The Times endorses Measure R
The Times' editorial board threw its support behind Measure R today, which would add a half a percentage point to the sales tax in Los Angeles County to pay for mass-transit and road projects. What do you think? With the economy teetering, is now the time to raise taxes on consumer spending?
The entire editorial:
Yes on Measure R
It's a tough time to seek a tax hike, but Measure R is worth it.
October 9, 2008
Los Angeles is as famous for its traffic congestion as it is for its sunsets and palm trees, and it has paid a steep price, in smog and gridlock, for its love affair with cars. Belated attempts to devise a functional public transit system have run up against a shortage of funding and a steep hike in construction costs, producing only a patchwork of street buses and light-rail lines, as well as a single dedicated busway and a single subway line -- which don't connect well with one another, not to mention with the parts of the county where they're most needed. Measure R would help change that.
The measure would impose a sales tax increase of half a cent on the dollar in Los Angeles County, raising the rate to 8.75% (tying Alameda County for the highest sales tax rate in California). The money would pay for a wide range of transportation projects, including an extension of the subway toward the Westside, light-rail extensions through the San Gabriel Valley, dedicated busways in the San Fernando Valley and a host of highway improvements. Overall, 65% of the money would go to transit, 20% to highways and 15% to cities for such things as fixing potholes and synchronizing traffic signals.
The official opposition to Measure R comes mainly from politicians from far-flung parts of the county who claim that they wouldn't get their fair share of the tax money; they tend to favor a regional distribution scheme in which funds would be split evenly. That's not just parochial, it's naive. A well-designed transportation network relieves bottlenecks in places where demand is greatest, and such high-density corridors aren't evenly distributed on the map. The projects to be funded by Measure R have been well chosen to maximize efficiency and thus give taxpayers the best bang for their bucks regardless of where they live. County residents tend to commute far from their homes, and they would see a traffic benefit even if nothing is built in their neighborhoods; they'd also enjoy improvements in air quality.
Although big cities often use sales taxes to pay for transportation improvements, it's not an ideal method. We'd rather see these projects funded by motorists, via higher vehicle registration fees or gas taxes. That would properly place the burden of relieving our traffic and smog problems on those who cause them. Sales taxes, by contrast, hurt low-income people the most and do nothing to discourage driving. Unfortunately, that seems to be the only politically tenable course. Tax increases require a two-thirds vote for approval, and polls show that the sales tax is the only funding source that comes close to reaching that level of public acceptance.
Measure R's timing is problematic -- voters will be understandably reluctant to approve a tax hike during an economic downturn. Yet, if it fails, it might be many years before another such measure comes along, during which gridlock and pollution will only worsen. L.A. County residents have a chance to turn our Third World transit network into something more befitting a world-class metropolitan area, and they should take it by approving Measure R.
This is another way to get money from all!!! Please, vote no on measure r because we do not need another sales tax increase especially with everything going up and what about a bail out? Too many times like prop 111 is for the same purpose, but some of the funds were used for other things, sound familiar? It's more than 25 dollars, look how many times we buy things like gas? Who wants a gas increase or more money for toi pay for food hello!!! vote no on r!!!!!@
Posted by: robin | November 02, 2008 at 02:28 PM
The politicians (and the real-estate developers backing them) want you to believe that Measure R is designed to reduce traffic. That is not the case. The Metropolitan Transit Authority has already stated that the Expo Line will not reduce traffic on the 10 freeway or any of the adjacent boulevards. The Department of Transportation has publicly stated in a letter to the MTA that the at-grade Expo Line will make the traffic on the north-south streets such as Overland, Westwood, Sepulveda and Bundy considerably worse. The politicians (particularly in Santa Monica) have let the real estate developers run riot and now we have bad traffic on the Westside. But now the developers are at an impasse because the Environmentally Impact Reports for their big projects are stating that they can't build as high or as large as they want to because of the traffic. Measure R is their end run so they can keep building. Their dream is to fill in the gap between Century City and the Water Garden with numerous high-rise office and condominium projects. If you vote yes, you will be funding the high rise development of the Westside. At the very least shouldn't this be funded by a commercial real-estate tax instead of a sales tax? I urge you to visit the Vote Yes on Measure R website. They don't have a single statistic or expert in the field to back up their claims. That's because, despite thousand of riders, no rail line in Los Angeles has ever improved traffic
Posted by: alex | November 01, 2008 at 05:15 PM
Sure, $25 isn't a lot, but I remember when the sales tax here was 6%.. every year, it's another 1/2 %, when does it stop? Find another way..
Posted by: kint | October 23, 2008 at 11:21 PM
The Politicians JUST DONT GET IT!!!!
Now is NOT the time to pass a tax hike. Los Angeles County already has the 2nd highest sales tax in the state.
Yet our politicians incredulously want the already burdened and beleaguered tax papers to foot the bill for projects that can wait until better times.
Those who say we urgently need these projects and the Times that says that "it might be many years before another such measure comes along' are full of you know what. We can wait a few years until better times come along, until the economy improves a bit.
My big question is this: What the Hell are they doing with all of our existing tax monies allocated for public transit that they need more and more?
My fellow Angelenos, with so much of LA struggling and scrimping by, we can not approve a new tax, a sales tax that would already hit the lowest classes the hardest.
