MTA management earlier this year informed the service sectors each would have to make cuts in local service to free up service hours to be reallocated to operate the new Orange Line. Quite simply MTA has to sacrifice some service to free up monies to operate the new busway. The Gateway sector responded by informing MTA management that they could not see why their patrons should lose service for the benefit of people elsewhere. This standoff should make the April 14 Gateway Service Sector Governance Council meeting interesting. I have been told MTA Deputy CEO John Catoe plans to attend and inform the Council in person that they must make the cuts.

My thanks to the members who filled out the Metro Connections evaluation sheet I distributed at the March 12 SO.CA.TA meeting. Derek Chernow, Executive Director of Odyssey which is coordinating the outreach effort left a voice mail message expressing appreciation for our response.

Also at the March 12 meeting Bart Reed shared with us chatter about the troubles the Chicago Transit Agency is having with the new articulated buses they are getting from NABI. A March 13 Chicago Tribune story ("Extra-long Buses Come with Big Flaws, CTA says") details the travails and also notes NABI's claim that the lessons learned from this debacle "...will benefit commuters in Los Angeles, which is buying an improved version of the NABI bus." That's right, this is a reference to the much ballyhooed Metro Liner articulated buses MTA is about to start taking delivery of. Should I say hold your breath and hope for the best?
Another object of interest at the March meeting was a current copy of the Bus Riders Union new service plan that Director Armando Avalos brought. Turns out it is the same impractical freeway based multi-billion dollar plan they trotted out years ago to fanfare and quick oblivion. Have they no new ideas?

Here he goes again! Congressman Henry Waxman talks out of all sides of his mouth in the March 4 L.A. Weekly (“Red Line to Somewhere”) [http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/15/news-pelisek.php]. He keeps asserting that any subway extension is a local issue while dodging any responsibility for meddling in local affairs by passing federal legislation that blocks the extension. What chutzpah!

Why does the Mayor of L.A. matter? Former mayoral candidate Michael Woo in an interview in the March 3 L.A.CityBeat [http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=1754&IssueNum=91] I think explained part of the significance: “How do we go about addressing the resistance to mass transit?
The actual power of a Los Angeles mayor is really the bully pulpit. Although the recent charter reform did give the mayor of L.A. some additional power, it’s not like Mayor Daley in Chicago or Mayor Bloomberg in New York, in terms of the actual power to make things happen. But in Los Angeles, there’s real potential for the mayor of L.A. to be a media star, and to use the media as a way of putting support together for issues.”

CityBeat also ran a great article by Chip Jacobs in its March 10 issue ("Money Train")
[http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=1776&IssueNum=92] on the fundraising Congressman Ishtook of Oklahoma did in L.A. when he was a key player in whether the Gold Line eastern extension could get federal funds. The one irony missed by the piece is even after the usual local suspects filled his coffers Ishtook came close to giving thumbs down to the project. Thankfully Ishtook has now been shunted aside by the congressional leadership after he overplayed his hand with recent attempts to punish fellow Republicans for signing a letter supporting Amtrak.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer fella.

The April 3 Daily Breeze article "Torrance May Limit Subsidies for Senior Citizens" discusses how Carson and Torrance are struggling with the spiraling cost of paratransit. With an aging population this is an issue that is only going to get bigger and more difficult to resolve, mark my words...

On April 15 Mayors from the Long Beach/SE County sector will vote at a 9 a.m. meeting at Bellflower City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, selecting a successor to Beatrice Proo on the MTA Board. Should be interesting to see how this interaction of local and regional politics plays out.

Roger Christensen tells me regarding the March 24 MTA Board meeting "I also noticed that sprinkled throughout the meeting were a growing chorus of complaints from the public about Rapid Bus service and how it is degrading local service - particularly on Fairfax." Which isn't surprising as MTA is more and more having to downscale Rapid Bus due to tight finances.

Rumor of the month: the Southern California Association of Governments may disband its Maglev Task Force, handing the issue off to the Plans & Programs Technical Advisory Committee that I am a member of. Guess the gravy train and days of delusion are drawing to a close.

In explaining why he didn't seek reappointment to the MTA San Fernando Valley Service Sector Governance Council David Fleming in the March 25 Daily News ("Fleming off Valley MTA advisers") is described as disappointed the governance council had no control over the budget, preventing members from making broader changes to bus operations. Excuse me, what broad changes does Fleming have in mind? Far as I know he has never made a specific proposal. Which I think proves that Fleming and the other Valley bigwigs were doing a power play this past decade when whining about inadequate transportation. Once the discussion had become something as mundane as improving bus service the bigshots quickly became AWOL. What a surprise.

I'll conclude by noting the recent retirement of Robert Henry, who oversaw the Port of L.A.'s Red Car revival, and wish him the best.