Antelope Valley Press: Measure R is a naive scheme backed by naive newspapers!

I'm still collecting editorials from around Los Angeles County on Measure R, the proposal to raise the sales tax by a half-cent to pay for more mass transit and road projects.

The above editorial ran in the Antelope Valley Press earlier this month. It's no longer online, thus you get the old school-type clip. Click on the above clip to enlarge it.

The headline says it all. The Press' editorial board also quotes two paragraphs from The Times' editorial in favor of Measure R and takes exception with The Times' assertion that it's appropriate to spend money where the traffic is the greatest problem -- and not in "far-flung" areas.

The above editorial also tells readers that Measure R "probably" won't offer improvements for the Antelope Valley.

The editorial does not inform readers that the Measure R spending plan would return 15% of sales tax revenues to cities and unincorporated areas on a per capita basis. Over the 30-year life of the tax, that could translate to more than $75 million for a city the size of Palmdale, which has a population of about 147,000.

Metro's spending plan for the sales tax revenues also includes $200 million to increase capacity for State Route 138 and another $33 million for environmental study of the so-called High Desert Corridor -- a new freeway or toll road that would link the 14 Freeway to the 15 Freeway. You can learn more about that long-sought project at the High Corridor website.

The Press' position that the Antelope Valley "probably" won't get anything from Measure R is a fair point and has been made elsewhere -- there are many concerns that Measure R money won't be spent as promised.

--Steve Hymon

Comments

[Tahoe Valley Lines]

The IEA (International Energy Agency) released on 28 October a very sobering report on the oil supply expectations. The imminent problem is 5% annual depletion rate for conventional oil. A running commentary, advised reading for transport planners, consultants & agencies of record, is seen in "theoildrum.com".

The Federal Government at high levels is aware of imminent transport fuel emergency, has on hand Gas Rationing stamps to facilitate gas rationing when supply actually is breached by demand. This has been delayed by economic slowdown, but remains likely in the next year or so.

Newspapers are certainly able to get the info, the term is "investigative reporting", as I recall from Journalism Class. Recent California event took place in Sacramento. Sept. Meeting of ASPO-USA. Association For The Study of Peak Oil & Gas. Try peakoildotnet. Books like Kunstler's "The Long Emergency' are background; James Howard Kunstler has scooped the US print media by several years. Print journalism has too much internal censorship for its own good. Editorial boards are too concerned with advertisors to properly and fairly cover motor fuel threat.

[Dana Gabbard]

It is sad a newspaper would rant and rage while saying "probably", which makes it sound like they didn't even bother to educate themselves on the measure versus engaging in a knee-jerk response possibly inspired by the electeds (e.g. Supervisor Antonovich) who have decried R on various spurious grounds. Parochialism uber alles! Kymberleigh Richards and I in our op-ed the Daily News has posted on its website take apart this entire "fair share:" argument that so many have used to justify why they oppose R: http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_10829264

"there are many concerns that Measure R money won't be spent as promised." I just don't get why this is an issue. For nearly a decade the Independent Commission Zev's Prop A created has audited Propositions A & C and given them clean bills of health:

http://www.metro.net/board/Agendas/2008/04_april/20080414OtherAICAOC_PH.pdf

Maybe this is a symptom of the paranoid distrust that permeates this age, especially given the legislature's propensity to rob money from anyone it can to avoid raising taxes (which is a deal killer when getting Republican votes to pass the budget).

Another factor in R's favor is slate mailers, which R has paid to endorse it "which account for a surprising number of votes" per Calwatch, a regular poster on various local transportation blogs:

http://metroriderla.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=52&page=1 (scroll down, and beware as there is some un-family friendly language used by some of the posters therein)

I just got the Voter Information Guide for Independent Voters from the Lloyd Levine organization [http://www.levineandassociates.com/] and it says yes to Proposition 1A and Measure R--only the campaign for R paid to appear on the mailer. We'll soon know whether this sort of expenditure outweighs the anti-R forces.