Metrolink News/Alerts

[whitmanlam]

Oct 3, 2008 21:41:16 GMT -8 Gokhan said:

Oct 3, 2008 21:36:01 GMT -8 whitmanlam said:

NTSB has confirmed the Metrolink Engineer, Robert Sanchez sent a text message from his cell-phone 22 seconds before the time of the crash. It's still preliminary, but it would be interpreted as just one of the factors, including fatigue.

Yes, this has already been thouroughly discussed in this thread.

If the light was green, which seems so according to actual witness accounts, both texting and fatigue are completely irrelevant to the accident which happened on a blind curve near the portal of a tunnel.

But was there any chance for the Metrolink to brake after it passed the blind curve ? Perhaps a few seconds.

[Gokhan]

Oct 3, 2008 21:46:12 GMT -8 whitmanlam said:

Oct 3, 2008 21:41:16 GMT -8 Gokhan said:

Yes, this has already been thouroughly discussed in this thread.

If the light was green, which seems so according to actual witness accounts, both texting and fatigue are completely irrelevant to the accident which happened on a blind curve near the portal of a tunnel.

But was there any chance for the Metrolink to brake after it passed the blind curve ? Perhaps a few seconds.

The best answer to that: The UP train only braked for two seconds before the collision, which hardly changed its speed. Both trains were going nearly with the same speed and they got into eye contact about 400 ft each direction from the crash point. 400 ft is 6 seconds at 42 MPH but this doesn't include reaction time.

So, the short answer is that it would make little difference even if he was paying full attention but perhaps it could have saved a few more lives. The intensity of the collision in this case was mainly determined by the speed of the freight train, since it's much heavier. I don't think the freight train would manage to slow down much on that downhill curve even if it had more time thanks to Metrolink train braking and coming to a near stop. So, the intensity of the collision wouldn't be much different, even if Robert Sanchez had managed to come to a full stop.

[Gokhan]

Assuming that it didn't cause this accident, which always seemed very unlikely given the experience of the engineer and configuration of the lights along that particular railroad, texting was actually a good thing because it ruled out other possibilities such as suicide, health problems, etc., and most importantly, it's telling us that there might be a ticking bomb at Control Point Topanga, or even worse, at the Metrolink Operations Center, which could cause a similar accident at any day.

I've always suspected a cover-up by some Metrolink people, from the way they initially said an alarm was tripped and they had tried to warn the engineer -- which then turned out that they had no idea what was going on until the conductor called them after the accident -- and the way the Metrolink spokeswoman jumped the gun.

NTSB have lost all their respect in my eyes, by jumping the guns themselves, carrying the investigation too slowly, and not carefully scrutinizing the Metrolink operations center.

I will add one more witness to the three witnesses cited in LA Times: Robert Sanchez. If all these four witnesses, all experienced with the particular railroad, saw the wrong thing, it's one thing. But, more likely, if they saw the right thing, then it's a shame on NTSB that they are not looking for the ticking bomb.

[whitmanlam]

I don't know what's worse, blaming the accident on an individual, or blaming it on a faulty signal system.
By putting it all on one person, the public can be led to believe that it was just an isolated incident. And that the Metrolink personnel would be more careful not to allow any future lapses in judgement with changes in protocol.
If the signalling system is to blame, then the public may never trust or ride Metrolink again, unless a massive overhaul (Which Metrolink can't afford) takes place. And even then people will be reluctant to ride a defective system for many years past.

Hopefully something will be done to reassure the public.

[Justin Walker]

For anyone that's been curious about the exact geometry of the area, I've whipped up a map. It shows all the locations of the track and signals and the approximate location of the trains about 1 minute before the collision.

This shows the "false proceed" argument. The northbound green signal for Metrolink #111 at CP Topanga is the one that may have been red or green.

After considering all the situational evidence and the witness testimony, I consider the "false proceed" theory most valid. I personally know one of the three "false proceed" witnesses and I can definitely vouch for his ability to understand signals he sees. He's at the Chatsworth station most afternoons and uses the signal indications to help passengers determine what track their train will be on. He's as kooky a railfan as you'll ever find but he helps the passengers and definitely knows his signals.

