Metro, working with Los Angeles World Airports, unveiled four potential station sites yesterday that would link the Crenshaw Line and the Green Line to a people-mover serving passenger terminals. Two of the proposed stations designs are underground, inside the central terminal area. Other proposed station sites are further away, one adjacent to Parking Lot C, which would serve light rail, buses, taxis, ride-share vans and charter vehicles, and another a mile to the east at Aviation and Century boulevards. Wherever the station is located it is expected to connect to an automated people mover that would ferry passengers to and from airline terminals.

Read it in the LA Times.

The Daily News, Long Beach Press Telegram, Pasadena Star News and Whittier Daily News have all published Move LA's Measure J op ed:

TURNING MEASURE J'S DEFEAT INTO VICTORY

Only in CA would 66 percent of the vote be defeat instead of a landslide victory

Losing Measure J by 0.56 percentage points even as it won 66.11 percent of the popular vote was a painful and, frankly, appalling reminder that the ghost of Howard Jarvis still hovers over California. Only in California would 66 percent of the vote be a defeat instead of a landslide victory.

But out of disappointment emerges opportunity: It’s important to remember that Measure J was actually “Plan B” for financing the 30-10 plan to build out LA County’s Measure R funded rail expansion in 10 years instead of 30.

“Plan A” was an innovative federal financing package – called America Fast Forward -- that was a combination of two proposals: 1) the TIFIA (Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act) low-interest loan program and 2) a new class of qualified tax credit bonds called “Qualified Transportation Improvement Bonds” or QTIBs.

QTIBs would have allowed issuers to finance more than twice the dollar value of capital improvements than is possible with traditional tax-exempt bonds, thereby easing demand for financially constrained federal grant programs. Congress considered both components of the America Fast Forward proposal but only enacted the TIFIA program.

Speculation at the time was that the QTIB program reminded Republicans of the Build America Bond Program, surely one of the most successful components of President Obama’s stimulus package. And in an election year Republicans were not willing to embrace anything invoking an Obama success.

But the election is over, and a new dynamic is in place. The transportation bill signed into law last July that included the dramatically expanded TIFIA program was only a 2-year bill, instead of 6 years as is normal, forcing Congress to pick up deliberations on a new bill in the near term.

This creates opportunity for Congress to reconsider the QTIB program, which together with TIFIA would allow LA County to accelerate Measure R without Measure J. After all, the QTIB program is a very Republican-friendly idea – it involves public-private partnerships, allowing private lenders to loan money to transit agencies with the federal government providing tax credits to lower the interest rate. TIFIA, in contrast, is a direct government-to-government loan program.

The Republicans, who face voters again in two years, are going to need a jobs strategy that they can endorse going forward — and a bond program allowing regions across the U.S. to invest in jobs-producing transportation infrastructure construction is a good one.

In sum this could be a good way to turn a sow’s ear — Measure J’s defeat —  into a silk purse by creating the momentum for a successful national program that could finance acceleration of Measure R and provide similar benefit to other regions.

Or we could turn a sow’s ear into two silk purses by recognizing that the two-thirds supermajority requirement for the passage of a special tax really is a perversion of democracy. Here are three observations that suggest the stars are aligned to remedy this situation:

First, in the last session of the California Legislature, Assemblymember Henry Perea, a moderate Democrat from Fresno, authored legislation to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would reduce the voter threshold for passage of local transportation funding measures to 55 percent. He did this at the urging of the Kern County Council of Governments, in a largely Republican county.

Second, Move LA has endorsed this amendment as has Mobility 21, a coalition of seven county transportation commissions and six chambers of commerce and other business alliances including the American Automobile Association (AAA). So not only will this legislation be in play, but we are also ensured of the support of a coalition of transportation and business interests.

Third, at the request of Move LA, Assemblymember Perea amended the bill to provide that, if approved by voters, the measure would be effective immediately. This means that it would apply to every qualifying local measure on the ballot – these measures would only need a 55 percent majority. The momentum that this provision would create for statewide coalition-building and local campaign development is dramatic. No action was taken on the bill last year but it will be reintroduced in January

Last year Move LA participated in a poll of voters in the six-county Southern California region that asked if they would support reducing the voter threshold to 55 percent for transportation funding measures — and 64 percent said yes. It is important to note that those six counties represent half of all voters in the State of California.

