The Pink Line

Daily Passenger Rail to Palm Springs & Coachella Valley

2012-01-05T12:03:00.000-08:00

Caltrans is sponsoring a study in January to explore the possibility of a passenger rail system between L.A. and the Coachella Valley.

Click Southern California Public Radio news to read

Here are previous blog posts on this topic:

It's About Time...

Let's Extend Metrolink to Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley

It's About Time: Caltrans to Study Cost of Palm Springs area train service

2011-12-22T11:54:00.000-08:00

It's long overdue, but Caltrans is to study the cost of Palm Springs local area rail service.

Caltrans to Study Cost of Palm Springs local rail service

It has been my hope that Metrolink commuter rail would eventually get extended to Palm Springs & the Coachella Valley. Please read my previous blog post about what this would entail.

How do we bring light-rail to the San Fernando Valley?

2011-12-14T10:07:00.000-08:00

On my previous blog post, Please combine the Sepulveda and Van Nuys transit projects into one rail project between Sylmar and LAX, Thomas Piland asked a very important question, "How do we get onboard and get this approved?"

I'd like to expand this discussion to not just have a north-south light rail line between Sylmar and LAX, but an east-west light-rail line between Warner Center or CSUN and Pasadena as well. So how do we encourage Metro to not just dump lesser busways on the San Fernando Valley while the rest of the county gets Metrorail extensions?

Anyone, such as me, can post on their blog a suggested rail alignment for Metro. However, that is not as effective as collection. What needs to happen is organized action. The San Fernando Valley transit advocates who want (at least) two light-rail lines of their own need to not just lobby Metro themselves, but lobby the San Fernando Valley powers that be to lobby Metro themselves.

Let's take these one by one:

First, you want to contact Metro regarding the Sepulveda Pass transit corridor and the Van Nuys transit corridor and state your comment that you want these to be a joined together as light rail project. You may do that here:

Sepulveda Pass corridor - berlinr@metro.net (Renee Berlin, Executive Officer, TDI)
Van Nuys corridor - Vannuys@metro.net (Walter Davis, Project Manager)

You may also contact the Metro Board of Directors and let them know you want Metrorail for the San Fernando Valley.

boardsecretary@metro.net (Metro Board of Directors)

If you want not just a north-south light-rail between Sylmar and LAX, but an east-west light-rail to, the most obvious candidate is upgrading the Orange Line busway to light-rail, which I discuss in this this blog post, What about upgrading the Orange Line to light-rail?. The idea is catching on elsewhere too: Orange Line Conversion to Light Rail: It Can Happen and Orange Line Bridges: Are they strong enough for light rail?

Even if the Alternative Analysis finds there is an even better east-west alignment, we still want the OPTION of upgrading the Orange Line. For that to happen the Robbins Bill needs to be repealed. The misguided actions of a corrupt State Senator and a bunch of NIMBYs twenty years ago shouldn't stand forever. There is an election coming up next year. So ask every candidate for the State Senate and State Assembly in the Valley to pledge to seek repeal of the Robbins bill that bans light-rail on the Orange Line corridor. Also contact your state legislators currently in office, which may be found here:

California State Assembly
California State Senate

Let the currently serving legislators and candidates for election know that you consider expanding Metrorail into the San Fernando Valley is a priority.

Then get involved with your Neighborhood Council and encourage them to support a resolution calling for expanding Metrorail in the San Fernando Valley. The San Fernando Valley Neighborhood Councils may be found here:

empowerLA Roster of Neighborhood Councils

Write your Los Angeles City Councilmember behind this as well as your Los Angeles County Supervisor, all of whom sit on Metro's Authority.

Write our U.S. Senators and Congressmembers to support Mayor Villaraigosa's 30-10 Plan. The sooner Measure R projects are underway, the sooner we can plan beyond Measure R.

Get the business community behind this idea too. Contact the Valley Industry and Commerce Association (VICA) and ask them to use their influence to support an expansion of Metrorail, which can only help their businesses with the new economic activity this expansion would bring.

Please consider joining a transit advocacy group. Southern California Transit Advocates and The Transit Coalition are groups that both support expanding light-rail into the San Fernando Valley.

Just because the San Fernando Valley is late to the game, doesn't mean it is too late for Metrorail.

NOTE: While I live in West Hollywood now, I lived in North Hollywood for six years and still care about the transit welfare of the San Fernando Valley. And, as I believe these two light-rail lines would benefit the entire region, I think it is important for ALL of us in Los Angeles County to support this effort. A rising transit tide lifts ALL boats because it increases connectivity.

Please combine the Sepulveda and Van Nuys Transit Projects into one rail project between Sylmar and LAX

2011-12-12T10:19:00.000-08:00

Metro is currently studying two different transit corridors, the Sepulveda Pass and Van Nuys Blvd. as separate projects:

Sepulveda Pass Corridor Van Nuys Boulevard Corridor

Huh? Two separate transit projects? The Rapid 761 bus currently travels through both of these corridors. The people suffering on the 405 Freeway don't see themselves as traveling through two separate corridors.

These two separate studies should be combined into one regional corridor study that looks into a light-rail project connecting Sylmar to LAX through the Valley, via the Sepulveda Pass, through the Westside. One only needs to look at the always clogged 405 Freeway to see the potential ridership of this project.

Here are some maps of what that project might look like, as suggested by the Transit Coalition:

Beyond the simple regional benefit of this project, there is another reason for transit advocates, politicians and the business community in the San Fernando Valley to enthusiastically get behind combining these two transit corridors to study a Valley-Westside rail project. The San Fernando Valley just isn't getting its fair share of Metrorail. The San Gabriel Valley will be getting at least two Gold Line light-rail extensions.

Gold Line Foothill Extension Gold Line Eastside Extension

Why this disparity? Because the San Gabriel Valley communities, its politicians, business leaders and transit advocates are enthusiastically lined up to get these extensions. Unfortunately, the San Fernando Valley political structure is not as organized or lined up the same manner.

The real danger here for the San Fernando Valley and the region is that Metro will "go cheap" and build two separate discordant bus projects, one on Van Nuys Blvd. and one through the Sepulveda Pass, leaving and countless people commuting between the Valley and Westside with no viable rail alternative.

The issue of financing a rail project always comes up, as it should. Measure R provides limited money for these two studies. However, Measure R as wonderful as it is should not be considered the end of transit expansion in Los Angeles County. We need to plan beyond Measure R too, and think it terms of financing beyond Measure R.

The east-west Orange Line busway was thwarted in the attempts to create a light-rail project initially because of the actions of a corrupt State Senator and a bunch of NIMBYs. (Note: The Orange Line bridges are safe enough for light-rail should this corridor be converted to light-rail as it should have been built in the first place.)

However, those actions from twenty years ago shouldn't condemn the San Fernando Valley and its stakeholders for having to settle for measly and inadequate bus projects while the rest of Los Angeles County gets the option of possibly expanding and hooking into Metrorail.

So if you commute in, through, to, from the Valley and/or Westside, and want to ride Metrorail somewhere between Sylmar and LAX, now is the time to get busy before you have two separate bus projects dumped on you while Metro gets busy expanding rail elsewhere.

ACTION ITEM:

Let Metro know that you want the Sepulved and Van Nuys corridor connected between Sylmar and LAX via RAIL.

berlinr@metro.net      Renee Berlin, Executive Officer, TDI
vannuys@metro.net    Walter Davis, Project Manager
boardsecretary@metro.net   Metro Board of Directors

Why the Occupy Movement Deserves the Full Support of the LGBT Community

2011-12-05T09:46:00.001-08:00

This past Saturday I went to a LGBT rally and march in West Hollywood where we marched down Santa Monica Blvd. and chanted "We are the 99%!", "What Do We Want? Equal Rights! When do we want them? Now!".

Why should this matter to the LGBT Community? Because we are just as affected by broader social-economic trends as everyone else.

One of the lies that anti-gay bigots repeatedly say about the LGBT community is that we are spoiled, pampered hedonists with more than enough disposable income to influence politicians with campaign money that "hard working 'Christian' families" cannot afford to give.

The truth is that the LGBT is just as likely to be poor as anyone else.

LGBT youths who have been cut off from their families are less likely to receive financial support to pay for college and get a higher education than their straight counterparts.

HIV positive men can tell you what negotiating our for-profit health care non-system has done to their finances.

Because of DOMA, we do not receive any of the federal benefits of marriage, meaning gay and lesbian couples are poorer than their straight counterparts.

Anti-gay bigots want to pretend we do not raise children and want no government recognition of our families, and our children are poorer for it -- and not just theoretically.

LGBT around the world depend upon an American government that believes that our human rights are important all over the world, at home and abroad.

Also, the Koch Brothers and other far right-wingers buy and sell politicians to implement economic policies to not only to create a "rigged market" that transfers ever-increasing wealth to the top 1% and their decendants, but also helps to elect anti-gay politicians who will use their time in office to pursue anti-LGBT legislation. Getting special interest money out of politics matters, especially from the bottomless pockets of corporations and the superwealthy who give money to anti-gay politicians, if the LGBT community is to see its inalienable right to legal equality become manifest in America.

While it is true that there are some gay activists who seem to care more about their "access" to the top 1% than actual "progress" for our community and believe we should ONLY focus on overtly "gay issues" like marriage equality. In my opinion, this is a very myopic look at the world. The countries with the greatest social justice (and marriage equality) for the LGBT community (Scandinavia, Canada, Netherlands, etc.) also have the greatest economic justice for ALL their citizens. Martin Luther King, Jr. knew this all too well. Social justice and economic justice go hand in hand -- which is why the success of the Occupy movement should matter to all of us, LGBT and our allies, and deserves our full support.

As the Occupy movement moves from having stationary camps to more organized activism, I implore you to get involved with a progressive movement in rescuing American politics from Fox "News" and the corporate-financed "tea party". The coalition building this encourages will make LGBT equality MORE likely in the future.

Local #7 Big Blue Bus Service worse than ever

2011-12-05T09:27:00.001-08:00

After the shiny new Rapid 7 bus service debuted, the Big Blue Bus cut its popular Local 7 bus service. They said that this would not affect rush hour service, but that has proven to be nonsense.

Local 7 buses are stuffed like sardines during rush hour in a manner far worse than before, when they actually come, and when they actually stop. This morning 20 people were left standing at Pico/Fairfax because a nearly full Local 7 bus decided not to stop and pick anybody up. The last two weeks, the Local 7 eastbound service that used to arrive around 5:20-5:25 pm at Pico/Roxbury didn't show up at all. The next buses that finally showed up 15-20 mintues later were stuffed beyond capacity.

Calls for the Big Blue Bus to DO something about this have clearly gone unheard as the Big Blue Bus probably just hopes that those pesky Local 7 bus riders simply wear themselves out and accept their fate.

This is not to say that the Rapid 7 service isn't a success. It clearly is. The shiny new articulated Rapid 7 buses carrying passengers from Santa Monica to the Wilshire/Western Purple Line station are full. Like a shiny new toy, this service is getting attention from Big Blue Bus, while the boring, sad, old, lonely toy of the Local 7 gets ignored.

I'm not suggesting cutting the new Rapid 7 service. In fact, I support it fully. I wish the buses went to Vermont/Wilshire to allow a one-seat transfer to from the Red Line too. However, what would be helpful is if Big Blue Bus just admitted the truth about the Local 7. They've clearly cut rush hour Local 7 service in favor of the Rapid 7 service and are hoping Local 7 riders either keep quiet or go away.

Cutting Local 7 service during rush hour if the local ridership had declined would make sense. That ridership has not declined. Therefore, I call upon the Big Blue Bus to please, please, please, restore the obviously cut rush hour service on this corridor or at least run articulated Local 7s so that local service passengers can at least get on the bus when it finally arrives.

Halloween's Scary Traffic in West Hollywood and your Transit Alternative

2011-10-31T13:45:00.000-07:00

The Source, Metro's great blog, has a great rundown of traffic snarls due to West Hollywood's annual Halloween celebration, so click here.

For public transit modifications for tonight, click here.

Won't it be great when you will be able to take Metrorail directly to West Hollywood for the Halloween Carnival (as well as the Gay Pride Festival and New Year's Eve)? Keep thinking positively that this can and will happen sooner than we ever thought possible.

Happy Halloween!

Has the Big Blue Bus Local #7 been thrown "under the bus"?

2011-09-15T12:49:00.000-07:00

Has anyone else noticed a sharp decline in the Local 7 service on the Big Blue Bus since the extended and increased Rapid 7 service to the Wilshire/Western Purple Line station was instituted?

Buses come less frequently and are far more crowded. Yesterday, four #7 buses came at once. One woman stated she had waited an hour for a Local #7 bus.

This is not a criticism of the new Rapid 7 service, which seems very popular. I just wish the Rapid 7 now went all the way to the Wilshire/Vermont station so there could be a one-seat transfer to the Red Line as well.

However, as inconvenient as bus stacking is, to have FOUR buses approach Pico and Beverly around the same time last night tells me that something is off operationally. The Big Blue Bus normally runs a stellar service with clean, on-time buses, so this is not an overall criticism of them.

What is your experience on the Local 7 during the last two weeks?

UPDATE:

Things are getting ugly on the Local 7 Big Blue Bus.

On Friday morning, I was riding the Local 7 to work, stuffed to capacity, when an angry older gentleman started saying very loudly to anyone who would hear:

- "They are treating us like animals making us stand. My rapid stop (Beverly/Pico) has been eliminated and now I am twenty minutes late for work every day. I called the Big Blue Bus and no one can tell me why. We all need to write the Mayor of Santa Monica!"

- Another woman said loudly back to him, "they've written off this corridor."

They both complained about the Rapids getting the longer buses while they were standing.

This Monday morning, the Local 7 was LATE, and stuffed to capacity. People were denied entry because the bus was so full, meaning they'd be even later having to wait for the next one. The same elder gentleman from Friday. who was pressed up against the front of the bus was shouting, "We are taxpayers! We are not animals. We don't have to be treated this way. Write a letter, make a phone call."

Now I am a big fan of the Big Blue Bus and the normally stellar service it offers, but the Big Blue Bus needs to do something. If people can no longer board a bus or get to work on time, that is their bread and butter.

Please put articulated Local 7s and/or just plain more Local 7s on Pico during rush hour. I do not believe the Rapids are to blame and they are just as crowded as the Locals.

Maybe we should think big about this corridor and consider rush hour bus-only lanes on Pico.

If you would like to contact Big Blue Bus yourself, you may click here.

The Crenshaw / LAX Line final document has been released (Yes, this matters to you.)

2011-09-01T14:55:00.000-07:00

The Source, Metro's award-winning blog, has a post you should read entiled: The Crenshaw/LAX Line final environmental document has been released

Yes, this matters to you who live, work and play north of the Expo Line.

The best chance to connect West Hollywood and mid-city Los Angeles to Metrorail currently seems to me to be as part of a northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX line which has as its initial northern terminus as the Expo Line, likely to be extended to Hollywood/Highland in the future, and quite possibly via West Hollywood (as San Vicente and Santa Monica both has rail service for decades).

Metro Study to extend Crenshaw/LAX Line

While this would not have provide a one-seat rail ride to the beach as studied for the West Hollywood transit corridor as part of the Westside Subway Extension project, it would provide a one-seat ride to/from LAX, which is more than a even trade in my opinion.

So yes, this project matters to you if you live north of Crenshaw and Exposition.

Let's extend Metrolink to Palm Springs & the Coachella Valley

2011-09-01T13:52:00.000-07:00

Believe it or not, I look to London for inspiration for Los Angeles County transporation improvements. If you ever want to know what a world class transit system looks like, go to the Transport For London (TfL) website.

While there is the "City of London", the sprawling Greater London region is a multi-modal, mutli-centered transporation wonderland with the Tube underground, the new overground rail network, light-rail, streetcar trams, a comprehensive 24-hour bus network with transit-only lanes and ferries, and, of coruse, dozens of commuter rail lines carrying people from the suburbs into the center of London. Imagine not just one Union Station, but several Union Stations (Paddington, Victoria, Charing Cross, Liverpool Street, etc.). In the future, commuter rail is going to continue to grow in popularity, especially after the Westside subway extension, regional connector and other Measure R rail projects are constructure.

The Southern California region currently has the Metrolink commuter rail network. Metrolink Trains

Many of you are are aware that Metrolink will soon be extended to Perris Valley. Click Perris Valley Metrolink extension for more details. But there are currently no Metrolink options for Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley.