[nickv]

11-member panel named to study Metrolink safety



The group was formed in response to the Chatsworth crash that killed 25 people.
A report on improving operations is due in 60 days.

By Jeff Gottlieb, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 11, 2008

In the wake of the devastating Chatsworth train crash last month, Metrolink's board Friday appointed an 11-member panel of industry experts to take a comprehensive look at the commuter rail's safety and operating procedures.

---

By the way, here's a link to Metrolink's Board Agenda in regards to the panel. Go to page 46 in the Acrobat Reader to see a familiar name...

---

The group, composed of people from industry and academia and a passenger advocate, is supposed to issue a draft report in 60 days. Improvements that can be made more quickly are expected to be forwarded to Metrolink in seven to 10 days.

Full coverage of Metrolink crashRemembering the lives lost
"It is healthy for us and the public to have a transparent, independent and thorough analysis of the organization to make sure everything is being done at the highest level," said Metrolink board Vice President Keith Millhouse, a Moorpark city councilman who selected members of the Metrolink Commuter Rail Safety Peer Review Panel along with board member Richard Katz.

In the Sept. 12 accident, a Metrolink train failed to heed a warning light and crashed head-on into a Union Pacific freight train. Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board say that just before the crash, the engineer of Metrolink 111 was sending and receiving text messages on his cellphone. Twenty-five people died and 135 were injured in the most deadly rail accident in recent state history.

The board also approved a review of Metrolink's emergency preparedness and crisis communications plans.

Since the crash, the board has pushed for a number of safety measures, including an automatic braking system and a video camera system to monitor locomotive crews. About two weeks ago, the railroad began using a second engineer, conductor or trainmaster in some trains.

Gray Crary, a Metrolink executive, told the board Friday that the commuter line has been placing two employees in the cabs on an average of 25 trips a day. Metrolink trains make 145 trips a day in Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties, rail spokesman Francisco Oaxaca said.

The railroad has been concentrating its two-person cabs on lines it shares with freight trains, such as the one in Chatsworth.

Crary said putting a second person in the cab would become more difficult over the holidays because of special trains and vacations. Those filling the slots have come from Metrolink's pool of employees normally used to replace primary engineers and conductors who are on vacation, sick or in training. When those employees were not running trains, they performed administrative work or collected fares.

As a long-term solution, Crary said, Metrolink could push for quicker hiring of engineers scheduled for expanded service in Orange County. He said six engineers could be ready for "extra eye" service in February, several months before they would be needed in Orange County.

"You get as many people in the cab as possible," Millhouse said. "We'll get the money."

Board President Ron Roberts, a Temecula city councilman, said that when he was in Washington recently, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer was adamant about placing a second engineer on the trains as soon as possible.

"She said, 'I know it's expensive, but we have grants we can help you with,' " he recalled.

The panel will be headed by Peter Cannito, ex-president of Metro-North Railroad in New York, and Don Sepulveda of HNTB Corp., an international architecture, transportation and engineering company based in Kansas City, Mo.

The panel's facilitator will be Linda Bohlinger, vice president and national director of management consulting for HNTB. Bohlinger is the former interim chief executive of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

According to a Metrolink memo, Bohlinger helped start the commuter railway when she was an MTA employee, working to purchase the railroad right-of-way, negotiate all the funding agreements with the five counties and secure the initial grants.

HNTB has had city contracts for $35 million of work at Los Angeles International and Ontario airports. According to a memo from Steve Wylie, a Metrolink assistant executive, HNTB is also an approved subcontractor to a firm that holds one of the three general engineering contracts with Metrolink. "As this contract has only recently been issued, HNTB has no currently authorized work with [Metrolink], and thus is ideally situated to support an independent review."

[e-mail]

[Gokhan]

Another accident. We need automatic train-control systems ASAP.

