LA Times: State Should Act to Save Transit Funding

An editorial in today’s Los Angeles Times takes the Governor, the Democratic-controlled legislature, and pretty much everyone involved in the dramatic showdown in state government to task for their role in stripping transit funding in the proposed budgets that are floating around Sacramento.  Sounding more like Kymberleigh Richards or Bart Reed than the flagship newspaper for the Car Culture Capital of America, the Times doesn’t pull punches as it breaks down the issue.

When democratic lawmakers presented their proposal for balancing the
state budget, there was one little thing they didn’t mention: It would
have all but eliminated funding for public transportation — not just
next year but in perpetuity.

The proposal was vetoed last week
by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, but that doesn’t mean it’s going away.
Moreover, the governor’s plan is even worse for public transit; the
Democrats want to keep distributing about $150 million the state
receives from a tax on diesel fuel to transit agencies, while the
governor aims to get the state completely out of the business of
funding transit. The rush to jettison passenger rail and buses as the
state tries to cope with a severe budget crisis counters not only the
will of the voters, who have repeatedly demonstrated that they greatly
value public transit, but the state’s ongoing crusade to reduce its
traffic and pollution woes…

…So Democrats found a clever way around that rule: eliminate the gas
taxes, replace them with a user fee that’s 13 cents a gallon higher
than the current taxes, then raise sales and income taxes by an amount
equivalent to the old gas taxes. They can claim that they can raise
taxes with less than a two-thirds vote as long as they reduce other
taxes by an equal amount.

The problem with this shell game is
that user fees have strings attached: They can only be spent on things
that directly benefit those who pay the fee. So a gasoline fee could
only be spent on roads, highways and other systems used by drivers —
and not on public transit.

This is a pretty cynical move.  Take funds people voted for transit projects and move things around to pay for the kinds of highway expansion projects that have been encouraging sprawl development, wrecking our air quality and making California a leader in Greenhouse Gas emissions.  The Governor’s veto had nothing to do with the transit raid, he doesn’t exactly have a strong track record when it comes to defending transit, so if we want to make certain the state doesn’t choke transit to save highway funds, everyone needs to get in touch with their legislators now.  For help, click here.

3 thoughts on LA Times: State Should Act to Save Transit Funding

  1. Mass transit? Gas is under $2/gallon. Guffaw! Who needs mass transit anymore?!?!

    This is pretty much a trend in Sacramento. It seems transit funds are being raided all the time. This is after there was such a huge boost in mass transit usage last year. The people have spoken directly and indirectly that they want more mass transit funding, and yet the politicians are out of touch. I just don’t understand it.

    I think that politicians that oppose highway expansion and embrace transit funding will do better the next time an election rolls around. Call me crazy but I kind of believe that!

  2. This frightening development occurred back on 06 November 208, and was quickly mentioned during the 20 Nov. Metro budget meeting. I still feel that the success of Measure R, which has yet to even start to prove itself, is partially to blame. An irony, to be sure. (And I realise the State Transit Assistance Fund is a statewide benefit, but I believe a sizable portion makes it way to Los Angeles.) Roger Snoble’s unexpected retirement implies more trouble ahead as well.

  3. Hello. I am posting beautiful architect sketches of the LA subway stations that would have been built in the 1990s. First one is in today’s post with an article about how Measure R combined with Obama’s stimulus package positions LA to receive federal money soon. I wrote the story at: http://www.examiner.com/x-1960-LA-City-Buzz-Examiner
    Check my blog “LA City Buzz Examiner” upcoming for architect sketches of the subway stations that did not get built in the nineties, but may be built now thanks to a change in government.
    Today’s picture shows what would have been LaBrea Station.
    Keep riding.
    Kay Ebeling
    LA City Buzz Examiner

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Help Stop Further State Cuts to Transit Operations

|
Caltrain parked in SF. Photo: smif/flickr Last month, Streetsblog we saw that thanks to some creative accounting, Governor Schwarzenegger had found a new and creative way to rob transit even after he effectively eliminated the transit subsidy that exists in the state budget.  Because the gas tax is producing more funds than expected, hundreds of […]
STREETSBLOG USA

Mica: “The Focus of the Bill Is on the National Highway System”

|
First, to recap: The transportation reauthorization proposal that House Transportation Committee Chair John Mica unveiled yesterday (sans legislative text) calls for $230 billion over six years, cutting 33 percent out of current spending levels. The plan maintains the current 80/20 split between highways and transit funding, supports state infrastructure banks in lieu of a national […]
STREETSBLOG USA

Massachusetts’ Anticipated Transpo Funding Plan Is a Big Ol’ Let Down

|
Yesterday, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick was supposed to unveil a visionary new statewide transportation plan. And while the spending component includes a commuter rail expansion and a pedestrian and bike program, the funding component bears some resemblance to what we recently held up as a worst-case scenario. Patrick’s proposal doesn’t contain a vehicle miles traveled […]