Breaking news: L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa supports a sales-tax hike for transportation projects

I just rode the subway with L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who said for the first time publicly that he would like to ask voters in November to consider a half-cent sales-tax increase in Los Angeles County to pay for more road and mass transit projects.

"I'd like to get a sales-tax initiative on the ballot, but we have to build a consensus on that first. I'm working on that as we speak," the mayor said.

The idea of a November transportation tax has been gaining ground with rising gas prices and increasing public pressure for new transit lines such as the Wilshire Boulevard "subway to the sea" and an extension of the Gold Line in the San Gabriel Valley.

Earlier this month, David Fleming, chairman of the Los Angeles County Business Federation, said that as a Metropolitan Transportation Authority board member, he intends to vote to move the sales tax toward the November ballot. He just wants assurances that the money won't be raided later for some other government purpose.

Villaraigosa has made building a Wilshire subway a top priority of his administration. But his efforts have made little headway largely because of the $5-billion-plus price tag. Congress last year lifted a longtime ban on tunnel work under Wilshire Boulevard -- but the money to build a subway remains a major problem.

Even if a tax goes on the ballot, it remains unclear whether it would pass. Some elected officials in the San Gabriel Valley and elsewhere have questioned whether the benefits of a subway are worth the huge costs. Transportation officials are considering a variety of new rail lines elsewhere, including extending the Gold Line, a second phase of the Expo Line from Culver City to Santa Monica, and a new line along Crenshaw Boulevard.

More later.

-- Steve Hymon

Comments

[Tony Fernandez]

deBeer, why do you think that density can only be downtown? If downtown is too expensive, then you can have another urban village that is less expensive and the jobs can be accessed by a quick train ride.

And why won't a rail system with massive bus and taxi system work for the masses? It works for the masses in London, Paris, and if you need an American example, New York.

You make baseless claims and think that they are true but in reality they aren't. You have no facts, just opinions. You really should reexamine what you think is obvious truth when it comes to land-use, transportation, and urbanity.

[deBeer]

Tony My area has more greenery, more trees, more wild animals etc then before it was built. It is a plus for the local enviroment and economy.

I am not against mass transit, but it has to be paid for in a up fromt and honest manner...not how it is currently funded by lies and robbing other revenue sources. If the politicians and people want mass transit, have them step up in an honest way. We both know this will not happen. Example Tony V and his 1/2 sales ta vision.

You again complain about the poor and rich and hope for a middle groundf. Under our system that will not happen in the inner city. Have you been to London, New York, Paris? What prices for the digs downtown? It will be any different here? I don't thinks so.

Lastly one reason I enjoy driving is I don't have to rely on much to go where and when I want.

On the other hand with utopian mass transit....

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bus27-2008jun27,0,6823618.story

No rail system can work in So Cal without massive bus and taxi service. That being the case , it will not work for the masses. It will for some, but not for most.

[Tony Fernandez]

As for your first claim that people aren't forced to sit in traffic, you know that's false. The Auto City (what we live in) demands low density. As such, inner city areas become neglected (as in South LA) or become ridculously expensive (as in West LA). For many people, they have no choice but to live further and further out so that they can live at a reasonable price. This is an inevitability with the auto city and you know that this is true (except if the city is shrinking and in this case, LA is not shrinking and you cannot change that). LA is a city and needs to thrive as such our city must continue to grow. So people are forced to sit in traffic.

Now, you say that suburbia is a good thing. Well, you know that suburban living encourages auto transportation. Agreed? Well then let's look at the prices for Central Boston (from the Conservation Law Foundation in 1994): bike/walk takes costs 13-14 cents per mile, rail 29 cents per mile, bus 58 cents per mile, carpool 41-43 cents per mile, and solo car 81-94 cents per mile. That price is HUGE for solo commuting and there is no way that auto commuting can compete with rail or walking/biking. But walking/biking cannot be done in suburbs as a real way to commute. So we are stuck with cars.

I could even argue about Peak Oil, but I'm sure that you're in the Fantasy Land that believes that cheap oil will be here forever.

I can argue on a lot more, but you must admit that suburban living is ridiculously expensive, makes our inner cities less and less attractive and is terrible for the environment (in that it paves over pristine land, especially for freeways, requires a lot of exhaust for auto travel, requires less efficient freight travel, pollutes good rainwater that could be used in homes, is not efficient in heating like higher density would, and contributes to the urban heat island effect).