From the Metrolink Web site

11/21/08 1:00 pm

At approximately 11:30 a.m. on Thursday Nov. 20, Metrolink Train 306, traveling from Los Angeles to San Bernardino, came into contact at low speed with a Burlington Northern Santa Fe local freight train, which was entering a siding in Rialto. The Metrolink train was traveling eastbound, with a locomotive in the lead, with two crew members on the locomotive. The contact between the Metrolink locomotive and the freight train is characterized as a minor sideswipe, not head-on, with no attendant damage to passenger coaches or freight cars, nor to track and signal facilities. There were 15 passengers on board the train. Four passengers reported minor injuries and have been transported to local medical facilities. The National Transportation Safety Board has responded to the scene.

“Although this incident occurred at a low speed, any incident on the Metrolink system is unacceptable,” said Metrolink Board Vice Chairman Keith Millhouse. “This incident will be fully investigated to determine the cause, and measures will be taken to ensure that incidents like this do not happen again.”

At this time, there is no update as to the cause of the above incident. The investigation is continuing.

[vnc]

I heard from one person on another site. That person was thinking. This engineer may have been grandstanding. Which I hear isn't a recommanded in the industry.

[Jason Saunders]

Nov 22, 2008 14:54:08 GMT -8 vnc said:

I heard from one person on another site. That person was thinking. This engineer may have been grandstanding. Which I hear isn't a recommanded in the industry.

Did this person say, how the engineer may have been grandstanding? Was this engineer for example attempting to show how close he could navigate his train to another?

Did this person say how he happened to know this information? Is this speculation or is he privey to some source of information?

[vnc]

Nov 22, 2008 16:53:23 GMT -8 Jason Saunders said:

Nov 22, 2008 14:54:08 GMT -8 vnc said:

I heard from one person on another site. That person was thinking. This engineer may have been grandstanding. Which I hear isn't a recommended in the industry.

Did this person say, how the engineer may have been grandstanding? Was this engineer for example attempting to show how close he could navigate his train to another?

Did this person say how he happened to know this information? Is this speculation or is he privey to some source of information?

I heard this from a two hoggers(engineers). Who have operated passenger and freight trains for many years. they know the ins and outs of the trade. And they have participated in grandstanding practices.

[Gokhan]

Metrolink train in Rialto crash ran red light, inquiry finds



Investigators inspect the Metrolink commuter train, left, that was struck by a freight train in Rialto on Thursday.
Francis Specker / Associated Press

'But we don't know why,' an investigator says. The collision injured five people Thursday.
By Robert J. Lopez, Rich Connell and Steve Hymon
November 22, 2008

Federal investigators said human error or brake problems may have caused a Metrolink train to run a red light before it slammed into a freight train Thursday in Rialto.

The Metrolink crew noticed two lights before the red signal, said Ted Turpin, the National Transportation Safety Board investigator supervising the inquiry. One was flashing yellow and the other solid yellow, which should have alerted the crew that they had to stop so the other train could move off the single line of shared track and onto a side rail.

Metrolink train collides with freight cars in Rialto

"They used the brakes but they didn't stop," Turpin said.

The Rialto crash, which injured five passengers, marked the second time in less than three months that a Metrolink train had failed to heed a stoplight before hitting another train.

Investigators in the catastrophic Chatsworth crash in September have said the engineer raced past a red light before slamming into an oncoming freight train, killing 25 people and injuring 135 others. The engineer was also text messaging before the impact.

The latest accident prompted Metrolink's board of directors on Friday to direct staff to explore what would be required to terminate the agency's contract with the private company that runs the commuter trains.

"If it turns out to be operator error, then it raises serious issues about how [the contractor] is responding to what happened in Chatsworth and the concerns raised by Metrolink," board member Richard Katz said in an interview.

Thursday's crash was similar to the Chatsworth collision, except that the commuter train was moving slowly when it hit the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway train.

Experts said the crash, coming on the heels of the Chatsworth collision and other deadly Metrolink accidents in recent years, raises safety questions about the popular commuter line.

