Post by bennyp81 on Jun 22, 2005 10:24:10 GMT -8
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 10th 4:26 AM
Mind you, I don't agree with the BRU that racism is what's wrong with the MTA, but I have to wonder why some people seem to take their very existence so personally. Surely there's an alternative somewhere between the identity politics of the BRU and the seemingly mindless pro-MTA, anti-labor attitude of the Transit Coalition...
crzwdjk
User ID: 0122954 Apr 10th 4:39 AM
I think what people hate most about the BRU is the fact that they are anti-rail, and also that they have leverage over the MTA through the consent decree. While most other cities are building modern efficient rail systems, the BRU is making the MTA buy more buses. Mind you, bus service does suck and could use some improving, but court order is not the way to do it. That and the BRU has done some pretty outrageous things like that pro-Palestine pamphlet. I haven't really seen the Transit Coalition being particularly pro-MTA or anti-labor, though maybe I'm just not familiar enough with what's going on. And I must say that though I am all for workers getting a decent wage and all, having month-long strikes every three years doesn't exactly make people like the labor unions. Both the MTA and the transit workers' unions need to be less stupid about that.
Joel C
User ID: 1084044 Apr 10th 1:50 PM
As a minority, I take offense when the BRU tries to use the racism card to stop rail *on my behalf*. As if all minorities are of a single mind on the subject. If it were up to the BRU, the Eastside wouldn't be getting LRT right now, and the Expo Line, which will largely serve the north part of South LA, wouldn't be an option. That would hurt LA's minority communities by relegating to buses that are increasingly stuck in traffic.
The views of the BRU do not represent bus riders, but bus drivers. Their goal is a system that requires the lowest possible driver-rider ratio, in order to benefit the labor side of the equation. From this vantage, it's obvious why they don't want rail: one driver will be able to transport 3-5 times as many passengers in a train than on a bus.
The Palestinian flier reflects the BRU's deep ties to far-left activist groups, and thus helps explain the group's motivations. I am a leftist and am very supportive of the Palestinian cause, but WTF does that have to do with Los Angeles' transit system? Nothing at all. It seems like the BRU is trying to drive an ideological wedge between LA's black/brown populations and its Jews/anglos. IMO, that is the last thing LA needs as it tries to address the immediate issues of land use and transit options.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 10th 5:06 PM
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is why some groups go to Swift-Boat-Vet extremes in trying to discredit the BRU. Who give a damn if they're funded by the ACLU? If you disagree with them, rebut their position on the merits, rather than resorting to lame ad hominem attacks on their president. I refer specifically to brutruth.com, and the endless "Truth about the BRU" pages on this site and the San Fernando Valley Transit Insider page.
Not to mention how hypocritical it all seems, when the Transit Coalition doesn't exactly go out of its way, on this website, to make it clear who is funding it and whether the founders/leaders of the TC have any hidden agendas or conflicts of interest. I would add to that the phony "Friends of the Red Line" type "sites" that are frequently listed as separate links on other pages, but which just point back to this Transit Coalition website. While you're certainly not the first people on the web to resort to this (IMHO) lame tactic, it does sort of raise a red flag to those, like me, who stumble onto the site through one of those phony redirects.
Again, before donning my flame suit, let me point out that I'm not a BRU member, and that while I'm pro-Palestine myself, and thus not "outraged" by BRU's bringing up the issue, I think that it's silly for them to drag it into the public debate over transportation in Los Angeles. That's why I'm wondering whether there's an organization in LA that truly represents public transportation users, current and future, without any hidden agendas or axes to grind. The BRU isn't it, IMO, but I seriously doubt that the TC is it either, based on what I've seen so far.
Bart Reed
User ID: 9523443 Apr 10th 8:14 PM
Wow, someone has finally done some deep digging to expose the deep dark secrets of The Transit Coalition. Sorry for the sarcasm, but this analysis is really a hoot from my point of view.
Have you ever been to a BRU meeting? Well, please try. The first month you attend, you will have to go to a mandatory indoctrination session. Then, if you buy in and are pleased with their dogma and doctrine, you may attend the regular meeting the following month.
Do you want to attend a Transit Coalition meeting?
OK, the details of the next meeting are on another thread. Come join us. Don't be shy.
Now, many folks have the assumption that BRU is a consumer organization. Perhaps you should look farther into this. For example, say a bus driver stops while in route with a load of 20 people to grab a cup of coffee and some donuts.