What about Amtrak? From WikiTravel's Palm Springs page:

Amtrak Station, 300 North Indian Canyon Drive (.6 mi south of Interstate 10), 1-800-USA-RAIL (872-7245), Amtrak's Sunset Limited route connects Palm Springs with Los Angeles and with Arizona and points eastward with three westbound and three eastbound trains per week (arriving Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday). Amtrak also provides Palm Springs with connections to and from the San Joaquins trains, which run up California's Central Valley to the Bay Area and Sacramento, via multiple daily Amtrak Thruway motorcoach runs to and from Bakersfield. Be aware that there are no rental car agencies that provide shuttles to the Amtrak station in Palm Springs and there is no public transportation available there. The "station" is really just an open platform without any building. Taxis from the Palm Springs Amtrak to the Palm Springs airport (where the rental cars are available) is about $30 (2008).

Not no car agencies, shuttles or public transporation from the non-amentiy Amtrak station? Not encouraging.

Amtrak currently has a Palm Springs Amtrak Thruway Bus Station (Route 19b) between Bakersfield and Indio. Here's a map of connecting Amtrak Rail Lines and Thruway Bus Routes in California.

I could also fly into the Palm Springs International Airport or take Greyhound Bus Lines. (While the Palm Springs Airport at least connects with shuttle bus service, Greyhound drops you off at the non-amenity Rail Station with no public transportation connetions.) But I prefer rail travel when possible.

How more ideally should Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley be connected by passenger rail?

From a Riverside Press-Enterprise news article in 2008 on this topic:

Officials agree Palm Springs and other desert destinations need connections to the coast. The debate is whether Palm Springs needs Amtrak or Metrolink service.

"There is very limited service in that direction, and given the distance of the Coachella Valley from western Riverside County, it fits more in the intercity category rather than as a commuter service," explained Riverside County Transportation Commission Deputy Director John Standiford.

Others, like Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada Executive Director Richard Silver, argue Metrolink makes more sense because commuter trains are more efficient for moving people in a region like Southern California, while Amtrak works better for long distances. "I think it will be easier to get it out there," Silver said of Metrolink service to Palm Springs.

I am not the only person thinking about this. From the Riverside County Tranportation Commision webpage on Coachella Valley Rail Service:

Currently the only passenger service in the Coachella Valley is a thrice-weekly long distance train operated by Amtrak between Los Angeles and Florida. This train is known as the "Sunset Limited". The Sunset Limited train operates through this area in the very early hours of the morning in both directions and primarily serves the leisure and tourism market.

RCTC and the State of California have been evaluating the feasibility of establishing an intercity passenger rail route between the following cities: Los Angeles, Fullerton, Riverside, Palm Springs, and Indio.

The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) continues its firm opposition to any new passenger service on its tracks through this area. Notwithstanding this opposition, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) continues to propose such service in the California State Rail Plan.

Caltrans has no unilateral powers to compel the UPRR to permit the operation of this train. Nevertheless, for intercity trains (as opposed to a commuter or Metrolink train), there are certain federal processes in place that can ultimately lead to an order compelling the railroad to operate the service.

The public agencies requesting the intercity service may be required to invest large sums in the physical infrastructure of the railroad. Some estimates place the capital investment requirement at a minimum of $500 million for a new set of tracks.

RCTC is working closely with the Coachella Valley and the Pass Areas on this issue and supports the expansion of rail service to additional areas of Riverside County.

Here is an action item for your to-do list. If you want to see more regular passenger rail service between Los Angeles and Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley, and since this may involve adjusting "federal processes", why not contact both Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack and the Railroad Policy and Development Team of Federal Railroad Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation to let them know you'd like them to prioritize this.

Two of my favorite transit organizations here in Los Angeles County and Southern California region are Southern California Transit Advocates and The Transit Coalition.

The Transit Coalition has certainly given this a lot of thought: Coachella Valley Trains

From the Transit Coalition's online discussion forum, I found the following comments on this topic very interesting:

One forum member stated the following:

For what it's worth, I looked it up, and the current Amtrak station location is apparently not the one that the Southern Pacific used (the one in the photo Nick posted). In fact, the current station is further east and a tad closer to P.S. than the old one. It's a bit surprising that the S.P. never built a spur or something to serve the area better. It seems to me, for Palm Springs Metrolink to be effective, you would need to show that there was a core body of Palm Springs commuters headed for either Riverside or some other area on a day-to-day weekday basis. With Amtrak, you could aim it for the Palm Springs/Palm Desert golf/art vacation folks, and use Surfliner-ish equipment. I remember in the '80s, Amtrak was aiming the San Diegan squarely at Disneyland/beach/vacation travelers, and it was something of a surprise that commuters would take the morning train into Los Angeles. The same thing could be tried with Palm Springs.

Another member of the forum stated the following:

In the past for the Coachella Music Festival, Amtrak ran special service called the Coachella Express that connected to a shuttle bus (kinda like Metrolink's Del Mar horseracing train). Outside the Sunset Limited, that would have been the only other time passenger train service rolled through the Coachella Valley in recent memory.

A third member of the forum had this interesting idea:

I think that this would be a great stop on a future high speed rail line between LA and Phoenix. LA-Phoenix is the 27th busiest air route in the world and would easily sustain frequent high speed rail service with a local stop at Palm Springs and/or Indio on the way. I think the travel times and frequencies for LA-Palm Springs on a high speed line would be much more appropriate than Metrolink. However, Metrolink has a marginal chance of actually being implemented in the next decade or two. LA-Phoenix high speed rail could be built as an extension eastward from the Riverside branch of phase 2 California high speed rail.

Of course, however we would eventually get to Palm Springs or the Coachella Valley by passenger rail, once you get there, how do you get around without a car? Well, that's for another blog post. In the meantime, you can check current bus services with the SunLine Transit Agency.

As an gay man who is no longer twenty-something, I may find myself in Palm Springs more often as I get older and will keep you posted of transit improvements both there and in Southern California.

2011-08-30T13:41:00.000-07:00

Here's a map of Los Angeles Public Transit in 1928.

"1928 Los Angeles Streetcar Map"

Just imagine if we had improved the system with transit-only lanes and select grade-separation.

Very sad. Oh, well. At least GM sold more cars and goodyear sold more tires.

Vote YES for a California Public Health Insurance Option!

2011-08-30T10:40:00.000-07:00

While most of the issues I discuss on this blog are related to public transportation issues, I also like to discuss and mention other issues dear to my heart.

Many of us who support single-payer health care, otherwise known as Medicare-for-All, supported a compromise during the health care reform debate called the "public option". The public health insurance option would have been opened to everyone. Unfortunately, the corporations who have a stranglehold on our nation's politics managed to scuttle even that. What we have left with the Affordable Health Care Act (called "Obamacare" or "Romneycare" by its detractors) is a mandate to buy private insurance and a tax penalty if we don't beginning in 2014, without even the choice of a public health insurance option.

There is a group seeking to change this. California and many states will have a new health insurance exchange beginning in 2014. Consumer Watchdog, the group behind legendary Proposition 103 in 1988 that called for a 20% rollback in auto insurance rates and created an elected State Insurance Commissioner, is seeking a new proposition for November 2012 to (1) roll back health insurance rates 20%; (2) allow the State Insurance Commissioner to reject unjustified health insurance rate increases; (3) create a new statewide, open-to-everyone public health insurance option on our state's exchange.

Here's a link to Consumer Watchdog's post on this: "Health-care-measure-seeks-public-option-rollbacks"

Sign me up.

By the way, the Affordable Health Care Act gives state's great latitude to pursue stronger health care systems in their states. Vermont is going for single-payer health care. "Vermont Governor Signs Single-Payer Health Care Bill into Law"

So why isn't California? The state legislature passed single-payer health care when Gov. Schwarzenegger was in office, which he vetoed. Why don't they pass it now with Gov. Jerry Brown in office? Did they only pass it because they knew it wouldnt' be signed?

Here is State Senator Mark Leno's bill to bring single-payer health care in California

SB810 Fact Sheet

Call your Democratic legislators and ask them.

Articulated Rapid 7 buses debut!

2011-08-30T10:01:00.000-07:00

I am happy to report that the Big Blue Bus now has articulated Rapid 7 buses running on Pico, now extended east to Western/Wilshire and the Purple Line subway. That's just great. (Why not extend them to Vermont/Wilshire so that Red Line riders from the Valley only need one transfer to/from the Rapid 7 instead of two -- but then I am always asking for more.)

Note: While I was waiting for my Local #7 Big Blue Bus, I notice that the Rapids were stuffed to capacity.

UPDATE: Maybe what is REALLY needed for Pico, as I rarely see a Rapid 7 pass a Local 7 because of the traffic through Pico-Robertson are transit-only lanes during rush hour. Since I am not running for office, I can readily suggest taking away a lane of traffic in each direction so that buses may run faster. Cars can switch to Olympic or the 10 Freeway (as Venice should have its own transit-only lanes with streetcars running in them).

Great singer/guitarist at Palms Thai Restaurant

2011-04-06T11:17:00.000-07:00

Last night I went to Palms Thai Restaurant in Hollywood.

While dining, for our music pleasure a young Thai girl of about 25 named Nong, wearing a French Beret, was playing the guitar and singing songs like The Eagles' "Hotel California" and Joni Mitchell's "Big Yellow Taxi" and Dolly Parton's "Jolene".

This is the America I believe in.

My Latest Discovery -- nextbus.com

2011-04-05T09:18:00.000-07:00

I was standing on the corner of La Cienega & Pico awaiting a bus to West Hollywood when a handsome blonde gentleman named Erik struck up a conversation with me. He wanted me to know about this website http://nextbus.com/ which by using GPS technology and some mathematical algorithm I couldn't even begin to understand states when the next in-service buses would be arriving around a particular location.

I used the web browser on my smart phone to access the site. Sure enough, the next buses came exactly when the nextbus.com said it would. Has everyone else in transitland known about this site and I was just in the dark? As we know, the buses do not always run on schedule and when waiting it would be good to know when the bus will actually be arriving, especially on days when the weather in less than California sublime.

Try this site yourself and report back to see if it works consistently for you. If so, the transit riding world should know (if it doesn't already and I was the clueless one left in the dark).

West Hollywood City Council retains pro-transit majority

2011-03-22T13:25:00.000-07:00

The results of the West Hollywood City Council election are in and I am delighted to report that the West Hollywood City Council retains a pro-transit majority.

Appointed Councilmember Lindsey Horvath is leaving the City Council, but I wish her all the success in the world in her future endeavors. Ms. Horvath took an active interest in West Hollywood's public transit issues and had already been lobbying for more money in D.C. for transit in West Hollywood.

We know that re-elected Councilmembers Heilman and Land are pro-transit from their records.

Councilmember-elect John D'Amico has assured me via the phone that he supports continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood, which is great.

While I am sorry to see Councilmember Horvath go, I am relieved that it was not Steve Martin who replaced her, after his uninformed, anti-subway rant in the WeHo News.

However we voted, let's all come together now to improve public transit to/from and within West Hollywood and throughout Southern California.

Metro Staff recommends that Line 704 truncation at Alvarado be removed from the recommended program of service cuts.

2011-03-22T13:07:00.000-07:00

Take a look at Metro's Staff recommendation on the proposal to truncate the Eastern end of Line 704 at Alvarado instead of Union Station.

http://www.metro.net/board/Items/2011/03_March/20110324RBMItem20.pdf

Inside the document, scroll down to "Attachment A", and look at the Line 2/Line 704 proposal.

It says "Remove from the Program". I am hoping this means that the proposal for eastern truncation of Line 704 at Alvarado instead of Union Station has been shelved after public comment.

I recommended that Metro study rerouting Line 704 to go into the heart of downtown as the old Limited 304 bus used to do, perhaps even ending up at LA Live. When I used to work downtown in the 1990s, I would ride the old Limited 304 from downtown after work and it was always standing room only.

It's a shame that Union Station doesn't have "destination" ridership the way that Grand Central Station and Penn Station in New York, or Victoria Station, Charing Cross Station or Liverpool Street Station in New York. However, this is good news for riders on this corridor.

City Council Candidate Scott Schmidt responds to our West Hollywood Public Transit Questionnaire

2011-03-05T13:50:00.000-08:00

Here is West Hollywood Council Candidate Scott Schmidt's reply to our Public Transit Questionnaire. (We thank him and all the candidates who take time out of their busy schedules to address these issues):

(1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood, and if so, with what alignment?

I was an early and ardent advocate of the West Hollywood line for the subway to the sea and hope we get a chance to re-evaluate it when the second phase of construction comes back. I believe we can be competitive with a Santa Monica extension, but we have to make our case. West Hollywood gave the highest support of any city to Measure R--which is funding the subway--and yet we are getting little in return since the incumbents on the City Council dropped the ball on the Subway.

(2) Do you support extending the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light rail line up San Vicente and then on Santa Monica Blvd. to the Red Line in Hollywood? (Note: This could potentially be a light-rail subway and would provide West Hollywood with a one-seat ride to LAX.)

About a year ago, I discussed this idea with Barbara Yaroslavsky while waiting for a plane to San Francisco, and to both of us, it was a new idea. I’m glad to see it being discussed, as it would link our City with both the Subway to the Sea and LAX. For any sections along Santa Monica Boulevard, I’d want to see it underground (even if it is just cut-and-cover) so as to minimize the impacts on pedestrians, bicyclists and traffic.

(3) As modern streetcars are coming to downtown Los Angeles by 2015, would you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

West Hollywood has made major investments in Santa Monica and Sunset Boulevard over the last decade. Unless any project were grade-separated, I would have reservations about the impacts that would have on pedestrians, bicycles and traffic.

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

No. There is not enough capacity for the cars on the street as it is.

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

First, I’d ask the City of LA how much it would cost to bring back the DASH West Hollywood line and find a way to write them a check.

Second, I would work with Metro to improve their iPhone application to incorporate the technology of Seattle’s “One Bus Away” app so people can know when the next bus is coming, using real-time data. Not knowing whether waiting for the bus will take longer than walking is a large impediment for shorter trips.

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

As a West Hollywood Transportation Commissioner, I worked to forge a compromise that would allow bicyclists to share the sidewalks in parts of the City where bike lanes were not available, provided the operated in a safe and reasonable manner and yielded to pedestrians. I believe that Abbe Land and Lindsey Horvath’s Bicycle Task Force is a cynical political ploy. When I chaired the Transportation Commission and we had three meetings cancelled in the last year for lack of staff or agenda items. Why create a Task Force when you have a Commission but to send out a press release and make 20 political appointments right before the election? Spend the $15,000 the Task Force will cost us on real improvements to make West Hollywood safer for bicyclists instead.

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

I’m an ardent supporter of a pedestrian lifestyle and support efforts to make West Hollywood a place where people can live, work and play. This means supporting a pedestrian orientation and human scale for new developments, and encouraging workforce housing so people can live in West Hollywood and walk to work. Tantamount to any pedestrian platform is pedestrian safety. We’ve seen too many tragic vehicle versus pedestrian accidents in West Hollywood and we need to look at crosswalk signalization not as a liability for the City but as a necessary enhancement along out major boulevards.

(8) Have you read Donald Shoup's, "The High Cost of Free Parking", and what do you think about it?

I have not read the book but am familiar with the hypothesis. Up to 28% of trips that begin and end in West Hollywood are spent looking for affordable parking. However, I have concerns about putting the cart before the horse. We need viable public transit options and strong workforce housing programs before we can move to act on the theory.

(9) How would you pursue additional funding for public transit in West Hollywood?

I would ask Congressman Waxman to add an amendment to any 30/10 enabling legislation that requires a mass transit option to serve West Hollywood. I’d also consider creative funding solutions--such as exploring a DUI abatement zone with a fee-per-cocktail to fund mass transit expansion into West Hollywood.
(10) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like the voters and everyone else who lives, works and plays in West Hollywood to know?

I believe that it is possible to live in Southern California without a car. I know it is possible because I do it.

-----------------------

Blogger's Note: I really appreciate this.

I believe that it is possible to live in Southern California without a car. I know it is possible because I do it.

Thank you, Scott. :)

City Councilmember Lindsey Horvath responds to our West Hollywood Public Transit Questionnaire

2011-03-03T22:49:00.000-08:00

Here is West Hollywood City Councilmember Lindsey Horvath's reply to our Public Transit Questionnaire. (We thank her and all the candidates who take time out of their busy schedules to address these issues):

(1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood,and if so, with what alignment?

