Leaders tout 110 toll lanes, but some motorists grumble
The fares, set to begin late Saturday, are seen as a way of easing congestion on the 110. But the timing of the opening a week after voters decided on Measure J is raising questions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1111-toll-lanes-20121111,0,5497986.story
Ladies and gentlemen, prepare to start your transponders. Or not.
Los Angeles County's first toll lanes were scheduled to go live on an 11-mile stretch of the 110 Freeway late Saturday amid hopes of faster commutes and early grumblings from some unhappy motorists.
The express lanes run between Adams Boulevard just south of downtown and the Harbor Gateway Transit Center near Torrance and the 91 Freeway. Officials aim to keep the lanes moving at 45 mph or faster. Solo drivers will pay an average of $4 to $7 per trip — and as much as $15.40 — depending on congestion and toll-lane demand.
"All commuters will benefit … because the ExpressLanes will redistribute and clear traffic across all lanes of the 110 Freeway," said L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, a Metropolitan Transportation Authority board member.
Many academics, planners and elected officials tout the potential benefits of toll lanes. But some motorists already are objecting that government is again dipping into their wallets.
"I voted on a lot less important items last Tuesday than the conversion of carpool to express lanes," said 49-year-old Hans Koenigsmann of San Pedro. "Toll is about revenue and income, and toll roads are cumbersome, inefficient and a step back into past times."
Some have questioned the timing of the toll lane debut just days after voters cast ballots on Measure J, a countywide transportation tax extension. The measure is falling short of approval, but some ballots remain to be counted.
"As best as I can surmise, the date was pushed back to avoid clouding the favorability of the Measure J vote," Ridley-Thomas, who criticized the measure, said recently. Metro officials have denied any scheduling connection between the election and toll lane opening.
Either way, here are a few things motorists should know:
•Anyone who wants to use the lanes, including carpoolers, needs a transponder. They cost $40 if you pay with a credit/debit card, and that money can be used toward fares. If you pay with cash, the upfront cost is $75, $50 of which can be used toward fares. Discounts are available for low-income households. The devices can be purchased online at http://www.metroexpresslanes.net; at walk-in centers at 500 W. 190th Street in Gardena or at the El Monte Station at 3501 Santa Anita Ave.; and by printing out and mailing an application to Metro ExpressLanes, P.O. Box 3878, Gardena, CA 90247.
•Fines for using the lanes without a transponder run between $25 and $55. Although carpoolers and motorcyclists need to obtain transponders, they don't pay tolls. Transponders must be set to accurately reflect the number of passengers in the vehicle on each trip. Those caught setting a transponder to two people or more while driving solo will face fines of at least $341.
•Those with electric and hybrid vehicles also need transponders and will have to pay tolls until at least March 1, 2014, in order to use the lanes. At that time, they will need a special green or white sticker issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles.
• FasTrak brand transponders from other regions will work here, but motorists will be charged the same rates as solo drivers even if they are carpooling because their devices do not have the same settings.
ari.bloomekatz@latimes.com
The “defeat” of Measure J is being hailed as a victory by the anti-transit Bus Riders Union:
The BRU’s opposition to Measure J wasn’t surprising. They are a highly ideological group, founded and backed by an obscure sectarian group in LA, the Labor Community Strategy Center. Led by Eric Mann, the LCSC burst onto the scene in the early 1990s with organizing against the closure of an auto plant in Van Nuys, and then did some good work going after oil refineries in the South Bay. In 1996, they hit upon a winning strategy by forming the Bus Riders Union, on the strange argument that investing in rail lines was something benefiting the rich at the expense of the low income people who relied on bus transit. The BRU won a consent decree in federal court against Metro’s rail planning, one reason why Metro is only now able to start the big buildout of the rail network LA once had and desperately needs again.
The irony is that if you’ve ever actually been on Metro Rail in LA, you’ll see that most of its riders are just as diverse in terms of racial, social, and class backgrounds as you find on a bus. Metro Rail lines help provide reliable, affordable, speedy transit options for a whole range of Southern Californians. Those factors matter a lot to the working class folks that the BRU claims as their base. At the end of a long day working in the service industry, people just want to get home quickly to their families without spending a lot of money or getting stuck in traffic. Rail provides that opportunity.
As gas prices continue to rise, so too does Metro’s operating costs for the bus fleet. That’s not an argument against buses, but it IS an argument for more rail. Rail’s operating costs aren’t subject to gas price spikes, especially as LA’s electric power generally comes from non-fossil fuel sources whose costs are stable. By providing more rail on the most heavily used travel corridors, Metro can move a lot more people for less money in the coming years than buses can.
That’s not an argument that rail should be favored over buses. LA needs both. And they need people
who will advocate for raising the revenue to fund a robust mass transit system, with rail lines moving people quickly along the main corridors and connecting the stations to other neighborhoods with reliable, frequent bus service.
But that doesn’t fit with the BRU/LCSC ideology that rail is for the rich and therefore must be opposed, and so they continue to try and convince low income voters and communities of color that Metro’s rail building plans come at their expense. It’s a strategy that doesn’t do any favors for mass transit or the people that depend on it.
Of course, it wouldn’t matter what the BRU thought if California didn’t have that obnoxious and destructive 2/3 rule. Prop 30 was able to pass with 54% of the vote because it amended the state constitution. With the tax revolt over as a political force, maybe California can begin to rip out the legal and constitutional remnants of that destructive movement. 64% is a big win and Measure J ought to be law.
You can leave comments on the website.