To consolidate, disseminate, and gather information concerning the 710 expansion into our San Rafael neighborhood and into our surrounding neighborhoods. If you have an item that you would like posted on this blog, please e-mail the item to Peggy Drouet at pdrouet@earthlink.net

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Metro's Measure J Would Speed Up Transit Projects, Bill Taxpayers Through 2069

Proponents say the measure would speed up job creation and construction on long-planned transportation projects, but opponents call it a "blank check"

Measure J: Speed Up Work, Bill Taxpayers 'Til 2069
 Metro says its Measure J would speed up transportation projects listed in pink by allowing the agency to take out loans earlier and begin work within five years, instead of 20, as originally planned.

By Melissa Pamer
|  Wednesday, Oct 24, 2012  |  Updated 4:21 PM PDT


Metro wants Los Angeles County residents to pay a half-cent sales tax for 30 extra years so the agency can more quickly complete work on a bevy of promised transportation projects, while taking advantage of current low interest rates and reduced construction costs.

Measure J, which requires approval of two-thirds of voters Nov. 6, would extend by three decades the nearly identical Measure R, approved by voters in 2008. The latter measure is now set to expire in 2039.

The proposed tax extension is intended to speed up construction of expanded rail lines, and freeway and street improvements that were planned under Measure R, and it's being sold as a measure to reduce traffic and create jobs.

Work would start within five years instead of 20, as originally planned.

Proponents of Measure J cite an analysis from the Los Angeles Economic Development Corp. (PDF) stating the Measure J would acclerate hiring for more than 400,000 new local jobs.

"Voters across the county agree that everyone benefits from traffic relief; everyone benefits when we put people to work," said Matt Szabo, a former LA deputy mayor and now executive director of the campaign's Yes on Measure J Committee for Jobs and Traffic Relief.

Opponents call the measure a "blank check" that would shift the financial burden of transportation projects to a future generation, with the tax hike set to continue until 2069. And they dispute the jobs figures, while arguing the list of projects benefits the city of LA more than other areas.

"It's very LA city-centric," said Tony Bell, spokesman for county Supervisor and Metro board Chairman Mike Antonovich, who opposes Measure J and opposed Measure R. "We have 88 cities and unincorporated areas … They're not getting their fair share."

Szabo disputed that, noting projects in the South Bay and San Gabriel Valley.

The measure would create no new projects, but a list of projects promised in Measure R would be accelerated. Those include:
  • Green Line extension to LAX and through the South Bay
  • Gold Line extension farther east into the San Gabriel Valley
  • The Westside Subway Extension
  • A still-undetermined rapid transit option through the Sepulveda Pass
  • The Regional Connector, which will link the Blue, Expo and Gold lines
  • Improvements to the 5, 91, 110, 405 and 605 freeways
Some projects depend on federal funding for completion - a fact that's been highlighted by critics of Measure J.

Proponents of the sales tax extension say the security of revenue in the future will allow Metro to take out bonds now at lower interest rates and not begin paying them back till 2039.

"We will be able to advance these projects at an extraordinarily low cost," Szabo said.

County supervisors Michael Antonovich and Don Knabe oppose the measure, as does LA City Councilman Bernard Parks.

They're joined by the Bus Riders Union, which has disapproved of Metro's emphasis on rail, and the Beverly Hills school board, which battled with Metro over safety concerns about the Westside Subway route.

The opposition group has a "grass-roots" campaign, compared to the well-organized and well-funded Yes on J effort, which just started airing television commercials.

Supporters include a coalition of business, environmental and labor groups, with LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – the self-described "transportation mayor" – as a champion.

Measure J is projected to cost an average of about $25 per person annually, and is expected to generate some $90 billion between 2039 and 2069, according to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

It was polling close to the two-thirds vote margin, according to a Yes on J internal poll released in September. Measure R passed with 67.9 percent of the vote in 2008.

Beverly Hills City Council Refuses to Join Rainbow Coalition to Defeat Measure J


 Last night, four members of the Beverly Hills City Council blew a golden public relations opportunity -- and refused to approve a strong anti-Measure J resolution. The initiative seeks to extend a recent half-cent L.A. County sales tax hike for another 30 years to 2069.

Instead, the Beverly Hills Courier reports, City Council members Willie Brien, Julian Gold, Lili Bosse, and Barry Brucker approved a wishy-washy resolution to "not take a position in support of Measure J," with Councilman John Mirisch the lone dissenter.

"Not supporting something is not the same as opposing it," Mirisch said. "This doesn't address the civil rights, social justice or spending (issues)."

So here's the back story. It may seem a little complicated, but we'll try to keep it simple.

You see, many people in Beverly Hills don't want the Westside subway to be built underneath the Beverly Hills High School campus -- Beverly Hills Unified board members are concerned that they won't be able to push through a long-planned renovation project at the campus if a subway tunnel is there.

The Measure J money, which is an extension of Measure R, which voters approved in 2009, will help fund the Westside subway. So it would make sense for Beverly Hills officialdom to oppose Measure J.

Now over the past year, pro-Westside subway factions are steamed that Beverly Hills has been putting up such a fight to stop the subway, which includes a couple of lawsuits.

Those critics have been hitting Beverly Hills hard, saying the city isn't so much concerned about the
renovation project but with the prospect of having a certain "element" come into Beverly Hills via the subway.

But here was the golden opportunity for the Beverly Hills City Council.

A kind of rainbow coalition has formed to oppose Measure J, with an assortment of black, white, and brown folks, Democratic and Republican, rich, poor, and middle-class trying to stop the ballot measure.

Everyone from the Bus Riders Union, the Crenshaw Subway Coalition, Beverly Hills Unified School District board members, Northeast L.A. Residents Against Measure J, Union de Vecinos of Boyle Heights, Congress of Racial Equality-CA, and La Basta of East Los Angeles are officially against Measure J.

Even Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, a Republican who represents the more conservative northern sections of L.A. County, has joined the No on Measure J fight.

They all have their different reasons, but they're all peeved at Metro board members, who want more county sales tax money to supposedly build more transportation projects.

Last night, Beverly Hills City Council members could have approved a resolution that said in no uncertain terms that they opposed Measure J. They would have firmly joined hands with brown and black folks from Boyle Heights and Crenshaw and negated the pro-Westside subway argument -- at least somewhat.

Instead, Brien, Brucker, Gold, and Bosse took a pass -- and now Beverly Hills looks even more elitist.

To the frustration and dismay of many folks in Beverly Hills, the City Council has long been hesitant to play hard ball against the likes of L.A. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who want the Westside subway to go underneath the high school.

Will Beverly Hills politicians feel any fallout? We'll see. Another election is coming up for City Council members in 2013.

Contact Patrick Range McDonald at pmcdonald@laweekly.com.