The Rialto collision, experts noted, was especially troubling because the Metrolink train had two engineers -- a measure enacted after the Chatsworth crash to prevent accidents.

"It's just intolerable to have so many accidents on one system in a relatively short period of time," said Barry M. Sweedler, who spent 30 years with the NTSB as an investigator and administrator.

Najmedin Meshkati, a USC engineering professor who has studied rail safety systems, said the accidents point to systemic problems with the agency. "We are dealing with a deep-seated issue that involves the safety culture of the organization," he said.

Part of the problem, Sweedler said, is that Metrolink contracts out for its engineers, creating a layer of bureaucracy that makes it difficult to hold individuals accountable.

A spokeswoman for Veolia Transportation, whose subsidiary employs the engineers, said Friday evening that officials from the firm were unavailable for comment.

Turpin, the NTSB investigator, said the inquiry would continue several more days and investigative teams would be poring over computer data from the trains, signals and the Metrolink dispatch center.

He said the Metrolink train slammed into the freight train about 120 feet past the red light. Investigators interviewed the Metrolink crew and took statements from the Burlington Northern crew, Turpin said.

"We know pretty much where everything was and what was going on," he said, adding that it would probably be months before a probable cause could be determined.

A Metrolink spokesman said Friday that all of the agency's trains would get complete mechanical inspections before beginning service Monday.

Lopez, Connell and Hymon are Times staff writers.
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

[spokker]

A while ago Metrolink was talking about leasing cars from other agencies. Did that ever happen?

Metrolink recently bought a bunch of new locomotives. What type of service additions can we expect?

What is the status of 30-minute service? Is it slated for 2009, 2010? Is Metrolink receptive to lowering fares for shorter trips, say, 1-3 station hops?

All I see if bag checks and collisions on this service. When will they throw us a bone?

[nickmatonak]

Of the 15 new locomotives that Metrolink bought, 4 will be dedicated to Orange Country to provide 30 minute service between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel.
The plan was once these new locomotives arrived, they would be taking out the old ones for overhauls first, I believe that have received 3 so far, but according to the latest meeting minutes their are still some engineering issues with them.

As far as fare reductions go, several months ago, one of the board members of the OCTA did float a proposal that would lower the fares for the Metrolink in OC by having passengers pay $1 per stop, so for example if you were going only 3 stations you would only pay $3. I don;t know what happened to that proposal.

[jejozwik]

The conductor and others contradict the preliminary findings of the National Transportation Safety Board, which has said the commuter train ran a red light just before colliding with a freight train.
By Robert J. Lopez and Rich Connell
December 5, 2008
The only surviving crewman aboard a Metrolink train that slammed into a freight train in Chatsworth in September has told investigators that a track-side warning light just south of the crash site was green, his attorneys said Thursday.

Conductor Robert Heldenbrand told investigators that he saw the green signal from the depot just before the train pulled out of the station, said San Dimas attorney John Gilbert.



"He checked the platform prior to the [train] doors closing to make sure there were no more passengers. That's when he observed the green light," said Gilbert, who was with Heldenbrand when he was interviewed by investigators.

Heldenbrand's account matches statements from three observers who say they saw that the light was green as the train left the Chatsworth station. After their comments appeared in The Times, the witnesses were interviewed by federal investigators.

But the conductor and the others contradict statements from Metrolink and the preliminary findings of the National Transportation Safety Board, which has said the commuter train ran a red light just before colliding with the Union Pacific train.

In an interview Thursday, Mark V. Rosenker, acting chairman of the NSTB, said the agency stands by its earlier findings that the signal system was working properly at the time of the head-on collision.

Twenty-five people died and 135 were injured in the Sept. 12 crash.

The safety board has said that engineer Robert M. Sanchez sent and received dozens of text messages while on duty the day of the crash, including one just 22 seconds before impact.

Earlier this week, The Times also reported that investigators have found that the red light was not as bright as the yellow and green lights displayed by the track-warning signal. The reasons for the visibility difference -- and what, if any, role it played in the crash -- are part of the investigation, which will take months to complete.

