Skip to content

Posts from the "Measure R" Category


Pasadena Star News/San Gabriel Valley Tribune: Wrong on Measure R in 2008, Wrong on Extending It Today

Four Years ago, a pair of newspapers in the San Gabriel Valley opposed the passage of Measure R, a county wide transportation sales tax initiative that ultimately earned nearly 70% of the vote county-wide.  The Pasadena Star-News and San Gabriel Valley Tribune, both owned by the same company, followed the lead of their local elected officials and loudly urged voters to reject the sales tax increase citing that there would be no benefit to the San Gabriel Valley despite the money promised for a Gold Line Extension, 710 Big Dig studies, local return dollars, and other projects.

2008 Caption: This group of middle-aged and retirement age politicians wants you to vote against transit the Measure R transit sales tax.

The pols and papers may have led, but few people followed.  The San Gabriel Valley vote count was similar to the rest of the county with nearly two out of every three voters supporting the sales tax increase.

Now the papers are bringing the band back together.  Following Mayor Villaraigosa’s announcement that he would be pushing an indefinite increase to the length of the thirty year sales tax on this fall’s ballot, both papers printed identical editorials slamming the plan as unnecessarily tying the hands of future generations.

Over half of the editorial is a recap of the battle over Measure R and an update on Metro, on Villaraigosa’s urging, beginning a push to get the extension on the fall ballot.  After the jump, we’ll look at the second part of the editorial, laying out their reasons for opposing the increase.  Read the Pasadena Star News editorial here and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune version here. Read more…


Mike Antonovich’s Tortured Point and How the Mayor Should Have Reacted

Villaraigosa, Antonovich, and Frank McCourt in the Dodger Shuttle. For the past two seasons, Antonovich has found the funds to keep the shuttle running. Photo:Mike Antonovich/Flickr

Yesterday, at a meeting of the Metro Board of Directors Construction Committee, L.A. County Supervisor Mike Antonovich became the first public official to throw cold water on Mayor Villaraigosa’s transit dreams by denouncing plans to place an extension of the Measure R half cent transportation sales tax indefinitely.

Much of the coverage of Antonovich’s complaints have focused on his choice of words and the Mayor’s reaction.  Even in the sometimes childish world of the Metro Board of Directors, “gang rape” qualifies as over heated rhetoric.  In response, the Mayor walked out.

While I understand the sentiment, it’s always better to disengage from a bully than roll around in the mud, the Mayor also missed a teachable moment.  Lost in the theatre of the day is that the idea that Antonovich’s rural and suburban Supervisor District is not being served by a thirty year transportation tax.  While I can appreciate the Mayor’s reaction, it would have been better if he had let the Supervisor have his say, and then responded with some facts.

Gang rape?  Really Mike?  Gang rape?

Let’s look at what the 5th Supervisor’s District gets out of Measure R, and then you tell me what is and isn’t ‘gang rape.’ Read more…


Antonio Villaraigosa, The Transportation Mayor

Five years ago, I was sitting at my desk in New York City reading about Los Angeles and wondering how I was going to adapt.  Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa seemed obsessed with speeding up car traffic to the detriment of neighborhoods.  It’s hard to remember the Mayor’s talk of Tiger Teams, specialized LAPD units designed to punish cars parked in rush hour travel lanes, cars “blocking the box” or anyone else that dared impede traffic at rush hour.  His attempt to “Manhattanize” Downtown Los Angeles was widely mocked in media outlets.  His signature transportation project was The Subway to the Sea, which was widely considered a pipe dream.

Villaraigosa, with two key transit allies, on one of the Expo "preview" trains. Photo:Intersections, South L.A.

What a difference half a decade makes.

Last night during his State of the City address, the Mayor doubled down on what has been his signature accomplishment, the passage of Measure R in 2008 and the beginning of a slow transformation of Los Angeles from the car dominated punchline of “Los Angeles Story” to a transit town.

“The successful passage of Measure R taught us something about Los Angeles,” proclaimed Villaraigosa.  ”This is a city willing to invest in itself. This is a city willing to lead and to chart a new path. And that is why today I am announcing that we will be asking voters to continue Measure R until the voters themselves decide to end it. “

With those sentences, the Mayor kicked off the 2012 election for many Angelenos.  If the legislature, the Metro Board and the L.A. County Board of Supervisors let it happen, L.A. County residents will have a chance to vote on extending a thirty-year half-cent sales tax that would allow Metro to build more and better transit projects now. The longer a sales tax, the easier it is to borrow against.  Via press release, the Mayor released a list of projects that would be accelerated and expanded by what is being billed “Measure R+.

