Subway to the sea: Worth a half cent sales tax hike?

Would you pay an extra half cent in sales tax to fund the subway to the sea? That seems to have been the hot topic of discussion at "It's Time to Move L.A.!" the mass transit funding conference held Thursday. Steve Hymon of the L.A. Times reports that several key politicians -- including Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and county Supervisors Yvonne B. Burke and Zev Yaroslavsky -- said they may support raising our county's sales tax rate to 8.75%.

While the subway to the sea idea to extend the subway down Wilshire Boulevard has widespread support, the project -- expected to cost $7 billion according to Villaraigosa or $5 billion according to Metro -- isn't funded. As Hymon reports, federal funding isn't likely to meet the demands, because $1.2 billion is the biggest award the federal government has given for a single mass transit project. State funding is unlikely too, considering that we already have a budget gap of $14 billion.

Thus, the sales tax hike idea. The Daily News estimates that an extra half cent tax could generate $4.5 billion within 6 1/2 years. (via LAist). However, that money would go not just to the subway project, but also a number of other transportation projects in L.A. County -- so the subway to the sea would still need to find other funding too.

To get a sales tax increase passed, the 13-member Metro board needs to first vote to put it on the ballot. Then, the measure needs to be approved by two-thirds of the voters. Metro did conduct a recent poll that showed more than two out of three voters would indeed support a tax increase -- but that poll seems to have emphasized freeway expansion more than subway funding.

What do you think? Is an extra half cent sales tax worth your getting from downtown L.A. to the Santa Monica beach in 35 minutes?

Update: Here's the vote tally!

Top photo by Cathy Cole via Flickr; bottom image courtesy of Metro

Comments

[Hugh Jorgan]

Hat, maybe something should be explained to you. The term "freeway" does not refer to something the average Joe gets to use at no charge. It is a misnomer for Limited Access Highway, that is "free" of cross traffic.

Gasoline taxes, and vehicle registration are a couple of user fees dedicated to highway upkeep and construction. Don't want to pay the user fee - don't drive a car. A sales tax to pay for a subway means that when you dine out, buy a new computer, or even rent a car, you will be subsidizing the subway.

The real difference is that the highways are used by all - commercial, government, and private - and everyone that uses the highway pays. A subway is not going to be used to move your new PC from the port to Frys Electronics, but you'll pay a Subway Tax just the same.

A better way to finance the subway is to let a private company build it, operate it, and charge a fare for using it. Look at the toll roads in OC; tolls keep rising, but the lanes are filled because the users get what they want - and the lanes were not built using tax payer money (though the State finally did buy the lanes).

[ZT]

I don't live downtown, but up in Los Feliz and I skirt Santa Monica whenever possible because the 10 is awful on weekdays AND weekends. One hour, two hours, sometimes more. Getting there reliably in 35 minutes during traffic time would basically put Santa Monica back on my list and welcome back!

[Paul]

Here's an idea: tax the commuters who drive instead of taking public transportation. Install electronic tolling on the freeways, charge a fee for maintenance and upgrades to the freeways and throw a tax on top of that to build the subways. Not only will the added cost of driving on the freeway encourage people to car pool or take public transportation, but it also spares/rewards those who are currently taking public transportation.

Just please, don't let some private company take over the tolling operation and shave/gouge their share of the income off the top. We taxpayers paid to build the freeyways and pay to maintain them, so why should some private company benefit?

[Stuart KD]

Yes, raise the tax and build the subway-to-the sea, build a light rail on the Orange line to Woodland Hills/Topanga Canyon and extend the Gold Line to Pomona. Then roll back the tax. Why not put a time-limit on the tax increase. Two, three, four years maximum then roll it back. Take the money from the tax and put it into a transportation fund. Don't use it for anything else. I think most Los Angeles residents will agree, we need a comprehensive rail system in the city. But don't keep taxing us ad infinitum. Take what you need and thats it. If the city and the mayor proposes a limited-time tax increase, most of us will vote for it.

[sheila]

how about a tax on cheap, polluting, long-distance, unsustainable and/or sweatshop goods only? fair trade, organic local goods exempt! also a tiered property tax, automobile tax and utility system where over-consumers, gas-guzzlers and mcmansions subsidize programs like the subway as an offset to their dreadful environmental practices?

people need to change their thinking and behavior, so making polluting expensive, and calling attention to it via specific taxes will pay for a subway AND make people either think twice before behaving unsustainably, or at least make them pay for something beneficial.

win/win.