Yes, I absolutely support continuing these efforts. I am disappointed that we were not successful in bringing an extension to West Hollywood at this time, but we were successful in ensuring that the MTA will fund a study of various routes through West Hollywood for future projects. I know this is how the Gold Line extension got started, and I am willing to do the work necessary to see this process through. Our residents and visitors deserve nothing less than a steadfast commitment to better public transit. I would like to hear more input from all parties involved--the MTA, residents, our business community, and all others concerned--before advocating for a particular alignment that would best accomplish these objectives. Until we see that extension come to West Hollywood, we need to explore opportunities to connect our City to the line that will be developed. Perhaps a shuttling system, a zip car program, or a shared bicycle operation can connect people who live, work, and play in West Hollywood to the subway.

(2) Do you support extending the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light rail line up San Vicente and then on Santa Monica Blvd. to the Red Line in Hollywood? (Note: This could potentially be a light-rail subway and would provide West Hollywood with a one-seat ride to LAX.)

I am 100% in support of ensuring that LAX gets connected to our existing subway/light rail network, especially if it provides West Hollywood residents with a far easier option to get to the airport than what is currently available.

(3) As modern streetcars are coming to downtown Los Angeles by 2015, would you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

This is an intriguing idea, but one whose effectiveness I would like to explore in greater detail before committing to supporting it. I am excited to see how the downtown Los Angeles streetcar network changes the community, and am always in support of effective ways to make our City more pedestrian-friendly and less dependent on the automobile. The example of San Francisco certainly indicates that street cars have the ability to not only improve transportation access and reduce dependence on cars, but also add character to the areas they serve.

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

I'm willing to explore all possible solutions to help our traffic issues and increase our use of mass transit. However, I would need to be convinced that transit-only lanes will mitigate the problem of traffic and not make it worse through reducing the number of lanes available to private vehicles. I would further need to see what new construction would need to occur and how it would affect the look and feel of a street that essentially defines the character of our City.

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

The first thing we need to do is prevent our current access from being degraded due to budgetary shortfalls in communities outside our City. This is especially the case with DASH lines, which are dependent on funding from our neighbors in Los Angeles. I worked with LA City Councilmembers to save access to one of the DASH lines that suffered a cutback on account of Los Angeles' budget shortfall and worked to mitigate those effects through a re-routing of our City Line service. In October last year, I also met with the Department of Transportation in Washington DC to discuss the unique issues facing West Hollywood and what potential support and solutions they could offer. New funding is always important to make sure we have the infrastructure available to support successful transit, but I believe we can use our existing resources - City Line, Dial-a-Ride, etc - to provide even better transportation within the City.

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

I strongly believe in encouraging cycling as a safe and reliable mode of transportation within the City, especially through the development of bike lanes. This will not only make the roads safer for cyclists, but will also make the sidewalks safer for pedestrians. I am proud to have created the Bicycle Task Force with Councilmember Abbe Land, which will explore the possibilities that not only create the infrastructure but help to shift the community mindset about using bikes as a real form of transportation.

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

We have a beautiful city, and walking is a great way to experience it! A pedestrian-friendly city is a critical component to a sustainable city. West Hollywood is very dense and very walkable, and our urban planning should incorporate ways of making our neighborhoods even more pedestrian-friendly through concepts such as mixed-use development.

(8) Have you read Donald Shoup's, "The High Cost of Free Parking", and what do you think about it?

I have not read this, but am happy to take your suggestion! The bottom line is that reducing our dependence on our cars will improve our overall quality of life, and urban planning ought to make that objective a priority. This is something I am committed to as a City Councilmember.

(9) How would you pursue additional funding for public transit in West Hollywood?

Through the same sound fiscal management that has allowed us to undertake other capital improvement projects, such as our new LibraryPark. The only way to ensure additional funding for public transit during times of economic difficulty is to maintain the discipline that has allowed us to maintain the highest-possible municipal bond rating--a genuine accomplishment, considering the fiscal state of other cities in the area. West Hollywood may not be able to depend on other public agencies to maintain their current commitments to public transit, and I am committed to ensuring that our City will have the resources to pick up the slack. As I said earlier, I personally met with representatives at the federal Department of Transportation to discuss our City's unique transit issues and what funding sources might be available to address them. While it will take time, I believe we have started to develop a relationship that will help us secure much-needed funds to create new modes of public transit.

(10) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like the voters and everyone else who lives, works and plays in West Hollywood to know?

I am dedicated to making West Hollywood more sustainable in all aspects, including by increasing access to and use of public transportation. Our motto here is "The Creative City" and I will consider all possible solutions that could make our City greener, alleviate traffic, and improve our transportation infrastructure. I am grateful that the Sierra Club and the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters have recognized this commitment through their endorsements of my campaign, and I hope that the voters will elect me to a full term in office so I can get to work on turning my vision for a sustainable West Hollywood into a reality. It's time to get West Hollywood moving!

----------------------

Blogger's Note: I was particularly happy to read the following:

"In October last year, I also met with the Department of Transportation in Washington DC to discuss the unique issues facing West Hollywood and what potential support and solutions they could offer."

Why I am voting to re-elect Abbe Land and am not voting for Steve Martin

2011-03-01T08:50:00.000-08:00

When considering how to vote in an election, we all have the issues that matter most to us. As you know since you are reading my blog, my pet issue in local government is public transit. It is vital to me that candidates for elective office have a clear understanding of both the needs and opportunities for public transporation in West Hollywood and the rest of Los Angeles County and the whole state of California.

When I put sent my public transit questionnaire to all of the candidates for West Hollywood City Council, I did not know what if any response I would get.

A couple of candidates stated they would get back to me who never did. One candidate, Matt Gonzaga, who I introduced myself to live and in person told me he'd leave "public transit issues to someone else" wanting to focus solely on the needs of renters in his campaign. (If he doesn't think that "renters" in West Hollywood have needs with public transit than he really doesn't understand the issues of either, does he?) It's the lack of curiousity about this issue I found astonishing (and appalling). Any member of a City Council is going to have to focus on a whole range of issues, from land use, sanitation, libraries, budgeting, social services, not to mention transportation.

However, I certainly understand having a passion for a particular issue and politics needs advocates. I recommend instead of running for City Council, Mr. Gonzaga might better use his interests to form a West Hollywood equivalent to Santa Monica Renters Rights which has tremendous power and influence there.
Of the top candidates, Councilwoman Abbe Land answered my questionnaire with thoughtfulness and with a thorough understanding of the issues involved which you can read here.

As a contrast, in an clueless rant in WeHo News, former City Councilman Steve Martin says the following about the decision not to include the proposed Metrorail subway through West Hollywood as part of the current Westside Subway Extension project:

"Perhaps we should be grateful."

He further states,

"The city should stop hectoring our residents about automobile use..."

In other words, in his rant, Steve Martin has positioned himself as the anti-subway candidate. I guess we cannot expect his support in extending a light-rail subway through West Hollywood as is now being discussed in transit planning circles. Someone should let Mr. Martin know that 86% of West Hollywood voted yes on Measure R in no small hope to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood.

However, Mr. Martin's anti-subway rant is very shortsighted. He seems to believe that West Hollywood can plan transportation and development in a vaccum. Even if West Hollywood adpots a strict, zero-development policy, the surrounding areas of Los Angeles will not, and traffic will only continue to worsen in the years ahead no matter what West Hollywood does within its borders, reducing the ability of people to drive single-occupancy automobiles to and around West Hollywood and, without viable transit alternatives, live/work/play here.

Therefore, we cannot afford to have ANY member of the City Council who does not 100% support bringing Metrorail to West Hollywood. Mr. Martin's proposed "shuttle bus" to Wilshire or Hollywood Blvds. doesn't cut it.

Meanwhile, Councilwoman Land still sees the importance of seeking to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood perhaps through another alignment. There is much discussion now of extending the Crenshaw/LAX light-rail line north to Hollywood via West Hollywood, giving WeHo a one-seat ride to/from LAX.

Read Abbe Land's answer to my questionnaire and then read Steve Martin's anti-subway rant in the WeHo News and you'll see the difference between one candidate who gets and understands the needs and opportunities for public transit in West Hollywood and one who clearly doesn't and is even disdainful to our issues.

And just compare their tone when discussing transit issues:

Martin:

"If it is so important for all of us to live close to where we work or take public transportation than maybe Lindsay Horvath should move to Venice or take the bus to work." (As if it is an insult to take the bus.)

Land:

I believe we must find alternative transit options for people, not only because it is one of the best things we can do for our environment, but also that our focus on regional connectivity will enhance the quality of life for all who live, work and play in our region.

And that is why next Tuesday, I will be enthusiastically casting my vote for Abbe Land and not for Steve Martin.

I wish all the candidates good luck and don't forget to vote on March 8th!

Vote like an Academy Member for Best Picture!

2011-02-17T12:10:00.000-08:00

On Huffington Post, Rob Richie has created an excellent demonstration what it called "ranked-choice voting (RCV)" or "instant runoff voting (IRV)" in America, or "alternative voting (AV)" in Britain or "preferential voting" in Australia and Ireland, using this year's Best Picture contest for the Oscar.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/poll-oscars-irv_b_824246.html

The Motion Picture Academy now uses this ranked-choice voting system to vote for Best Picture, and this voting system has been adopted by an increasing number of municipalities in America, including San Francisco and Oakland here in California.

I am a big fan of ranked-choice voting. I am not a fan of they system we use in America often called "first past the post (FPTP)". "First past the post" has left us with two major parties both under the influence of the same campaign contributors and offers little chance for other parties or new parties to break through except in playing the media-designated role of "spoiler".

Wouldn't you love to vote for your first choice candidate or party without worrying that you might help elect your least choice candidate or party?

The way ranked-choice voting generally works is that if no candidate wins more than 50% of the votes ranked #1, the candidate with the least number of #1 votes is eliminated and those votes are distributed to the #2 choices for the non-eliminated candidates. (If a voter does not indicate a next preferred candidate, that vote does not get redistributed and is said to have "exhausted"). After this, if no candidate has 50% of the votes, the candidate with the next lowest non-exhausted vote total is eliminated and those votes are redistributed to the next preferred candidate. This is process is repeated until a candidate achieves over 50% of the vote. Since the voters rank the candidates on the same ballot, this process has acquired the name "instant runoff".

Ranked-choice reduces the number of rounds of voting to be paid for, reduces negative campaigning and leads to consensus winners. For example, if a candidate doesn't win a majority of the #1 ranked votes, he/she will want to be liked enough by the other candidates supporters to be their #2 choice.

In the recent Oakland Mayoral election we saw the establishment candidate not win because he did not receive as high a ranking of preferences as the eventual winner. Even though the establishment candidate won a little over a third of the first-choice votes, nowhere near a majority, what the preferences of the voters determined is that Oakland now has a Mayor with the highest preferred support of the majority.

http://www.acgov.org/rov/rcv/results/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/11/11/919562/-IRV-Produces-Stunning-Results-in-Oakland-Mayoral-Race

http://www.fairvote.org/oakland-faq

Please go to the linked website and check out the ranked-choice voting system in action for yourself. This is the electoral reform I strongly believe we should adopt locally, statewide and nationally.

For more information about ranked-choice voting a.k.a. "instant runoff voting", please go to http://www.fairvote.org/instant-runoff-voting/.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

Move LA's 2nd Annual Valentine's Day Celebration

2011-02-16T10:50:00.001-08:00

Whether you have a sweetheart or are "in-between" relationships, I hope you will consider attending MoveLA's 2nd Annual Valentine's Day Celebration tomorrow night.

Metro proposes truncating the Rapid 704 and Local 217 buses. Make your voice heard.

2011-01-31T13:03:00.000-08:00

Warninig,

Metro is about to reduce service on the Rapid 704 by terminating the eastern end of the line at Sunset/Alvarado. So you if you were heading downtown on the 704, you would have a forced transfer to the Red Line at Santa Monica/Vermont. Line 2 would be rerouted to go to Union Station instead of the 704, so you'd have to transfer to a local 2 or local 4 to get to Echo Park or further stops downtown.

Here's a thought. Line 304 used to go into the heart of downtown and it used to be packed solid during rush hour. I know this, because I used to ride it. Perhaps the change that needed to be made here was simply switching the 2 and the 704 so that the 704 went into the heart of downtown. (Unfortunately, unlike Penn Station and Grand Central Station in New York and Liverpool Street Station and Charing Cross Station in London, there isn't much "destination" ridership to/from Union Station as it is pretty much used for transfers to/from trains only.

My comment to Metro is that the should simply switch the 2 and 704 routes east of Sunset/Alvarado and try that before truncating the service.

Another bus service truncation you need to know about is Metro's proposal to terminate all northern trips of the 217 at Hollywood/Vine station. This means if you are headed to East Hollywood or Los Feliz, Metro will force you to transfer onto the Local 180/ Rapid 780.

Forced transfers are so discouraging to potential transit riders.

Here are the details of all the proposed service "enhancements". (In bureaucratic language, a service reduction is still called an "enhancement".)

http://www.metro.net/around/service-enhancements/metro-service-enhancements-proposed/

If you have any comment about these proposals, please contact Metro at servicechanges@metro.net

Please send in your comments in and be heard.

City Councilmember Abbe Land responds to West Hollywood Public Transit Questionnaire

2011-01-31T09:06:00.000-08:00

Here is West Hollywood City Councilmember Abbe Land's reply to our Public Transit Questionnaire. (We thank her and all the candidates who take time out of their busy schedules to address these issues:

1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West

Hollywood, and if so, with what alignment?

Yes, any alignment that allows West Hollywood to connect to other lines

and provides our residents an easy way to get downtown and further

west. This would also ease traffic by making it easier for people who

work in West Hollywood to get here from other locations.

(2) Do you support extending the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light rail

line up San Vicente and then on Santa Monica Blvd. to the Red Line in

Hollywood? (Note:This could potentially be a light-rail subway and would provide West

Hollywood with a one-seat ride to LAX.)

Yes, absolutely.

3) As modern streetcars are coming to downtown Los Angeles by 2015,

would you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa

Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

I support exploring all options that help connect West Hollywood with

other transit options, and that encourage people to use public transit

I would like to explore the modern streetcar for use on Sunset

Boulevard as well so we can determine best way to align with existing

options and maximize ridership.

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

I would want to see and understand the impact as we balance pedestrian

use and bike use for Santa Monica Boulevard.

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West

Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

That we all continue to work together to ensure connectivity, as well

as potentially add lines to best accommodate where people really need to

go.

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

I was proud to initiate and co-sponsor the creation of our Bicycle Task

Force in West Hollywood. This is a group of people with varying fields

of expertise related to transportation, bicycling, urban planning and

public safety. I am looking forward to the results of their work, to

seeing what their recommendations to the City Council will be and how

we can best try to implement those. I would really like to see

bicycling become a more viable means of transportation (as well as

recreation) in our city and our region.

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

The city undertook the renovations of Santa Monica and Sunset

Boulevards to improve pedestrian activity and ambiance, and I think the

quality and impact of that work is clear. Our General Plan that is

currently being updated will add more language about the need to

enhance and maintain a pedestrian modality for West Hollywood.

I am a supporter of mixed use, as part of an overall effort to get more

folks to enhance quality of life and give our residents and those who

work here real and safe options to enjoy their neighborhoods and our

iconic boulevards without having to drive/park their cars.

(8) Have you read Donald Shoup's, "The High Cost of Free Parking", and

what do you think about it?

I have not read his book, but if his philosophy is about looking at the

true impact of free parking -- i.e., more cars, higher cost to build

housing, less turnover for merchants -- then I share some of his concerns.

(9) How would you pursue additional funding for public transit in West

Hollywood?

West Hollywood voters overwhelming supported Measure R, which is

intended to fund public transit. I would like to look at

developer exaction fees and once we know there is a

feasible option (like light rail), I would be willing to talk with the

community about extra revenue options as well.

(10) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like

the voters and everyone else who lives, works and plays in West

Hollywood to know?

That I am a longtime supporter of alternative vehicles, Flex car and

bike rental/sharing programs; that I am interested in looking at

additional uses of CityLine so people could potentially utilize it for

nighttime use on Santa Monica and Sunset Boulevards.