Now, bear in mind that the driver is on the clock with specific duties to follow an appointed route and to keep a schedule. He has legally mandated breaks negotiated by his labor union.
Now, from my point of view as an impacted consumer, I would hand out Transit Coalition customer service cards and fliers that describe the specific steps so everyone who is being delayed getting to home and work has an equal chance to complain to the bus company.
Now, from the Bus Riders Union point of view, there is nothing wrong here and it is against BRU policy and philosophy to report the driver or in anyway identify this specific incident to the bus company, as this is viewed as anti-labor.
Conficts of interest and hidden agendas? Do we get large salaries? Do we get funding from labor unions or the automotive industry? What special interest or organization is there to fund a group that advocates for taxpayer supported improved bus and rail service? I know I am missing the point, but what corporation would want to fund us to achieve what result?
Now, our website lists the tax returns for the BRU, as it is a public entity. It clearly shows that the BRU owners make $4M per week. For that kind of money, you would clearly expect some significant changes in LA transportation.
Here is what happened when the BRU suddenly stopped sending me my monthly meeting notices:
tinyurl.com/443g4 You may note that they suddenly started coming again, even though they never could locate the proper staff member to look into my concerns.
Now, as far as our special interest committees like Friends of the Red Line and Green Line. At one point these were free standing websites which were created and donated by one of our members. One day without notification to our volunteer group, he pulled the plug and these websites went away. Fortunately, we had another volunteer who started learning how to build a website and he learned as he went and started to rebuild it from his point of view and member input.
That said, he has not had the volunteer time available to restore the huge amount of data on the Red and Green Line websites. We can only hope, as we are volunteers.
I don't know why you assume we are pro-MTA and anti-labor? Because many of us complain when our buses are late or don't show up? Because the drivers run ahead of schedules and we miss our connecting service? Because we complain about the drivers delaying us while they stop for donuts?
Because we advocate for better bus routes and rail service?
Most recently, we testified before MTA that we believed that the incumbent unions should operate and maintain the new $725,000 articulated buses, rather than contracting out said service which will operate on the new Orange Line.
Now, in Los Angeles, we have a diverse city with many points of view. There are at least 3 transit
groups that I know of. Perhaps, if you took the time to visit all of them and ask questions of the leadership and members, you could get a more rounded point of view. I doubt if you could understand the very nuance of TC, BRU or others from just reading over websites.
But you sure can, should you come to a meeting and throw out your questions, comments and concerns. We certainly can answer them. Try us.
Þ--Þ--Þ
Ken Feyl
User ID: 0339064 Apr 11th 12:58 AM
Bart, you're right as usual (you're the man, as usual), but you need to be more forceful. Here's the real "BRU Truth": the Bus Riders Union is full of twisted, slothful charlatans. It's GOOD if buses fill up to and beyond capacity. It means people are using them, and are more likely to support true MASS transit (e.g., rail) in the future. Besides, the possibility that you will have to stand is a reality you must accept. If having to stand is going to make you whine like certain waxy politicians with big nostrils (we won't mention any names), DON'T GET ON THE DARN BUS.
While I'm at it, here's another proclamation. If you're so morbidly obese that you take up more than one seat, you have no business taking public transit. Consider ordering a stretch limo instead.
Bart, keep ripping the BRU and revealing the truth to the masses. I'm tired of all this self-serving individualist baloney derailing (haha, a pun) L.A. transit. The Foothill Extension, the Bus Deriders Union, the South Pasadena NIMBYs... they're all examples of L.A. sinking in a mess of individualism. We need a powerful leader to whip these people into line if we're ever going to see viable transit in L.A..
And thank you all for educating me about the PRT stuff. It sounds really sexy.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 11th 5:53 AM
Bart Reed wrote:
How on earth should I know? That's what I'm trying to find out, but nobody so far has leapt up to volunteer the answers to any of those questions.
Apparently beating around the bush isn't going to get me any answers, so I'll just come out and ask:
Who exactly is behind the Transit Coalition? Where does the funding come from? Do any of the leaders (officers, representatives, what have you--sorry, I don't yet know enough about the organization's structure to use specific titles) work in any industry or own any business that could be expected to gain financially if the positions endorsed by the TC were adopted by the various public agencies under discussion? Will the TC consider making available on this website the same sort of information about itself that it does about the BRU? If not, why not?
The TC sees fit to investigate and expose all manner of information about who is "behind" the BRU, but all a casual viewer is able to find out from this website about who makes up the Transit Coalition is that it is a "broad based group of concerned citizens mobilized to passionately demonstrate community support for the economic development and continuing operation of improved transportation." Well, gee, that tells me a lot. How about opening up your own books?