[Saul]

Some of you can be so selfish why should i pay a extra .5 sales tax if i won't use the metro blah blah. Well Rot in your car in bumper to bumper traffic.

[Matt]

It is very sad to see how myopic the citizens of Los Angeles still can be. Public transportation is going to be an absolute necessity, not a luxury, in the coming century. As much as Los Angeles was founded on the suburban American dream, that city no longer exists, and what stands in its place is a vibrant multi-cultural metropolis. But the quality of life will continue to deteriorate as the traffic continues to increase. If anything this board shows that people (and specifically Angelenos) can be so self-centered that if they cannot see the direct benefit, they feel its not their problem. I only hope that the mayor and the County Board of Supervisors have the backbone to do what is right for the future of our city.

[Bill C.]

From Hugh Jorgan:

"Think it's cheaper to ride public transportation? Let's eliminate the public transportation subsidies, then determine the true cost of riding the train or the bus. Without the subsidies, no one in LA would ride the bus or the train."
..........
"A better way to finance the subway is to let a private company build it, operate it, and charge a fare for using it. "

From my understanding of Jorgan's posts, if a private company builds and operates the subway without the sales tax subsidy, then the higher non-subsidized fares will now deter people from taking public transportation. Well then...wouldn't this defeat the purpose of having the subway in the first place? Or is Jorgan an expert at subway construction and knows that a private company can build the subway at half the cost of a public authority and fares would actually be near where they are now even without the sales tax subsidy. I highly doubt this, so lets not build the subway and have everyone traumatize Jorgan further by being single occupant car drivers clogging up the streets and freeways further lengthening his commute and polluting the precious air that he apparently doesn't value over paying a higher sales tax or toll for.

Manu, thanks for the insightful post about the other benefits a subway may generate for those who will never ride the subway but will drive the less congested streets and freeways.

[Jeff]

It's really tiring to see people say "why pay for something I won't use?" and "why more taxes." This city has no choice but expand public transport. We will be gridlocked with traffic in a matter of a few short years.

Does everyone understand that our economy runs (allowing you to collect a paycheck) because people of all incomes spend money? And these people must be able to get to their jobs, get to the stores, and generally get around town to earn and spend money. We live in a COMMUNITY. Not everything we do or spend can be for ourselves.

Were you ever sent a bill for the street in front of your home, or for the police that make you safe? No? Exactly. This is what taxes are for.

And why would upper middle class and rich people pay more taxes for something they won't use than those who will use it? Because the very reason most of them have more money is that they have benefited from a community who buys their products or services. Again, to do so, we must allow people to get around.

Personally, I would prefer income and capital gains taxes to be raised on people like myself, rather than a regressive sales tax that disproportionately affects lower income citizens. But because there's no chance that would ever happen, I fully support this sales tax for something I will never use.

[Sal B]

NO subways anywhere near me, because I live in a poor area [Maywood]. Only the well-off areas get subways, why tax *all of us* to pay for goodies that only benefit the well-off? 8.25% is too much as it is.

Let the RIDERS pay for the "subway to the sea."

[JGW]

Maybe the pro- and anti-tax camps could agree to a sales tax increase that is guaranteed to sunset in 6 or 7 years, after it's brought in enough cash to build the subway extension?

[David in Los Angeles]

YES to the sales tax increase, but make it TEMPORARY - ten years MAX. Orange County did it (Measure M) and it raise tons of $$. Build the subway to the sea, Aqua line to Culver City & Santa Monica, Green Line to LAX, Orange Line to Woodland Hills, extend the Gold Line each way, a new line to connect the Valley to the Westside, LAX, South Bay, and Long Beach, etc etc.

London, Paris, New York, Tokyo, even Mexico City all have SYSTEMS, not the pathetic three or four lines we have, that in the case of the Green Line, go from no where to no where (sorry Norwalk and Manhattan Beach). The fact that the Purple Line ends at Western is a JOKE. Thank you Henry Waxman. Imagine if the Santa Monica Frwy just "ended" at Western. Same thing, only worse, because at least in a car you can navigate surface streets.