Posted by: Fred | October 19, 2008 at 10:12 PM
I just bought a car - the additional tax hit on that alone (already bad enough) would have been almost $200. So much for $25 per year. And I want the money to go to freeways, not more wasted on useless public transportation projects. And I prefer that the exisitng money stop being wasted on things like health care for illegal immigrants, and spent on proper highway repair and expanasion, as it is in other non-Democrat controlled states and cities.
Posted by: Truth | October 18, 2008 at 02:33 PM
Yes on Measure R.
Yes, higher taxes suck for everyone.
Yes, the bill isn't perfect, but NO bill is.
Yes, we BADLY need improved public transportation in this city.
Yes, Traffic is a top complaint of the majority of commuters in the Los Angeles area.
Yes, linking together our existing subways and dedicated buses would help ease traffic all over the county.
Yes, it is embarassing that a city as large as Los Angeles has such a pitiful public transportation system.
Yes, the only way to fix this is with increased costs and long term major construction, but it will be worth it in the end.
Yes on Measure R!
Posted by: sevag demirjian | October 17, 2008 at 03:11 PM
Vote NO on Measure R!
Dear Editor,
Measure R on the Nov 4th ballot is being promoted by Metro ads as a way to move "freight freely in LA County". That's right - Metro is attempting to "close the gap" of the 710 freeway through Pasadena, El Serrano, and So. Pasadena for the purpose of moving goods via trucks from the ports of LA and Long Beach to destinations beyond (Northern CA, Nevada, Colorado etc) by connecting it to the 210 freeway. This 710 freight truck "gap closure" will bring increased exhaust emissions to Southern California because it is part of an effort to EXPAND THE PORTS and increase the amount of trucks using the ports. This is NEW pollution and traffic congestion being added to our area and will not at all relieve traffic congestion as proponents are falsely claiming! I’m against the gridlock that increased trucking on the 210 freeway would cause, and the destruction and pollution of our environment that would be the result.
What we need is a good bill that takes the freight trucks and pollution off our freeways.
There is already a great alternative to the freeway being proposed involving short haul electric trains and an inland distribution port, which would remove these Freight Trucks from our inner cities. But Measure R is not the way to accomplish that.
And for those of you who live in the proposed route (uncertain and ever-changing), if you read Measure R, you will see that they are not guaranteeing it will be a tunnel - nowhere does it promise that. They can build anything they want! And with the built in "escape clause" Metro can even use ALL the money from the Measure R tax to build the 710 freight truck "gap closure" - leaving nothing for any other local communities as far as street repair, rail expansion, etc. This is a badly written bill - promoted by Port and Importers interests. Cargo Movement is the hidden agenda behind Measure R.
We should invest our efforts and time into the alternative options and not sell our clean air off to foreign corporations so they can pollute our area.
Don't let Metro slip this one by us.
Posted by: Carol | October 17, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Michael, in response to your questions:
You're right, Los Angeles County already imposes a 1% sales tax to pay for transportation, and passing this ordinance would make it 1.5%. The existing money covers both the operating budget of the MTA and the cost of new projects, but as operating costs rise, the amount left for construction shrinks (meanwhile, the cost of construction keeps rising). The existing tax doesn't supply enough money to expand the transit system much beyond what we've got now, unless we're willing to wait several decades before it happens.
Your question about bait-and-switch is a good one, because that's a common problem with dedicated funds in the state budget that are supposed to go for things like schools or transportation. But it doesn't apply to the county sales tax. This money goes into a separate account and can't be spent on anything but transportation. Even if the Board of Supervisors wanted to take it for something else, they don't have the power to do so.
Posted by: Dan Turner | October 14, 2008 at 03:34 PM
How is transportation funding spent now? And where does the existing funding come from?
I know that 1% of the current sales tax in L.A. county is dedicated to transportation, but is there other money which we might see cut if this Measure passes? In other words, is there room for a bait-and-switch here, like we've seen before with education?
Posted by: Michael | October 14, 2008 at 01:02 PM
I don't know that I trust our Mayor with this much money. Wasn't he supposed to fix this traffic light problem last year? Also, how do we know that the majority of this money will go towards more public transportation and not towards highway expansions (which will be a short term fix and a huge headache for commuters)?
Posted by: RT | October 10, 2008 at 05:40 PM
Actually, it's a little bit more than one empty aluminum can - CRV on a 12 oz. can is $.05. $25 per year works out to just under $.07 per day.
We need a regional system that goes beyond Los Angeles County. I'd like to see a 1% tax increase for all of Southern California (less than $.14 per day on average), with all of the money going to build a rail system that works for all of Southern California.
Grade separate Metrolink, build new lines and run them 24 hours a day, seven days a week, every 10 minutes during peak hours.
Posted by: William R. Cousert | October 09, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Actually, now IS the time -- this will create 200,000+ new jobs and inject billions into our local economy, according to LAEDC.
Think of Measure R as an economic stimulus package for LA County!
Posted by: David Murphy | October 09, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Actual cost of Measure R
Critics like Gloria Molina have claimed that Measure R will impose a burden on low-income people in their neighborhood.
In order to find out how much burden this will be, I considered the extreme case of a person making a living by collecting cans. Measure R is calculated to cost approximately $25 a year per person on the average. So, this is roughly one empty aluminum can a day. I think this is not really any burden for the can collector.
One empty aluminum can a day = Brand-new Los Angeles with a comprehensive rail-transit system, affordable and efficient public transit, and improved freeways
Posted by: Gokhan | October 09, 2008 at 07:58 PM