(And for the third time, because I guarantee you that somebody will miss this otherwise, I am neither a member of the BRU nor am I terribly impressed by their analysis of what's wrong with public transportation in Southern California.)
As for the coffee and donuts, unless the driver is taking a really long time, or the bus is already behind schedule, I would seriously suggest not having a fit over it. Nothing to do with being pro- or anti-labor, it's just a matter of not letting utterly trivial crap give you high blood pressure. By "really long time," I mean anything over, say, a minute and a half. If it's his regular route, there's no reason why he can't make an arrangement with a store along the route to have the coffee and donuts ready for him every day. Jump off, grab, pay, jump back on, drive. So what if it's not strictly by-the-book? Stress kills, literally. Don't let trivial things stress you.
Ken Alpern
User ID: 1696934 Apr 11th 7:52 AM
Great questions, Mr., ah, Giant. I am President of the Transit Coalition, and like others on this Board I have put my own money into The Transit Coalition (TTC).
I am a dermatologist, with absolutely no financial conflicts of interest with regards to rail or other forms of transportation (who knows--maybe some of mutual funds have related stocks?).
The budget is a rather shoestring one with several thousand dollars a year coming entirely from individuals like myself. We have a lawyer or two, a website designer/organizer who's self-taught and who's in the phone card business, and other professionals. Some of us are in school.
We have opposed the MTA when we feel they're making bad decisions, but recognize that compared to previous years they're probably better run and with better priorities. We do, however, consider ourselves realists and allies and recognize that sometimes good friends oppose bad moves and will disagree and speak our minds when we feel it's necessary to any governmental organization.
Our Friends of the Green Line and Red Line movements have spoken out to either favor or oppose previous and current plans of our governmental entities.
In short, we're as grassroots and volunteer as they come--we are not anti-union or pro-union as a group, with a wide divergence of opinions on that subject. We are, however, opposed to any actions of either the MTA or a bus driver union that could hurt commuter service.
That said, I honestly and sincerely believe that the leadership of the BRU has used the courts inappropriately and led many well-meaning transit commuters along the primrose path. The BRU has hurt public transit and is loaded with hidden agendas that most of its members would be surprised to learn about.
As with the successful L.A. City Neighborhood Council movement, we need a true grassroots effort to pursue better transportation options in the Los Angeles region. It is my hope that The Transit Coalition will be what this region has been awaiting for over the last decade.
Keep checking us out--I think you'll find we're as volunteer and as open to input (including yours!) as any entity you'll find with respect to transportation.
Michael M.
User ID: 0310794 Apr 11th 2:30 PM
The Giant,
All I know about the BRU is second-hand and from briefly perusing their website.
I have several problems with the BRU's claims.
First, as to claiming that rail transit excludes racial minorities or the economically disadvantaged:
This is a BIIIIIIIG lie.
- I ride the Blue Line round-trip between Long Beach and Los Angeles an average of twice a week, and the Red Line nearly as often. It's rare for there to be more than 5% Caucasian riders on the Blue Line. The Red Line rarely has more than 10% Caucasian riders.
- And second, what is a "minority". In 2000, 45% of the population of LA County was Latino/Hispanic, 31% was white, 12% was Asian.
So Los Angeles County has no "majority", only a number of minorities, inlcuding a PLURALITY of Hispanics (that is, the largest minority; Center for Regional Employment Statistics, www.cresla.org/latino). I expect that LA County will be majority Hispanic by 2015 or so.
- If the BRU's complaints about rail are more directed toward Metrolink, I have heard that Metrolink's ridership reflects LA County's ridership in terms of ethnicity fairly well.
Second, what is the BRU's answer: More buses.
Buses simply don't draw choice riders (that is, riders who have other options, such as a car) to public transit. So all-bus transit systems tend to attract only those too poor to afford a car (and those who can't drive: because they're too young, too old, medical reasons, illegal aliens, whatever). Poor people don't give $$$$$$$$$ to politicians and generally don't vote. Therefore, programs for poor people tend to be poorly funded programs. This sets up a downward vicious circle in which only the poor ride transit, so transit is allocated only enough funding to offer crappy service, so only the poor ride transit...
So the BRU's "solution" will have the effect of keeping precisely the people the BRU CLAIMS that it wants to help GHETTOIZED on public transit.
