Some readers have wondered why I hate light rail in California, and I've come across an article in the LA Times that perfectly illustrates the reasons for my revulsion. Unfortunately I can't find the article online, but it's titled "Panel Derails Vote on Rail Line", and it's found in the August 2nd, 2004, edition of the California section, Orange County edition.
Transportation officials rejected a proposal Friday to let Orange County voters have a say on whether to move forward with the controversial CenterLine project -- a $1-billion light-rail system that would connect neighboring towns. ...Honestly, I can hardly believe the arrogance of some of our elected officials. Here's a guy actually coming out and saying that he's against the democratic process because he predicts that he won't like the results of the vote. Why even bother running for mayor next year, Mr. Pulido? If you don't think people will vote for you, why not just declare yourself dictator-for-life?Board member Miguel A. Pulido, a supporter of the rail line, led the opposition, arguing that a ballot measure would be an unwise gamble because voters would probably reject the project.
"It would be a terrible mistake... by voting to put it on the ballot, we kill the project," said Pulido, who is mayor of Santa Ana.
He suggested that voters who would not benefit from CenterLine -- a rail line that would connect downtown Santa Ana to John Wayne Airport -- might not appreciate its value, and vote against it.
So the Orange County Transportation Authority is going to go forward with a project they know isn't popular with the majority of the people paying for it. Obviously the voters who won't benefit from the rail line will vote against it, and why shouldn't they? Why should they pay for something that benefits someone else? Screw you, you arrogant prick.
It should be noted that both conservatives and liberals try to block the public from voting. Conservatives over the years have tried to keep voters from having a say on gambling and alcohol, for instance.
If you want a lot! of hard data, visit Wendell Cox' Public Purpose web site. He's a transportation policy analyst with a decidedly free market view.
One thing he particularly enjoys ripping apart are light rail plans. There is a chart on the web site (somewhere) which demonstrates that the marginal cost of adding a new rider to a light rail system is typically several thousand dollars a year. In his view, it's cheaper for the transportation authority to lease cars for all those riders than to spend the money necessary to get them to ride. Really good stuff.
And did I mention that there is a lot! of it?
Enjoy.
JT: I didn't mention anything about rightists or leftists in this post!
AG: I've seen his site and linked to it before. I got much of my data for earlier posts from him.
That's not so much an indictment of light rail as it is an indictment of the Orange County Transit people. Santa Clara County's light rail project is reasonably popular, and taxes to pay for it keep passing at the ballot - proof both that some light rail systems can garner public support and that some transit districts listen to the voters. Others do not.
Actually, Michael, you brought your own opposition to public transit into the picture. Your view is clearly based on your conservative/libertarian leanings. If you had wanted your post to not be between left and right, you could have just stuck to the issue of the democratic process and omitted your stance on the merits of mass transit.
JT: Except in the linked-to post there's no way to tell what my objection is to light rail, other than the arrogance of its proponents.
I don't see:
a) Why you or others assume people who think they won't benefit from the Santa Ana/JWA rail line will never ever truly benefit from it?
The benefit of rail connection isn't solely based on whether an individual actually personally uses the thing - it can affect car traffic, commerce, business, etc. Intangibles can still be valuable.
b) A lot of public projects are difficult to sell to the public at large that doesn't know a lot about them but are still a benefit to the community. Elected officials are expected to know this - that's why we have a representational democracy. We elect them to represent us.
That's why I don't like referendums for every thing in the world - we're not always qualified to make that decision, but we are qualified to choose our reps.
B: It doesn't matter. If it's a good idea, they should sell us on it. If we don't buy it, they shouldn't force it down our throats.
Further, if you'll notice, these people on the OCTA board aren't "representatives" in the legislative sense, they're mainly executives. We elect legislators to decide how to spend our money, but in this case the mayor of one town is deciding how to spend the money of people who live in other towns, who don't have any say in his re-election.
I understand the value of getting the support of your constituency in any matter, but some things...truly...are too technical, or complicated for the "majority" to understand. If you commissioned study after study after study from experts in multiple professions, and they all agreed this light rail system was a good idea for your community (economically, culturally, fiscally) but your constituents based their disagreement only on NIMBY principles (or any other non-professional principles, not based on experience or training), whose side would you favor? I'd favor the pros. Maybe I wouldn't make a good rep, but that's what I would want my rep to do. Represent me - in my ignorance - in situations where my ignorance might get me in trouble. Or miss a good opportunity.
You said "transportation officials", meaning the majority of the OCTA, rejected the proposal. I'm assuming Mayor Pulido was one of the ones who voted 'no'. But he's not deciding himself how to spend the money, he's making his opinion known. Who are the other members who voted 'no'? Don't they represent other parts of the community?
Maybe your argument is with the makeup on the OCTA, and its internal politics rather than with the decision. I assume the OCTA is empowered to make (or recommend) policy decisions to Orange County Government...
If you are citizen of Santa Ana you do not need to vote for Mayor Pulido on November 2, 2004.
In fact lesser evil nor you need to vote for evil at all.
Vote for me!
I am Stanley Fiala and I am running as people's Mayor.
See www.pulido4sale.com