Sanchez, who was killed in the collision, was supposed to stop Metrolink 111 at the red signal just before a switch mechanism intended to guide the freight train onto a side rail, investigators said.

Instead, Sanchez barreled over the switch at 42 mph, bending it badly, before slamming into the southbound freight carrier on a sharp curve about a quarter-mile farther, according to federal investigators. Heldenbrand's statement raises the possibility that Sanchez may not have been entirely at fault for the crash.

But the NTSB, which is leading the probe, has said that three separate tests have confirmed that the signal system was working properly, and that the light was red.

Sanchez failed to heed two warning signals, investigators said. The first one, just before the Metrolink station, was yellow. It should have warned Sanchez to stop at the red light about a mile past the depot, according to investigators.

The final light was visible from the station when Sanchez was at the depot, investigators said.

After the crash, NTSB member Kitty Higgins said Heldenbrand told investigators that he did not communicate with Sanchez about the color of the last two lights.

The communication breakdown, Higgins told reporters, was an apparent violation of regulations requiring conductors and engineers to confirm to each other the colors of yellow or red lights. She said she didn't know why the two men did not discuss the signals.

But Gilbert said Thursday that Heldenbrand told investigators that he and Sanchez did not call out the signals because they had a green light.

"There wouldn't be any need to communicate," Gilbert said.

Lopez and Connell are Times staff writers.

la times

[Transit Coalition]

As you may know, Amtrak is one of several parties seeking to take over staffing of conductors and engineers for Metrolink trains. For those interested, here is Amtrak's presentation to the Metrolink Board of Directors from last week.

Some other reports, including Metrolink's option to run their own trains, are remain posted here on our MetrolinkMAX website.

-Enjoy!

[nickv]

LA Times Exclusive Investigation with Metrolink



The Los Angeles Times featured an exclusive in depth report dubbed "Death on the rails in LA", showing the locations of Metrolink-related fatal collisions, the need to improve the grade crossings used by Metrolink trains and the need of other safety improvements.

For the record:

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, one of the agencies that form Metrolink, is already working on establishing separated grades at several busy rail crossings in Riverside County mainly to reduce wait times.

Links

- RCTC Grade Separation Funding strategy
- Grade Separation Concept - West Corona Station area
- Grade Separation Concept - North Main Corona Station area
- Grade Separation & Station Concept - Highgrove/Grand Terrace

[Justin Walker]

Sept 27, 2009 20:56:48 GMT -8 nickv said:

The Los Angeles Times featured an exclusive in depth report dubbed "Death on the rails in LA", showing the locations of Metrolink-related fatal collisions, the need to improve the grade crossings used by Metrolink trains and the need of other safety improvements.

A disgustingly misleading article...

[Jason Saunders]

Sept 27, 2009 21:23:05 GMT -8 Justin Walker said:

Sept 27, 2009 20:56:48 GMT -8 nickv said:

The Los Angeles Times featured an exclusive in depth report dubbed "Death on the rails in LA", showing the locations of Metrolink-related fatal collisions, the need to improve the grade crossings used by Metrolink trains and the need of other safety improvements.

A disgustingly misleading article...

How so?

[bobdavis]

There were at least 18 comments on the LA Times article in Trainorders.com today (and most likely there will be more tomorrow). A common theme is "if you're not drunk, stupid or suicidal, you won't get hit by a train".

[Justin Walker]

Sept 27, 2009 21:32:42 GMT -8 Jason Saunders said:

Sept 27, 2009 21:23:05 GMT -8 Justin Walker said:

A disgustingly misleading article...

How so?

Unfortunately, this is nothing new. To quote the late George Carlin:

"This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?"

IMO, the article is a shameless attempt to continue to skewer what has been made an easy target: Metrolink. The story would be much more meaningful if billed as "Motorists and pedestrians still deliberately disobey basic traffic laws." The facts themselves say quite a bit about motorist/pedestrian behavior and very little about Metrolink.

[James Fujita]

I read the article. I don't think that it was as shameless as you say it was.