I am a member of the Westside Cities Council of Governments (COG) and

co-chair of that group's Sustainability Committee. I believe we must

find alternative transit options for people, not only because it's one

of the best things we can do for our environment, but also that our

focus on regional connectivity will enhance the quality of life for all

those who live, work and play in our region.

----------------------------

Blogger's Note: Councilmember Land clearly "gets" it.

Martin Topp suspends his campaign

2011-01-31T09:03:00.001-08:00

Martin Topp, a West Hollywood City Council candidate has decided to suspend his campaign. Here is the note he sent to me:

"Due to business time constraints, I have had to re-evaluate my candidacy for city council. I have had to suspend my campaign going forward."

So that is one less candidate.

A West Hollywood City Councilmember is not a full-time position, so we should be thankful to any candidate willing to spend all of their free time serving West Hollywood.

Dropping the Ball on New Year's Eve in West Hollywood?

2011-01-20T08:43:00.000-08:00

At Tuesday evening's West Hollywood City Council meeting, Councilman John Duran spoke of how New York has the ball dropping in Times Square as its iconic New Year's Eve event and other cities have other events, but Southern California really doesn't.

He suggested that West Hollywood could not only be the nexus for Gay Pride weekend and Halloween, but for New Year's Eve (and Mardis Gras too).

This, of course, would be just one more reason to extend Metrorail to West Hollywood.

What should this iconic Southern California New Year's Eve stroke at midnight event in West Hollywood be?

Any suggestions?

West Hollywood's City Council candidates and the Public Transit Questions I Sent Them

2011-01-19T17:34:00.000-08:00

According to the City of West Hollywood website, here are the ten "qualified candidates" for City Council in the March 8, 2011, General Municipal Election:

Mito Aviles

John D'Amico

Mark Gonzaga

Mayor John Heilman (incumbent)

Councilwoman Lindsey Horvath (incumbent)

Lucas John

Councilwoman Abbe Land (incumbent)

Steve Martin

Scott Schmidt

Martin Topp

Voters will be allowed to vote for no more than three (3) of these candidates. Incumbents have a natural advantage in most elections and fortunately all of the incumbents running for City Council are pro-transit and seem to "get" these issues. I hope their challengers do too. Below are the questions I sent all of the qualified City Council candidates. When I receive their answers, I will post them for your perusal. You, of course, will then be free to comment on and share any of their answers.

I would imagine most candidates for office in Southern California are asked questions about traffic, parking and the welfare of someone's single-occupancy automobile, so I imagine this might be a refreshing change for them. After all, this is a post-Measure R, 86% vote in favor, multi-modal transportation world in which we are now living, working and playing.

Let's hope as many as possible think about these issues seriously and give intelligent thoughtful answers. You, as citizens who live, work, play and/or vote in West Hollywood deserve nothing less.

-----------------------------

QUESTIONS FOR WEST HOLLYWOOD CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES ON PUBLIC TRANSIT ISSUES:

(1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood, and if so, with what alignment?

(3) As modern streetcars are coming to downtown Los Angeles by 2015, would you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

(8) Have you read Donald Shoup's, "The High Cost of Free Parking", and what do you think about it?

(9) How would you pursue additional funding for public transit in West Hollywood?

(10) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like the voters and everyone else who lives, works and plays in West Hollywood to know?

Thank you!

What about the Beverly Hills right-of-way on Santa Monica Blvd.?

2011-01-11T09:43:00.000-08:00

Anyone traveling on Santa Monica Blvd. through Beverly Hills notices the unused, Metro-owned right-of-way on the southern side of the street.

It seems a bit of a missed opportunity?

It seems any subway alignment that runs via Santa Monica Blvd. through West Hollywood will head south to the Beverly Center instead of through the low density back end of Beverly Hills.

There are two basic ideas of how to use this right-of-way to increase mobility.

(1) Turn the right-of-way into transit-only lanes. This would take buses off of Santa Monica Blvd. and allow them to move quickly through this area, adding to their appeal.

(2) Turn the right-of-way into a modern streetcar or light-rail route between Century City and West Hollywood that could then be extended east on Santa Monica Blvd. to Hollywood and beyond.

(3) Do both. In Seattle's downtown transit tunnel, both buses and the new light rail share the tunnel.

Yes, this would require redesigning parking structures and redesigning part of Beverly Hills Civic Center, but that could be a great opportunity. However, it would be worth it as a light-rail/streetcar stop at Beverly Hills Civic Center would allow even more people to get to/from Beverly Hills.

I don't believe those homeowners on the north side of Santa Monica Blvd. would mind a light-rail/streetcar on the south side, as it would be more attractive than what is there now, which is nothing.

Perhaps West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Century City, Hollywood and the rest of Los Angeles can work together to create something wonderful for the future on this unused right-of-way.

What do you think?

What Questions Should I Ask West Hollywood City Council Candidates?

2011-01-06T16:30:00.000-08:00

I am inviting all West Hollywood City Council candidates to answer a few questions about their public transit and liveable streets platform and will share their answers with you on this blog.

Here are the questions I am considering asking all of the candidates for West Hollywood City Council. If you have any tweaks or additional suggestions, please add your comment.

(1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood, and if so, with what alignment?

(2) Do you support extending the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light rail line up San Vicente and then on Santa Monica Blvd. to the Red Line in Hollywood?

(3) Do you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

(8) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like the voters in West Hollywood to know?

------------------------------

What do you think?

Metro plans to reduce Rapid 704 service in upcoming cuts

2011-01-06T11:23:00.001-08:00

You need to know that Metro plans cutting the Rapid 704 but making the eastern terminus at Alvarado/Sunset. (Line 2 would be rerouted to terminate at Union Station.)

Click here to see planned service reductions

Please make sure to comment at servicechanges@metro.net if you do not think this is a good idea.

I also wonder if Metro has considered alternate eastern terminals for the 704 other than Union Station. For example, what about 7th St Metro or Pershing Square stations more into the heart of downtown?

The Rapid 704 needs to be enhanced, especially to include late night service as does the 720. Many people travel on this corridor late at night to/from their service jobs and entertainment destinations.

Every Wednesday night when i get on the #4 bus at Bundy towards West Hollywood, it is standing room only. This corridor does not operate under traditional “rush hour” 9-5 workaday service.

At the very least bring back the articulated #4 after the 704 stops running.

There is no reason to force people to stand like packed sardines inside a crowded 40 foot bus during late night when there are articulated buses available. Simply turn the articulated #704 buses to #4 after the 704 stops running or run the #704 until 2:00 a.m.

Another bus change you should be aware of is the extension of the 217 south to the Expo Line station opening next year. This makes sense. Unfortunately, it may mean you have a forced transfer onto the 180 at Hollywood/Vine if you are headed to Los Feliz.

What about a Fly Away bus in West Hollywood?

2010-12-29T13:00:00.001-08:00

Upon landing in LAX on the way back from spending Christmas in Seattle, I was waiting for the Super Shuttle. I asked the Super Shuttle gentleman if he had one going to West Hollywood soon. He said to me, "Of course. Everyone is going to Santa Monica or West Hollywood". I found that interesting.

We already have Fly Away buses to/from LAX and Union Station, Irvine, Van Nuys and Westwood. I wonder if one is viable to/from West Hollywood or nearby?

If you support a northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX light-rail project (a.k.a. "Rose Line") to Hollywood via West Hollywood (San Vicente & Santa Monica Blvds.) as I do, one of the primary benefits to this alignment is a one-seat ride to/from Hollywood, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills and points between to/from LAX.

As the risk of angering Super Shuttle and Prime Time with this suggestion, perhaps Hollywood, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills can investigate creating a Fly Away bus route to/from LAX until that northern extension of the Crenshaw Light Rail is adopted.

West Hollywood City Council elections upcoming

2010-12-21T11:57:00.000-08:00

Elections to the West Hollywood City Council are upcoming in Spring.

I am happy to provide a forum here for any candidate who wishes to discuss public transit issues in the area.

Here are my principle questions of all the candidates:

1) Do you favor efforts to extend Metrorail to/through West Hollywood and Santa Monica Blvd.?

2) Do you support the new proposal of a Metro light-rail subway connecting the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor via San Vicente Blvd. to the Crenshaw/LAX light rail project approved in Measure R?

3) Would you be in favor of transit only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd. even if that means taking away lanes of traffic and parking, and would you favor modern at-grade streetcars/light-rail running on those transit-only lanes?

4) Would you favor serving the Sunset Strip with streetcars -- noting that tourists and affluent riders would love them?

5) What are your proposals for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in West Hollywood?

I will ask all the West Hollywood City Council candidates these questions and will let you know the answers when they are provided to me.

----------------------

Note: One City Council candidate who I won't name contacted me and mentioned to me about how he wanted to increase the amount of parking available to make life easier for motorists.

If your primary transportation concern is the welfare of single-occupancy automobiles, then I think you've contacted the wrong blogger. :)

Bring Back Articulated #4 Buses at Nighttime

2010-12-21T11:49:00.000-08:00

About six months ago both Lines 4 and Lines 704, the local and rapid buses on Santa Monica Blvd. respectively, had larger articulated buses. Then the Line 4's were reduced to the old 40 foot buses. Without knowing the ridership figures, perhaps during the day the articulated buses were needed more on another line.

However, this has left an awkward situation late at night after the Rapid 704 bus stops running around 8:00 p.m. I now have to get on late night 40 foot buses from West Los Angeles to West Hollywood that are packed like sardines and are standing room only. The articulated Rapid 704 buses are no longer running.

Many of the people taking the #4 bus late night are getting off work at their restaurant/service sector jobs and they could use a seat, or they are going to nightclubs and other entertainment venues

Here is my question:

Why can't the Rapid 704 run until midnight like the Rapid 720 since there is late night demand? Or why couldn't those same 704 buses turn into local 4's after 8:00 p.m?

Not all transit corridors have the same traditional 9-5 with rush hour patterns.

I've sent a message to Metro asking this question. I'll let you know if I hear anything.

What about the Sunset Strip?

2010-11-16T14:55:00.000-08:00

West of Vermont, Santa Monica Blvd. is sometimes seen in competition with Sunset Blvd. as a potential rail corridor.

Some affluent hipsters dream of taking Metrorail to the western Sunset Strip.

When traveling between UCLA and West Hollywood, the truth of the matter seems to be that there is just isn't much demand for public transit. The #2 Sunset Blvd. buses I ride are half-empty west of Fairfax. That is why there is a short line #2 terminating on its western end at Fairfax. The Los Angeles Department of Transportation ("LADOT") recently canceled its bus service on the Sunset Strip. Sunset Blvd. also doesn't even support an all-day limited bus, let alone a rapid bus.

When I attended the Metro community station planning meeting for the originally proposed Hollywood, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills stations for the Westside Subway extension, I overheard one gentleman say, "It's too bad we couldn't also put a station somewhere on the Sunset Strip. We're not bus people". (This is a true story and my eyes rolled into the back of my head when I heard him say it.)

However, one commenter on a transit blog made the following suggestion for the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line to Hollywood via West Hollywood:

Why not have the "Rose Line" (Crenshaw/LAX Transit light-rail) head north on San Vicente all the way to Sunset, then head down Holloway back to Santa Monica Blvd. for stops at Santa Monica &Fairfax and Santa Monica & La Brea.

So the Rose Line would be tweaked to look like this:

In this scenario the stops between Hollywood/Highland and Wilshire/SanVicente would be the following:

Hollywood/Highland

LaBrea/SantaMonica

Fairfax/SantaMonica

Sunset Strip

SanVicente/SantaMonica

Beverly Center

SanVicente/Wilshire

Another possibility would be for the Crenshaw/LAX light rail to run north on San Vicente to Fairfax, then north on Fairfax to Sunset and then to Hollywood /Highland with a separate light rail project entirely using the unused right-of-way in Beverly Hills to connect Century City to Sunset Junction via Santa Monica Blvd. and then down Sunset to downtown.

In this scenario, the Rose Line would have stops at the following:

Hollywood/Highland

Sunset/Gardner

SantaMonica/Fairfax

Beverly/Fairfax

Wilshire/Fairfax

There would be a transfer at SantaMonica/Fairfax for an east-west light rail connecting Century City to Sunset Junction to downtown with stops at

Century City

Beverly Hills Civic Center

SantaMonica/SanVicente

SantaMoncia/Fairfax

SantaMonica/LaBrea

SantaMonica/Vine

SantaMonica/Western

SantaMonica/Normandie

SantaMonica/Vermont

SunsetJunction with stops further down Sunset to downtown

I'm a skeptic that both lines would get built or that Beverly Hills would agree to let that right-of-way be used.

Personally, I'd keep the SanVicente to SantaMonica to Hollywood alignment as proposed and serve the Sunset Strip with a modern streetcar. The affluent hipsters who won't ride the bus might actually ride that and the tourists would love it.

But I'm only one person and I put it out there for your consideration in fairness because the Sunset Strip question comes up every once in a while. But Sunset should not be used "instead" of Santa Monica Blvd. as the primary alignment because the ridership just doesn't support it.

Hollywood to West Hollywood to Crenshaw to Long Beach initial Metro review

2010-11-15T10:31:00.000-08:00

Metro staff has filed an initial review of the newly discussed possibility of the Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor being connected to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor approved as part of Measure R.

Please read by clicking this
Metro Crenshaw/LAX LRT extension study

Here are some paragraphs that stood out for me:

"Receive and file this report on the issues, options and costs to conduct an Initial Review of a possible Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor that would connect the Metro Red Line Hollywood/Highland Station to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station (currently under construction). Such a corridor would have the potential to provide a north/south transit connection with the CrenshawJLAX Transit Corridor, the South Bay Metro Green Line Extension and future potential extensions that could ultimately extend as far south as Long Beach and/or San Pedro."

--------------------

"Previous studies have been conducted as part of the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor for a future extension of that project north from Exposition Boulevard to Wilshire Boulevard. The CrenshawILAX Transit Corridor WilshireILaBrea Light Rail Extension Study (June 2009) identified possible connection points to the Westside Subway at La Brea, Fairfax, La Cienega or San Vicente with future extensions farther north to West Hollywood and Hollywood. Such an extension could operate along the same route as the heavy rail subway alternatives that were considered in the Westside Subway Draft EISIEIR."

----------------

"Costs to complete an Initial Review of a Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor connection to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor could be undertaken for approximately $1.5 million and would take approximately 12 months to complete following notice to proceed. Such a study would evaluate conceptual alignments, station locations, connection points with existing and planned transit lines and potential ridership and costs. Since this corridor is currently included in the unfunded, strategic element of the adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), no funding currentlyexists for the completion of this study or the implementation of this project. The South Bay Metro Green Line Extension to Long Beach and/or San Pedro is also included in the Strategic element of the adopted LRTP. Staffing is not available to complete this work. Additional staff would need to be hired to prepare a Statement of Work, procure consultant services and to conduct the Initial Review."

---------------------------

If you see the map above, you will still two proposed alignments for the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX line.

Originally, discussion about the Crenshaw Line heading north was primarily a discussion of how to get this light rail project to Wilshire Blvd. to allow for transfers to the westside extension of the Purple Line. At that time the alternatives were considered to be LaBrea or Crenshaw. As light rail ruled was ruled out for Crenshaw Blvd. north of San Vicente, that made LaBrea/Wilshire seem like the natural extension and transfer point.

However, since those initial studies were made, transit planners and advocates are now thinking that the real northern terminus of the Crenshaw Line ought to be not just Wilshire, but the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station. Also, at the same time, the West Hollywood Transit Corridor was studied as part of the Westside Subway extension project. There is growing realization that a LaBrea alignment for the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line would miss several ridership generators such as The Grove/Farmer's Market, Beverly Center/Cedar-Sinai, City of West Hollywood, etc.

Even though the West Hollywood transit corridor was not included with the heavy rail extension of the westside subway at this time, Metro noted that the West Hollywood transit corridor had high potential and that a light-rail subway might be more competitive for federal funding. The decision to put the LaCienega/Wilshire station on the east side of that intersection means that a transfer to a SanVicente/Wilshire station as northern alignment of the Crenshaw/LAX line that runs up San Vicente to Santa Monica Blvd. would be rather easy to build.

San Vicente used to have rail on it and Santa Monica Blvd. has already been studied as a transit corridor. LaBrea just doesn't have the ridership generators to justify going straight north/south towards Hollywood. To me it is a no-brainer. A Heavy-Rail extension connecting to the Purple Line may not occur for three decades because of the cost. If we could get this alignment above with the Santa Monica Blvd./San Vicente extension of the Crenshaw/LAX as a light-rail subway, we should take it.

