I dragged myself down to Orange County Oct. 25 to attend the GoCalifornia regional workshop put on by Caltrans. The presentations were impressive but left unanswered the central question: grandiose plans are great, but how will we pay for it all? The current bundle of legislative proposals by the Governor are wholly inadequate to the task -- like hoping a firecracker can do the work of a stick of dynamite. At least I was able to raise the veto of Senate Bill 275 (subject of my op-ed in the Oct. 3 Los Angeles Business Journal "State Needs Plan to Upgrade Roads, Rail") and the continuing need for a statewide needs assessment for transportation investment. Things are percolating and we'll continue to monitor the situation.

Want to get involved with transportation in your area? Several cities in our area are currently engaged in General Plan updates. One element of these deals with transportation. Contact your local City Hall and find out if your city is revising its Plan (or hopes to do so in the near future).

What is it with maglev? First I had to recently endure listening to the usually clearheaded State Senator Lowenthal tout maglev for freight. Now new L.A. Harbor Commission Chair David Freeman is spouting similar nonsense ("Harbor commission leader rides herd on clean-air", Daily Breeze Oct. 25): "It is practically possible to lift, in a sense, a platform holding containers off the ground a little bit and move it through the air. It's not magic. It works. Whether we can work out the logistics of moving containers on and off is another question." Words fail me.

I was surprised to find buried in a brochure issued by the L.A. Dept. of Transportation outlining their Riders' Code of Conduct "#11 --Videotaping or taking photographs on any LADOT vehicle is prohibited without the prior consent of LADOT". As you can imagine we will be protesting this provision and urge the agency rescind it.

Question of the month: why does Foothill have to spend $162,500 to clean, degrease and re-strip its Pomona bus yard? Shouldn't the contractor who created the conditions pay for this? (agenda item #12, Foothill Transit Executive Board meeting of Oct. 28).

Can someone explain why MTA supervisory employees are under the jurisdiction of the Public Employee Relations Board due to statue known as the Transit Employer- Employee Relations Act?

There has been some questioning in re the role of Beach Cities Transit Administrator Terisa Price as Chair of the South Bay Service Sector Governance Council in pushing the proposed replacement of a portion of MTA route 439 by Beach Cities Transit. But Faithful Reader informs me when a similar situation that seemed to pose conflict of interest concerns was brought to the attention of MTA's ethics watchdogs, their response was since the appointers were aware such conflicts would result this obviated any need for concern. HUH?

Faithful Reader also noted the doubling (from $3 to $6 million) of the budget for MTA's security system enhancement project [agenda item #36, MTA Board Oct. 27 meeting] under the rubric of security enhancement without bothering with the usual change orders or indeed any explanation for why project costs ballooned so dramatically...

Quote of the month: "At the current rate of hire, it is projected that there will be a shortage of 177 Operators upon opening Orange Line Service" (report by MTA Deputy CEO John Catoe, item #26, MTA Operations Committee Sept. 15 meeting).

I've learned a valuable lesson--many MTA agenda materials such as power point presentations
(including for so-called "oral" reports) are not posted on the internet but in some cases can be obtained via requests to Records Management. These often prove to provide invaluable insights and details otherwise unavailable.

I recently had an interesting thought - by using various means to push their funding desires to the extent of starving MTA the Munis helped shaped the fiscal conditions that drove the actions that resulted in the consent decree.

From the start I have taken a dim view of public funds being used for starting an Access Services Foundation whose goal was raising millions to provide premium service ASI users desire that are not mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Now a recommendation has been made to jumpstart the Foundation ASI should fund it at the rate of $300,000 per year for the next 3-5 years. Hopefully the ASI Board will instead decide to dissolve the Foundation before it turns into a real money pit.

Spending this past month attending a few meetings where insularity created the impression of closeted consensus reminded me how important it is to expose yourself to diverse views. Nancy Michali, who headed the Metro Connections effort, left MTA in mid-October. On her last day we spoke for 15-20 minutes, and it was plain Michali had become frustrated at the lack of traction the proposal had within MTA. Personalities and regional funding issues also contributed to stalling the project. Ironically a status report Michali had prepared beforehand was received and filed at the Oct. 20 MTA Operations Committee meeting (agenda item #34). While full of goals and strategies the report falls short in illuminating the difficult task of implementation.

Kudos to Foothill Transit, which suspended fares on Friday Sept. 9 and instead donated to the Red Cross what was deposited in the fareboxes that day for Hurricane Katrina relief. This came to some $38,000!

Congratulations are also in order to OCTA, awarded by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) the 2005 Outstanding Public Transportation System Award for systems with 30 million or more passenger trips per year. Way to go!

I'll conclude by noting the impending retirement of James Sumner, longtime Director of Transit Operations at SCAT.