And before you go off on your crusade calling me commie and such, just know that I am not forcing anyone to do anything. I just want funding for the proper infrastructure that we need in this city for its future. I can try to convince people otherwise, but I am not going to force anyone to move out of their homes and into 500 sq ft apartments like you say. I am just defending a more sustainable urban form while you turn a blind eye like a child and say "la la la la la I can't hear you la la la la la." The facts have been around for a long time, you just refuse to listen because you are comfortable with destroying the local environment for children and leaving them in unsafe because of high car use and high car speeds in the suburbs.

[deBeer]

Tony F No one is forced to sit in traffic to get to work. They are free to move closer to their work as you suggest or find a job closer to their home. They can even take mass transit. If they choose not to, it is their choice.

Your comments on suburbia makes my point completely about you and your ilk. It is not about oil, prices or even traffic. It is about dramatically changing the way we as a nation live. You do not like this nation as we are. You want to limit what people have, what they do, where they live, how they live, what they eat, their very freedom...all to fit your way of thinking. Everyone the same. You can say that is not collectivism, but you would be dishonest. I don't have a problem with your views. For at least a little while longer this is a free nation. I do however have a problem when you couch your views as something other than what they are. That is dishonest.

Mass transit has a place in our city, a major place. It is not however the end all. It is also not a realistic replacement for the automobile either as a mode of necessary transportation or as enjoyment for millions of Angelenos. It is also a major budget expense. IF mass transit is so necessary get the powers that be to step up and really pay for it, rather than this nickel and dime (actually 1/2 tax) or snaking the money from other sources. If so many people including Tony V see it your way, it would not take any political courage to propose the real cost of mass transit and the vehicle to pay for it. The people should willingly pay the big bucks to get it done...especially the people who will use mass transit. There must be a reason this is not happening. We both know why that is.

Again as far as suburbia, I don't know what your experience is, but your views are so off, it really is not possible to have a discussion with you about it. For most, the burbs are a great place to live as a community and as neighbors and a needed respite from the problems of the inner city. You can tout your mystery stats, but people know reality. That is why there are suburbs and mass flight from the inner city. Sure there are some moving back. Good for them. I am happy when people exercise their freedom..something you and your ilk cannot stand.

[Jeremy R]

“Collectivism is alive and well in LA. Correct comrade?”
Debeer, you have said some misinformed stuff, but that one takes the cake. The red scare ended 5 decades ago, so just stop with the dillusions already and relax man.

Mass Transit is not a soviet conspiracy. Its about optimization of traffic flow. A city with mass transit and pedestrians has 5 times greater transportation capacity than a city with mostly cars. LA has reached the capacity using cars, and now it needs to become more efficient. Please read the MTA 2001 long range plan for more analysis on this subject, or visit the transit library in DTLA.

The only valid argument you can make is that land use in LA is not set up for transit, and that it would cost way too much money to build a transit system that moves people as efficiently as cars move. I don’t believe this argument, but it is valid.

[Tony Fernandez]

deBeer, you are obviously nothing but a troll. You ignore all of my facts and continually state "freedom." Well I guess freedom means the freedom to be FORCED to sit in traffic to get to work.

And then you get into incoherent ranting about things that I didn't mention. That's a nice straw man argument. YOU describe who I am and then YOU bash that image. It's important to note that I am not who you describe I am.

Maybe if you actually listened to my arguments you might actually see that suburbia is not the wave of the future.

Suburbia: no sense of community, high water pollution, no way to collect rain water and use it locally, high traffic congestion, urban heat island, no parks, MORE CRIME (yes it's true, look it up), etc.

You have been blinded to any truth, as I can tell by your unwillingness to listen to my FACTS.

[deBeer]

Tony F Typical of your ilk you completely ignore what most people want..freedom. If you want to ride a rail car, crowd in a bus, wait at a stop especially in outlying or off hours, walk miles in the heat or rain, go for it. I have no problem with that and in fact welcome it. It provides less traffic on the roads.

You find a way that can fund it along with section 8 housing, Cal Works, WIC, foot stamps Medi care, free breakfast and lunches at schools, HUD, educating millions of children here illegally on and on WITHOUT breaking the pocket book of the people who pay the bills....Have at it. You will not be able to do it.

I have on occasion rode the line and it was OK, a novelty like the monorail at Disney. It will ever suit anywhere near a large percentage of our population, but for those it works for, good.

Of course you and your ilk again do not want freedom or a combination of transportation choices including affordable car transportation. No, you will keep at it until you have everyone living in 500 sq ft homes crowded 50 stories high in the city. Suburbia is your enemy. We all must live alike. Then you may get some semblance of effective public transportation for the masses here in So Cal but at a cost few except your milk will want to pay...either with taxes, fees or by accepting.