By the way, try to find any physical anthropologist who considers "race" a valid way of classifying human beings, and you're going to do a lot of looking. And that's been true for 50 years. It's because the differences WITHIN "races" are far greater than the differences BETWEEN "races". So the whole idea of "race", in biological terms, has been discredited.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 11th 3:28 PM
"Choice riders"? <big eyeroll>
Thanks, Ken, for the answers. That wasn't so hard, was it? Now maybe somebody can explain to me what exactly the TC is pushing for. From what I'm able to glean, it appears that the TC is very pro-rail and somewhat anti-bus, yes?
Both from the definite positions I've seen espoused here (when I can find them) and from comments like Michael's, the TC seems to represent suburban commuters with their middle-class concerns, while the BRU represents the carless poor. Apparently, then, the choice presented to me is this: should I join the group that actually understands how much poor people are dependent on transit, but which has a bizarre anti-rail fixation; or should I join the group that supports extending the rails (as I do), but which seems to think that the needs of poor people are a joke (see "Criswell Predicts" for 2005, along with countless snide remarks on the discussion board)?
Not much of a choice if you ask me, but I'll keep lurking on the board.
crzwdjk
User ID: 0122954 Apr 11th 3:33 PM
It would be interesting to transplant the BRU and their "Billions for buses (and not a cent for rail)" mentality to NYC. I wonder, would they still propose to take the 5 million current subway riders and put them on buses? Are they going to claim that NYC was wrong to build subways?
An interesting thought-experiment.
Christopher Smith
User ID: 8973393 Apr 11th 4:08 PM
The BRU didn't seem to "actually" understand "how much poor people are dependant of transit" during the MTA strike, as I recall! Seems that supporting the policy of NO service was a dis-service to bus riders... as well as the entire city!
Or have I missed something - maybe bus riders really are more concerned about how much the driver gets paid, rather than just getting from point a to point b.
...also - I would venture to guess that many "Pro-rail" people ride busses (such as myself) - and it's this direct experience that makes them pro-rail!
-Christopher
Jeff Wilson
User ID: 9892733 Apr 11th 4:42 PM
Michael M., I really think you need to find another term than choice riders. I know what you're saying, but it sounds quite elitist. The first time I heard it I thought it meant "choice" as in "best", not as in "those who *choose* to use public transit". It would probably be better if you just spelled out what you mean instead of using this short-hand that makes it sound like you're a racist.
PForce
User ID: 0247944 Apr 11th 5:24 PM
I ain't poor, but I ride buses all the time. Partly because I believe that driving--except in unusual circumstances--cannot be justified for routine short trips. And, I just plain hate driving and think that cars are a menace to both people and the environment.
The people that I see on the bus are, for the most part, average. They shop, carry packages and kids, are very polite and considerate when the bus is full, and will actually give up a seat to an elderly person or a woman with a small child. I do think that some people will not ride public transportation because they are uncomfortable around minorities or lower-income individuals, or perhaps they just love to drive. That's fine. All the more room for the rest of us.
Besides, think of all the pollutants we are not putting into the air by not driving.
Ken Alpern
User ID: 2338204 Apr 11th 5:35 PM
Again, Mr., ah, Giant, your questions are well-stated and probably right on the money considering how new you are on this board.
The Transit Coalition is absolutely for improved bus service, and has gone to the mat to fight for it and has opposed the MTA on numerous occasions in their desire to streamline and reorganize their lines.
That said, what we don't want is short-sighted Busways and Rapid Buses when a higher-capacity and lower-operating cost Rail Line is needed. Yes, it costs more for rail in the short run, but is invariably cheaper in the long run.
Buses are essential for mass transit, but for Rapid Transit that will pull people out of their cars as well as serve the transit-dependent, these buses need to feed into speedier, smoother and preferable rail when indicated.
I can understand why anyone new to this Board would think we're "anti-buses", but nothing could be further to the truth. Both buses and rail are as necessary to transit as surface streets and freeways are to the automobile--they're not mutually exclusive.
We've got lots of buses, but are decades behind on the rail infrastructure. Furthermore, ask the average car commuter which mode of transit they'll rather use and pay for...and it's invariably rail (as well as a good bus that takes them to the rail).
That same choice is as understandable as asking a car commuter which route he'd rather take--a long surface street with signals, or a freeway?
Hence, TTC's main (but NOT only!) focus on rail.
