Kudos And A Suggestion For OCTA

I can be harsh on OCTA, but it's because I care about the Authority's mission. Transportation infrastructure is a fundamental government purpose. OCTA can lay claim to much greater legitimacy for its activities than most government agencies.

Which is why I've been meaning to extend much-deserved kudos to the OCTA Board of Directors for approving $1.46 billion on infrastructure improvements and Metrolink. The vast majority of commuters want to commute in their cars all, or at least a good part of, the time.  Transportation planning ought to be oriented towards that reality, rather than spending billions of dollars on transit systems most commuters think other commuters ought to use, but not themselves.

Hence my concomitant disappointment in the disproportionate allocation of the $1.46 billion to carpool lanes vis-a-vis streets and highways.

According to the chart in the Los Angeles Times story yesterday, $454 million -- or 31% -- of this appropriation is going to carpool connectors for the 22/405 and 406/605 intersection.

On the other hand, only $150 million --  or 10% -- is being spent on highway improvements. This includes the Bristol Street widening, which is interesting because having OCTA pay the Bristol improvements is why Mayor Miguel Pulido and the Santa Ana City Council flipped from opposing to supporting CenterLine.

Another $115 million -- or 7% -- is going to  local streets and roads, while just $81 million -- or 5.5%  --  is going to existing improvements like chokepoint projects on the I-5.

In other words, far more of the $1.46 billion is being spent on carpool connector lanes at two freeway intersections that is being spent on highway, street and roads improvements combined.

That's out of whack.

I have a suggestion for OCTA. In a year they'll be asking Orange County voters to extend Measure M.Be bold and propose a moratorium on future carpool lane construction, and instead plow the billions that would be spent on carpool lanes to go to the construction of additonal general use lanes. I think voters would respond favorably to such an initiative that demonstrates OCTA is in touch with the everyday reality of life on the freeway.

Comments

[MrWhipple]

Better yet, move out of the 70s-era Soviet-style planning and convert all O.C. carpool lanes into HOT lanes.

Drivers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your crawling commute!

[Screech]

Extending measure M will only result in OCTA getting millions MORE to spend on carpool lanes, mass transit, etc. They have proven they don't much want to spend it on roads, which is what we approved it for.

But they don't dare mention that in their illegal political advertising, now do they?

Measure M should sunset as originally promised. The roads are built, and we don't need "extra" taxes for that anymore. We can finish up with the "regular" road funds, from gas taxes.

[rational exuberance]

Ditto, Screech!

[OpenMinded]

Screech,

Make up your mind:

"They have proven they don't much want to spend it on roads," then you go on to say, "The roads are built, and we don't need "extra" taxes for that anymore."

Reality is OCTA cannot arbitrarily allocate Measure M money to what ever it wants. On the contrary, MM clearly delineates where the money MUST go, include about 40% to streets and roads. Every year, for the last 14 years OCTA has allocated millions to the cities to take care of street maintenance and improvements. Another 40% goes to freeways, which was used to expand every single freeway in Orange County, including the 22 (which was never in the original plan). The other 20% is to go to transit, which includes light rail and HOV projects.

I find it difficult to blame OCTA for the way the money is allocated, when it was the voters who elected for it to be that way. If you want to see more allocated to concrete (freeways) and roads, and less to transit, contact OCTA and let them know your stance. I'm sure they are drafting the next plan to succeed Measure M, and the biggest question is how to divvy up the money.
Screech,

Make up your mind:

"They have proven they don't much want to spend it on roads," then you go on to say, "The roads are built, and we don't need "extra" taxes for that anymore."

Reality is OCTA cannot arbitrarily allocate Measure M money to what ever it wants. On the contrary, MM clearly delineates where the money MUST go, include about 40% to streets and roads. Every year, for the last 14 years OCTA has allocated millions to the cities to take care of street maintenance and improvements. Another 40% goes to freeways, which was used to expand every single freeway in Orange County, including the 22 (which was never in the original plan). The other 20% is to go to transit, which includes light rail and HOV projects.

I find it difficult to blame OCTA for the way the money is allocated, when it was the voters who elected for it to be that way. If you want to see more allocated to concrete (freeways) and roads, and less to transit, contact OCTA and let them know your stance. I'm sure they are drafting the next plan to succeed Measure M, and the biggest question is how to divvy up the money.

[Screech]

I am not blaming OCTA, except for their advertising how great they saved us from gridlock, but the way they did it was by building those elaborate carpool flyover ramps. Man, those must have cost millions! Could have used that 40% of the money (your figure) for more and better regular road expansion, where it would have gone even farther. But no. They bought EXPENSIVE stuff.

Anyway, Measure M was supposed to sunset, it should be allowed to sunset. We don't need any more sales tax money for transit. We have road tax in our gasolene for that.

I don't want to lobby OCTA for how to divide the money. I don't want to divert the discussion to that. I want the voters to reject any extension of the half cent Measure M tax. That's the correct approach.

[calwatch]

And watch as the infrastructure of the OC crumbles.

You actually have to be somewhat careful of assuming that the quarter cent "automatic" sales tax (TDA Article 8 for those of us wonks) and gas tax will go to roads. It will probably cover for maintenance but by law the rest has to go to transit. Orange County has a very good bus system, but if service does not meet the demand, then you could very likely have a civil rights lawsuit and a consent decree shoved in your face, like LA County, thus "draining" your road money into transit.

(See my prior post on "conformity" for my explanation as to why OCTA must build carpool lanes and cannot, by EPA regulation, build mixed flow lanes.)

I do agree that HOT lanes would be the next logical alternative if Measure M redux fails. However, you will need bonding capacity to start what is always a long and grueling environmental process before one lane of HOT is built, which of course a bond provides. You can bond against TDA and gas tax funds but it is pretty difficult.