Until then it is and will be a pipe dream by those who want this nation changed so dramatically that no one will recognize it.

Your statement about "sense of entitlement" says it all. You can call yourself anything you want. Your words and ideas tell the reality of whom your are....Comrade

[Tony Fernandez]

Also, deBeer, you are hilarious. I am the most anti-Communist person you will ever meet. My dad is a Cuban refugee and I hate what Communism has done there. Your claim that I'm a Communist is laughable. I just don't take a blind eye to facts and realize that we need real answers to population growth. And this does not mean population control, which is what you advocate. And wouldn't you know, that's what Communist China does. Well isn't that interesting. It seems that you show more of the Communist ideas than I do, and you are the one lambasting me for perceived Communist notions. Please, take a look at the facts, and get rid of your sense of entitlement to be able to drive anywhere you want without paying the full price (because gas taxes DO NOT nearly cover the full cost of driving).

[Tony Fernandez]

deBeer, it does not matter that people supposedly want this lifestyle. It is simply not sustainable. Gas taxes may go further, but they do not go all the way, so there goes the argument that roads are the free market option. A gas tax does not cover maintenance and police patrol and it does not cover any external costs (collisions and pollution).

You have yet to refute my argument that rail is cheaper than roads and is more sustainable.

Btw, i am of firm belief that the reason people support roads over rail is because of a perceived freedom given to them by cars (cars only go where roads allow them to go) and the total advertisement dominance by automobile and gas companies. Imagine if transit agencies could advertise like they do. If people were educated in an unbiased manner about the advantages and disadvantages of rail and road travel, then I think we all know that people would support rail infrastructure.

Roads cannot support more density. More people are coming into this city, and we need more density to handle all of those people. Like it or not, we cannot change this fact. So should we build more freeways that will just get filled up with traffic right away and encourage more fringe development (destroying what's left of our ecosystem) or should we build the rail we need which will allow us to handle the influx of people we will see and finally give people an option besides driving?

[deBeer]

Tony The gasoline tax goes so much farther towards paying the way of roads then any bus fare or train ride you pay, it is not even worth discussing the two as anywhere near the same. Those are the real world facts, not the fantasy of mass transit funding.

Just admit this is not about gas taxes, freeways etc. It is about a very small number of vocal people who want to change the ways of life of millions of people who in reality do not want their lives changed.

You want a complete change in the way we as a nation eat, live, control our home thermostats, the size of our homes, not only what we drive but IF we drive, and of course the way we think...Which is ok just be honest and admit it...

Just like the proposed mortgage bailout by Congress where the government will own a piece of your home, collectivism is alive and well in LA. Correct comrade?

[Tony Fernandez]

deBeer, of course the fare doesn't pay for the full cost of riding transit. But does a car and gas pay for the full cost of driving? The answer there is a vehement NO! Gas taxes are way too low, do you have any idea how expensive roads are?

Btw, transit is cheaper in the long run, spurs sustainable development, and is more efficient. The gas and car companies have put the veil over your eyes.

Take a look at this blog post to see that roads really are expensive and that mass transit is the only viable option that we have.
http://metroriderla.com/2008/04/03/exposing-socialist-libertarians/

[Bozo]

It seems like $5 Billion would put a lot of buses on the road for the next five years and let's face facts, step one needs to be giving people an alternative to their cars. That's buses, they could be on the road by this winter.

Once you have the buses, people we have ways to get to and from the trains. Right now, eveyrbody DRIVES to the trains.

[Jeremy R]

"Just remember the added tax they put on your trash pick up for police....only to come back and ask for the same thing again.

It is interesting that you mention this. LA really should ask for a 1 cent sales tax increase, but Angelenos are too stingy to cough it up. instead they give government the bare minimum, and then complain when services are subpar. The MTA has repeatedly stressed that it is under funded, but Angelenos don't care. All we do is piss and moan and complain about conspiracy theories.

I suggest that everyon go to the MTA website, download their fiscal sheet, and short term and long range plans. Listen to their analysis, and then make a decision whether or not you want to fund them completely, partially, or almost not at all.

[Jeremy R]

"Politicians are lying thieves and the mayor is a politician. California voters have approved increases in taxes for transit over and over again, and somehow, we never seem to get the improvements we pay for."