It’s also important to note that the vote in these six counties in the race that resulted in Jerry Brown’s election as governor was just 1 percent different than the statewide vote — 52 percent versus 53 percent. In other words, the electorate polled mirrors the statewide electorate, suggesting that voters statewide would also support reducing the voter threshold.

Moreover, the results of this November’s election appear likely to give Democrats two-thirds vote in both legislative branches, the number required to place a constitutional amendment before state voters. And because it would not raise taxes, only allow local governments to seek voter support for taxes at a more reasonable voter threshold, there’s even the possibility of Republican support.

Governor Brown just pulled a rabbit out of his hat with the victory of Proposition 30, for which he deserves accolades from all Californians. Is it possible that Brown, fresh off the forward momentum of Proposition 30 and Democratic gains in both houses of the Legislature, could become interested in a partnership with the Southern California business-labor-environmental coalition that supported Measure J? Would he work with us to change the local voter threshold for new transportation revenue sources?

We are betting on it. And together we could return California to responsible democratic governance rather than the perversion of democracy that is the two-thirds vote requirement. Two silk purses are well worth enduring a sow’s ear.

 

The American Public Transportation Association released a report today showing that nationally transit trips are up 2.6% in the first three quarters of this year. In Los Angeles, ridership on LA Metro's system was up 1.7% in the first three months of this year, with light rail ridership up 13.7% and bus ridership up 0.1%. But Metro noted that ridership in October was actually up by 23% over October 2011, with rail ridership up 23% and bus ridership up 5%.

In Southern California transit ridership is up most impressively in Riverside County, where it jumped 27% over the past decade, largely due to high gas prices and high unemployment. A significant share of ridership in Riverside County is also due to an "any ride any time" program that was introduced in 2006 for college students who pay a small fee and can ride transit as much as they want.

Read more in the LA Times.

 

The LA Times says in an editorial that "California's landmark tax measure is back on the table. And it should be."

But perhaps there's a better framing for a discussion of whether a two-thirds vote should be required for the passage of a local sales tax measure, such as: Should a minority of voters be able to dictate what happens? Or should a "no" vote count twice as much as a "yes" vote? Or should we restore democracy by lowering the voter threshold to 55%?

Read the LA Times here.

 

Denny Zane, Move LA's executive director, was on KCRW's "Which Way LA?" program yesterday to discuss a dilemma caused by the build-out of LA County's transportation system: While transit will help mitigate congestion across the county and the region, local traffic may increase near stations, at least in short term, as development becomes more transit-oriented and higher densities are allowed.

Zane suggested one possible mitigation measure -- charging "trip fees" on new development -- as a way to address the concern that people who decide to live or work near transit often do not use it. Zane said details would have to be worked out but that a baseline number of car trips could be allowed for each residential or commercial development, and a fee charged on trips exceeding the baseline -- these trips could be counted as cars come out of a parking structure or garage.

The proceeds could then be used to fund transportation demand management strategies including the provision of transit passes for people who live or work on-site or at some other site.

Listen to the Which Way LA program here.

That's how the LA Times headlined today's story about the possibility of a campaign to overturn the two-thirds vote requirement for local sales taxes for transportation. Denny Zane told reporter Ari Bloomekatz, that there are many reasons for the defeat of Measure J -- which would have extended the Measure R sales tax for transportation 30 more years to allow LA Metro to finance construction now when interest rates are at historic lows and unemployment is high. Reasons include lower voter turnout compared with four years ago, but Denny laid the blame squarely on late anti-tax activist Howard Jarvis and Proposition 13, which mandated two-thirds approval for local tax increases. "Losing Measure J by 0.56 [of a percentage point] even as it won 66.11% of the popular vote is a painful and, frankly, appalling reminder that the ghost of Howard Jarvis still hovers over California," Zane told the Times. "Only in California would 66% of the vote be a defeat instead of a landslide victory."

Read more.