  • Green Line to LAX would open 10 years sooner (2018)
  • The Subway to Westwood would open 13 years sooner (2023)
  • The Green Line extension in the South Bay would open 17 years sooner (2018)
  • Gold Line to Whittier or El Monte would open 15 years sooner (2020)
  • A new project in Southeast LA County – the West Santa Ana Branch – would open eight years sooner (2019)

Read more…

No Comments

Daily News: More Measure R Funds for Bikeways

The Daily News, which still appears to be the conservative alternative to the Los Angeles Times in many respects, published an editorial earlier today calling on the L.A. County Board of Supervisors to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to bicycle planning.  The message: it’s not enough just to pass a bike plan, how about spending some of your own transportation dollars to make it a reality.

Click on the image to see the plan.

For too long, those doling out transportation dollars have given preference to projects that benefit motorists, ignoring projects that would encourage use of alternative and environmentally friendly alternatives such as human-powered bikes and scooters…

County officials absolutely should tap Measure R for the bike plan. Voters endorsed the half-cent sales tax in order to build projects that can ease traffic and offer community alternatives. This is one of the few that comes with a small price tag.

Measure R is expected to raise $40 billion over 30 years. Surely there’s a few hundred million for building the region’s first system of bike-riding routes.

Earlier this week, the Supes passed the county’s own surprising-progressive bike plan which includes over 237 miles of bike lanes, 23 miles of bike boulevards (not “bike friendly streets”) and 832 miles of total bikeway improvements in the unincorporated portions of Los Angeles County.

While it’s unlikely that the Metro Board of Directors will make a change to the Measure R funding scheme, the Daily News’ editorial could be an important tool for bike advocates making a case for a portion of the funding pie in any “Measure R+” sales tax measure that goes on the ballot this fall.


Move L.A. Hosts “L.A. on the Verge” This Friday, What Would You Do with Measure R+

The current "Measure R" map.

Is Los Angeles on the “verge of a transit breakthrough” as Move L.A. states in the promotions for Friday’s all day conference featuring Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other political leaders, labor organizers and environmental groups? Or, is Los Angeles decades away from fulfilling the dream of a workable rail system promised by Measure R?

For more on Friday's conference, click on the image.

If you talk to Denny Zane, the executive director of Move L.A., the county is on the verge of something big, but if politicians and voters don’t act quickly we might be years away from real change.

“Now is not a time to get shy. We are at a transformational moment, and votes have shown they are ready to make a transformational investment in the economy,” Zane states.

He’s talking about what transportation watchers are calling “Measure R+,” a possible extension of the Measure R sales tax passed by voters in 2008 that helps fund Metro operations, a slew of highway projects, 12 transit expansion projects, and “local return” to help municipalities with their own transit projects. Before such a plan could go to the voters, it would need the blessing of the legislator, Governor, Metro Board of Directors and L.A. County Supervisors. Even then it would take a 2/3 vote of the electorate to pass the measure.

Seem like a long shot? The odds of passing Measure R were even longer in 2008. After all, an extension of the 30 year tax doesn’t add an additional burden to today’s taxpayer, but to people paying taxes thirty one years from now. If it seems unfair to dedicate decades of taxes to people not even born, it seems doubly unfair to leave the next generation with a transportation system in shambles. Read more…

No Comments

The Mayor’s Office, Measure R and Multiple “Plan B’s”

When the Mayor and his staff in city hall say that nothing is off the table when it comes to accelerating project development and construction for the transit projects funded by the Measure R sales tax, they aren’t just talking.  While the Mayor promised that there was a “Plan B” if his efforts to change federal law to favor communities that tax themselves to build transit don’t go anywhere in D.C.

Borja Leon. Photo: Mayor's Office

Now, on the eve of announcement of a new federal transportation bill from leadership in the House of Representatives, the Mayor’s office is pursuing three different options to leverage the expected $40 billion in sales tax revenue over the 30 years between 2009 and 2039.  Besides the pursuit of federal dollars, there is also the possibility of asking L.A. County voters to tax themselves again and working with equity firms in China to finance the projects.

Last week, Streetsblog talked to Deputy Mayor for Transportation Borja Leon about the different options being pursued and where the city is in the process.

Plan A: America Fast Forward Née 30/10

Streetsblog will feature ads for the Regional Connector Final EIS/EIR throughout the next 30 days.

“Plan A” is still the 30/10 or America Fast Forward plan to change federal law to reward communities that choose to tax themsleves to expand transit.  If enacted, the Mayor’s proposal would create interest free loan programs that would allow projects to get started earlier and would re-prioritize federal grant programs.  When Republican leadership in the House of Representatives and Democratic leadership in the Senate announced proposals last year, both included major increases in the TIFIA loan program which is a major provision of America Fast Forward.

