The Battle for Mass Transit in Los Angeles

I arrived at the MTA's public hearing on the MTA's fare proposal to find that the meeting room was already full to capacity. A representative from the MTA announced that as long as attendants filled out a speaker form by 10am they would be alllowed to speak for one minute. By the time I filled one out, 287 people had already done so, which I thought was great. Soon thereafter the lobby of the building became full and security stopped allowing people into the building all together. I left and returned several hours later, since I figured if most of the people before me who had signed up to speak followed through it would take at least 4 hours.

I was among a lot of people who was shut out of the proceedings, so I was unaware that the board was considering a compromise proposal that involved less drastic fare hikes. I based my public commentary on the figures that had been looming before us for more than a month; an $8 day pass and a $120 monthly pass.

I was also unaware that that morning Antonio Villaraigosa had held a press conference to propose an alternative that involved raising fares by a mere %5 annually as well as borrowing. Supposedly he had released a blueprint on Monday, which I was unaware of. Were you aware of it? It wasn't on his website. For weeks the mayor said nothing about the fare hikes. I called his office several times over the course of several weeks, inquiring as to what his position was on this matter, but could not get an answer. For a mayor that talks such an excellent game on mass transit, I found the behavior strange, even disturbing.

I stand by my charges against him. He doesn't have the balls to challenge the anti-tax philosophy of conservative anglo-saxons. It is a charge that extends to the entire political establishment. There is a dragon that dominates society, and on it's scales are written the words, "Thou shalt not raise taxes." For people who want to transform the society, the challenge is to slay that dragon.

The Los Angeles Times has been citing the following statistic: the median household income for bus riders is $12,000. Based on the cost of housing in Los Angeles, it is hard to imagine that a person who earns that much could possibly consume more than $2,000 to $3,000 in taxable products and services. For such a person, a half cent increase in the local county sales tax would represent 10 to 15 more additional dollars in taxes per year. Nearly half of the MTA's budget is already financed by %1 of the local county sales tax, and a half cent increase would logically generate a proportionate amount. After Thursday's vote, such a person will be paying at least $23 more in fares per month by July 2009.

When the most regressive tax of all, the sales tax, represents such a sheer economic benefit to the poorest people of the society, it is time to slay the dragon. The ecological catastrophe we are facing as well as the inevitable, predictable, escalation in fuel prices and the possibility of fuel shortages should motivate us to do so. Our radical dependence on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation does not make sense either from an ecological point of view or an economic point of view. According to this Yahoo article citing the Government Accountability Office, the increase in U.S. gasoline prices this year has cost consumers an extra $20 billion, or about $146 for each passenger car. Complaining, handwringing and demonizing oil companies is pointless. The solution to the gasoline crisis is to increase the gasoline tax and fund mass transit. This can be done on the local, state and/or federal level.

For anti-tax people who may believe in their right to consume gasoline gratuitously, I suggest that they join the armed forces and enlist to fight in Iraq to secure oil resources. This Memorial Day, let us acknowledge the real reason why our soldiers are occupying a foreign country.

Before Thursday's fare hikes, Los Angeles had a mediocre mass transit system. After Thursday's fare hikes, Los Angeles continues to have a mediocre mass transit system. The only way to vastly improve it is through additional revenue through tax increases.

I plan on buying a car soon. I will be happy to pay $4.00 for a gallon of gasoline. How much better the society would be from an ecological, economic, and cultural perspective if people could live their lives to the fullest, as they can in other industrialized societies, without the necessity of owning a car. Unfortunately, there are too many irrational people in our society, and too many people who don't have the balls to challenge these people, and yet other people who are oblivious.

The Disturbing Case of Antonio Villaraigosa

As some of you may know, the Los Angeles MTA has announced astonishing fare hikes. A day pass will increase from $3 to $5 in July and to $8 by January, 2009, and a monthly pass will go from $52 to $75 in July and to $120 in January, 2009.

Not only will these fare hikes punish poor people, the proposal presented by MTA officials works against the declared goals of our society of reducing petroleum dependence, decreasing traffic, improving air quality, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Apart from this, the proposal contradicts just about every public statement Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has ever made about mass transit.

During the first mayoral debate he declared that "we must build mass transit on a scale we've never seen before." The proposal also includes service cuts.

During his campaign he made the claim that traffic costs the Los Angeles economy $11 billion dollars per year. This proposal will surely cause more people to drive.

Recently, during his state of the city address, he said, "We are the impoverished inheritors of a persistent refusal to plan and invest. As a result, we waste more time stuck in traffic. We get less time with our kids. And we spend more days of the year choked by smog."

He is widely regarded as a visionary political leader. He seems to understand that the car as the primary mode of transportation will only provide diminishing results. In one of his earliest speeches he declared, "We are not going to build more freeways in the city of Los Angeles."

In another of his early speeches he said, "You can use public transit. You can get where you want to go. We've got to start to articulate that vision for the city, or this isn't going to be a city where any of us want to live."

The MTA's proposal makes us the perpetuators of "a persistent refusal to plan and invest," and with the predictable results of increased traffic and pollution, contributes to a degradation of the quality of life of the region. For these reasons, it is astounding and disturbing to observe Antonio Villaraigosa's silence on this matter.

