On Monday, the OCTA Board of Directors voted to send a recommend support for SB 974 (a $30 tax on cargo containers) back to the Legislative Committee, which had earlier recommend against supporting the cargo container tax (I should note that the "support" recommendation was condition on certain changes being made to the bill).
The Legislative Committee yesterday recommended opposing SB 974 unless it is amended. I'm not sure if that asks for different amendments than were requested earlier. It comes back before the full Board of Directors on August 27.
Last Thursday I blogged about how this morning the OCTA Board Directors would be considering a recommendation that they endorse SB 974, which would impose a new $30 tax on incoming cargo containers. You can see that post for more details.
I'm told the Board of Directors sent it back to the Legislative and Government Affairs Committee at the behest of Pat Bates, who chairs that committee. Bates interrupted the staff report on SB 974 to voice that opinion. The matter actually came before the Leg Committee in the spring, and the committee vote NOT to support SB 974.
I was just looking at the massive (606 pages, 53 megabytes) Agenda for this Monday and saw Director Art Brown's travel authorization form to attend the 2007 Rail Volution Conference ("Building Livable Communities With Transit") in beautiful Miami, Florida at the gorgeous Loews Miami Beach Hotel! There, the long-serving Buena Park Councilman can join other conferees in "grappling" with these issues:
Climate change and dwindling resources
Fostering and enhancing a healthy economy
Addressing the needs of diverse cultures
Proactively financing infrastructures that support livable communities
SB 974 would impose a tax on containers coming into three California ports:
This bill would require the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland to collect a user fee on the owner of container cargo moving through the Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Long Beach, or the Port of Oakland at a rate of $30 per twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU).
The funds would be earmarked for mitigating port pollution and funding transportation measures for container cargo.
Support it or oppose it, it's a new tax -- and one that will add to the cost of importing goods into this country.
The question is, will the almost completely Republican Board of Directors vote to support the imposition of a new tax?
Steve Greenhut posted this a little while ago over at Orange Punch.
The OCTA bus strike is over, which will help local riders. That’s good news. But the irony is that Teamsters drivers should be thanking OCTA CEO Art Leahy and the OCTA Board of Directors for insisting on pay hikes for newer drivers.
The union — led by older drivers trying to spike their retirement — wanted to shortchange the newer drivers. The union insisted on NO pay raises for drivers who have been on the job for fewer than five years. OCTA management assured that the new drivers got a fair deal. OCTA management assured that drivers got information about the negotiations, while Teamsters leaders kept that info to themselves.
I took these pictures this morning at the OCTA Bus Base located on Hyland and MacArthur in Santa Ana. Roughly 40 or so employees showed up to demonstrate. They were all given hand-held signs to walk back and fourth infront of the entrance to the base. I didn't see any violent or questionable behaviors from the demonstrators, but nevertheless, the Sheriff's Department dispatched 2 police cruisers to be on stand by inside the base as a precautionary measure. Hope you will enjoy the pictures.
Steve Greenhut blogged this excellent post on Orange Punch a short time ago:
Forty percent of OCTA's Teamsters bus drivers need to be wondering why
they are out on the picket lines, given that the union is insisting
that ALL the pay increases go only to senior drivers. The union's 60
percent of drivers who have been on the job for more than five years
already get the best routes and the best hours. They want OCTA to give
them even more pay and benefits, and these union leaders are perfectly
happy that the younger drivers get nada.
John Seiler posted this today on his blog about a conference local government he attended several years ago, given by some liberal academics:
The most interesting lecture was about how high costs for government
transit workers’ wages and benefits mean they have to operate large
buses, which means fewer riders on some routes.
It makes sense. There’s only so much money for bus transit. Wages
are high because bus transit is a monopoly and the union exerts
pressure. That leaves less money for buying buses. So the transit
authority — in our local case, the Orange County Transportation Authority — buys large buses that often, as everyone notices, ride around with one or two passengers.
This passage from today's Los Angeles Times speaks volumes about who's responsible for the OCTA bus driver's strike:
Art Leahy, the OCTA's chief executive, said talks broke down at 11:30
p.m. Friday, about 30 minutes before the court-ordered 60-day cooling
off period expired.
He said transit negotiators increased their offer to $209 million in
the afternoon, an $18-million increase from the three-year contract
that has expired.
But just before midnight, Leahy said, the
Teamsters countered at $209.7 million, a $200,000 increase from their
previous demand.
Leahy said the 14.6% raise in wages and
benefits in the OCTA deal would give younger drivers, those with five
years or less of experience, an hourly wage of $14.27. Top drivers
would make $23.87 an hour.
"The offer we made was 10% higher than the one we made two weeks ago," Leahy said.
So, with minutes to go before the cooling off period expired, Teamsters Local 952 (the bus drivers' union) president Patrick Kelly responded to an OCTA concession by increasing his demands.
The OCTA coach operators' threatened strikes illustrates the need to develop transit alternatives to the government bus monopoly. If the buses stop running, the vast majority of those who use them have no other way of getting to around.
Privatizing the bus system via competing private operators is one idea, but given the cost of operating those big eco-friendly beasts, privatizing the county bus system as it's currently constituted probably isn't viable. But still worth studying.
Where we ought to be looking is deregulating jitney services. Unfortunately, the OCTA Board of Directors has no authority to do so. I say unfortunate because our current OCTA Board is conservative and creative enough to seriously study such an initiative.