The next step is a fully funded study of this corridor by Metro. If you want Metro to continue to officially study this corridor, please send your comments asking them to do so at customerrelations@metro.net

I also recommend contacting Metro's Crenshaw/LAX project team to let them know that you want the Crenshaw/Expo station built in a manner that allows for a further northern extension of the line and that you support the SantaMonica Blvd./SanVicente alignment of that route at diasroderick@metro.net

The tradeoff for a one-seat ride from West Hollywood to the beach will be a one-seat ride from West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Hollywood and their adjacent areas to/from LAX, and as you can see from the map, potentially Long Beach. (On a personal note, connecting the two large gay communities in West Hollywood and Long Beach by train would be great.)

As I said, in my opinion, if we can get this Hollywood-WestHollywood-SanVicente-Crenshaw-LAX-LongBeach line built, we should take it.

Hollywood to West Hollywood to Crenshaw to Long Beach?

2010-10-22T09:59:00.000-07:00

I was informed by e-mail that at Metro's Measure R Committee meeting today Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas asked Metro staff to come back next month with some sort of feasibility analysis of a study that begins with the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor originating at Hollywood and Highland and continues via Santa Monica Blvd. to San Vicente to the south via Crenshaw with an alignment all the way to Long Beach.

Could this be the start of a coalition to keep alive a Santa Monica Blvd. rail alignment by combining it with a project that would help another underserved area in the south of the county?

If so, this would certainly have my full support. The lines would share tracks on Crenshaw, but that is just fine. In our emerging system, there should be shared tracking in transit corridors that makes transfers and mobility easy and convenient.

I would like to eventually see also an east-west Metrorail alignment that shares tracks on Santa Monica Blvd. between this proposal by Supervisor Ridley-Thomas and one that connects Century to downtown and points east via Santa Monica Blvd., Sunset Junction and Sunset Blvd.

While the ultimate dream for all transit advocates, of course, is a heavy rail subway like the Red and Purple Lines in their preferred transit corridor, most of the future construction of Metro rail will likely be some form of light rail and some modern streetcar.

In any event, the next step for those of us who want to see any type of Metrorail on the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor, heavy-rail, light-rail, or modern streetcar, is to keep the corridor alive for future feasibility studies.

Please attend Metro's meeting on October 28th and submit your comments that you want Metro to keep the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor alive for further feasibility studies.

Regular Metro Board Meeting
Metro Board Room
One Gateway Plaza, 3rd Floor
Los Angeles
Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

If you cannot attend the meeting in person, then please send an e-mail customerRelations@metro.net

Look at how far this transit corridor has come in just a few years. Keep up the great work and stay optimistic and motivated. We can and we will ride Metrorail in some form on this corridor within (God willing) all of our lifetimes.

Councilmember Bill Rosendahl

2010-10-18T15:21:00.000-07:00

I just heard Councilmember Bill Rosendahl speak on legislative advocacy.

I also want to thank him for his tireless advocacy for mass transit.

Thank you, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky!

2010-10-18T08:56:00.000-07:00

I am very pleased that Los Angeles County Supervisor and Metro Board Member Zev Yaroslavsky's newsletter quoted my blog.

http://zev.lacounty.gov/news/transportation/metro-pushes-for-subway-to-va

It has to be said that Supervisor Yaroslavsky's is owed a huge heap of gratitude for steering Measure R and the Westside Subway Extension through the rocky seas of Metro. (Give Assemblymember Mike Feuer his share of gratitude for steering the necessary legislation through our state government.)

So thank you Supervisor Yaroslavsky for your vigorous and tireless work, and everyone else for their work, and even Los Angeles County's voters, for helping to design pass Measure R through seemingly impossible obstacles.

Bravo.

Now let's support Mayor Villaraigosa and MoveLA for their work on the 30/10 plan which will build the Westside Subway Extension and several other transit projects within ten years. Woo hoo!

What if the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor were light rail?

2010-10-13T10:29:00.000-07:00

When Metro issued it's recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension, it sadly did not include the Santa Monica Blvd. spur we were hoping for. In fact, Metro even cut out a future heavy rail (HRT) transfer structure to join the Purple Line at La Cienega. Disappointing news, I know. It is possible that if the Mayor Villaraigosas's 30/10 plan goes through that there might be extra money available down the far road, but that is a LONG shot. Every region of the County will want an "extra" money that shows up from fast tracking Measure R.

On the bright side, and I am by nature an optimist, Metro's staff recommendations did state that West Hollywood had high potential as a transit corridor and stated a light-rail subway might be more viable to qualify for federal funding.

So what would this corridor as light rail look like potentially?

Let us assume that the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor from the Westside Subway extension, "the Pink Line" is planned for light rail (LRT) and looks like this below:

As you can see below the Pink Line and planned Rose Line (Crenshaw/LAX) can be connected very easily via San Vicente. (Both Santa Monica and San Vicente were rail corridors for decades).

The plus side of this option isn't just the one-seat ride from LAX to Beverly Hills, West Hollywood and Hollywood, but the possibility for future light rail expansion as seen below:

Very exciting to me is the possiblity of extending this light rail project each from La Brea & Santa Monica to Sunset Junction and then southeast on Sunset to downtown. Another possibility is extending this south on La Cienega to Venice Blvd. where it could to Venice Beach or LAX.

However, these extensions are all far in the future.

If there is to be any Metrorail on Santa Monica Blvd. or serving West Hollywood at all, be it HRT, LRT or even modern streetcar, we need to begin lobbying to keep this transit corridor alive for further and future consideration.

We may be very disappointed that the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor is not moving forward as part of the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Westside Subway extension at this time, and I certainly am. But don't get discouraged. Look how far this transit corridor has come in consideration and energy in such a short period of time.

Come to the next Metro meeting and/or write your comments to Metro stating that you want the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor kept alive for the future. It will benefit not just West Hollywood, but the entire region.

What next for Santa Monica Blvd. and West Hollywood after the LPA recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension?

2010-10-12T09:30:00.000-07:00

Metro's Planning and Programming Committee released its recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension this morning:

(Although I have admit it is a little eyebrow-raising that this document was released BEFORE the Public comment period was officially over.)

Metro's Planning and Programming Committee recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension

As I expected and as Metro has been hinting at for months, they will go with Alternative 2. This means extending the Purple Line to the V.A. in Westwood through Century City. This means that the full Purple Line extension to West Los Angeles and Santa Monica will not happen at this time. It also means the hoped for heavy rail subway connector through West Hollywood will not happen either, especially as Metro will is cancelling any plans for a heavy rail transfer structure at the La Cienega station:

This structure is not recommended for inclusion in the LPA. The cost of $135 million is not within the available funding reserved through the LRTP for the project. Additionally, the heavy rail option for the West Hollywood Line did not perform as well as anticipated when evaluated against FTA New Starts criteria in the DEIS/DEIR. As such, the high cost of the connection structure is not justified when there may be alternative, less costly, solutions to serve the route through West Hollywood.
While the DEIS/DEIR identifies that the West Hollywood line has very high potential as a transit corridor, further study is needed to determine if a more cost-effective transit alternative such as light rail subway may provide a project that would be more competitive under federal funding criteria. If such an alternative were selected in the future, there would not be the need for a heavy rail connection structure.

So there are really three basic options for those of us who dream of a Santa Monica Blvd. metro rail line.

(1) Since federal funding is out and there will be no transfer station at La Cienega, find the money from somewhere else for a heavy rail subway. Good luck with that. Metro will spend the next thirty years paying off Measure R.

(2) Metro does state that a light-rail subway may be possible. This option would most likely be the Crenshaw-north option, a northern extension of the Crenshaw Line from Crenshaw/Expo up San Vicente to Santa Monica Blvd then over to Santa Monica/LaBrea and then up to Hollywood/Highland. Now there is no designated money for this either, but it would be less expensive to built than a heavy rail spur of the Purple Line.

Another possibilty is a separate light-rail subway project involving Santa Monica and LaCienega Blvds. to Venice Beach or LAX.

(3) This would be the at-grade streetcar option.

The advantage to this is that this could be built within five years with a coordinated effort. It it were put in a transit only lane, it would move very well. Yes, two weekends a year, during the gay pride festival and Sunset Junction street fair, there may have to be substitute buses running, but the benefits to the other 352 days a year a worth it. This could use the back end of Beverly Hills ROW that Metro is sitting on. Would people be prepared to give up a lane of traffic/parking for this? I would, but I suspect some motorists and store owners may object. But who are we designing our transportation network for? People or single-occupancy autos?

NO ONE has been a bigger advocate for a Santa Monica Blvd. rail line than me. Today's recommendations for the LPA are hugely disappointing. But I encourage those others who support a rail project on Santa Monica Blvd. to get behind the less expensive and therefore more feasible options of a light-rail subway or at-grade modern streetcar running in a transit only lane. Personally, I like the light-rail extension of the Crenshaw Line. There would be a one-seat ride from LAX to/from Beverly Hills, Beverly Center, Miracle Mile, West Hollywood and Hollywood. That is no small compensation for not having a one-seat ride to the beach.

However, I am just one person and would like to hear your suggestions about how we should proceed from here forward.

The Other Side of the President's Visit to Los Angeles - The Forgotten and Marginalized Transit Rider

2010-08-17T09:01:00.000-07:00

Last night it took me two and one-half hours to get from Pico/Roxbury to West Hollywood by bus. You see, the President was in town at a million dollar fundraiser.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-la-20100817,0,485361,print.story

While the President was raising money from the rich and powerful, thousands of commuters were faced with no way to get home.

"What a spectacular evening," Obama said. "Let's just hang out."

Yeah. Great. I was “hanging out” at bus stops with nowhere to go. There was no northbound traffic on La Cienega and Fairfax. Buses on Pico were at a standstill. I had to take a crawling bus on Pico to WESTERN, then north on Western to Santa Monica Blvd. Whoops! The buses were not running east on Santa Monica Blvd. past Western either. So I had to catch another bus north on Western to catch a bus on Sunset Blvd., which thankfully was still running.

At each bus stop I waited at there were crowds of people not having any idea the President was in town, let alone how they were to get home.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Police Department said that the Secret Service had not shared street-closure information with the department. The Secret Service also didn't tell Metro. So in other words, there was no ability to plan for this nightmare and no warning people would have that there would be disruptions to their lives. What about the people that had to get home to their kids?

Now contrast this with the wealthy and powerful at the fundraiser who no doubt had the best in valet parking. Congratulating themselves at their concern for the plight of the hardworking American people, they were no doubt perfectly attended to while the working poor were invisible, irrelevant and inconvenienced.

Isn’t this just a living metaphor for America today? In the greatest recession since the great depression the wealthy and powerful got the attention and priority and congratulations while the working and middle classes were left to fend for themselves with no resources. And the President and local political leadership were, of course, at a FUNDRAISER.

So who is to blame for this?

Didn’t it occur to anyone on the President’s staff that the bad feeling and anger that this commuting nightmare would cause might outweigh all the benefit of “hanging out” at this fundraiser?

Didn’t it occur to the city/county leadership and to Metro to announce the following: “The President is in town during rush hour for a fundraiser, and the Secret Service won’t tell us the routing, so you may not be able to get home that evening.”

Now I lived in Manhattan for several years and when the President came to town there were underground alternatives to getting around while the surface streets were disrupted. My only hope is that the President and Congress approve Metro’s 30/10 Plan, which would pay for construction of the Purple Line extension in 10 years, and that money comes in from somewhere to pay for the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment and the extension of the proposed Crenshaw Line north to Hollywood and a Sepulveda line connecting the San Fernando Valley with the westside and LAX.

But that best case scenario is in the best case ten years from now. In the meantime, how we can ensure that this won’t happen again or that we will at least be informed that we won’t be able to get home the next time this or a future President has a mid-city rush hour fundraiser with the elites?

I have a feeling based on the bad PR coming from the traffic/transit nightmare that this fundraiser caused, that future Presidential fundraisers will be held in lest disruptive locations like someone's Malibu beach home.

Venice Blvd. Streetcar Proposal

2010-07-01T12:43:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine who sits on the Palms Neighborhood Council thinks it would be great having a streetcar connecting the LaCienega station on the coming light-rail Exposition Line to Venice Beach.

Extending that idea eastward to a northern extension of the Measure R approved Crenshaw Line, and imagining a future LRT on Sepulveda and Lincoln, it would look something like this:

When streetcars return to Los Angeles in a few years I am convinced that many areas that will never see heavy-rail subway or above-ground light-rail, will be interested in at-grade modern streetcars such as those currently running in Portland and Seattle.

What about upgrading the Orange Line to Light Rail?

2010-06-30T08:48:00.001-07:00

Let me preface this blog post by stating I think bus service is wonderful, and I support a county-wide network of transit only lanes and busways.

However, I do not subscribe to the belief that a seat on the bus is as "good" as a seat on a train, nor do I agree with the choice of Metro to brand busways with official colors like the "Orange Line" and the "Silver Line".

The San Fernando Valley seems to be left out of mass transit planning in Southern California. Meanwhile the entire San Gabriel Valley political structure is united and is eagerly anticipating two or more Gold Line extensions eventually on the northern prong to Montclair and even Ontario Airport and on the southern prong to possibly Whittier and/or Duarte. The reason for this is obvious. With our oversized, too populous, too few legislative districts at the national, state, county and municipal level, many of the politicos who represent the southern San Fernando Valley also represent and have their power bases in the Westside. All of their attention is going toward extending the Purple Line to the Westside, which of course is the most needed and highest profile transit project in planning.

Just how did this former rail corridor end up as a busway anyway?

From Wikipedia:

The majority of the Orange Line is built on part of the former Southern Pacific Railroad Burbank Branch right-of-way. This had passenger service from 1904 to 1920, with stations at several locations including North Hollywood and Van Nuys. It had Pacific Electric Red Car service fromNorth Hollywood to Van Nuys again from 1938 to 1952.

The right of way was purchased by the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (now Metropolitan Transportation Authority) in 1991 along with several other rail road right of ways across the Southland for future use in transportation projects.

The California Legislature passed a law in 1991 introduced by Alan Robbins which prohibited the use of the corridor for any form of rail transit other than a "deep bore subway located at least 25 feet below ground". Later Los Angeles County passed Proposition A in 1998, promoted by supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, which prohibited Metro from using its county sales tax funding to build subways anywhere in the county.

With subway and light rail now off the table the only option left to develop the transit corridor was to build a busway.

The "Orange Line" busway is already at capacity and shows the limits of BRT. The San Fernando Valley deserves an east-west rail project that connects Warner Center with the Red Line (and could potentially be extended east through Burbank and Glendale to meet up with the Gold Line in Pasadena). Since the San Fernando Valley politicos are focused elsewhere, it is up to you and me to remind them that simply extending a busway north doesn't cut it. Perhaps some of you could lobby to get VICA (Valley Industry and Commerce Association) behind an east-west line and a north-south line for the San Fernando Valley. If the San Gabriel Valley is getting two light rail lines, the San Fernando Valley deserves no less.

In Measure R which was approved by voters in 2008, there is a project study for a north-south transit project connecting the Orange Line with Wilshire/Westwood through the Sepulveda Pass. If this were a rail project, many local transit advocates see it logically being extended south down to LAX and north up to Sylmar Metrolink. That would take care of a needed north-south rail line for the San Fernando Valley.

What about east-west rail travel? The most obvious solution is to upgrade the existing Orange Line to light rail.

I asked the incomparable Kymberleigh Richards (http://transit-insider.org), member of Metro's San Fernando Valley Governance Council, her thoughts on the issue and the possible challenges and here is what she had to say:

Here are the problems that would be faced:

1. You would need to retrofit the busway without seriously disrupting existing service, otherwise what's the point? You wouldn't want to inconvenience the existing passengers by forcing them to a slower alternative during construction. The most likely way to proceed would be to close one segment at a time, one lane at a time, then cut grooves into the pavement down to the roadbed and install the rails so that they were flush with the pavement (like a grade crossing, only along the entire alignment) then reopen the lane to bus traffic. Service would continue to run with only a minor delay by using the remaining open lane to run both directions, with flagmen. Grade crossings would require a bit more logistics, especially the major arterials like Van NuysBlvd.