User ID: 9001673 Apr 10th 4:26 AM
Mind you, I don't agree with the BRU that racism is what's wrong with the MTA, but I have to wonder why some people seem to take their very existence so personally. Surely there's an alternative somewhere between the identity politics of the BRU and the seemingly mindless pro-MTA, anti-labor attitude of the Transit Coalition...
crzwdjk
User ID: 0122954 Apr 10th 4:39 AM
I think what people hate most about the BRU is the fact that they are anti-rail, and also that they have leverage over the MTA through the consent decree. While most other cities are building modern efficient rail systems, the BRU is making the MTA buy more buses. Mind you, bus service does suck and could use some improving, but court order is not the way to do it. That and the BRU has done some pretty outrageous things like that pro-Palestine pamphlet. I haven't really seen the Transit Coalition being particularly pro-MTA or anti-labor, though maybe I'm just not familiar enough with what's going on. And I must say that though I am all for workers getting a decent wage and all, having month-long strikes every three years doesn't exactly make people like the labor unions. Both the MTA and the transit workers' unions need to be less stupid about that.
Joel C
User ID: 1084044 Apr 10th 1:50 PM
As a minority, I take offense when the BRU tries to use the racism card to stop rail *on my behalf*. As if all minorities are of a single mind on the subject. If it were up to the BRU, the Eastside wouldn't be getting LRT right now, and the Expo Line, which will largely serve the north part of South LA, wouldn't be an option. That would hurt LA's minority communities by relegating to buses that are increasingly stuck in traffic.
The views of the BRU do not represent bus riders, but bus drivers. Their goal is a system that requires the lowest possible driver-rider ratio, in order to benefit the labor side of the equation. From this vantage, it's obvious why they don't want rail: one driver will be able to transport 3-5 times as many passengers in a train than on a bus.
The Palestinian flier reflects the BRU's deep ties to far-left activist groups, and thus helps explain the group's motivations. I am a leftist and am very supportive of the Palestinian cause, but WTF does that have to do with Los Angeles' transit system? Nothing at all. It seems like the BRU is trying to drive an ideological wedge between LA's black/brown populations and its Jews/anglos. IMO, that is the last thing LA needs as it tries to address the immediate issues of land use and transit options.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 10th 5:06 PM
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is why some groups go to Swift-Boat-Vet extremes in trying to discredit the BRU. Who give a damn if they're funded by the ACLU? If you disagree with them, rebut their position on the merits, rather than resorting to lame ad hominem attacks on their president. I refer specifically to brutruth.com, and the endless "Truth about the BRU" pages on this site and the San Fernando Valley Transit Insider page.
Not to mention how hypocritical it all seems, when the Transit Coalition doesn't exactly go out of its way, on this website, to make it clear who is funding it and whether the founders/leaders of the TC have any hidden agendas or conflicts of interest. I would add to that the phony "Friends of the Red Line" type "sites" that are frequently listed as separate links on other pages, but which just point back to this Transit Coalition website. While you're certainly not the first people on the web to resort to this (IMHO) lame tactic, it does sort of raise a red flag to those, like me, who stumble onto the site through one of those phony redirects.
Again, before donning my flame suit, let me point out that I'm not a BRU member, and that while I'm pro-Palestine myself, and thus not "outraged" by BRU's bringing up the issue, I think that it's silly for them to drag it into the public debate over transportation in Los Angeles. That's why I'm wondering whether there's an organization in LA that truly represents public transportation users, current and future, without any hidden agendas or axes to grind. The BRU isn't it, IMO, but I seriously doubt that the TC is it either, based on what I've seen so far.
Bart Reed
User ID: 9523443 Apr 10th 8:14 PM
Wow, someone has finally done some deep digging to expose the deep dark secrets of The Transit Coalition. Sorry for the sarcasm, but this analysis is really a hoot from my point of view.
Have you ever been to a BRU meeting? Well, please try. The first month you attend, you will have to go to a mandatory indoctrination session. Then, if you buy in and are pleased with their dogma and doctrine, you may attend the regular meeting the following month.
Do you want to attend a Transit Coalition meeting?
OK, the details of the next meeting are on another thread. Come join us. Don't be shy.
Now, many folks have the assumption that BRU is a consumer organization. Perhaps you should look farther into this. For example, say a bus driver stops while in route with a load of 20 people to grab a cup of coffee and some donuts.
Now, bear in mind that the driver is on the clock with specific duties to follow an appointed route and to keep a schedule. He has legally mandated breaks negotiated by his labor union.
