German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
ChineseBus Riders Union speaks out
Over at LAist there is a post stating the the Bus Riders Union (BRU) has been visiting various neighborhood councils trying to gain support for extending the consent decree which is due to expire this year. In a video interview posted in the article, BRU organizer Lisa Adler talks about MTA’s actions that led to the consent decree ruling:
“We were able to demonstrate that MTA was stealing bus funds that served a predominately black, latino, and asian population and using those funds to construct and operate a rail system that at the time was serving a predominately white or caucasian population.”
What I find interesting is the claim that rail construction was (note her use of “at the time”) a racist act and that rail transit would ingnore the communities (poor ethnic) that needed it the most. Anyone who has ridden any of the train lines in LA (including the Gold Line) know the the demographics of train riders is very similar to the demographics of the bus riders: working class latinos. This makes sense to me since the majority of people in Los Angeles county are, you guessed it, latino! If on the trains I noticed mostly white people, then I would understand that something wasn’t right, since whites are NOT the majority in Los Angeles county (in terms of population). I think anyone with eyes can clearly see that the rail transit in LA is serving minority communities effectively.
What are your thoughts on the BRU and their proposed extension of the consent decree?
[tags]Bus Riders Union, BRU, consent decree[/tags]
Discussion
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Please keep discussions civil: exercise Troll Controll.
Though I think the BRU has helped out a great deal in the fight to expand public transit in LA, I also think they’ve gotten so full of themselves they now think in a manner detrimental to many of the people they’re trying to endorse. Though the consent decree was a great stepping-stone, it has also become dated for it discounts the cities rails as a viable and real transportation method. Certainly I would agree with Ms. Adler ten years ago, but things have changed and so should the BRU’s point of view. Represent all metro riders instead of just bus riders. Only then can they truly represent the latino and black communities they have so preached as their constituency.
Food for thought:
BRU Truth
San Fernando Valley Transit Insider’s BRU page
Los Angeles transit advocates have long had an antipathy to the Bus Riders Union. Many dislike its methods and its monomaniacal anti-rail, bus-only vision.
That’s being too kind on them.
As for me, I have long thought that the Bus Riders Union is a fraud and a parasite, and that the best thing that would happen to public transportation is for the consent decree to expire and the BRU to just vanish.
The BRU is not so much a union as it is the methods and madness of Eric Mann. He’s legendary in leftist circles and has been an interloper on many issues. Most of the organization is actually paid staffers rather than a deliberative, member-based organization. So it’s Eric Mann who desired all buses and no rail, and you belong to the BRU only to agree with his plan.
Update: The BRU is set to throw a tantrum on July 11, demanding a Wilshire Boulevard bus lane.
Metro is a better organization for having submitted to the consent decree, and hopefully management knows better than to let bus service decline should it expire.
A decade ago, the BRU’s debate about “transit racism” didn’t hold water. The real “transit racism” has been the long tradition of Westside NIMBYs fighting against the Wilshire subway, thinking it will allow poor people to “invade” Hancock Park and Beverly Hills. Luckily, those NIMBYs have become YIMBYs, and the much-needed project is back on track.
In the 1990’s, the BRU did have a great argument: the bus system was terrible. Old buses that broke down, overcrowded routes, and a hyper-focus on rail construction that prevented any improvement. Today, the bus system is far better. The fleet is new and efficient, articulated buses and Rapid lines are relieving overcrowding, and rail is no longer the main priority.
The BRU has moved away from reality, instead grabbing onto the power necessary to further its political ambitions, which include socialist revolution. Crises of “transit racism” ring hollow when Metro is building lines on the Eastside and in South L.A., and when the BRU opposed the Orange Line, a busway, it lost all credibility.
Bus lanes on Wilshire are a good idea but politically impossible. The merchants will never go for it, they want their street parking. Besides, a dedicated bus lane wouldn’t increase speed too much…there’s still a traffic light at almost every intersection. A grade-seperated transit line is the only way to provide a long-term solution.
MTA has already studied a Wilshire bus-only lane and allocated the funding to it, but it requires coordination with the cities of Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica and even the county of L.A., and they have to be kept on the same page.
Each of those cities have different prerogatives, and a bus-only lane puts MTA at the mercy of the cities.
Worse, the project is expected to cost over $100 million, and that’s for a bus lane during rush hours only.
Moreover, speed advantages are lost because cars are still allowed to pull into the bus lane to make right turns. Because of the heavy pedestrian activity, buses will have to wait for cars to complete their turns, who in turn have to wait for the pedestrians to cross. And the traffic light transponders, like now, won’t do squat.
wad or mitch, any real word on redline extension? i’ve read some stuff here and there, but haven’t got anything definite. something about a new phase to fairfax. is that true?
The Red Line extension is in the “good idea with public support in its favor” phase. There’s no actual plan yet, meaning no new corridor study, requests for proposals or designs yet.
The plan looks like MTA is waiting for the bond measure to pass in November. The lion’s share will go to a westside Red Line extension.
This is because of Proposition A, aka Zev’s Law, passed in 1998. It prohibits county sales taxes to be used for building tunnels. It is not a ban on tunneling. The Gold Line has tunnels, but MTA is paying for those with state and federal funds.
That will likely happen with the November bonds. It results in a new funding source, and MTA can maintain its existing local, state and federal tax allocations to existing projects.
Tykejohnson, there is a new corridor study underway for the Wilshire subway. You can read about it here. This study looks at a stretch from Wilshire/Western to Century City as “phase one” despite others’ views that Wilshire/Fairfax is a more realistic goal.
Despite “Zev’s law,” the Red Line extension is closer to reality than it has ever been since the Ross explosion in 1985.
this is all great news… also, i heard some time ago that a tax on our utilities was raised to go to public transit (searched but could not find the npr link). can that money be allocated to the red line or is that under Zev’s law as well?
For utilities, it might be a federal tax. That would just go in the general highway pot, for which some goes to transit.