The Mayor’s Office appears confident that this increase will remain.  ”We have been working with the Federal Government and have a great partnership,” explains Leon.  ”A lot of things have been moving in the last week with America Fast Forward.”

We should find out if the confidence, and Mayor’s lobbying efforts, have paid off this week. Read more…

1 Comment

Metro-City Seek Closer Relationship to Move Measure R Projects

At tomorrow’s hearing of the City Council Transportation Committee, a last-second motion by Councilman Jose Huizar, who also sits on the Metro Board of Directors, and Councilman Bill Rosendahl seeks to create a mechanism for the City to accept Measure R dollars to better coordinate between the city staff and Metro.

At first glance, the motion creates more questions than it answers, so to that end Streetsblog talked to staff with Councilman Rosendahl’s office, the Mayor’s Office and Metro to get some answers.  Here’s a quick F.A.Q. on the motion.

Why does the Mayor’s Office need Measure R Dollars to better coordinate with Metro?

The City of Los Angeles is the largest partner that Metro has.  Metro staff has quietly complained that working with the city can be a tough process, especially when permitting is involved.  LADWP is somewhat notorious for this, although nobody was willing to go on the record.  Having a central contact person in the Mayor’s office to manage schedules and follow-up with various departments

Where is the money coming from within Measure R?

The money will come from the 1.5% of Measure R that is set aside for “Administrative costs.”  The funding will not come from Measure R’s local return and will not impact the funding of any project.

Why does the City have to pass a motion to accept money from Metro? Read more…

No Comments

Q&A with Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel member Allison Yoh

Dana, you left out a key part of her bio. Yoh was also the captain of my (last place finishing) team in the Transit People Transit Race of 2009. - DN

Earlier this week, we posted the responses of Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel member Gary Painter to some questions including several suggested by readers of this blog.  Today, it is Panel member Allison Yoh’s turn.  Yoh is Associate Director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies and also a past member of the Metro Board of Directors. The latter experience resulted in my asking Yoh one extra question I didn’t ask Painter.

And again I wish to express regret at the delay in getting this material ready for posting. As I said earlier, life happens.

 Gabbard: Briefly describe your academic background?

Yoh: I work in urban planning, particularly in public transit. I’ve done research on how transit agencies can increase ridership, the costs of bus rapid transit, transit improvements (operational and capital) needed to increase rider satisfaction, smart card adoption and applications, and different fare structures that could improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of transit services.

Gabbard: To what extent are you a daily train user? Is it you main means of mobility? What other modes do you use (automobile, bicycle)?

Yoh: Transit is one of the modes that I use. It is not my primary mode now, though it had been for over a decade when I first moved to LA in 1999. During that decade, I used transit for a good majority of my trips – to school, work, leisure activities, shopping, and other appointments. Now, I drive or carpool for most trips that are related to getting my child to school, doctor’s appointments, other activities, and for work. I use transit about once every week or two for work and other trips. I also walk. I bicycle/skate/scoot the least.

Gabbard: How long have they been riding transit (i.e. from what age)? Have you experienced outside of Los Angeles, outside of California and outside of North America? Any impressions or thoughts about our system comp[ared to others?

Yoh: I’ve been using transit since I was about 17 years old. I’ve used transit in the Bay Area and in Southern California. Outside of California, I’ve used transit in other large urban areas (New York, Boston, etc.) and also in not-so-large, not-so-urban areas too (Florida). Outside of North America, I’ve used transit in Paris, London (and suburbs), Stockholm (and other areas in Sweden), Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, and San Juan (Costa Rica).

My impressions/thoughts about our system compared to others? Well, the experiences I’ve had run the gamut. One thing I can say is that LA’s transit system can get you anywhere you need to go. We have great coverage. What we don’t have, however, is good reliability. You can get anywhere, but how long it will take and whether your vehicle is on time is another story. I think LA’s transit system would benefit immensely from having a network of bus-only lanes to pull transit vehicles out of congested general flow lanes. It is something that would require far less in capital costs (compared, for example, with rail), it would improve throughput on our street systems, and it would reduce travel time and wait times.

However, such a system would require a lot of political will and leadership, and support from the local governments that maintain and operate the roads. In other parts of the world, particularly in Europe and Asia, there is a strong public willingness to support transit and to make it a viable mode – in terms of giving it priority and making it a convenient way to travel.

Gabbard: What reaction did you have when asked to serve on the panel? Have you undergone any briefings or been supplied with any materials by the agency prepatory to your service? Have you been given an idea when the panel may be convened and how often it is anticipated it will meet?