Now, from my point of view as an impacted consumer, I would hand out Transit Coalition customer service cards and fliers that describe the specific steps so everyone who is being delayed getting to home and work has an equal chance to complain to the bus company.
Now, from the Bus Riders Union point of view, there is nothing wrong here and it is against BRU policy and philosophy to report the driver or in anyway identify this specific incident to the bus company, as this is viewed as anti-labor.
Conficts of interest and hidden agendas? Do we get large salaries? Do we get funding from labor unions or the automotive industry? What special interest or organization is there to fund a group that advocates for taxpayer supported improved bus and rail service? I know I am missing the point, but what corporation would want to fund us to achieve what result?
Now, our website lists the tax returns for the BRU, as it is a public entity. It clearly shows that the BRU owners make $4M per week. For that kind of money, you would clearly expect some significant changes in LA transportation.
Here is what happened when the BRU suddenly stopped sending me my monthly meeting notices:
tinyurl.com/443g4 You may note that they suddenly started coming again, even though they never could locate the proper staff member to look into my concerns.
Now, as far as our special interest committees like Friends of the Red Line and Green Line. At one point these were free standing websites which were created and donated by one of our members. One day without notification to our volunteer group, he pulled the plug and these websites went away. Fortunately, we had another volunteer who started learning how to build a website and he learned as he went and started to rebuild it from his point of view and member input.
That said, he has not had the volunteer time available to restore the huge amount of data on the Red and Green Line websites. We can only hope, as we are volunteers.
I don't know why you assume we are pro-MTA and anti-labor? Because many of us complain when our buses are late or don't show up? Because the drivers run ahead of schedules and we miss our connecting service? Because we complain about the drivers delaying us while they stop for donuts?
Because we advocate for better bus routes and rail service?
Most recently, we testified before MTA that we believed that the incumbent unions should operate and maintain the new $725,000 articulated buses, rather than contracting out said service which will operate on the new Orange Line.
Now, in Los Angeles, we have a diverse city with many points of view. There are at least 3 transit
groups that I know of. Perhaps, if you took the time to visit all of them and ask questions of the leadership and members, you could get a more rounded point of view. I doubt if you could understand the very nuance of TC, BRU or others from just reading over websites.
But you sure can, should you come to a meeting and throw out your questions, comments and concerns. We certainly can answer them. Try us.
Þ--Þ--Þ
Ken Feyl
User ID: 0339064 Apr 11th 12:58 AM
Bart, you're right as usual (you're the man, as usual), but you need to be more forceful. Here's the real "BRU Truth": the Bus Riders Union is full of twisted, slothful charlatans. It's GOOD if buses fill up to and beyond capacity. It means people are using them, and are more likely to support true MASS transit (e.g., rail) in the future. Besides, the possibility that you will have to stand is a reality you must accept. If having to stand is going to make you whine like certain waxy politicians with big nostrils (we won't mention any names), DON'T GET ON THE DARN BUS.
While I'm at it, here's another proclamation. If you're so morbidly obese that you take up more than one seat, you have no business taking public transit. Consider ordering a stretch limo instead.
Bart, keep ripping the BRU and revealing the truth to the masses. I'm tired of all this self-serving individualist baloney derailing (haha, a pun) L.A. transit. The Foothill Extension, the Bus Deriders Union, the South Pasadena NIMBYs... they're all examples of L.A. sinking in a mess of individualism. We need a powerful leader to whip these people into line if we're ever going to see viable transit in L.A..
And thank you all for educating me about the PRT stuff. It sounds really sexy.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 11th 5:53 AM
Bart Reed wrote:
Do we get large salaries? Do we get funding from labor unions or the automotive industry? What special interest or organization is there to fund a group that advocates for taxpayer supported improved bus and rail service? I know I am missing the point, but what corporation would want to fund us to achieve what result?
How on earth should I know? That's what I'm trying to find out, but nobody so far has leapt up to volunteer the answers to any of those questions.
Apparently beating around the bush isn't going to get me any answers, so I'll just come out and ask:
Who exactly is behind the Transit Coalition? Where does the funding come from? Do any of the leaders (officers, representatives, what have you--sorry, I don't yet know enough about the organization's structure to use specific titles) work in any industry or own any business that could be expected to gain financially if the positions endorsed by the TC were adopted by the various public agencies under discussion? Will the TC consider making available on this website the same sort of information about itself that it does about the BRU? If not, why not?
