The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority just needs California Gov. Jerry Brown's signature before it can ask county voters in November to for the next 30 years to accelerate rail, highway, bus and local transportation improvement projects around the region.
A bill authorizing the ballot measure received California Senate approval Wednesday. Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles) wrote the bill, known as AB 1446.
If Gov. Brown signs the bill, the Nov. 6 ballot will include Measure J—which refers to the extension of Measure R, the half-cent sales tax hike voters approved in 2008. Measure R is dedicated to the construction and operation of a specified list of transportation projects, including the , the Gold Line Extension, and various other projects in the San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley and Los Angeles. The sales tax increase is already set to last until 2039, raising a projected $40 billion in that time period. Approval of the November ballot proposal would extend the tax until 2069.
Click here to see the Measure J language Metro plans to include on the November ballot.
The extension would enable Metro to "bond against" future Measure R revenue from the tax, meaning the agency can estimate the anticipated amount of Measure R revenue, sell that amount in bonds to receive that estimated revenue quickly, and then pay back the bond holders when the money from the Measure R sales tax is collected.
In addition to allowing Metro to build transportation projects sooner than originally planned, relying only on local funds to do so, AB 1446 would also create jobs for local construction workers building those projects.
"We need to get these transportation projects underway now," Feuer said in statement. "By passing AB 1446, we are empowering L.A. County voters to jumpstart 160,000 jobs and break through traffic congestion that chokes our region."
To read AB 1446 in full, click here.
We want to know what you think, readers—are you willing to continue to pay a higher sales tax to fund transit projects? What do you think of the projects that the county has planned? Do you think the investment in transit will ultimately pay off? Vote in the poll and leave your opinion in the comments below.
">consistently</a> use the other lines that already exist. Or are we the many, going to be paying taxes so the few have a cheaper easier less stressful commute? I know none of the current or proposed lines can take me or my family to any location we frequent, not work, school, extra curricular activities, entertainment, etc.
As a result of the MTA's opposition, Antonovich is cooking up a scheme to divert highway money generated by Measure R for rail extension in the San Gabriel Valley. The biggest problem is that this scheme will only ALLOW funds to be diverted. The actual allocation of funds must be APPROVED by the MTA board, composed of several seats with Los Angeles interests. This only invites more deal making and a furtherance of the Byzantine way important projects are handled in this area. The Gold Line has an average daily ridership of 47,000. The project stands by itself as a testament of success, despite Los Angeles attempts to take all Measure R funding and decry mass transit usage outside its corporate city limits.
B) the Metrolink figure (and Metrolink is a much smaller feature of this spending) is beyond nonsensically fictional. Source? C) Every-time you park your car and don't pay for it, you are receiving a subsidy, a very substantial one. Even though I don't own a car, every time a driver parks their car for free I am helping pay for their privilege. Transit users at least pay a fee on every trip, but drivers get free (but not really because someone is paying for it) real-estate for storing their land use gobbling machines for the majority of vehicle trips, and even when parking is charged, it is typically below market rate. D) Whether you can use transit or not because of loads you carry, it's better if more people who can do, so they are not competing for limited road space and parking with people who do drive. Traffic is a system and social issue of many components, with indirect benefits and consequences for all. E) "Even if the rider paid 25% of the cost it's a start. " Fare box recovery for riders paying directly is already 25%-30% of LA Metro costs.
7:49 pm on Wednesday, August 22, 2012 And you base your conclusion on what? So are you saying that only Occupy/Democrats should be the ones posting comments?? Comment_arrow Andy Krinock 12:22 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012 Common sense does not make one a member of any group" I take this all as tacit agreement that what I've pointed out is true.
Take a little time to actually be in the world of people, and a little less time promoting your website MYTICKETRESCUE. You've been already tagged as inappropriate for the SPAM (read: free advertising).
I do believe most public sector employees are down to earth, hard working and the brunt of undue criticism. The items you mentioned may be isolated; however, I can tell you as a business owner I was forced to pay people less (not more), I had to lay people off for lack of work, I had to reduce and finally eliminate health care due to government regulations. We had no annual step raises. My biggest complaint is the unrealistic job security afforded public employee union members. When there is no money a private business either goes out of business or cuts costs. Public sector just keeps rolling along and unfortunately, government costs are somewhere around 70% payroll. Public employment has become an entitlement program that we cannot afford.
It might not actually be graft that leads to great contracts, from the union point of view. It might just be that the officials who negotiate the public union contracts on behalf of the public agencies they represent have no skin in the game. One reason the entertaiment union negotiations are protracted is because the union contracts effect studio, network and producers' bottom line and the financial impact is felt immediately. (Please note that I support the enterainment unions 100% and the funds that are in invested for the benefits the entertainment unions provide are very well managed.) The generous benefits for members of public worker unions are causing a financial drain on public coffers because the benefits are paid directly from tax revenue, not the investment of monies paid to the union benefit funds by employers.
1) Meaningful reform of public pensions and work rules. 2) Prop 13 reform.
It's like dropping change into a bottomless pit. With the Miramar, 6 story building on 6th St., Apt. buildings downtown with locked parking spaces added for'developers' perks? Do you trust "them" to stop their behavior?
Not to mention the valley alwyas gets screwed in these deals westside and downtown get a subway we get a busway Just remember "ITS NOT PUBLIC SAFETY, ITS PENSION SAFETY
"No on Measure J"