2. You would have to use a low floor light rail vehicle in order to avoid having to retrofit the existing station platforms. This means the existing light rail cars would not be compatible with the Orange Line. So there would be a third fleet of LRVs at Metro; heavy rail subway (Red/Purple), high floor/high platform light rail (Blue/Green/Gold/Expo/Crenshaw) and low floor/low platform light rail (Orange). So forget any Orange Line extensions that would interline with something else.

3. Because of the constraints of construction, the technology will have to be something other than overhead catenary for power. Installing that would require full busway closure for longer periods of time, which puts us back to inconveniencing passengers during construction. Third rail power, like the Red/Purple Line, is also out of the question because of the open-air operation (you can't have passengers in danger of making contact with the electric source). A DMU, like the San Diego system, is going to be far too expensive for this and brings constraints of its own to the process. So either you need a protectedthird rail (very costly; they are experimenting with this in some of the Middle Eastern countries, where cost is no object) or a self-contained, rechargeable on-board power source. Perhaps some type of storage battery that could plug in at the layovers?

4. The street running segment between Canoga Station and Warner Center would have to be negotiated with traffic engineers at LADOT. I doubt they'd give up traffic lanes for the light rail, and I don't savor the idea of running light rail in mixed-flow traffic.

And of course, you'd have to do an entire new scoping/AA/EIR/EIS and figure out where the funding is coming from. Just that last part (the $$$) pretty much means all the Measure R projects would have to be underway and near completion before you could start programming funds for an Orange Line upgrade.

No one has ever done a busway-to-light rail conversion. We'd be breaking new ground, which is why there's no hard research available on the subject.

Hmm. Sounds problematic, doesn't it? However, why couldn't this be the first corridor to attempt a busway to light-rail conversion? I'm game.

In any event, the Robbins bill would have to be repealed for any light rail project, so start lobbying your state legislators if you want to see ANY rail service in this area, for a subway ain't coming to this corridor this century.

What about alternatives? Metrolink commuter rail is in the northern San Fernando Valley, but many people travelling to the San Fernando Valley are travelling to/from a destination on or near Ventura Blvd. in the southern part of the Valley.

1) San Fernando Valley transit advocates could lobby for a subway under Ventura Blvd. connecting Warner Center with the Universal City station. Yes, sounds great. Only there are easily 50 years of subway projects ahead in line, assuming those actually get full funding and constructed.

2) San Fernando Valley transit advocates could lobby for a transit-only lane on Ventura Blvd. that ran buses and modern streetcars. This would require taking away street parking on Ventura Blvd. and possibly losing a lane of traffic each way. I have no problem with this as I don't believe we can or should socially engineer our cities in favor of single-occupancy motorists anymore, but I suspect not a few single-occupancy motorists would object. However, a streetcar is much less expensive than a subway and could be up and running within a few years, while it will be decades before we would see a subway on Ventura Blvd. Here's a fun map I created for a Ventura Blvd. streetcar project to spur your imagination:

One challenge of doing some project on Ventura Blvd. means you need to find another way to connect Burbank and Glendale into Metrorail.

Your thoughts?

One Seat Ride to the Beach or to LAX?

2010-06-24T13:41:00.000-07:00

For Westside Subway Extension supporters, this is our dream:

I count myself as the BIGGEST support of a Santa Monica Blvd. subway project, colloquially nicknamed the "Pink Line".

However, only the first three minimum operating segments (extending the Purple Line west from Wilshire/Western to Wilshire/Fairfax, to Century City, to Westwood) of the Westside Subway Extension project are likely to go forward for Federal funding at this time, in no small part because of the money that was already thankfully approved by Measure R for that portion of this project and not the other portions, and because the cost-benefit ratio for the first three minimum operating segments meets current federal guidelines for matching funds.

Alternatives 4 and 5 have the West Hollywood subway spur included. (This chart is also not good news for the City of Santa Monica which wants the full extension of the Purple Line to the beach which is in Alternatives 3 and 5).

Therefore, because of the above chart, this is what will likely be constructed within 10 years if Mayor Villaraigosa's 30-year plan goes through.

Supporters of MOS-5, the segment of the Purple Line west of the V.A. grounds, have little choice but to pursue Federal funding later and keep lobbying for Metro to build the full extension to the beach.

Those of us who support MOS-4, the West Hollywood spur, have a couple of options, if Metro abandons us (even though West Hollywood voted 83% in favor of Measure R, more than any other city).

Option 1) Continue to lobby for the Purple Line spur between Beverly Hills and Hollywood along Santa Monica Blvd. seen above, understanding that we are not part of Measure R funding, and are unlikely to be constructed within the next several years if not a few decades.

Option 2) Lobby for the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment to become part of the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line, which Measure R will see constructed as light-rail between the Expo Line and LAX. The tradeoff would be a one-seat ride to/from LAX instead of a one-seat ride to/from the beach. While the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line to the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station is not funded by Measure R north of the Exposition Line transfer, and as this is a light-rail project rather than the heavy-rail subway extension of the Purple Line, and as it will not all be underground, and therefore likely to be less expensive, it may be more easily funded and built sooner.

Here's a map showing the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment as an alternative to link the Crenshaw Line at Expo/Crenshaw to the Hollywood/Highland station as light rail:

Here is how it would look from a larger perspective:

For many people, the tradeoff of having a one-seat ride from West Hollywood to LAX may be acceptable for not being part of the Westside Subway extension. However, there is no guarantee that the this would be the approved alignment of the northern extension of the Crenshaw light-rail line, which may end up simply going north on La Brea or Fairfax towards Hollywood/Highland instead of via San Vicente then Santa Monica Blvd.

3) Another option comes from the realization that for 30 years Metro is going to be financially focused on Measure R or paying off a federal loan that fast tracks Measure R construction projects. Unfortunately, this means that there might not be ANY funding for am underground Santa Monica Blvd. rail project for at least thirty years.

What if we brought streetcars back to this corridor? Not the historical red cars of yore, but the new modern streetcars such as the ones we see in Portland or in the Cryodon borough of London -- and then run them in transit only lanes?

Here are pics of what a modern streetcar looks like:

Just in case you think the era of the streetcar is over, you should go to LA Streetcar's website.

http://www.lastreetcar.org/

Streetcars are coming back to downtown Los Angeles in a few years and when that happens, demand for the them will grow everywhere.

Here's is my original proposal that runs a modern streetcar from downtown to Sunset Junction on Sunset Blvd., then down Santa Monica Blvd. via the unused right-of-way in the back end of Beverly Hills. A variation of this could have on the western end the route head south on La Cienega and then southwest on Venice to the beach.

To be effective, streetcars on Sunset and Santa Monica Blvd. would probably require eliminating parking and/or a lane of traffic in each direction. I'm totally fine with that, but some motorists and small business owners may object. It may also require adjusting the annual gay pride parade and Sunset Junction street festival by moving them or an agreement to run alternative buses on those days. In fact, as part of a modern streetcar project, we should create transit-only lanes for them to run on, limited to streetcars and buses. In Seattle, buses and rail share the downtown transit tunnel effectively.

-------------------------

Of course, we all want to see subway service on Santa Monica Blvd. and see it soon. However, it is not looking good for seeing it within the next 30 years if Metro decides not to pursue federal funding at this time, which according to their own studies is starting to look unlikely. While the City of Santa Monica will get the full advantage and use of the Exposition Light-Rail Line in the meantime until MOS-5 is hopefully eventually built, the City of West Hollywood and the Beverly Center areas may be left with nothing for decades.

Metro has already spent a lot of time and money studying the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment and knows it needs "something". Plus I believe having the largest vote in favor of Measure R has brought West Hollywood some good will from Metro. It must be refreshing for Metro to deal with a community that says, "build here, build here, build here", rather than the NIMBYs who selfishly have been trying to obstructing the Purple Line and Expo Line projects in Hancock Park, Beverly Hills and Cheviot Hills.

So now that you know where we appear to be with a Santa Monica Blvd. rail alignment, which course of action(s) do you think Santa Monica Blvd. rail advocates should we take if Metro doesn't go forward with MOS-4 of the Westside Subway Extension Project for Federal funding as we all hope?

1) Keep lobbying for a heavy-rail subway extension from the Purple Line anyway and hope that somehow the money will come from some unknown source somehow, sometime, somewhere?

2) Begin strongly lobbying for the northern extension of the light-rail Crenshaw Line towards Hollywood to run along San Vicente, then Santa Monica Blvd, still not knowing where the funding will come from and knowing it is not certain that this would be the alignment of this extension, but knowing it will require less funding as a light-rail project than as a heavy-rail subway?

3) Lobby for modern streetcars to run down Santa Monica Blvd. in transit-only lanes, trading ultimate hope of eventual grade separated rail in decades for at-grade rail within years?

Keep in mind, I really want a subway running on Santa Monica Blvd., so I support the Westside subway extension. I just want to give you a realistic picture of where we stand at the moment at least on paper.

Your thoughts?

Westside Subway Extension Station Issues for the Pink Line

2010-06-24T12:32:00.000-07:00

This blog is overdue, way overdue, for an update:

Here are thumbnails of slides you should look at regarding the Westside Subway Extension Station Information Meetings that were held back in November 2009. These are interesting because these meetings were about the nuts and bolts of designing subway stations.

First, here is the dream we are all hoping for for the Westside Subway Extension of the Purple Line with a West Hollywood alignment included (colloquially referred to as the "Pink Line"):

However, this is what is likely to move forward for Federal funding request at this time, in part because this is the portion that will be matched with funds approved by Measure R:

We need to continue to lobby Metro to build the Santa Monica Blvd alignment, at least in the long-term.

However, with that understood, if the Mayor's 30/10 plan is financed by the Federal government, we may be riding this Purple Line extension within 10 years.

The sooner the Purple Line gets to Westwood and the V.A., the sooner we will see a rail alignment for Santa Monica Blvd.

Please find below the relevant slides to station design that were presented back in November. Enjoy!

Creating a Transit Plan for the San Fernando Valley

2009-10-21T12:35:00.000-07:00

On the Los Angeles Times website under its LA Now Blog, Dave A. wrote the following:

"How about some attention to the San Fernando Valley...?

The Valley has 2/3 the population, yet gets 1/10th the public transit investments."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/10/mayors-effort-to-fasttrack-westside-subway-faced-challenge.html#comments

Dave A. raises a good point.

I'm watching the machinations of San Gabriel Valley politicos who are persistently and consistently advocating for two Gold Line extensions.

There is no equivalent energy and advocacy happening in the San Fernando Valley.

It's not that the San Fernando Valley doesn't have worthy transit infrastructure projects. My top five SFV projects are:

1) a Sepulveda light rail project between Sylmar and LAX;
2) upgrading the already at capacity Orange Line from busway to light rail;
3) Connecting Burbank Airport to Metro Rail;
4) An east-west line connecting the North Hollywood Station to the Gold Line through Burbank and Glendale;
5) A Ventura Blvd. modern streetcar between Universal City and Warner Center.

These are achievable in the long-term if the San Fernando Valley decides to get busy and start advocating for them.

There are certainly dynamic transit advocates in the Valley, such as Kymberleigh Richards. Please check out her website: http://www.transit-insider.org/ (While you are there, check out her "Transportation 101" link for a great presentation on how transportation is funded.)

Because California, Los Angeles County and Los Angeles City have legislatures that are too small and have enormous size legislative districts, many of the San Fernando Valley's elected politicians also represent the Westside, where their power and influence is based and where most of the density is. Since I believe the downtown Regional Connector and the Westside Subway extension are the two most critical public transit infrastructure projects in Los Angeles County, I do not fault this.

However, what is missing in discussions about the future of Los Angeles transit infrastructure is an organization advocating on behalf of the San Fernando Valley specifically.

Could VICA (Valley Industry and Commerce Association) be the organization to get this SFV specific transit advocacy going? What about a SFV neighborhood council alliance? I'm interested in hearing your ideas.

Help Plan the Westside Subway Extension Stations

2009-10-21T10:39:00.000-07:00

Some exciting meetings are coming up with the Metro Westside Subway extension.

http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/westside/meetings.htm

We're all invited to attend Metro's upcoming meeting to discuss potential subway stations in your area. We want you to “roll-up-your-sleeves” and engage with us to discuss station locations and entrances, easy connections to and from the stations, and other issues.

Content will be tailored for each meeting, and will be not be replicated for each location — so be sure to attend the meeting which reflects your particular interest.

Thursday, October 22, 2009, 6– 8pm
Stations to be discussed: Wilshire at Bundy, 26th, 16th & 4th Street
Santa Monica Public Library – Multi-Purpose Room
601 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA 90401
Served by Metro Lines 4, 20, 33, 333, and 720 and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Validated vehicle and free bike parking is available.

Monday, October 26, 2009, 6– 8pm
Stations to be discussed: Wilshire at Crenshaw, La Brea & Fairfax
Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) – Terrace Room, 5th Floor
5905 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90036
Served by Metro lines 20, 720, 920, 217 & 780. Validated vehicle parking is available in the Museum’s 6th Street underground garage. Enter from 6th and Ogden.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009, 6– 8pm
Stations to be discussed: Hollywood/Highland, Santa Monica Boulevard at La Brea,
Fairfax & San Vicente & Beverly Center
Pacific Design Center
8687 Melrose Avenue, West Hollywood, CA 90069
Served by Metro Lines 4, 10, 105, 305 & 704. $10 self-parking is available in the Pacific Design Center Parking Lot off Melrose. Metered street parking is available on San Vicente Blvd.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 6– 8pm
Stations to be discussed: Wilshire at La Cienega & Beverly
Beverly Hills City Hall – Municipal Gallery
455 N. Rexford Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Served by Metro Line 4, 14, 16 & 704. Free 2-hour parking is available in the adjacent structure.

Thursday, November 5, 2009, 6– 8pm
Stations to be discussed: Century City, Westwood/UCLA & VA Hospital
Veterans Administration – Wadsworth Theatre
11301 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90073
Served by Metro Lines 20 & 720 and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines 2, 3 & 4.
Free parking is available in the lot adjacent to the theatre.

-------------------

For those of us who support the Santa Monica Blvd. portion of the subway extension, Phase 4 of the project, be sure and show up Tuesday night, November 3rd.

I will see you there!

Everybody Ride the Sunset Streetcar

2009-10-13T08:56:00.001-07:00

You may not be aware that streetcars will be returning to downtown Los Angeles in a soon as five years, but they are.

From the Los Angeles Streetcar website:

"Streetcars are designed to be a constant fixture of urban transportation options for residents, employees, and visitors; they are very different from the Metro rail transportation and subway system that Los Angelinos are used to. A streetcar, unlike light rail, travels in the flow of traffic on rails that are embedded in the road. Automobile drivers traveling in the same lane as the streetcar rarely notice that they are driving on top of rails. Although traveling at speeds similar to those of a bus, streetcars are the preferred downtown circulators due to the comforts offered by fixed-rails during their short trips. Because the streetcar runs on a fixed route, riders can be assured that the route will never change, and appropriate technology, kiosks, architecture, and guideways can be integrated into the urban environment to provide route guidance."

If you have been to San Francisco, you have probably seen the old streetcars from around the world carrying passengers between the Castro, downtown and Fisherman's Wharf. What we will likely see here are the newer modern streetcars like those seen in Portland and Seattle.

Some of you are saying, "Don't we have buses already that go to these places"? Well, true. However, there are "choice" riders who won't use a bumpy uncomfortable bus, but do like more the comfortable ride that streetcars bring. Streetcars also have been shown to attract development and revitalize neighborhoods.

From the Los Angeles Streetcar website:

"Buses are excellent local and regional public transportation options, but they will do little to spur redevelopment and economic investment in Downtown LA. This is due to the inherent flexibility of bus service, as routes change regularly to accommodate varying needs; in addition, buses contribute to nerve-racking pedestrian experiences due to heavy street-level emissions and noise pollution that discourses active use of sidewalks. Streetcars do the exact opposite. They provide developers and business owners certainty that the routes will not change, and are considered preferable to buses by residents, visitors, and employees as they offer more amenities, highly reliable routes and timetables, and enhanced urban experiences. Buses and streetcars do, however, work together to connect access points within regional transportation networks. For example, sidewalks can be designed to specifically accommodate both vehicle configurations; in return, a transit stop effectively doubles its value within a regional transportation network."

The planned downtown alignment runs down Broadway.

