban and white commuters,” the suit says. It cites ridership data showing a majority of SEPTA bus riders are Black and Latino, with many customers who have no access to a private vehicle or other affordable alternatives.

SEPTA adopted the cuts even though it had other options that would have allowed it to keep operating at regular levels until the state budget is finished, the lawsuit says. A stalemate over transit funding is a major reason the full-year state budget is two months overdue.

SEPTA has said it could not “budget on hope,” as it had in the past.

“SEPTA conducted a full equity analysis in accordance with all applicable regulations before proposing the plan for service cuts and fare increases to address our structural budget deficit,” said Andrew Busch, a spokesperson for the transit agency. “There has also been an extensive public process and education campaign surrounding the proposal, along with a series of public hearings that were overseen by an independent examiner.”

In a list of requested court actions, the complaint also asks that a judge bar SEPTA from raising fares by 21.5%, which is scheduled for Sept. 1.

Bochetto filed a motion for a temporary injunction against SEPTA on Thursday.

An emergency hearing on the request has been scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Friday.

The motion is needed for a judge to grant an emergency hearing, at which lawyers for the plaintiffs and SEPTA will argue over a temporary injunction to stop the cuts and a looming fare hike.

After an emergency hearing, the judge could order a halt to the service cuts while both sides prepare for a trial — or could deny the motion.

None of the most well-known nonprofits working on transit issues have joined the suit, including the Transit Riders Union, Transit Forward Philadelphia, 5th Square, and Transit For All PA.

“This lawsuit is not a solution to anything,” said Alex Milone, transportation committee co-chair for urbanist PAC 5th Square. “It is a dangerous distraction that risks bankrupting SEPTA even faster … and forcing expensive and crippling short-term fixes over stable long-term funding.”

The filing marks at least the third time in the last 25 years that SEPTA has been sued over service cuts or fare increases. During Mayor John F. Street‘s administration, the city won two court battles on similar grounds: that SEPTA’s actions would have placed an unlawful burden on low-income riders and people of color.

Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act prohibits public transportation providers from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin.

Consumer groups and the city, led by Deputy Solicitor Mark R. Zecca, sued SEPTA in 2004 and won a court order stopping the transit authority from slashing service and raising fares.

Early in 2005, then-Gov. Ed Rendell transferred federal highway money to SEPTA and the fiscal crisis was over.

In 2007, a city suit stopped SEPTA from getting rid of free transfers, which would have required riders to pay two full fares when changing buses. The suit charged that it was a capricious move that would have burdened disadvantaged riders.

SEPTA says it will comply with a court order. Earlier, officials said it could take as many as 10 days to fully reverse the cuts because of the need to change schedule information for apps and way-finding signage.

SEPTA could ask for time to comply, or could begin to operate a normal schedule within a day or two, even at the risk of more chaos during the transition.

» READ MORE: From alerting riders to changing Google Maps, here’s how SEPTA is preparing for service cuts

There could be some kind of agreement among the judge and the two sides’ lawyers to allow that. Otherwise, a normal schedule could resume in a couple of days, but not without some confusion.

Tennille M. Hannah is a single mother who has lived in South Philadelphia for 48 years and works from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. as a paralegal. Her children, 17 and 14, attend Constitution High School in Center City and engage in after-school activities at Benjamin Franklin High School until 8 p.m.

The family has relied on the Route 12 bus, which was eliminated. Now her children rise much earlier and take three different forms of transportation, “exposing them to unsafe transfers, longer walks, and dangerous waits” in violent neighborhoods.

Johndell Gredic, of North Philadelphia, cares for her high school-age grandson, who uses the Route 26 bus and the Market-Frankford Line. The routes were not eliminated, but she reports they are dangerously overcrowded and she feels “compelled” to drive him to school, requiring her to leave her night-shift job early.

A former consumer affairs official in city government, Haver has for months railed against SEPTA for planning service cuts and a fare increase, arguing that its service stabilization fund has enough money in it to hold off until a state budget is done. In his city role, Haver was involved in the earlier litigation against SEPTA.

There’s a long-standing disagreement about the nature of the service stabilization fund, which Haver has been advocating for SEPTA to use to alleviate the need for massive cuts. It differs from the Public Transportation Trust Fund, from which state Senate Republicans proposed allowing SEPTA and other transit agencies to use capital money temporarily for operations.

» READ MORE: Is there actually $1 billion sitting in a fund for SEPTA? Explaining the Public Transportation Trust Fund.

Haver and others see the service stabilization fund as a rainy-day cushion that SEPTA can use in an emergency to shield riders from cuts and fare increases.

SEPTA officials have said it is more like a checking account it uses to pay anticipated bills and unexpected expenses, with some money in reserve for potential catastrophes such as flooding or collapsed infrastructure.

In response to Haver’s questions at a July SEPTA board meeting, staff members said there was about $396 million in the stabilization fund. SEPTA’s chief financial officer said that the cuts would save around $5 million per month.

The transit agency projects a $213 million deficit in its operating budget.

“You don’t have to do this,” Haver said.

But SEPTA board member Michael Carroll, who is deputy city managing director for transportation and infrastructure, said then that “service stabilization” is a bit of a misnomer.

“I can appreciate that at the surface level, it seems like there’s this pot of money that you can just draw down and down and down, and you don’t need to make hard decisions,” Carroll said. But he added, “There’s no scenario where we can spend it down to zero.”

This story has been updated to correct the title of Alex Milone, a transit advocate with 5th Square.