3010 Wilshire Blvd. #362, Los Angeles, CA 90010
213.388.2364

Southern California Transit Advocates is a non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion, development and improvement of public transportation in the Los Angeles metropolitan area.

Dana Gabbard's statement at the Metro 2007 fare increase hearing

Mr. Gabbard made comments at the fare hearing, in addition to those made by Southern California Transit Advocates.


I am disappointed to note the insubstantial nature of the public outreach for the proposal. This includes the brochure placed on buses only last week that announces the location, date and time of this hearing in type so tiny that you need a magnifying glass to read it. The limited information made available (including on Metro’s website) falls far short of what one could reasonably hope to be provided by which to analyze the proposal.

Instead much rhetoric is offered without substantive supporting documentation (such as underlying assumptions) that would buttress the assertion of the need for fare and pass increases of the magnitude proposed. In fact recent budget trends as presented by staff at the March 14 Finance and Budget Committee meeting actually are encouraging.

Metro’s budget is in flux (especially any projections in the 3-5 year time frame) given several uncertainties:

*ultimate disposition of current negotiations regarding changes to the Formula Allocation Procedure

*potential continuation of the Municipal Operator Bus Service Improvement Program

*result of efforts to restore the full amount of the spillover funds for transportation in the state budget

*regional fare distribution process final shape as decided by the EZ Pass Task Force

*impending insolvency of federal transportation trust funds

Given these multiple imponderables, I would suggest at the very least that a decision regarding fares and pass rates for 2009 is extremely premature and should be deferred until the budget picture is more clear.

Also two obvious actions that may produce substantial cost savings should be pursued: First, further explore re-establishing the Metro Police Department . A presentation made at the January 15, 2004 Operations Committee indicated this would eventually produce annual savings of between $10 and $20 million (after a 5 year implementation period). Also the MTA Board under the authority granted it by Public Utility Code section 130051.9(d) should evaluate the potential advantages of procuring legal services by a competitive process versus the current contracting with L.A. County Counsel. This is an action that is long overdue.

Lastly, I question the legality of the Board voting today on the proposal. This would make a mockery of the hearing as being a sincere exercise and that the comments made will be evaluated by the Board before any final decision is made. Instead, an immediate vote smacks of a rubber stamp and I worry may make MTA liable for entangling legal challenges.