I think we can all agree that most people who get hit by trains get hit because they made idiotic mistakes.

However, calling them idiots does nothing to solve the problem. It does absolutely nothing to prevent people from acting like idiots.

The article says that the MTA is way ahead of Metrolink when it comes to idiot-proofing its rails. The article also says that Metrolink is underfunded. It implies that safety funds are being spent in the wrong areas. These are issues that ought to be addressed.

It is irresponsible and insensitive to just throw up our hands and say "it's the driver's fault, it's not our problem." If these problems can be fixed by installing quad gates, they should be fixed. Even if it means shifting funds from expansion to safety.

I would love to see Metrolink get more funding - for safety, for track repairs, for expanding service, for conversion to TAP cards.

Sometimes you have to expose a problem such as this before it gets dealt with. I think that was what the Times was aiming for.

[spokker]

Analyzing a grade crossing for redesign or grade separation is something that must be done on a case by case basis. I have no doubt that there are some confusing crossings on the Metrolink system, but nothing that an attentive driver can't handle. Here's one that tricked a big rig driver:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjeUrfjB8dE

Funny how everyone else was able to deal with the flaw at this crossing, though. So I don't know.

But to say the entire system is unsafe is pretty stupid. Separating every crossing from traffic without regard to context is even more stupid. People don't like to hear it, but the value of a human life is not infinite. It does not make sense to spend millions of dollars to save the one person a month who falls prey to Metrolink's thirst for blood.

[James Fujita]

the L.A Times article didn't say every intersection should be separated. where did that claim come from?

the article pretty much singled out two intersections that looked like they were slam dunks for installing quad gates.

it barely even touched on the issue of grade separation, which is a much more expensive solution (although one that will inevitably have to be addressed when high-speed rail comes through).

people have made some ridiculous claims when it came to safety, but this article wasn't one of them.

[spokker]

Death on the rails! All must bow down to Metrolink and their insatiable thirst for human flesh!

The article I saw included a map of the Metrolink system with bubbles around every grade crossing showcasing the amount of deaths at each one as if we are supposed to be frightened of trains or something.

One thing I found funny was how Metrolink was the epitome of unsafe railroads, unlike the MTA, haha. That should piss off FixExpo.

[spokker]

Wow, the Times is really going after Metrolink.

www.latimes.com/news/local/metrolink/la-me-pedestrians-metrolink27-2009sep27,0,7747168.story

But nothing bothers Vowels as much as the belief that his wife's death might have been prevented had Metrolink installed a fence between its right-of-way across San Fernando Road and what was then a small hospital where he thinks she was heading.

...

Fifteen years after she died, the stretch where Joan Vowels was killed is still easily accessible to anyone on foot.

"It drives me nuts," Vowels said. "How much does it cost to put a damn fence up?"

So let me get this straight, your stupid wife decided to make the decision to save a few minutes by crossing the tracks in exchange for the risk to lose the years she would have lived had she decided to walk to a rail crossing?

If Metrolink ever proposes to build a fence here, I will oppose it!

This is why I don't understand people who jaywalk and cross tracks at places other than crossings. Yeah, cities suck and don't share our super liberal green views that streets are for people and not cars and blah blah blah, and you have to walk half a mile to a mile to cross the street at a designated intersection. But the extra 10-15 minutes it takes is not worth your life. People are making decisions that aren't in their best every single day.

Since then, the agency has installed stanchions and locked gates at street crossings to prevent cars from driving onto the right-of-way. But pedestrians can simply walk around the barricades, and even a car could get past them by jumping the curb, because much of the track has yet to be enclosed in fence.

A car might jump a curb and still get hit! My God, we've gotta enclose this commuter railroad in those fences they install at Nascar tracks.

[James Fujita]

Spokker, you should be put in charge of Metrolink's PR department.

obviously, it's better to act like an arrogant, condescending jerk than to spend money on a chain link fence. obviously, the public is too dumb to live. it's so obvious!

why come up with simple, inexpensive solutions to a problem when you can set up strawman arguments and knock them down?

thank you for pointing out that Metrolink is perfect in every possible way and NEVER needs to change!

