Stupidity of Los Angeles MTA

Please read this article.

OK.

There is a clear misunderstanding (or naivete) of the purpose and forces that affect bus ridership on the part of MTA. The article's premise is that bus ridership has been low due to the economic downturn. It goes on to describe how Art Leahy, head of MTA, has decided to cut bus service (he calls "inefficiency") by 4%. But, instead of bolstering his reason of "inefficiency" in the system, he cites low ridership as the reason for cutting bus lines.

Here is my issue:

1. MTA is completely naive to think that state-wide economic concerns are the reason for low bus ridership. I distinctly remember when a day pass was $3, a one-way was $1 and a month pass was less than $60. That was less than 10 years ago. This financial burden is the main driver of low bus ridership. This burden has been the result of high deficits within MTA due to inefficient use of funds, not the economic downturn of the last 3 years.

2. They make the assumption that using the bus amounts to a financial burden. It shouldn't be. Public transit should represent a cost effective, pollution lessening choice for those who cannot afford, or decide not to use, a car. When we link public transit to economic condition, we put a stigma on it that assumes those who cannot afford a car use public transit. And, because LA tacks economic status to car ownership, many (on the west side) look down on those who ride public transit, especially buses.

3. They want to make the bus system more efficient by cutting down bus lines and routes. If you want to make a system more efficient, try to expand the routes that buses go in order to make major transit hubs more accessible. They did it with the orange line in the SF Valley.

Sadly, I am not surprised. This comes from a city that loves the idea of public transit, but doesn't even want to consider funding it through rational means. This means a tax on gasoline. Detractors will complain that CA has the highest gas tax already. Well, the problem with that assumption is that gas taxes go to funding public transit. They do not. They fund roads and highways, of which many are in dismal condition. Our public transit is highly subsidized, and incredibly inefficient and badly planned. This point is emphasized every year when a new LA Times story comes out about inefficient use of funds or transit boondoggles that plague the taxpayer.

In general, the article says a lot about what we are willing to do or say in the name of "economic downturn." Somehow, the inefficient ticket system, the irregularity of schedules, the wrong use of gas taxes, the squandering of funds, the inadequate planning and the general "out-of-sight-out-of-mind" attitude of so-called "green transit" opportunistic, west-side, pedestrian politicians don't do the system wrong. Its all about the economy. Somehow, I think there are other forces at work...