Skip to Content
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Log In
Governor Greenhouse

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 thestate budget, there was one little thing they didn't mention: It wouldhave all but eliminated funding for public transportation -- not justnext year but in perpetuity.

The proposal was vetoed last weekby Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, but that doesn't mean it's going away.Moreover, the governor's plan is even worse for public transit; theDemocrats want to keep distributing about $150 million the statereceives from a tax on diesel fuel to transit agencies, while thegovernor aims to get the state completely out of the business offunding transit. The rush to jettison passenger rail and buses as thestate tries to cope with a severe budget crisis counters not only thewill of the voters, who have repeatedly demonstrated that they greatlyvalue public transit, but the state's ongoing crusade to reduce itstraffic and pollution woes...

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

The problem with this shell game isthat user fees have strings attached: They can only be spent on thingsthat directly benefit those who pay the fee. So a gasoline fee couldonly 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.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Los Angeles

Measure HLA Is Now Officially Law for L.A. City

Check the city maps to find what bus, bike, and walk improvements are coming to streets in your neighborhood

April 12, 2024

Metro Releases Final Environmental Documents for Southeast Gateway Line

The new Southeast Gateway Line EIS/EIR doesn't have major changes compared to the draft EIS/EIR released in 2021

April 10, 2024
See all posts