Open Discussion: Subway: "...ready to be taxed for a comprehensive subway system?"

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post ""WHY" L.A. traffic sucks #3: Bus'em and clog'em":

So are you finally ready to be taxed for a comprehensive subway system?

Note:
Transit ridership is much higher than people seem to think. At 1.3 million (bus and rail) daily riders that ends up being roughly 10% of the county.

Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 6/01/2006 03:38:54 AM

italianesco replies:

I think this question should be put to L.A. Country voters along with a few other questions. Some of the answers can be gleaned from this article in the L.A. Weekly:

The Subway Mayor - How a bus-only politician — and a car-obsessed city — are learning to love the underground By ERIC BERKOWITZ - Thursday, August 18, 2005 - 12:00 am

Here are some highlights from the article. All emphasis mine:

"Villaraigosa talked of a 'subway to the sea' during the campaign and staked a big chunk of his political capital on a promise to expand the rail system. [...] Villaraigosa took the first step by assuming the helm of the MTA. Now, the question is whether he will have the clout to move the political mountains required to get Los Angeles the transit system it deserves."

HOW LONG will it take?

“'This isn’t going to happen in four years,' the mayor said. 'We’ve got to start building a consensus around a plan for the next 20 years.'"
-----------------------

HOW MUCH will it cost?

"The Red Line’s extension to the Valley was completed in 2000. Jagged as a gerrymandered congressional district, and carrying a milelong spur from Vermont to Western, the $4.7 billion line is the most expensive 17 miles of subway ever built."
-------------------------------------------

WHO will pay for it?

"Riding the swell of frustration, Yaroslavsky sponsored an initiative in 1998 that barred the use of county sales-tax money for subway projects. He described it as the county’s 'last chance' to avoid 'a regional transportation nightmare.' With no opposition on the ballot, it passed. That same year, the MTA suspended all new rail projects." [...]

"Yaroslavsky stands by his 1998 prohibition against the use of county money for underground rail, and he still says subways are too costly. But he’s starting to sound like a cautious Red Line advocate." [...]

"Given that Sacramento has diverted more than $2 billion of local transit funding in the past two years to meet state budget shortfalls, and the Bush administration likely will continue to try to cut transportation funding, the subway will be a budget challenge even if Waxman and Yaroslavsky soften up." [...]

"Transit rider Harris, who has little money to spare, said he would “gladly accept a half-cent sales tax for the Red Line. I’d do it in a second.” That’s good, but it’s probably not representative of the electorate. People meekly give oil companies record profits by funding a 40 percent boost in gasoline prices, but they seize up when the word tax is involved. The voters will need to be convinced." [...]

"Villaraigosa can’t count on bundles of help from Washington or Sacramento. The region was reasonably successful in the recent federal transit bill [...], but money for a new subway project is a long shot even if Waxman comes around. Closer to home, our Hummer-driving governor won’t ever back such a project. The mayor will have to build local resolve to carry a substantial share of the load." [...]

--------------------------------------------
WILL it ever happen?

"Before one more foot of subway tunnel is in place, Villaraigosa and his new rail coalition must conquer the demons that have derailed L.A.’s most ambitious transit plans, even before the smattering of subway and light-rail lines were built." [...]

"Criollo is easily set off by talk of more subways. If Villaraigosa 'advocates for more rail, then we are willing to have open struggle with him in court, in the boardroom and in the streets. We’ll fight him every inch of the way.'”

"So far, the Red Line is nowhere to be found on the MTA’s schedule of priorities. After the Waxman and Yaroslavsky prohibitions, 'it’s not really on the radar screen,' said MTA spokesman Marc Littman. Villaraigosa said he intends to rectify this when the MTA prepares its new long-range plan in the coming months." [...]

"Villaraigosa’s challenge — and it’s a big one — is to communicate a vision that will inspire the city to endure the costs and disruptions of long-term transit projects."
---------------------------------------------

Not to sound pessimistic or to discourage anyone - I'm a believer in public transporation - but sounds to me like L.A. has waited a bit too long to tackle this immense problem. A comprehensive subway system for L.A. is a long, long, long-term project, and even if it were approved tomorrow, it'd be a long, long, long way from completion.

“'This isn’t going to happen in four years,' the mayor said. 'We’ve got to start building a consensus around a plan for the next 20 years.'"

On top of that, you can be sure that the traffic would be horrendous with the disruption caused by all the construction. Anybody pinning their hopes on a complete subway system for relief from the traffic problem is dreaming. I'd say that the city needs to do whatever it takes NOW - NOT tomorrow, NOT four years from now, NOT 20 years from now - to find simple, affordable and politically viable relief, immediate relief, to the traffic problem. Some of my ideas might be a good place to start... ;-) [See WESTSIDE SOLUTION AT A GLANCE]
------------------------------------------------
Read the complete article in the L.A. Weekly: The Subway Mayor - How a bus-only politician — and a car-obsessed city — are learning to love the underground By ERIC BERKOWITZ - Thursday, August 18, 2005. It's mostly a history of the roadblocks to the subway.
------------------------------------------------
Make it viral. Make it vital. Spread the word...