We need something VISIONARY a la the proposal at www.getLAmoving.com. You think traffic is bad now?? IMAGINE TWENTY YEARS FROM NOW WE WE CONTINUE AT THIS SNAIL'S PACE OF CONSTRUCTION.

[CarrieCann]

I use MTA daily. I ride the Red Line to NoHo to pick up my grandson. I live three miles from where I work, so I ride the bus (after having spent $75 a month just to park my car at work, PLUS paying for gas). When gas hit $3 a gallon, I sold both my cars, and haven't looked back. I totally welcome the city's finally acknowledging that we need this subway to Santa Monica.

[Dmitriy]

I am anti tax on this. I and many other people will never use it. City is way to big and unless they run hundreds of subway around la, it will never get close enough to any place that i can either catch a 10 min bush ride or walk. As result i do not see why citizens of Los Angeles and other surrounding areas, should be paying this tax.

[markl]

YES....but if theyre really serious about a subway,one that would have much more benefit would be a subway/ lightrail that parallels the 405...doing a 405 subway would benefit every traffic artery and major freeway in LA.And if they cant figure out where to put it they could place it right on the damn 405!It would be cheaper to construct and could be in operation quite fast that way.Also drivers could see what a waste driving is as the train whizzes by them.Its time to give cars the 'back seat'...
Stop expanding freeways.More freeway lanes means accomadating more traffic...More lanes begets more traffic NOT LESS.
YES TO SUBWAY/LIGHTRAIL.YES TO A TAX INCREASE.
The tax that comes without a tax increase for subways is worse traffic and more time wasted in ever increasing traffic jams.

[Joshua Komanapalli]

Why not try taxing automobile commuters for entering that area where they want to build a subway? I travel to London often and pay $16 A DAY to drive in London. I think that would definately MAKE people drive less and use the subway, and if people can afford to drive then they should.

I also know that unless a decent subway is built for ALL areas of LA a congestion charge like that shouldn't be paid.

I recomment the having a congestion charge at around $1 a day per car and $2 for a heavier vehicle so that the funding can be built. Eventually I think we would get used to that expense (like we do our HIGH GAS PRICES that increase, when i first immigrated to America, gas was $1.25, now a whopping $3.00/Gl).

The congestion charge can increase ONCE the whole subway system is done for ALL of the area that gets charged for congetion.

I used to drive to BH for work, and I think i can honestly say i could afford $25 a month charge for congestion so the money can build up for a MASS transit system.

I really hope that they build an underground metro for the Los Angeles Area! And please don't increase the tax, God knows you wont decrease it once the funding is over.

[ellen]

I would absolutely support this. On so many levels, we need viable public transport.

[Are you kidding]

This is another boondoggle. A few loud do gooders wanting to feel good about their lives. Tax tax tax is the solution for their pet projects They complain about how the so called free---ways are built. Ever heard of the gasoline tax? The same tax the politico dregs have siphoned off by the billions to pay for non transportation projects?

It will never end with you folks. If you really want to save this land...this land with limited resources...like water...control the population!

We have millions of people who don't carry there weight..Many from foreign lands that are here illegally. They suck up much of the money for your rail lines projects. As long as we have a ever increasing flow of these people and their spawn, you will NEVER be able to keep up...no matter HOW much taxes you steal from the working people and so called wealthy.

The taxes for these projects are seldom spent where they are supposed to be. They are seldom if ever rolled back.

This is going to be any different? LOL

[Nel Ivancich]

Since I live out of the L.A. area I wouldn't be a frequent user of the Subway-to-the-Sea. Yet, I'd happily give a half a cent per dollar to fund a project which will relieve the stasis which we erroneously call "traffic." I'd like to see another subway arm going to San Pedro at the Los Angeles harbor.

[Leon Kofman]

The problem is that MTA is thinking too big. Instead of building these grandiose plans and requesting $10 billion, they need to come up with short term plan, like they do in other countries in Europe. If they can get 1.2 billion from Federal Government, then how many stations will that build? Even if that mean expanding the subway to Fairfax, or La Sieniga, then start working on it, keep opening one station at the time, and while you do, ask for future funding.