This led me thinking about other parts of the area that might benefit from Streetcar service, especially areas that desire rail service, but are unlikely to see heavy or light rail in the next few decades, but for whom streetcar service could be up and running in the next few years.

Ventura Blvd. between Universal City and Warner Center came to mind. Also, I imagined connecting Venice Beach and Santa Monica north/south to the Expo Line and Purple Line. I am sure you have your own ideas.

However, what I'd really like to propose for your thoughts today is a Streetcar connecting downtown and Hollywood via Sunset Blvd., through Echo Park and Silver Lake. The first leg could connect downtown and the Red Line. Extensions could go further along Sunset Blvd. to the Sunset Strip and along Santa Monica Blvd. to Century City via the unused right-of-way in Beverly Hills. (Please click on the image below to see whole route.)

There would actually be two streetcar lines using the same tracks on the West and East end, but running on different streets in the middle.

Both Lines would run from Union Station to Sunset Junction.

Line 1 would run on Santa Monica Blvd. between Sunset Junction and San Vicente.

Line 2 would run on Sunset Blvd. from Sunset Junction to the Strip and then south on San Vicente to Santa Monica Blvd.

Both Lines would be reunite at San Vicente & Santa Monica Blvd. and then head to Century City via the unused right-of-way in Beverly Hills.

The tourists will love it, of course. More importantly, regular commuters will use it.

When someone says, "this town was built for cars", show them this map below and remind them that it was RAIL that built up Los Angeles and California. Just look at what we lost fifty years ago. If we had not tragically dismantled the streetcar system, but improved it over the last several decades, we'd have an amazing system already in place now. (Please click on image below to see whole map. You may want to keep kleenex nearby for weeping purposes.)

However, we move forward and the upcoming return of streetcars to Los Angeles is something to celebrate along with the expansion to Metro Rail that Measure R funds will bring. All hail as we leave the car-only transportation culture behind. Los Angeles is transforming into the world class metropolitan city is deserves to be.

My Westside Mass Transit Dream

2009-08-09T01:15:00.000-07:00

Isn't this beautiful?

This is my Westside Mass Transit Dream.

I was inspired by the Westside Transit Corridor Extension Project public briefing meetings held last week. There are still two more for you to attend:

• Tuesday, August 11, Beverly Hills Public Library, 444 N. Rexford Drive, Beverly Hills
• Wednesday, August 12, Westwood Presbyterian Church, 10822 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles

What we see here is existing Metro Rail on the Red and Purple Lines plus the completion of the Exposition Line.

In addition, we see completion of the Westside Subway Extension Project extended all five phases:

1) Extend Purple Line from Wilshire/Western to Wilshire/Fairfax;

2) Extend Purple Line to Century City;

3) Extend Purple Line to West L.A.;

4) Connect Hollywood/Highland and Purple Line through Santa Monica Blvd. (The "Pink" Line);

5) Extend Purple/"Pink" Lines to Santa Monica

The new map of Alternative 11 of the Westside Subway Extension presented at last week's public briefing contained two "new" fingers added to a possible northern extension of the proposed Crenshaw Light Rail Line. The previous maps only contained a possible light-rail leg to LaBrea & Wilshire. The new "fingers" at Fairfax/Wilshire and SanVicente/Wilshire seem to indicate that Metro wants a northern extension of the Crenshaw Line to head west of LaBrea. Most Southern California transit advocates see the Hollywood/Highland station as the ultimate northern terminus of the Crenshaw Line.

In thinking about this as to what I would select, I ruled out the SanVicente "finger" because there is no Purple Line stop there and I am sure Metro will want Crenshaw Line riders to be able to transfer to the Purple Line. I ruled out LaBrea because even though it would be cheapest and more direct for the Crenshaw Line to head straight up LaBrea, it would leave out numerous ridership opportunities such as the Grove and a stop on the Sunset strip. Since I see the Pink Line already serving the Beverly Center, therefore I opted for Fairfax/Wilshire for a transfer station with the Crenshaw Line. This would allow service at the Grove, West Hollywood, and it includes a Sunset Strip stop around Sunset/Gardener. I think the added ridership of the Fairfax alignment justifies it over the less expensive cost of the LaBrea alignment of the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line. If Metro heartbreakingly decides it cannot go forward with Santa Monica Blvd. subway alignment (Phase 4) because of funding, then heading to Fairfax/Wilshire instead of LaBrea/Wilshire becomes even more imperative.

What is so delicious about a Fairfax alignment is that Fairfax was originally the planned northern route of the Red Line from Wilshire towards Hollywood before NIMBYs and anti-rail idiots sabotaged the building of the Red Line. (Just think. If it wasn't for the NIMBYs and misguided organizations like the so-called Bus Riders "Union" we might already be riding a completed Purple Line.) It would be beautiful karma to see a Fairfax alignment rise from the ashes.

In Measure R, there is a Sepulveda Pass transit project connecting the Valley from the Westside. I envision for the health of a region an alternative to the parking lot that is the 405 Freeway with a Sepulveda based line moving north from LAX and the Green Line up to the Exposition Line, the Purple/"Pink" Lines, and into the Valley connecting with Ventura Blvd, the Orange Line, Van Nuys Metrolink Station and ultimately Sylmar Metrolink station.

What an amazing system this would be if this were all constructed and operating.

Now that I've showed you my dream for the Westside, and I am sure you all have your own transit dream, let me admit to some stone cold reality.

There is no funding identified for most of this -- and funding is what will determine whether a transit line gets built, and that is assuming you[ve gotten past the inumerable NIMBYs and competing interest gauntlets pulling at Metro to come to a heavy or light rail line preferred alignment proposal that Metro and the Community is strongly enough supporting.

What transportation capital funding there is will go towards constructing the transit lines and segments with the highest ridership. As passionate as I am about Phase 4 of the Westside Subway Extension Project, the Santa Monica Blvd. subway, I fully realize that Phases 1, 2 and 3 of the Westside Subway Extension (Wilshire plus Century City) and the super crucial downtown Regional Connector, come first, and then there are all the worthy competing Los Angeles County projects out there (i.e. finishing the Expo Line, extending the Green Line to LAX, upgrading the Orange Line to light rail, TWO Gold Line extensions, Crewnshaw Line, a Sepulveda Line, etc.)

Also, don't forget the need to maintain a comprehensive and robust bus system and the desire of automotive diehards to expand roads.

In fact, there is no shortage of need and desire, but not an abundance of transportation money for public transit.

The good news is that there has been a sea change of opinion within Southern California. Only the willfully delusional still believe that Los Angeles can preserve a car-only transportation system forever. In fact, the 67% vote in favor of Measure R demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of Los Angeles County knows better. $4.00/gallon gasoline and ever-worsening congestion beat a lot of people into reasonableness. We need alternatives. However, Measure R won't pay for all of my dream or your dream or anyone's dream. The State Budget is a basket case for the forseable future and if the State ever gets out of financial crisis, it really needs to put its transportation focus on transit operation (not capital) funds and seeing the needed High Speed Rail project into manifestation.

So, if you like my transit dream or have a dream of your own for the Westside or anywhere else in Los Angeles County and Southern California, you will need Federal dollars. Please join a transit advocacy organization such as Southern California Transit Association or The Transit Coalition (but not the misguided Bus Riders "Union"). Please write your member of the House of Representatives and our state's two U.S. Senators. Please write your County Supervisor and your city mayors and councillors and ask them all to support mass transit not just in words, but financially too.

Any transit dream without adequate funding is just a fantasy. So let's start advocating for transit dollars to start turning some of these dreams (many of which are absolute necessities for our economic and environmental future) into reality.

An Alternative Pink Line through West Hollywood

2009-08-06T08:48:00.000-07:00

Last night at Plummer Park in West Hollywood there was a community forum on the progress of the Westside Subway Extension Project. (You might have noticed drills on Wilshire and Santa Monica beginning to take soil samples.) This project is in environmental review. For more information about this project, please visit Metro's website at http://www.metro.net/westside

There are still three more community forums within the next week and I encourage you to attend to learn more and to communication your support and suggestions:

• Thursday, August 6, Santa Monica Public Library, 601 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica
• Tuesday, August 11, Beverly Hills Public Library, 444 N. Rexford Drive, Beverly Hills
• Wednesday, August 12, Westwood Presbyterian Church, 10822 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles

All the meetings are from 6:00-8:00 PM. The material presented will be identical at each meeting (though the crowds will be different), so pick the one that is most convenient for you.

I am still very hopeful that the Westside Extension will be build with Phase 4, which includes the Santa Monica Blvd. subway through West Hollywood, also known as Alternative 11:

There have been a couple of adjustments to the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment you should know about. As you can see from the above map, there was one alignment at La Cienega and one at San Vicente. The La Cienega alignment has been eliminated because of the inability to design that hard turn. The alignment will run south via San Vicente and the stop will be on Santa Monica Blvd. between La Cienega and San Vicente, right in the heart of West Hollywood. At last night's forum there was lots of comment about how and where to design the Beverly Center area stop. There will be specific Metro forum's this fall around specific stops. If you intersted in how the La Brea, Fairfax and west of La Cienega but east of San Vicente Santa Monica stops or any other stations along the alignments are designed, be sure and attend those upcoming Fall meetings.

This project is current divided into five phases:

Extension of Purple Line from Wilshire/Western to Wilshire/Fairfax
Extension of Purple Line to Century City
Extension of Purple Line to West L.A.
Connection of Purple Line and Hollywood/Highland through West Hollywood (The "Pink Line")
Extension of Purple Line to Santa Monica beach.

Thank goodness Measure R passed. This will fund Phases 1 through 3. At the Forum, I asked the money question: What will determine if Phase 4 will get built? After all, there is rock support in the community for this project. West Hollywood voted 83% in favor of Measure R.

It basically comes down to money. Heavy Rail Subway is the most expensive form of transportation construction. Can Phase 4 be competitive for federal matching funds? That will be the determining factor to getting funding for this project. So start writing your letters in favor of federal funding for this project to Congressman Henry Waxman and Senators Feinstein and Boxer.

What happens if Phase 4 doesn't get the go ahead? That's pretty sad. A lot of people who supported Measure R and who support this project will be heartbroken.

There is an alternative that I have heard being whispered as a possible backup by various transit advocates. It would involve incorporating the Pink Line through West Hollywood with the Crenshaw Line project under study right now.

For more information about the Crenshaw Line project go to http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/crenshaw/default.htm

Here's a map posted on the Transit Coalitions discussion forum by Darrell:

Instead of a Heavy Rail subway like the Red Line and Purple Line, in this alignment, the Pink Line would be a Light Rail alignment line like Blue, Green, Gold and Exposition Lines. This would not necessarily be all at ground level. Portions of the Blue, Gold and Exposition lines run underground and there will be grade separated crossings at the busiest intersections.

This northern extension of the Crenshw alignment would continue light rail up from Crenshaw/Expo up Crenshaw to San Vicente and then head northwest up San Vicente and resume the Phase 4 alignment in West Hollywood.

The advantage of this alignment is that light rail is cheaper to construct than heavy rail, therefore the numbers would be more advantageous for federal funding. Also, Metro will have already invested millions of dollars studying this corridor, received feedback and comment on station locations and design, and have a whole lot of heartbroken people on their hands. There is also a regional benefit. People in Hollywood, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills and points south will more easily access LAX. Basically, West Hollywood and the Beverly Center area would be trading easier one-seat access to the Westside for easier access to LAX.

I still fully support Alternative 11 for the Westside Transit Corridor Extension Project. That is why 83% of West Hollywood voted for Measure R. I believe it is the right one for the region's future. However, while this light rail alternative may not be the most preferred or most desirable rail service to this area, it is in my opinion fully acceptable and preferable than the alternative if Phase 4 is not constructed, which is nothing.

The Most Exciting Los Angeles Transit Project You May Never Have Heard Of -- Bring on the Downtown Regional Connector!

2009-07-21T09:28:00.000-07:00

Everyone has heard of the Subway to the Sea (which this blogger enthusiastically supports and hopes to ride in his lifetime).

People may have noticed the construction happening on the Exposition Line light rail project which will travel from downtown to Culver City and back up to Santa Monica.

East Los Angeles is excited about the soon-to-open Gold Line extension.

However, let me introduce you to an exciting transit project you likely haven't heard anything about, but will dramatically transform transportation in Southern California -- the downtown Regional Connector.

Metro's Regional Connector webpage

The Regional Connector is a light rail project that will connect the Blue, Expo and Gold Lines downtown in such a way that people will be able to travel through downtown without having to transfer on and off the Red/Purple Lines.

We could see light rail trains from Santa Monica to Whittier, from Long Beach to Pasadena, or other types of combinations. Getting to/from Union Station and Metrolink commuter rail and eventual high-speed rail will be much easier. We will have the makings of an actual "system", rather than a hodge podge of individual projects that don't really seem to work together.

According to the Metro website...

"Metro is currently in the initial 18-month Draft Environmental Impact Study/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) phase of the Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project. This environmental review, which follows the Alternatives Analysis phase (AA), was authorized by the Metro Board at its January 2009 meeting. Moving forward for further study are two Build alternatives – an at-grade emphasis alternative via Second Street with a couplet on Main and Los Angeles streets, and an underground emphasis alternative via Second Street crossing First and Alameda streets at grade, as well as a No-Build alternative and a Transportation Systems Management alternative."

Let us hope that they choose the underground emphasis, which will be better in the long-term.

Measure R partially funds this connector, but more funds will be necessary.

While nearly everyone understands the value of this project, the local political structure isn't as behind this project as it should be. The primary issue is that it more obviously serves the system as a whole, rather than parochially serve someone's individual district. Because of its physical location downtown, there is less ability for a politician to say, "Look at this amazing piece of bacon I brought home for the district," even if it will benefit the transit riders of their district tremendously. In particular, Gold Line advocates should be pushing for it because it will help increase their projected ridership numbers. Blue Line riders will appreciate being able to get to Union Station without the added transfer onto the Red Line. New downtown stations will benefit all of us.

Now that you know about this project, please ask your elected leaders to support and help find the money to pay for this very important project.

Boycott Next Week's DNC-LGBT Fundraiser

2009-06-18T08:52:00.000-07:00

The Department of Justice just filed a legal brief to UPHOLD (not repeal) the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) which not only bans federal recognition of gay marriage, but civil unions and domestic partnerships as well, and denies all of the 1,138 federal benefits of marriage for gay partners, and also bars gay marriages performed in one state from being recognized by another.

This legal brief used outrageous legal arguments invoking incest and pedophilia and could have easily been submitted by a McCain/Palin administration or the Bush/Cheney administration for that matter. This legal brief was signed off by Assistant Attorney General Tony West, President Obama's appointee in HIS Department of Justice.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16355867/Obamas-Motion-to-Dismiss-Marriage-case

Here is John Aravosis' great commentary on the legal brief:

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

Here is what David Mixner had to say about this legal brief:

http://www.davidmixner.com/2009/06/a-personal-statement-doma-brief-brings-shame-to-obama-team.html

We cannot let this DOMA brief go without an accountability moment. It's a willful betrayal of the community and nothing less than that. There was no legal requirement for the Justice Department to file any brief. Previous administrations have occasionally declined to file briefs in the past. There was certainly no requirement to file a brief that invokes incest and pedophilia. Why didn't the legal brief at least stipulate that the plaintiffs were entitled to the 1,138 federal benefits of marriage if not the name?

I don't care what "standard procedure" is. Some of the worst evil on the planet is carried out in the name of "standard procedure". The SS guards in Nazi Germany were just following orders. People who bought and sold slaves were just following standard procedure. Apartheid was standard procedure. Intensive State spying was standard procedure in East Germany. Throwing us in prison for being gay was standard procedure, that is if we were lucky enough not to be tortured and killed. Even now it is standard procedure to allow people to deny us employment, housing and hospital vistation of our partners in most states. Standard procedure is not a defense for evil.

And, this is not a matter of the President and the Administration having too much to do to help us with their campaign promises. I too support the President's success on the economy, health care, climate change and the myriad foreign policy challenges. However, this is a case of the Administration using its valuable time and energy to actively harm us. And the time they picked for this was now, on the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall. And now they ask us for more money?

Just for once can we not be doormats who go back for more when politicians wipe their feet on us, as they think we are?

We HAVE to boycott this DLC-LGBT fundraiser. If we don't, what does it say about us individually and our self -esteem and pride? What does it say about us collectively on the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall?

