Consent Decree Compliance Campaign - History

Background to Bus Riders Union case against Los Angeles County MTA:

In 1994, the Labor/Community Strategy Center and Bus Riders Union, along with the Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates and Southern Christian Leadership Conference, represented by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, brought suit against the Los Angeles MTA, charging them with violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which prohibits government agencies that receive any federal funds from distributing those funds in a racially discriminatory manner. The Strategy Center, BRU, and NAACP LDF charged the MTA with establishing a separate and unequal mass transit system—a dilapidated, overcrowded bus system for 400,000 overwhelmingly Latino, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander bus riders (at that time, estimated at 81% people of color, but on most of the worst inner-city lines it was essentially 100% people of color).

On September 1, 1994, Federal Judge Terry Hatter issued a Temporary Restraining Order against the MTA, prohibiting them from raising bus fares and prohibiting them from eliminating the unlimited use bus pass.

On October 28, 1996 the MTA signed a civil rights Consent Decree with the Bus Riders Union. BRU was recognized by the courts as the "class representative" for 400,000 bus riders. MTA pledged to make the bus system the first priority, dramatically reducing overcrowding on the buses, establishing a $42 monthly pass and a $11 weekly pass and agreeing that if it could not reduce overcrowding and provide sufficient service to new areas, MTA would "reallocate funds" from existing projects outside the bus system.

Click here for the Consent Decree

1996-1998 The MTA failed to modernize the old bus fleet and to order expansion buses to comply with the first overcrowding standard of 1.35 (no more than 15 people standing on average in any 20-minute period) set for December 31, 1997.

In 1999 the courts began to rule in favor of bus riders.
*The MTA was forced to admit that virtually every bus line was in violation of the overcrowding standards of the civil rights Consent Decree—98% of all lines were in violation.
*The Special Master, appointed by the federal court, ordered the MTA to buy 532 new buses and hire the appropriate number of drivers to operate them. The MTA appealed to him to reconsider.
* The Special Master reduced his order to 481 buses. The MTA appealed to Federal Judge Terry Hatter.
* Judge Hatter reduced (temporarily) Special Master Bliss' order requiring MTA to buy 350 buses, but warned the MTA in its defiance of the federal court's authority that they were "siding with the segregationists."
* The MTA still refused to buy the 350 buses and instead, appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, claiming that the Special Master and Judge Hatter had exceeded their authority and asked the Ninth Circuit to release them from their obligations under the civil rights Consent Decree.

Click here for Special Master Bliss's Load Factor Compliance Order March 1999
Click here for Special Master Bliss's Load Factor Compliance Order May 1999
Click here for Judge Hatter's Order September 1999

February - May 2001 – Through our direct organizing work, we were able to get four mayoral candidates, Antonio Villaraigosa, James Hahn, Xavier Becerra, and Joel Wachs to pledge that if they were elected mayor—with four votes on the MTA board—they would stop blocking civil rights enforcement and would try to get three other board members (to create a majority on the MTA's 13-member board) to vote for a motion to drop the appeal to the Ninth Circuit, and abide by and enforce Judge Hatter's order to buy 350 buses.

August 31, 2001 – A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Judge Terry Hatter’s 1999 order for 350 buses. Mayor James Hahn publicly opposed further appeals of the Consent Decree.

September 10, 2001 – The MTA board voted to appeal the Ninth Circuit panel decision, requesting a rehearing by the full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

October 16, 2001 – The full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected MTA’s request for a rehearing.

Click here for Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling

January 9, 2002 – In closed session, a split MTA Board of Directors voted to appeal the BRU/MTA Consent Decree to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to annul the Consent Decree and endangering civil rights enforcement nationally.

March 18, 2002 – The United States Supreme Court rejected MTA’s request for certiorari. In effect, previous rulings by the court-appointed Special Master Donald Bliss and District Judge Terry Hatter, as well as the entire BRU/MTA civil rights Consent Decree, were upheld as the law.

May 6, 2002 – The Special Master held a status conference with the Bus Riders Union and MTA to begin legal procedural evaluation of MTA’s performance in regards to the overcrowding standards established by the Consent Decree. The second load factor standard of 1.25 means no more than 11 people standing on average in any 20-minute period and third load factor standard of 1.20 means no more than 8 people standing on average in any 20-minute period.

June 3, 2002 – The Special Master ordered MTA to increase monitoring of overcrowding on 78 bus lines which combined carry 90% of MTA’s ridership.

June 3, 2002 – The Special Master ordered that when the data was completed (at about the end of July), MTA and the BRU must fill out a form determining on a line-by-line basis whether or not MTA has met the 1.25 overcrowding standards (no more than 11 people standing on average in any 20-minute period) on the top 78 bus lines.

July 18, 2002 – MTA declared to the press and the public that it was in 98% compliance with the 1.25 overcrowding limit.

July 23, 2002 – BRU showed data proving that MTA was 96% in violation of the 1.25 overcrowding limit.

August 2, 2002 – MTA filled out the court-ordered form, admitting that it was 87% in violation of the 1.25 overcrowding limit.

August 6, 2002 – Special Master Donald Bliss ruled that MTA was 96% in violation of the 1.25 overcrowding limit.

November 8, 2002 – MTA filled out the court-ordered form, admitting that it was in 92% violation of the 1.20 overcrowding limit (no more than 8 people standing on average in any 20-minute period).

December 9, 2002 –Special Master Donald Bliss confirmed that MTA is in 92% violation of the 1.20 overcrowding limit.

March 19, 2003 – Special Master Bliss ordered the MTA to expand its bus fleet by at least 125 additional buses and 287,000 revenue hours to meet the 1.25 standard.

March 31, 2003 – MTA submits a service plan proposing large cuts to bus service instead of expansing the bus fleet. BRU submits a counter proposal asking for all 272 expansion buses supported by MTA and BRU data (including the 125 expansion buses referenced above).

Click here for the BRU Consent Decree Load Factor Plan submitted March 31, 2003

January 12, 2004 – Special Master Bliss, in a strongly worded order, confirms that MTA must expand its bus fleet by at least 145 buses and 381 buses for fleet moderization to meet the 1.25 standard.

February 2, 2004 – A split MTA board barely musters the vote to appeal Bliss's order to District Judge Terry Hatter. The vote showed a split on the board between the City and County of Los Angeles (and its outlying more suburban cities) with the City voting against and the County voting for.

February 12, 2004 – Los Angeles City Council, led by MTA Board members Antonio Villaraigosa, Martin Ludlow, and Tom LaBonge, passes unanimous motion opposing MTA's appeal and demanding the withdrawl of the appeal from the courts and for the immediate implementation of the Bliss order.

Click here to read Bliss's January 12, 2004 decision ordering 526 buses for 1.25 load factor compliance.