The TC sees fit to investigate and expose all manner of information about who is "behind" the BRU, but all a casual viewer is able to find out from this website about who makes up the Transit Coalition is that it is a "broad based group of concerned citizens mobilized to passionately demonstrate community support for the economic development and continuing operation of improved transportation." Well, gee, that tells me a lot. How about opening up your own books?
(And for the third time, because I guarantee you that somebody will miss this otherwise, I am neither a member of the BRU nor am I terribly impressed by their analysis of what's wrong with public transportation in Southern California.)
As for the coffee and donuts, unless the driver is taking a really long time, or the bus is already behind schedule, I would seriously suggest not having a fit over it. Nothing to do with being pro- or anti-labor, it's just a matter of not letting utterly trivial crap give you high blood pressure. By "really long time," I mean anything over, say, a minute and a half. If it's his regular route, there's no reason why he can't make an arrangement with a store along the route to have the coffee and donuts ready for him every day. Jump off, grab, pay, jump back on, drive. So what if it's not strictly by-the-book? Stress kills, literally. Don't let trivial things stress you.
Ken Alpern
User ID: 1696934 Apr 11th 7:52 AM
Great questions, Mr., ah, Giant. I am President of the Transit Coalition, and like others on this Board I have put my own money into The Transit Coalition (TTC).
I am a dermatologist, with absolutely no financial conflicts of interest with regards to rail or other forms of transportation (who knows--maybe some of mutual funds have related stocks?).
The budget is a rather shoestring one with several thousand dollars a year coming entirely from individuals like myself. We have a lawyer or two, a website designer/organizer who's self-taught and who's in the phone card business, and other professionals. Some of us are in school.
We have opposed the MTA when we feel they're making bad decisions, but recognize that compared to previous years they're probably better run and with better priorities. We do, however, consider ourselves realists and allies and recognize that sometimes good friends oppose bad moves and will disagree and speak our minds when we feel it's necessary to any governmental organization.
Our Friends of the Green Line and Red Line movements have spoken out to either favor or oppose previous and current plans of our governmental entities.
In short, we're as grassroots and volunteer as they come--we are not anti-union or pro-union as a group, with a wide divergence of opinions on that subject. We are, however, opposed to any actions of either the MTA or a bus driver union that could hurt commuter service.
That said, I honestly and sincerely believe that the leadership of the BRU has used the courts inappropriately and led many well-meaning transit commuters along the primrose path. The BRU has hurt public transit and is loaded with hidden agendas that most of its members would be surprised to learn about.
As with the successful L.A. City Neighborhood Council movement, we need a true grassroots effort to pursue better transportation options in the Los Angeles region. It is my hope that The Transit Coalition will be what this region has been awaiting for over the last decade.
Keep checking us out--I think you'll find we're as volunteer and as open to input (including yours!) as any entity you'll find with respect to transportation.
Michael M.
User ID: 0310794 Apr 11th 2:30 PM
The Giant,
All I know about the BRU is second-hand and from briefly perusing their website.
I have several problems with the BRU's claims.
First, as to claiming that rail transit excludes racial minorities or the economically disadvantaged:
This is a BIIIIIIIG lie.
- I ride the Blue Line round-trip between Long Beach and Los Angeles an average of twice a week, and the Red Line nearly as often. It's rare for there to be more than 5% Caucasian riders on the Blue Line. The Red Line rarely has more than 10% Caucasian riders.
- And second, what is a "minority". In 2000, 45% of the population of LA County was Latino/Hispanic, 31% was white, 12% was Asian.
So Los Angeles County has no "majority", only a number of minorities, inlcuding a PLURALITY of Hispanics (that is, the largest minority; Center for Regional Employment Statistics, www.cresla.org/latino). I expect that LA County will be majority Hispanic by 2015 or so.
- If the BRU's complaints about rail are more directed toward Metrolink, I have heard that Metrolink's ridership reflects LA County's ridership in terms of ethnicity fairly well.
Second, what is the BRU's answer: More buses.
Buses simply don't draw choice riders (that is, riders who have other options, such as a car) to public transit. So all-bus transit systems tend to attract only those too poor to afford a car (and those who can't drive: because they're too young, too old, medical reasons, illegal aliens, whatever). Poor people don't give $$$$$$$$$ to politicians and generally don't vote. Therefore, programs for poor people tend to be poorly funded programs. This sets up a downward vicious circle in which only the poor ride transit, so transit is allocated only enough funding to offer crappy service, so only the poor ride transit...
So the BRU's "solution" will have the effect of keeping precisely the people the BRU CLAIMS that it wants to help GHETTOIZED on public transit.