Yoh: I am very honored to serve on the panel — there were many well-qualified candidates whom Metro considered. I keep in touch with Metro staff on occasion as questions arise. I’ve been told that the oversight panel will draw on advisory members on an as-needed basis, and perhaps on an individual-by-individual basis when certain questions arise.

Gabbard: What further improvements would you make to the present Metro system, if any?

Yoh: In addition to more bus only lanes as I mentioned above, I would encourage Metro to improve the frequency of their bus services, and particularly the reliability of their bus schedules, since buses provide the most extensive geographic coverage in our region. Rail lines have the advantage of operating in their own rights of way, which helps with reliability and on-time performance, and these service qualities are possible with buses as well if you provide dedicated lanes. If Metro Rail is the “backbone” of the transit system, as I’ve heard some advocates and transit officials proclaim, then Metro Bus and Rapid are really the muscle that supports the backbone. I’d put rail only in corridors with extremely high levels of congestion because rail is so expensive to build.

Metro has recently launched a rather aggressive campaign to provide real-time information (via smart phones, internet, etc.) on bus and rail arrival and travel times. I’d encourage them to continue these programs.

Finally, I’d improve the way that we collect and set transit fares to better reflect the costs of providing services and to improve the equity of how we charge fares. With smart cards, we can begin to really innovate with our fare structures through incentive programs, distance-based, time-of-day-based, and mode-based fares that could really transform the system.

Gabbard: Are you excited at the prospect of undertaking this advisory role to a public entity?

Yoh: Yes!

Gabbard: Has your time serving on the Metro Board effected how you see this appointment? In what way?

Yoh: That’s a good question. On the Metro Board, I voted on very difficult choices. There are many critical improvements needed for LA’s transit system, but these all carry with them price tags and opportunity costs. Now is a particularly hard time for transit across the nation as agencies are expected to maintain service levels at a time when people need affordable travel options and yet, it is exactly at this time when revenues to support operations and maintenance are down. LA is quite unique (and perhaps in a better relative position) because of Measure R. There is no shortage of the ways we can make transit better. The toughest work is political.


Q&A with Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel member Gary Painter

All things come to those who wait. In May I solicited input from readers of this blog for questions to ask Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel transit system user members Gary Painter and Allison Yoh. The final set of questions I subsequently e-mailed Painter and Yoh included several that blog readers had suggested. Painter and Yoh sent their responses shortly thereafter. But in the meantime life happened and I had to put the task of doing the final writeup aside until now. My apologies to one and all for the delay.

Professor Gary Painter

Below are the responses of Painter, who as I previously noted is Director of the Graduate Program in Public Policy and Management for the USC School of Policy, Planning and Development. Yoh’s responses will follow tomorrow.

Gabbard: Briefly describe your academic background?

Painter: I was trained as an economist at UC Berkeley, and have been at USC since 1996. I primarily conduct research on housing markets and education policy. My main focus has been on the housing and locational choices of immigrants. I have only conducted one study of immigrant transit mode choice, so my academic expertise on transportation policy issues is limited.

Gabbard: To what extent are you a daily train user? Is it you main means of mobility? What other modes do you use (automobile, bicycle)?

I either take transit or I telecommute. I drive to either the Willow, Norwalk, or Lakewood park and ride, and then take transit in to USC from there.

How long have they been riding transit (i.e. from what age)? Have you experienced outside of Los Angeles, outside of California and outside of North America? Any impressions or thoughts about our system compared to others?

I have riding transit exclusively since 2007. I ride the DC Metro at least 3 times a year, and rode BART daily when living in Northern California. I have also used public transit in Europe. The metro cars and buses are generally not as nice as the other systems. The metro cars appear to be designed for low capacity usage. Read more…


What Questions Would You Ask Daily Transit User Reps. on Advisory Panel to Metro’s Measure R Oversight Committee?

My metaphor of choice to describe transportation funding and policy making is an onion, in which there are a succession of layers representing complexities and multifaceted cross-jurisdictional dimensions. And one cannot be complacent since there are always new aspects to explore and try to fathom.

Passing Measure R was just the beginning. Image:Long Beach Post

For example, in a previous commentary I laid out the history of the Measure R Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee, which per the ordinance (section 8) is composed of three retired federal judges where the Mayor of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles County Supervisors and the “other cities” of the county each choose one of the three. The Committee is tasked to appoint an advisory panel to assist it, made up of various folks representing various professions or areas of expertise.

My intrigue at all this was that the specified categories for members of the panel included “transit system user”. I was curious how Metro would recruit someone to fill this role. There was even a rumor at one point some folks had me in mind. My thought process was maybe Metro would do outreach via The Source and/or the Metro Monthly take one brochure to recruit interested riders to apply. Read more…