This way the people in the region will feel immediate impact and will not be so reluctant to approve future funding. Otherwise this will turn into another 15 year project, that will never finish.

[cameron]

I live downtown, and frankly, I would LOVE to use the subway to the sea. It wouldn't work for everything, but it would put things like going to The Grove and hitting other points westward far simpler. I'd be more than happy to walk a few extra blocks if it meant that I could avoid the often maddening gridlock we experience every day. Los Angeles must have effective and egalitarian public transportation system, because the traffic is only going to get worse.

[Are you kidding]

How many of you people have even been to the cities that you brag about their mass transit? Most are a fraction of the size of the SVF alone! There is NO WAY an effective railway system can be built her in LA unless you tear her down and rebuild her..

Once you get one block out each way of downtown or any end destination then what happens? Bus after bus after bus? People walking blocks and blocks? Yeah that will work here. Besides, if it ever gets built, how many riders will be able to pay the fare that actually sustains the railway? Few...SO......More subsidies...more taxes.... Typical...But you know, the well is running dry. the politicos have gone to it far to often rather than addressing the REAL root causes of our problems

Again, this town is not set up like the others...NEVER will be IMO. Sure the big boys are pushing the rail line. You know why? They (and foreign investors) are buying up the older buildings downtown and want to replace them with high rise offices, condos and apartments.

The same do gooders who claim they are looking out for the poor, the illegal's ..what not...will sell them down the drain in a second for this new development. Then what will happen to the displaced millions whom you claim to be so compassionate about?

I laugh when someone posted that this $15 billion boondoggle will allow the poor to be able to get to the beach because they deserve it. WHAT?

Until you solve the over population of this area, everything else is just a pipe dream. There will NEVER, EVER be enough money because too many people are on the low rung eating up financial resources

[Are you kidding me]

"Because the very reason most of them have more money is that they have benefited from a community who buys their products or services"

Are you kidding me? I have some extra dollars because I WORKED my way through college and I work hard at my job. There are millions of us out there. For you to insinuate that somehow I and millions of other HARD working people in LA are making it off the backs of the less fortunate..Well I cannot post on here what I really want to say. Unreal

[angelina]

To state the obvious, the expansion of the subway system to transect West LA would reap phenomenal benefits economically, environmentally and societally, in the long run. You don't have to be an urban planner to figure that out. I don't live in the area anymore, but I would be more than happy to accept a tiny sales tax increase to provide an opportunity to improve one of the most integral parts of Southern California. In Los Angeles, the is a huge issue about parking and traffic, obviously, and turning Olympic and Pico into one-ways just isn't going to cut it. One of the solutions would be to minimize dependence on cars, and this subway system is already doing that in east Los Angeles. I have seen it and dealt it. It CAN work in west LA, even if it lis ess dense than its eastern counterpart.

The nay-sayers are driving down society's morale and letting the city keep its bad habits. Yes, it would take many years to build this Subway to the Sea and yes, you may or may not live to see it work to its full potential. This is probably why you also feel it's okay to be wasteful with energy and resources -- because you won't live long enough to truly suffer from it personally. Well if there is a hell, that's where you're headed and I hope you enjoy the subway-free, gridlocked shi*fest.

[J from Pasadena]

I'd rather fall from the sky in a monorail than be buried underground in a subway. And that is exactly what will happen if you examine the history of MTA subway construction in Los Angeles. Cost overruns. Poor budgeting. Construction errors. Shoddy planning. All in earthquake land. The Red Line is a death trap in my estimation since I remember the concrete walls were poured so thin they had to be reinforced with steel plates -- a tidbit that was discovered after the fact. It was the West Coast Big Dig when it was built so why would we let the MTA make this mammoth mistake again? That would be the true definition of stupity.

A real (and much lower cost) alternative would be a monorail over the skies of Los Angeles. Plus it would be I believe the only major U.S.city to have such a mass transit system so it would be an instant tourist attraction. Anyway, I'm sure this idea won't be explored since the MTA doesn't like to use good ideas as they would rather overspend, create self-fulfilling bureaucracies, kowtow to the energy and other special interests and just do a bad job in general. (Why did the green line never get built to LAX? Why did the Metrolink trains use more fuel than the commuter cars they intended to replace? Exactly. Get real LA!!!)