[spokker]

Sept 29, 2009 14:39:15 GMT -8 James Fujita said:

Spokker, you should be put in charge of Metrolink's PR department.

They don't have the guts

Put me in charge of Metrolink's Perris Line and I will route it through every playground near the ROW. Muahahahaha!

the public is too dumb to live.

Actually, most of them are intelligent enough to not get hit by a train, hence the low number of fatalities compared to everything else in life that will kill you, including driving.

why come up with simple, inexpensive solutions to a problem when you can set up strawman arguments and knock them down

Spend millions to save some guy's retarded wife. That's such an efficient use of taxpayer dollars.

Actually, I'm only kidding. I would support a redesign of every Metrolink grade crossing that the LA Times thinks is dangerous, only after they put up a fence to separate the sidewalks I use every day from vehicle traffic. Together, we can make our world idiot proof.

[James Fujita]

Sept 29, 2009 17:39:44 GMT -8 spokker said:

Sept 29, 2009 14:39:15 GMT -8 James Fujita said:

why come up with simple, inexpensive solutions to a problem when you can set up strawman arguments and knock them down

Spend millions to save some guy's retarded wife. That's such an efficient use of taxpayer dollars.

Actually, I'm only kidding. I would support a redesign of every Metrolink grade crossing that the LA Times thinks is dangerous, only after they put up a fence to separate the sidewalks I use every day from vehicle traffic. Together, we can make our world idiot proof.

I really don't see what your problem is here. Why do we have to be so reactionary to every safety suggestion? Why can't there be a compromise between overprotective, expensive Damien Goodmon/ NIMBY style "safety" and total kneejerk libertarian "it's your own fault for being a human being" irresponsible "safety"?

Metrolink is already skating on thin ice after last year's accident. There are plenty of people who would love to see the whole thing shut down.

These are not radical ideas that are being promoted, and the general public deserves better than the silence and boilerplate that Metrolink has been serving them.

[nickv]

For the Record: Metrolink Budget Shortfall Proposed Actions



Several news sources and blogs have speculated possible Metrolink service reductions, mainly on weekends due to a Metrolink budget shortfall. Although some service reductions were considered, no Metrolink service reductions are recommended by staff at this time.

The following is a list of proposed budget alternatives that will be considered (following a public hearing period) by the Metrolink Board today (October 9, 2009):

• A 4.5% fare increase effective on January 1st, 2010.
• Increase in the price of 10-trip ticket to be equivalent to 5 round trip fares.
• Cancel the December 25% monthly pass fare discount.
• Overtime reductions to maintenance of way operations.
• Suspension of the 2009 Holiday Toy Express. Metrolink patrons will be encouraged to donate toys directly to their local fire stations.
• Application of rail equipment lease proceeds as an additional funding source.
• Additional budget actions to reduce costs.
• Additional member agency subsidies

[nickv]

Metrolink: No Service Reductions Proposed,
Fare hikes are a last resort,
Christmas Toy Train to Keep Rolling



“It will no longer be acceptable to simply raise fares, while at the same time cutting service. We must find other solutions.”
- Leslie Rogers, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) at
SunLine Transit Agency’s 2nd Annual State of Public Transit Luncheon


By DUG BEGLEY
The Press-Enterprise

No Service Reductions Proposed:

Metrolink officials researched reducing service, but pulled the suggestion from board consideration because cutbacks to train service also require lengthy public comment periods and approval from federal transit officials.

Fare Hikes Last Resort:

Metrolink board members said Friday they want to consider all their options including taking out a loan or cutting costs before they are forced to increase fares at a time when ridership is declining and commuters are cash-strapped.

Facing the loss of $5.5 million in fare revenue because fewer people are riding, commuter train officials are pondering a 3 to 6 percent hike in fares. For someone buying a round-trip ticket from downtown Riverside to Union Station in Los Angeles, the increase would raise the cost from $20.75 to between $21.50 and $22.75 on a weekday.

