German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
ChineseZach Behrens > Mike Antonovich
[tags]los angeles, mta, red line, purple line, laist, mike antonovich[/tags]
The Metro Purple Line extension to the sea, while not official, has been gaining in popularity despite no federal or state funding available and no local taxes being allowed to build it. One county supervisor, whose district will not even come close to any subway access, wants to protect the rest of the county from the tunneled scourge.
Yet a local blogger makes the case of how the future subway can have aggregate benefits to residents of the Antelope Valley. Zach Behrens of LAist writes in Wilshire Subway Watch: How it Helps Palmdale:
So can the Purple Line subway for Wilshire Blvd. improve a commute from Palmdale to Los Angeles? I’m no traffic expert, but when you relieve the busiest corridor in this country it might affect the perpendicular 405, thus butterfly affecting the 5, thus the 14. But maybe someone can school me in the comments section or maybe someone can agree.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich does not like the idea of spending all this money on the subway, citing … because only “three cities” would benefit from the Purple Line that takes people from Downtown LA to the beach in Santa Monica. For example, money could instead go to the county’s 5th district which, shocking surprise, Antonovich represents.
Behrens is on to something. Plus, while Behrens is untested politically, his .000 governance average is better than striking out on every county governance issue that was pitched before Antonovich and his comrades. Metro is 180 degrees what it was a decade ago, largely in part to effective administrators and eight other board members to dilute the taint of the supes.
Another benefit to residents of Antonovich’s fiefdom district is that north Los Angeles County residents — at least during rush hours — would be one transfer away from the subway. Santa Clarita Transit and Antelope Valley Transit Authority run commuter buses to the Westside, and the former runs them both ways! These riders would be most appreciative for having a subway to the sea, too.
Discussion
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Please keep discussions civil: exercise Troll Controll.
I disagree. Antonovich is a very principled person who has served in office for the last 27 years (and whose kids would have probably succeeded him, had he not had them when he was in his 60’s). He is absolutely right about the County CEO, though… it is a stalking horse for Zev Yaroslavsky to become King of Los Angeles County in 2014 when he is termed out.
Ultimately, Antonovich is the reason why the North County hasn’t seceded. There were secession movements back in the 70’s. Imagine South Bay County, San Gabriel County, Chumash County, Los Cerritos County, and Santa Monica County, all of which were proposed in the 1970’s. http://eec.co.la.ca.us/publications/html/cntyorg/7805-NewCounty.asp Antelope County was also on the list. Would it be better to just draw a line along the San Gabriel Mountains and just give up the north to Antelope County? If Antonovich wasn’t elected, that would have probably happened. He has rightly advocated for all of the other cities’ needs so that the folks in Palmdale do get some transit (remember, Metrolink was never supposed to go up to Lancaster until after the Northridge earthquake happened).
Frankly, I’m not convinced that the Antelope Valley is well served by the current arrangement.
I also don’t think that we in the urban core are well served by the current arrangement.
I think the County Government is deaf to its constituency, and only heeds big-moneyed interests, like land developers. Over the past 27 years, the County has bent over backwards to accomodate and encourage urban sprawl and the large-scale destruction of what used to be a mixed urban-rural landscape.
I’m not saying this is Antonovich’s fault. But you aren’t going to convince me that he has dedicated his long public career to promoting transit and wise development in Los Angeles County.
All politicians who were in office in Southern California over the past 30 years helped lead us down this traffic-choked path.
But then again, Calwatch, why even bother with the county level in the first place?
Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters pointed out in a colum he wrote a few years ago that every county-level function is already provided by, or can be transferred to, cities, the state or special service authorities.
And the county proposals of the 1970s were not about good governance but mostly ugly paranoia surrounding busing/desegregation.
Everything attributed to Antonovich, the same and even more could be said for Kenneth Hahn. As for Antonovich, his tenure is heavily weighed towards the problems of county governance today. Granted, the plateload is full, but even Antonovich with all his experience is still not able to rein in the cascading problems.
Maybe, the best legacy Antonovich could leave is to help dissolve the county. Let the unincorps vote on their fates, to incorporate or to be annexed, and convert county agencies to the city, state or regional powers authorities.
I disagree: More local control would exacerbate the problem.
The problem with transportation (and planning, homelessness, and other related issues) are regional problems that require regional solution. The counties, not the cities, should be addressing this. Otherwise, you get problems tossed around like a hot potato.
Sadly, our county governments are impotent, and/or incompetent, and/or corrupt. They are unwilling/unable/uninterested in providing the kind of transit we need.
I agree with you about local control being a problem.
However, the county as a level of governance is obsolete, and the regional problems you mentioned can be handled at the state level. Or, for government services, create regional joint powers authorities.
For transportation, the state level would be too remote for California. State-level public transit works in New Jersey, Rhode Island and Delaware since the states are pretty small. It would be impossible here, but an RTD-level system would be needed again.
Ultimately, you would need some form of regional governing body by urbanized zone (UZA), or Communist-China-sized states where the city government governs most of the hinterlands (and leads to incredible city size populations, because “Beijing” goes all the way to Banning in this scenario). Or a New England governance system where the county level is essentially neutered.
No one wants a Demolition Man-type scenario where they are governed by “San Angeles” hundreds of miles away. I would never live in the City of LA because of its politicians are aloof to the interests of their constituents. Smaller cities can be more responsive to their residents because they have less bureaucracy.