By the way, try to find any physical anthropologist who considers "race" a valid way of classifying human beings, and you're going to do a lot of looking. And that's been true for 50 years. It's because the differences WITHIN "races" are far greater than the differences BETWEEN "races". So the whole idea of "race", in biological terms, has been discredited.
The Giant
User ID: 9001673 Apr 11th 3:28 PM
"Choice riders"? <big eyeroll>
Thanks, Ken, for the answers. That wasn't so hard, was it? Now maybe somebody can explain to me what exactly the TC is pushing for. From what I'm able to glean, it appears that the TC is very pro-rail and somewhat anti-bus, yes?
Both from the definite positions I've seen espoused here (when I can find them) and from comments like Michael's, the TC seems to represent suburban commuters with their middle-class concerns, while the BRU represents the carless poor. Apparently, then, the choice presented to me is this: should I join the group that actually understands how much poor people are dependent on transit, but which has a bizarre anti-rail fixation; or should I join the group that supports extending the rails (as I do), but which seems to think that the needs of poor people are a joke (see "Criswell Predicts" for 2005, along with countless snide remarks on the discussion board)?
Not much of a choice if you ask me, but I'll keep lurking on the board.
crzwdjk
User ID: 0122954 Apr 11th 3:33 PM
It would be interesting to transplant the BRU and their "Billions for buses (and not a cent for rail)" mentality to NYC. I wonder, would they still propose to take the 5 million current subway riders and put them on buses? Are they going to claim that NYC was wrong to build subways?
An interesting thought-experiment.
Christopher Smith
User ID: 8973393 Apr 11th 4:08 PM
The BRU didn't seem to "actually" understand "how much poor people are dependant of transit" during the MTA strike, as I recall! Seems that supporting the policy of NO service was a dis-service to bus riders... as well as the entire city!
Or have I missed something - maybe bus riders really are more concerned about how much the driver gets paid, rather than just getting from point a to point b.
...also - I would venture to guess that many "Pro-rail" people ride busses (such as myself) - and it's this direct experience that makes them pro-rail!
-Christopher
Jeff Wilson
User ID: 9892733 Apr 11th 4:42 PM
Michael M., I really think you need to find another term than choice riders. I know what you're saying, but it sounds quite elitist. The first time I heard it I thought it meant "choice" as in "best", not as in "those who *choose* to use public transit". It would probably be better if you just spelled out what you mean instead of using this short-hand that makes it sound like you're a racist.
PForce
User ID: 0247944 Apr 11th 5:24 PM
I ain't poor, but I ride buses all the time. Partly because I believe that driving--except in unusual circumstances--cannot be justified for routine short trips. And, I just plain hate driving and think that cars are a menace to both people and the environment.
The people that I see on the bus are, for the most part, average. They shop, carry packages and kids, are very polite and considerate when the bus is full, and will actually give up a seat to an elderly person or a woman with a small child. I do think that some people will not ride public transportation because they are uncomfortable around minorities or lower-income individuals, or perhaps they just love to drive. That's fine. All the more room for the rest of us.
Besides, think of all the pollutants we are not putting into the air by not driving.
Ken Alpern
User ID: 2338204 Apr 11th 5:35 PM
Again, Mr., ah, Giant, your questions are well-stated and probably right on the money considering how new you are on this board.
The Transit Coalition is absolutely for improved bus service, and has gone to the mat to fight for it and has opposed the MTA on numerous occasions in their desire to streamline and reorganize their lines.
That said, what we don't want is short-sighted Busways and Rapid Buses when a higher-capacity and lower-operating cost Rail Line is needed. Yes, it costs more for rail in the short run, but is invariably cheaper in the long run.
Buses are essential for mass transit, but for Rapid Transit that will pull people out of their cars as well as serve the transit-dependent, these buses need to feed into speedier, smoother and preferable rail when indicated.
I can understand why anyone new to this Board would think we're "anti-buses", but nothing could be further to the truth. Both buses and rail are as necessary to transit as surface streets and freeways are to the automobile--they're not mutually exclusive.
We've got lots of buses, but are decades behind on the rail infrastructure. Furthermore, ask the average car commuter which mode of transit they'll rather use and pay for...and it's invariably rail (as well as a good bus that takes them to the rail).
That same choice is as understandable as asking a car commuter which route he'd rather take--a long surface street with signals, or a freeway?
Hence, TTC's main (but NOT only!) focus on rail.