Board members Friday expressed deep reservations about raising fares.

"I don't think it's fair to ask these people who are being hit, trying to hold on, to pay more," Metrolink board member and Hemet Councilwoman Robin Lowe said.

On Friday, the board set a hearing for Nov. 13. Drew Phillips, the agency's budget director, said Metrolink staff has yet to support a rate hike. The agency is required to hold hearings before any rate increases are approved.

"We are now up against our timeline for any changes of ticket prices," said Metrolink CEO David Solow, adding that, if approved, the fee hikes could begin Jan. 1.

The region's job losses have cut into the number of commuters hopping on trains at a time when Metrolink is investing in safety improvements and facing higher costs as it maintains it fleet. Without quick action, the agency falls deeper into a budget morass, officials said.

Loan Option:

Metrolink staff and board members could find a solution instead of the fare increase before the public hearing. One suggestion is a loan from Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority, which has a surplus, said Maureen Micheline, transportation director for LA Metro and a Metrolink board member.

Micheline said the transit system could lend Metrolink the money to make up the gap, and then the five counties that comprise Metrolink -- Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura -- could repay it.

If the loan is not approved by the Metrolink board, Micheline said Los Angeles County might try to "buy down" the rate hike for its residents.

Members did not formally discuss the loan offer, but many were supportive.

"We'll pledge our firstborn to fix this," San Bernardino Mayor Pat Morris joked about fixing the budget without a fare increase.

Others said the loan didn't address Metrolink's need to raise revenue or curtail cost.

The loan would address the current shortfall, said Cathedral City Councilman Greg Pettis, "but it is not an answer to the question" of Metrolink spending more than it makes.

Lower Admin Costs:

Lowe and Pettis, both alternate members of the board for the Riverside County Transportation Commission, said before rates are raised on commuters, Metrolink must control its own costs, including a hard look at administrative expenses.

"All bets are off," Lowe said. "We hired two people to handle Twitter. Now how ignorant does this look as an organization?"

Metrolink spokesman Francisco Oaxaca said the agency has two vacant positions in its public relations office, one that will oversee sending information to riders pertinent to train times and delays. Twitter is one of the methods used to send riders up-to-date information, Oaxaca said.

Both positions were included in the agency's current fiscal year budget.

Some cost savings were also proposed by staff, such as eliminating overtime for maintenance crews and delaying acceptance of new passenger train cars.

Friday the board unanimously approved those changes.

Cutting back was more popular among board members Friday than increasing fares.

"We should not raise our ridership fares and we should be looking at service cuts if need be," said board chairman and Moorpark councilman Keith Millhouse of Ventura County.

Christmas Toy Train will Continue - Possible Private Sector Sponsorship/Funding Discussed

One cost saving suggestion by staff but rebuffed by the Metrolink board was suspending the Holiday Toy Train for this Christmas season.

The popular program where Metrolink delivers toys via train travels throughout the five counties and has gained a following. Officials said the toy trains are an introduction to Metrolink for youngsters who one day will commute to jobs in Southern California.

"My grandson wants to ride the Metrolink because of the holiday train," Morris, the San Bernardino mayor, said. "This seems to me to be a long-term investment."

Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich said suspending the service would probably cost the agency goodwill in the community, even if it was for only one year. Antonovich chided Metrolink staff for not more aggressively seeking corporate sponsors for the holiday trains.

"If we can't do it in-house, then we need to hire a development supervisor," he said.

Reach Dug Begley at 951-368-9475 or [e-mail]

Additional member agency subsidies

Four of the five counties involved in Metrolink would also be asked to contribute more to help fill the commuter train system's budget gap. San Bernardino County, which already contributes more than $9 million each year to Metrolink, has seen ridership plummet, which means it will actually get money back because contributions are based on the number of riders from each county. Based on projections, below is the proposed additional contribution from the counties.

Riverside
$320,600

San Bernardino
$116,300 rebate

Los Angeles
$756,000

Orange
$287,900

Ventura
$309,400

Source: Metrolink