|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Feb 4, 2021 9:38:42 GMT -8
Today's Daily breeze newspaper 02/04/2021 has a article about Phil Washington retiring from Metro. This will take effect in May when his contract is up. Speculation that he will get a job in D.C.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 6, 2021 19:12:06 GMT -8
So, will the "free metro" also be retired? Riding for free if you can afford to pay never made much sense to me and I am worried that when a service is free that you get what you pay for.
When I listen to board meetings the accolades flow as if Mr. Washington brought the concept of expanding the system with him from Denver all on his own. I think that he's been a good steward and advocate, but from the outside it's hard to see what he brought that wasn't already in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Feb 8, 2021 14:59:34 GMT -8
So, will the "free metro" also be retired? Riding for free if you can afford to pay never made much sense to me and I am worried that when a service is free that you get what you pay for. When I listen to board meetings the accolades flow as if Mr. Washington brought the concept of expanding the system with him from Denver all on his own. I think that he's been a good steward and advocate, but from the outside it's hard to see what he brought that wasn't already in place. I very much agree. $1.75 with free transfers is hardly keeping anyone off the system other than some homeless who seem to get on anyway. It is hard to evaluate Metro CEOs sometimes, but the operators seem to feel Washington didn't put their health very high on the list from what I gather. Also, pretty much all of the construction projects are late and over budget. Some would say that is the fault partly of the Leahy administration or just circumstances. I don't know. The Blue Line rebuild was pretty much a disaster. In the end did they even save any time at all? They were touting 10 minute in savings and then when it opened they had trains that were running 10-15 minutes or more late. Ridership had been in a free fall before the pandemic and now there will probably be a perm loss of more riders. It is hard to feel good about much at Metro now. I guess we'll see how NextGen goes. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 12, 2021 21:27:24 GMT -8
So, will the "free metro" also be retired? Riding for free if you can afford to pay never made much sense to me and I am worried that when a service is free that you get what you pay for. When I listen to board meetings the accolades flow as if Mr. Washington brought the concept of expanding the system with him from Denver all on his own. I think that he's been a good steward and advocate, but from the outside it's hard to see what he brought that wasn't already in place. I very much agree. $1.75 with free transfers is hardly keeping anyone off the system other than some homeless who seem to get on anyway. It is hard to evaluate Metro CEOs sometimes, but the operators seem to feel Washington didn't put their health very high on the list from what I gather. Also, pretty much all of the construction projects are late and over budget. Some would say that is the fault partly of the Leahy administration or just circumstances. I don't know. The Blue Line rebuild was pretty much a disaster. In the end did they even save any time at all? They were touting 10 minute in savings and then when it opened they had trains that were running 10-15 minutes or more late. Ridership had been in a free fall before the pandemic and now there will probably be a perm loss of more riders. It is hard to feel good about much at Metro now. I guess we'll see how NextGen goes. NextGen is another huge fail imo and it's also another example of Metro being less than honest. When they state that bus frequencies are being improved by NextGen they are comparing to existing service levels which are greatly reduced due the pandemic. There are significant cuts when compared to pre-covid levels. The 20/720 is just one example. Even the metro board complained that they thought that the statements were misleading, but Metro didn't change anything for the public. Metro staff are misleading about construction progress on every board update until very recently. Everything is always making "good progress" even as the schedule keeps slipping. When metro was promoting service patterns for the C and Crenshaw lines, they were dishonest about Aviation being able to handle 3-car trains. I'm really down on metro right now. I don't think that they have the leadership to get us to the next level. Other than the expansions and construction projects, everything else is going backwards. Crenshaw is over a year late and soon after it opens, they will shut it down to build 96th street station and the bridge over Centinela. They want to decrease police presence because some riders feel uncomfortable when crime and safety are two of the biggest deterrents for choice riders. The board spends a significant part of every meeting congratulating each other for doing their job. And not just when people retire or leave the board. Just for doing their job. I've never seen anything like it. Are board members egos really that fragile? |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Feb 13, 2021 11:29:14 GMT -8
So, will the "free metro" also be retired? Riding for free if you can afford to pay never made much sense to me and I am worried that when a service is free that you get what you pay for. When I listen to board meetings the accolades flow as if Mr. Washington brought the concept of expanding the system with him from Denver all on his own. I think that he's been a good steward and advocate, but from the outside it's hard to see what he brought that wasn't already in place. Phil Washington has said they are bringing the fareless initiative to the board this month in recent speeches and interviews this past week: |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 13, 2021 14:01:40 GMT -8
So, will the "free metro" also be retired? Riding for free if you can afford to pay never made much sense to me and I am worried that when a service is free that you get what you pay for. When I listen to board meetings the accolades flow as if Mr. Washington brought the concept of expanding the system with him from Denver all on his own. I think that he's been a good steward and advocate, but from the outside it's hard to see what he brought that wasn't already in place. Phil Washington has said they are bringing the fareless initiative to the board this month in recent speeches and interviews this past week: It's odd how he points to a 13% farebox recovery as a positive because he sees "going free" as eliminating only 13% of revenue. But expenses are about to go way up with new lines opening and metro is already cutting back on service. Most transit agencies try to increase farebox revenue and metro is going the opposite direction. Yet they're installing fare gates at new rail stations. I think that having drivers pay for free public transit will be very unpopular and political suicide for those that support it, but it certainly has its supporters. Public transportation is a public good and it makes sense to a degree. But in general, no one on either side, metro or the public, will see a free service as needing to be world class. Metro may think so now, but in the future who will think twice about cutting back on something that is provided for free to spend the money elsewhere? |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 7, 2021 14:26:51 GMT -8
Pending tomorrow's special board meeting vote, the next CEO of LA Metro is Stephanie Wiggins, current Metrolink CEO who was previously Phil Washington's deputy CEO. This probably means most of Phil Washington's programs and plans will continue instead of being ditched midstream, it won't be like last time when they took basically a year to install a new executive team and ditch the former CEO's old projects and plans.
|
|