GO to the MTA website. The layout every penny they spend and from what fund. There are like thiousands of buses, they have rail lines, freeway onramps, carpool lane expansions, etc. They are ordering 2000 brand new state of the art buses, and 207 new rail trains.

You think this is free?

Our complex transit system costs money. If you don't know where to get this information, ask you councilmember, or an MTA rep! In the internet age, there is no excuse to be clueless.

[mike]

How about a north - south line in the valley near the 405. We always seem to get the short end of the stick.

[mike]

What about the valley? We desperately need a north/south line (the Chatsworth n/s line is too far west.

We always get short changed.

[DK]

In a recent election the voters approved funding for providing housing to low-income and homeless persons. This has been turned into funding for the areas around the Staples Center. This won't be for the low income nor the homeless.
I'd like a recap of all of the monies that have been earmarked in the last 15 years for improved transportation and how they have been spent. This would include bonds and tax monies. An honest politician would be able to provide this recap and state exactly why more funding is necessary.
I'm tired of throwing money at a problem to be disillusioned by where the money is spent. We have been responsible voters and approved monies for this problem - where did it go?

[deBeer]

Laldava The vast majority of people who use mass transit are poor....many here illegally As far as your mass transit being more affordable, do you believe what you pay to ride actually comes close to covering the cost of your ride? Of course it does not. So others are paying your way...paying by taxes. It cracks me up that people tout mass transit yet they refuse to acknowledge how and where the money comes from.

[Dana Gabbard]

The local sales taxes are audited per an obscure provision of Zev's anti-subway initiative. The money is safe and can't be raided.
http://www.metro.net/board/Items/2008/04_April/20080414OtherICAOC_PH_Item2b.pdf

The Zev measure only applies to local sales tax proceeds. Even rail opponent Tom Rubin has said in public careful budgeting can circumvent the measure. Note that the Gold Line eastside has a short segment underground. And if we need to repeal it we can at the right time. The subway won't start construction for 2-4 years while all the environmental etc is done.

And the San Gabriel Valley should wise up and get on board with the sales tax if they ever want their Foothill Extension to get even a squib of money. Their dreams of millions of federal funds being showered on them is delusional.

[No name]

Politicians are lying thieves and the mayor is a politician. California voters have approved increases in taxes for transit over and over again, and somehow, we never seem to get the improvements we pay for. Same thing with the Lottery. Billions of dollars were supposed to be generated to help fix ailing schools, but our schools are worse than ever.

First thing to do is use eminent domain to acquire the homes of every elected official in the state, paid for by a special fund that is empty. Oops, too bad. When the politicians can get their acts together and show some fiduciary responsibility they get their property back.

Jail would be better, but it's too expensive.

If the mayor were actually serious, he would take money from other funds, get transportation projects built, and then ask for tax increases to replace those other sources.

[richard schumacher]

1. Yes! It's about time. Piddly-@ss wanna-be cities like Dallas have a 1% sales tax dedicated to transit. In LA even 0.5% would easily fund vast improvements, starting with the Subway to the Sea and including things like hybrid electric buses.

2. Zev's law? are you kidding? It will be repealed in a flash.

[Laldava]

Jim and DeBeers - who said transit has to be exlusively for the poor? Its that attitutude that has prevented a coherent system from ever being built in this city. A subway down wilshire could provide a great transit option for a variety of different people. I'm not poor and I ride transit because its convenient as is more affordable overall than driving.

Let's pass this sales tax so long as the funds can't be raided and build a system that can be used by a variety of Angelenos. Also, I agree that a subway would be a huge boon for tourism which is one our largest industries.

[LAofAnaheim]

Zev's law only affects Prop A. Yes, the MTA will still collect sales tax from Prop A, but that money will be used for bus/light rail projects, just not subway. The next 25 years of Prop A & C are reserved for Expo Line, Crenshaw Corridor, and other random projects. So, no, Zev's law will not apply to the new sales tax.

[debeer]

Just remember the added tax they put on your trash pick up for police....only to come back and ask for the same thing again. This will never stop with politicians. Enough is enough. Clean up all the wasted money, crime and boondoggles...Then we can talk. After being "fooled" so many times in the past about where tax money is supposed to go...we can believe them now? I don't think so.

[ngan]

Alex wrote:
"As the article states, as long as the money can't be raided; as long as it is held in escrow EXCLUSIVELY to pay for the transportation project..."

You actually believe that? Every year, there are news about the govt raiding funds to balance the budget when there were clauses to against this. The govt always finds a way to go around that and take the money at will.

The easily way to stop the money from being raided is to not have any money for them to raid!