Another quote from the state of the city address: "It is outrageously shortsighted to shortchange transit investments in California's most gridlocked cities. "

When we consider how a world class mass transit system for a city like Los Angeles might be funded and sustained, consider how the MTA is currently funded. Almost half of it's budget is derived from 1% of the local county sales tax. A half-cent increase in the local county sales tax would result in at least 600 hundred million dollars in additional revenue. For a person that consumes $4,000 in taxable goods and services in a year, such an increase would represent a mere $20 in additional taxes.

According to the FY07 budget $338.8 million is derived from .25% of the 7.25% retail sales tax collected statewide under the Transportation Development Act. Additionally, $67.9 million is derived from the statewide 4.75% sales tax on diesel fuel and 4.75% sales tax on $0.09 of the state excise tax on gasoline under the State Transit Assistance program. It is the “spillover” funds from this program which Arnold Schwarzenegger is withholding from mass transit agencies.

Earlier this year when the California Transportation Committee shortchanged the county of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa led a diligent effort to claim L.A.'s share and even passed out flyers to motorists urging them to call the CTC and demand L.A.'s fair share. Most of those funds are assigned for roads and highways. There is no such effort by Antonio Villaraigosa on the part of mass transit.

That 28% of California's population resides in Los Angeles county gives the region the power and influence to shape the transportation policy of the entire state of California. A mere 10 cent increase in the gasoline tax dedicated to mass transit would result in revenue of $1.6 billion annually. Even the Los Angeles Times recently suggested that the gasoline tax should be raised or indexed to inflation.

As we can see, there are numerous options for Los Angelenos to consider regarding how to increase funding for mass transit in the region with the aim to vastly improve it. As the political leader of the region and gubernatorial hopeful, Antonio Villaraigosa has the opportunity to boldly lead the transformation of the region's transportation system, and even that of the entire state, but instead he lacks the balls to challenge the philosophy of conservative anglo-saxons which opposes any and all tax increases. A tax increase for the purpose of funding mass transit would help our society fulfill its declared goals, as well as help regulate the price of gasoline by relieving demand.

The number to the mayor's office is 213-978-0600. Perhaps the reader will be interested in encouraging the mayor to either find his balls or his principles and to state a position on the MTA's proposed fare hikes that is consistent with the declared goals of our society as well as his own public statements.

Villaraigosa: I Am Responsible
When a mayor makes hiring 1,000 more police officers an integral part of his platform, and the city's police force fucks up as bad as it did this past Tuesday, their shit can smear his face and make him look like a traitor to his people.

To prevent this, and of course, in order to repair the relationship between the police and the community, the mayor has visited churches, attended civic events, and even ate tacos in MacArthur park according to The Los Angeles Times. The people have received him with a lot of affection according to this article in La Opinion which mentions a mayor which kisses babies, hugs women, and pats men on their backs. He even makes speeches in Spanish.

Here are some of the statements he made according to La Opinion.

"I am responsible. Like every Angeleno, I am profoundly and personally worried about the events of May 1st. They hit me hard."

"What happened on May 1st was wrong, and as mayor I am here to work as hard as possible to correct it."

According to another article in La Opinion, " I came to this church because it is the closest one to MacArthur Park. I came to tell this community, to my people...that I know that in these times we pray for peace, but we also pray for justice, because without justice there is no peace."

"What we saw on May 1st is unacceptable, it's something which cannot happen, and I pledge to you that I will make sure that people assume responsibility for this, because our community has the right to march and to demonstrate."

The truth, I am impressed. I don't doubt that he is sincere. I know I supported him for mayor for a good reason.

I wish he would do as good a job discussing, repudiating, and suggesting alternatives to the MTA's atrocious fare hike proposals. Such proposals are against the declared goals of our society of reducing petroleum dependence, reducing traffic, improving air quality, and reducing green house gas emissions. They are even against everything he's ever said about mass transit and reducing traffic. His silence on this issue is astonishing and at this point it can only be interpreted as a tacit endorsement. I ask myself, where is the Antonio Villaraigosa that makes brilliant speeches when it comes to this issue? Where are his balls? Where are his principles? Anyone can condemn what happened on May 1st. His charisma will not benefit us when we face unnecessarily exorbitant fares.

May 1st, Koreatown Is Transformed Again



On May 1st, 2007 the afternoon march that began on Vermont and 3rd on behalf of immigrant rights made its way down Vermont Ave. transforming the neighborhood of Koreatown, although marginally. Whereas last year's march took up the entire width of Wilshire Blvd., this year's march was confined to the sidewalk. Also, only a fraction of businesses closed, whereas last year the vast majority of businesses in the neighborhood closed.

Unfortunately, the rally which followed the march at MacArthur Park ended with the LAPD firing rubber bullets at the assembled crowd. From what I perceive and I was there but left shortly before it happened, the LAPD and the perspective of conservative white people which they represent, could not stand to see people which they regard as not having a right to be here gathered in a park. A place which on any given day is filled with people regardless.

May 1st, Koreatown Joins


This is footage from last year's historic economic boycott and afternoon march. For one afternoon, the Koreatown neighborhood was transformed.