Denny said we shouldn't be discouraged by the loss of Measure J, because the loss is really due to the two-thirds vote requirement for all local sales tax measures for transportation: "I think (the results) encourage the belief that the voters really want to do this and there will be the right moment in a slightly different environment with slightly different partners, maybe a little bit different program and you'll have a winner," Zane said. "Meanwhile I think we all have to start thinking about how to amend the California constitution to lower the voter threshold to something reasonable."

Metro has not yet decided whether it will place another measure on the ballot. For now, the agency said it is focusing on the projects already funded under Measure R.

Stories appeared in the Pasadena Star News, Torrance Daily Breeze, Long Beach Press Telegram and San Gabriel Valley Tribune.

LOS ANGELES -- Measure J -- which would have extended LA County’s Measure R half-cent sales tax for transportation to accelerate construction of seven transit and eight highway projects -- has failed with 66.11% of the vote. The measure was on the Nov. 6 ballot but the LA County Registrar of Voters didn’t finish counting all ballots until Sunday, when it was determined that Measure J fell short of just 0.56% of votes, about 14,000 votes in all.

Since anti-tax activist Howard Jarvis won statewide passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, all measures to increase local sales taxes require approval by two-thirds of voters.

Denny Zane, executive director of Move LA, said: “Losing Measure J by 0.56 percentage points even as it won 66.11% of the popular vote is a painful and, frankly, appalling reminder that the ghost of Howard Jarvis still hovers over California. Only in California would 66 percent of the vote be a defeat instead of a landslide victory.”

Measure J would have extended the existing Measure R sales tax another 30 years, until 2069, and the longer revenue stream would have enabled LA Metro to secure low-interest loans enabling the acceleration of 15 major transportation projects, which were expected to also accelerate 250,000 jobs in LA County within the decade. Transit projects would have included the Green Line to LAX, Westside Subway, I-405 Transit Corridor and downtown LA Regional Connector.

Measure B1, a one-cent sales tax measure in Alameda County, also fell short with 66.53%, and the Alameda County Transportation Commission has asked for a recount.

The difficulty of mounting successful campaigns that can win the two-thirds vote required in order to raise funding for badly needed city and county services is bringing together a north-south coalition that is interested in reducing the local voter threshold to 55%. The fact that Democrats now hold a two-thirds majority in both the state Assembly and Senate increases the chance that a measure like this could win, as Republicans have opposed it in the past.

Measure J was supported by a powerful coalition of business, labor, environmental, community and civic groups including the LA Chamber of Commerce, Valley Industry and Commerce Association, LA-OC Building & Construction Trades Council, LA County Federation of Labor, Unite HERE, Laborers, Ironworkers, the Sierra Club, NRDC, American Lung Association in California, LA League of Conservation Voters, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, American Jewish Committee, the LA Dodgers, Eli Broad, AEG and many others.

Adds Zane, “Is it possible that Governor Brown, fresh off the forward momentum of Proposition 30 and Democratic gains in both houses of the Legislature, could become interested in a partnership with the powerful business-labor-environmental coalition that supported Measure J and that already supports changing the local voter threshold for new revenue sources?

“I think the answer is yes. And together we could return California to responsible democratic governance rather than the perversion of democracy that is the two-thirds vote requirement.”

 

At a recent post-election debrief at the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington DC it was agreed that the U.S. DOT still needs to focus on finding a sustainable funding source for transportation. It was just last year that the House proposed a 33% spending cut to keep spending in line with revenues, and there was speculation that by 2014 proposed cuts could be as high as 57%.

While many believe an eventual switch to a mileage-based funding system in inevitable if politically toxic, the gas tax is still the obvious solution. Doug Foy, who ran Mitt Romney's Office for Commonwealth Development in Massachusetts, noted that people have to start thinking of paying for transportation like they for utilities, adding that he paid upwards of $2,000 last year for cable/internet, phone and gas/electric.

Read it on DC Streetsblog.

To make up for declining state gas tax revenues, the City of Portland is considering a local gas tax or street maintenance fee. The fee would be added to the monthly water and sewer bills of property owners and would be dedicated to fix the backlog of street maintenance. Two Portland suburbs already have gas taxes of 2 and 3 cents per gallon.

Read more on the Portland Mercury.