It's clear that our votes don't matter to them, our volunteer time and energy doesn't matter to them. Even our street protests don't seem to matter them. The only thing that seemed to get their attention was when be started turning off the GayTM.

So in response a scrambling President Obama signs a memo granting gays and their partners "benefits" that were already available via the federal agencies for which they work, but don't include health or pension benefits. Yay. There were no executive orders on anything meaningful and no mention of stop lossing the over 200 gays who have been discharged from the military since he took office.

Pardon me while I try and keep my lunch down.

The crumbs the President threw us last night in no way begin to make up for his Department of Justice filing this offensive legal brief.

We cannot let this DOMA brief go without an accountability moment. It's an out and out betrayal of the gay community and nothing less than that. There was no legal requirement for the President's Justice Department to file any brief. There was certainly no requirement to file a brief that invokes incest and pedophilia.

Don't fall for the "standard procedure" defense for filing this brief. Some of the worst evil on the planet has carried out in the name of "standard procedure". The SS guards in Nazi Germany were just following orders. People who bought and sold slaves were just following standard procedure. Corrupt CEO's who ran their countries into the ground while paying themselves obscene bonuses are following standard procedure. Insurance corporations play games with people's lives by denying them the health care treatments they believe they were paying coverage for as standard procedure. For centuries, throwing us in prison for being gay was standard procedure, that is if we were lucky enough not to be tortured and killed. Even now it is standard procedure to allow us to be denied housing, employment and hospital visitation of our partners in most states.

If you know anyone who was planning to attend this fundraiser, please ask them to withdraw.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/11487/politely-ask-barney-frank-tammy-baldwin-and-jared-polis-why-they-are-hosting-a-dnc-fundraiser

There will be hundreds of $1,000 a plate fundraisers before the next election.

Please consider giving this $1,000 elsewhere. All worthy nonprofits and political organizations are suffering in this economic climate. This one time, redirect your $1,000 to something constructive. Don't throw good money after bad. Only when we were willing to withhold our money did Washington give a crap about our outrage. If money is all we are valued for, then we should use that value for our greatest benefit.

If you need any further incentive to boycott next week's fundraiser, then click on the link of what Obama promised us and compare this with his Administration's feckless behavior over this legal brief.

http://obama.3cdn.net/36ddd2f5daac41cb21_rym6bxaax.pdf

Even if the President meant to be honest with us during the campaign, he's chosen that he cannot and will not be that "fierce advocate" for us now.

And since we are exercising the only power we seem to have, we should also boycott the DSCC and DCCC as well until they take action. Congress isn't returning our phone calls either and our "allies" are hiding under their desks lest we find them and ask them to keep their promises to us as well. Since we aren't going to get the kind of leadership from the White House we were promised, we need to refocus our efforts to getting our legislation through Congress without its leadership. Don't let our allies in Congress hide behind waiting for the White House.

As an alternative, California gays have the luxury of two Democratic candidates for Governor who have shown they aren't just talk, they show action -- Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsome. Plus, the campaign to repeal Prop 8 will be on the ballot next year. Can we use our political campaign money for something that will actually benefit us?

Don't worry about the hysterical rantings of Beltway insiders and apologists who are in a panic about this one fundraiser falling apart. There will be countless others and there are a lot more important things to worry about than their "access".

Boycott the DLC-LGBT fundraiser.

The Department of Justice just filed a legal brief to UPHOLD (not repeal) the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) which not only bans federal recognition of gay marriage, but civil unions and domestic partnerships as well, and denies all of the 1,138 federal benefits of marriage for gay partners, and also bars gay marriages performed in one state from being recognized by another.

This legal brief used outrageous legal arguments invoking incest and pedophilia and could have easily been submitted by a McCain/Palin administration or the Bush/Cheney administration for that matter. This legal brief was signed off by Assistant Attorney General Tony West, President Obama's appointee in HIS Department of Justice.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16355867/Obamas-Motion-to-Dismiss-Marriage-case

Here is John Aravosis' great commentary on the legal brief:

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

Here is what David Mixner had to say about this legal brief:

http://www.davidmixner.com/2009/06/a-personal-statement-doma-brief-brings-shame-to-obama-team.html

We cannot let this DOMA brief go without an accountability moment. It's a willful betrayal of the community and nothing less than that. There was no legal requirement for the Justice Department to file any brief. Previous administrations have occasionally declined to file briefs in the past. There was certainly no requirement to file a brief that invokes incest and pedophilia. Why didn't the legal brief at least stipulate that the plaintiffs were entitled to the 1,138 federal benefits of marriage if not the name?

I don't care what "standard procedure" is. Some of the worst evil on the planet is carried out in the name of "standard procedure". The SS guards in Nazi Germany were just following orders. People who bought and sold slaves were just following standard procedure. Apartheid was standard procedure. Intensive State spying was standard procedure in East Germany. Throwing us in prison for being gay was standard procedure, that is if we were lucky enough not to be tortured and killed. Even now it is standard procedure to allow people to deny us employment, housing and hospital vistation of our partners in most states. Standard procedure is not a defense for evil.

And, this is not a matter of the President and the Administration having too much to do to help us with their campaign promises. I too support the President's success on the economy, health care, climate change and the myriad foreign policy challenges. However, this is a case of the Administration using its valuable time and energy to actively harm us. And the time they picked for this was now, on the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall. And now they ask us for more money?

Just for once can we not be doormats who go back for more when politicians wipe their feet on us, as they think we are?

We HAVE to boycott this DLC-LGBT fundraiser. If we don't, what does it say about us individually and our self -esteem and pride? What does it say about us collectively on the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall?

It's clear that our votes don't matter to them, our volunteer time and energy doesn't matter to them. Even our street protests don't seem to matter them. The only thing that seemed to get their attention was when be started turning off the GayTM.

So in response a scrambling President Obama signs a memo granting gays and their partners "benefits" that were already available via the federal agencies for which they work, but don't include health or pension benefits. Yay. There were no executive orders on anything meaningful and no mention of stop lossing the over 200 gays who have been discharged from the military since he took office.

Pardon me while I try and keep my lunch down.

The crumbs the President threw us last night in no way begin to make up for his Department of Justice filing this offensive legal brief.

We cannot let this DOMA brief go without an accountability moment. It's an out and out betrayal of the gay community and nothing less than that. There was no legal requirement for the President's Justice Department to file any brief. There was certainly no requirement to file a brief that invokes incest and pedophilia.

Don't fall for the "standard procedure" defense for filing this brief. Some of the worst evil on the planet has carried out in the name of "standard procedure". The SS guards in Nazi Germany were just following orders. People who bought and sold slaves were just following standard procedure. Corrupt CEO's who ran their countries into the ground while paying themselves obscene bonuses are following standard procedure. Insurance corporations play games with people's lives by denying them the health care treatments they believe they were paying coverage for as standard procedure. For centuries, throwing us in prison for being gay was standard procedure, that is if we were lucky enough not to be tortured and killed. Even now it is standard procedure to allow us to be denied housing, employment and hospital visitation of our partners in most states.

If you know anyone who was planning to attend this fundraiser, please ask them to withdraw.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/11487/politely-ask-barney-frank-tammy-baldwin-and-jared-polis-why-they-are-hosting-a-dnc-fundraiser

There will be hundreds of $1,000 a plate fundraisers before the next election.

Please consider giving this $1,000 elsewhere. All worthy nonprofits and political organizations are suffering in this economic climate. This one time, redirect your $1,000 to something constructive. Don't throw good money after bad. Only when we were willing to withhold our money did Washington give a crap about our outrage. If money is all we are valued for, then we should use that value for our greatest benefit.

If you need any further incentive to boycott next week's fundraiser, then click on the link of what Obama promised us and compare this with his Administration's feckless behavior over this legal brief.

http://obama.3cdn.net/36ddd2f5daac41cb21_rym6bxaax.pdf

Even if the President meant to be honest with us during the campaign, he's chosen that he cannot and will not be that "fierce advocate" for us now. It is beyond outrageous that did not repudiate, distance himself from or even criticize this legal brief.

And since we are exercising the only power we seem to have, our money, we should also boycott the DSCC and DCCC as well until they take action. Congress isn't returning our phone calls either and our "allies" are hiding under their desks lest we find them and ask them to keep their promises to us as well. Since we aren't going to get the kind of leadership from the White House we were promised, we need to refocus our efforts to getting our legislation through Congress without its leadership. Don't let our allies in Congress hide behind waiting for the White House.

As an alternative, California gays have the luxury of two Democratic candidates for Governor who have shown they aren't just talk, they show action -- Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsome. Plus, the campaign to repeal Prop 8 will be on the ballot next year. Can we use our political campaign money for something that will actually benefit us?

Don't worry about the hysterical rantings of Beltway insiders and apologists who are in a panic about this one fundraiser falling apart. There will be countless others and there are a lot more important things to worry about than their "access".

Boycott the DLC-LGBT fundraiser.

P.S. The fundraiser is on Thursday, June 25, 2009
at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel
1330 Maryland Avenue SW
Washington, DC
Reception 5:30 p.m. / Dinner & Program 7:00 p.m.

If you are going to be in Washington, D.C., feel free to attend the protest and see who actually attends this thing. Take pics and upload them so we can all know who the scabs are.

California's Financial Armageddon

2009-05-20T12:48:00.001-07:00

Well, I hope everyone in California is happy. You showed them! You rejected all of the ballot measures yesterday.

Go on. Feel self-satisfied that you stood up to those politicians in Sacramento.

Unfortunately, the Day of Reckoning is coming. We are going to see cuts in services beyond our worst nightmare.

Yes, the politicians are to blame. Yes, they overspent money in the good times and didn't prudently save.

However, you voters are to blame too. You consistently vote yourself lower taxes and higher spending and then hamstring the legislature with spending requirements. You then enacted term limits which gave immense power to lobbyists because no one is around with any institutional memory or stake in long-term planning. You have an woefully small State Legislature with only 80 Assemblymembers for 36,000,000 people (with one member for every 450,000 persons, over 10 times the national median). You instituted a 2/3 budget rule which means super-MINORITIES on both sides of the spectrum can stop all decision making. Therefore, you want it all, low taxes and high spending.

You are about to experience the REAL world. You're not totally at fault. Conservatives sold you an economic lie that low taxes would bring so much economic growth you would not need to cut spending in order to balance the budget. They told you that you could have "something-for-nothing". And, of course, you wanted to believe them.

However, now we are going to get draconian spending cuts far beyond your worst nightmare. And this is not what the majority opinion in this state is.

Just know the era of supply-side economics is over. Tax cuts do not "pay for themselves". They require spending cuts to balanced the budget. Previously conservatives have gotten away with calling for tax cuts without having to outline how they would be paid for. Now you will see what level of spending conservative tax policy will support. And chances are high that you won't like it.

I want to know why rescinding the 2/3 state budget rule wasn't on the ballot.

I want to vote for a measure that will repeal that undemocratic rule AND repeal all voter improved tax and spending measures for the last 40 years, including Prop. 13 and Prop. 98, thus both forcing and enabling the legislature and governor to once again make policy decisions and be held accountable for those decisions. I want to increase (double) the size of the State Assembly to 160 members so that Committees have more influence and that districts are less populous so that less special interest money is needed to run for these seats.

I want California State Government to be overhauled root and branch, and I want the elected politicians to be able to enact and be held accountable for their policies. No more rule by super-minority and being able to blame the other party for their intransigence.

Blame the Governor and the Legislature and your fellow voters, and the worst economy since the Great Depression for this financial disaster, but primarily blame the undemocratic 2/3 budget rule for the prisoners about to released early from prison, from the parks that will close, for the draconian cuts in education and health and transportation spending, and for the draconian cuts to county and city budgets soon to follow.

-------------

Note: As far as transit goes, if you want to know why we are about to have cuts in bus service despite passing Measure R, it is because the state budget completely abolished the $536 million that it dedicated to subsidizing transit operations.

A tale of two Valleys

2009-03-27T09:35:00.000-07:00

While I currently live on the Westside, I have lived in the San Fernando Valley previously and do care for the welfare of its transit future -- if for no other reason that getting to/from the Westside via transit is often as exercise in frustration and futility.

What struck me over the debate over Measure R (which the voters thankfully passed last November) is just how unified the San Gabriel Valley political establishment is over the construction of the Gold Line extensions. There may be differences of opinion about the routing of the southern leg, but there is unified support for it. (I hope these same politicians also recognized the importance of upgrading Metrolink Commuter Rail service and Foothill Transit bus service.)

Compare this to the San Fernando Valley. Where is the unified support of SFV pols for upgrades to transit in their areas? While they rave about the Orange Line busway, and there is great fanfare about extending on the western end up to Canoga Park, anyone who actually takes the darn thing knows it is already stuffed to capacity as it is. Most transit advocates realize the Orange Line will eventually need to be converted to light-rail. However, why aren't Congressmen Howard Berman and Brad Sherman working together for this with the same unity that Congressmembers David Dreier and Adam Schiff and the SGV state legislators are doing for the Gold Line? Will the local pols have the courage to face down North Hollywood NIMBYs when it is?

What about the issue of connecting the Burbank Airport to the North Hollywood Station? What about connecting the North Hollywood station to the Gold Line in Pasadena through Burbank and Glendale? What should be done on Ventura Blvd? light-rail? subway? streetcar? Perhaps bus-only lanes on Ventura and Van Nuys Blvds?

There is some money for a Sepulveda project. What about the vision of a rail line from Sylmar to LAX connecting two Metrolink Stations, the Orange Line and Ventura Blvd. to points south?

However, for argument's sake, since there are two Gold Lines connecting to Union Station, let's boil this down to just two proposed rails lines for the San Fernando Valley: (1) converting the Orange Line to light-rail and extending it east through Burbank and Glendale to the Gold Line in Pasadena; and (2) a Sepulveda north/south line from Sylmar to LAX -- I just find it so strange there is not the advocacy activity in the San Fernando Valley as there is in the San Gabriel Valley.

There are individual advocates of course, but not the sort of political coordination by elected officials to bring these two rail project to the SFV.

The only explanation that comes to mind is that with California's and Los Angeles County's "too large, too populous" legislative districts, many of the people representing the south San Fernando Valley have districts with most of the voters and political weight on the Westside.

As a Westsider, I benefit from this, and understand and appreciate that the Purple Line and Expo Lines, and perhaps even the Pink Line via Santa Monica Blvd. are considered higher priorities. However, the San Fernando Valley will probably be a poor relation to the San Gabriel Valley and Westside unless SFV specific transit advocates work together and a lot of people with automobile-entitlement decide having transit alternatives in the Valley is a good thing for themselves as well.

A Homophoblic Incident on the Big Blue Bus

2008-11-13T19:31:00.000-08:00

Here is a letter I sent today to the Big Blue Bus regarding an unfortunate incident that happened on Tuesday.

-----------------------------

Dear Big Blue Bus,

I am sorry to have to write this note for I do not like to get people in trouble, but I've thought about this incident for two days and based on the events of the past week, I feel I must report it.

On Tuesday night, I was riding on a No. # Bus, number ####. Around 6:10 p.m. we past a "No on 8" demonstration in Santa Monica on Ocean Avenue. The bus driver surveyed the situation and exclaimed the slur, "sodomites."

As a gay man, I found this to be incredibly and deeply offensive. I do not believe a public employee on duty and in uniform has any excuse for using a slur like "sodomites". What's next? "Faggots"?

A bus operator is entitled to his beliefs, opinions and even prejudices.

However, no rider should have to hear any slurring language against them by a bus operator on duty for any reason, be it race, gender, religion, sexual orientation or anything else.

Anti-gay bigotry is no longer publicly acceptable as far as I am concerned. Perhaps your operators need diversity training.

In any event, I would like an apology and a promise that it will not happen again.

I am sorry I had to write this note. I believe the Big Blue Bus provides exemplary service and I am otherwise a very satisfied customer.

Best regards,

Dan Wentzel

-------------------------

Here is the text of the note the Big Blue Bus sent me in reply:

------------------------

Thank you for taking the time to contact us.

The Big Blue Bus does not condone the type of behavior that you have described. Your comments have been forwarded to the operations supervisor. The driver will be addressed and the appropriate action will be taken. It is our priority to have curteous drivers.

We appreciate your feedback as it makes us aware of the problems that hinder us from providing excellent public transportation.

Customer Service
Big Blue Bus