You work for Metro. Why is it wrong for me to assume you have a regular bus?

I asked Steve Hymon the writer/publicist/blogger/editor/reporterish for The Source what bus he took and he got offended.

"I would suggest you think about how you ask questions. Asking 'what bus do you take regularly?' is an assumption and leads me to believe you expect or want a certain answer," Steve Hymon.

I would suggest you remember you work for Metro Mr. Hymon.

The 75% car, 10% rail, 15% bike combo isn't sustainable, especially when I'm going to bet you're in your car when traveling over 85% of the time.

You implying I am unfair for assuming you have a regular bus says volumes. I could have gone online and just lifted info about you talking about your car, but I thought maybe you might have found a bus or two that you like.

"You could have simply asked “how do you get to work,” Steve Hymon.

I don't care how you to get to work. I wanted to know the answer to the question I asked:

What bus do you take regularly?

It could have been just on the weekends. It could have been on every third Tuesday. I gave you an out, but you're so clueless in regards to public transit you couldn't even see that freebie. In your mind it was like the GRE Physics test (I guess that's why you called your post about my question a quiz.)  You couldn't even see that I was being very generous and fair with you.

I regularly take the Metro 2, but that's not the bus I take everyday to work.

A "what bus do you take to work" question may have been an assumptive question, if you're a car centric kind of person. A "what bus do you take regularly;" that's just a basic question that if you work for Metro you should be able to answer without the hysterics.

If you didn't work for Metro I wouldn't be so harsh, but you work for Metro and you seem insulted that I asked you if you take the bus.

And this all leads to the bigger statement, because I would never waste anyone's time on this blog the way I feel Steve wasted the public's time on The Source with personal bs with no point.

This is Metro, folks. This is what is OK if you work for Metro: being insulted by someone assuming you use one of Metro's products.

This is why Metro Los Angeles is proud to have less than two percent of it's employees using it's product. Metro has so little respect for the people who use their products that their lead writer throws up a post on the company blog about how he's insulted by someone assuming he takes the bus and everyone at One Gateway thinks that's peachy.

That's shameful.

If you worked for Ford Motors and I asked what kind of Ford you drove would that be an unfair question?

-Browne Molyneux

Comments

[Justin N]

Posts that start with "There oughta be a law" are so cliche... but still...

There ought to be a law that requires anyone directing public transport spending or routing (including staffers and Directors) to ride the transit system at least once every 30 days. (I'd love to see them do it daily... but anyone can manage once a month.)

[Chewie]

I've gotta say, this Molyneux-Hymon feud makes for some pretty interesting reading. Maybe if it increases readership of the blogs, it will increase transit ridership.

You know, people will be like "I've gotta ride this thing everyone's arguing about" :)

I'd post a comment on The Source too, but they're not ready to take that step yet :( I'd really respect Metro more if they did that. Letting the public publicly hassle you on the Internet is a sign that you're ready to listen, and good fun . . .

[Bert Green]

Browne, I now think that you are a genius. Thank you. Sorry, Steve, she's right. I walk to work, but I take the train and buses all the time. If someone asked me which bus I take regularly I would have quickly answered the 720 and the 51/52/60/26 on 7th Street.

I also have a car, and I use it when necessary. Like when I have to visit rich people in Beverly Hills and Brentwood who have no clue that I might be on transit at other times.

[ds]

This is bullshit. He wasn't insulted. You asked a loaded question. He doesn't ride the bus, just like the vast majority of car owners. Why would you assume otherwise?

If you can afford to own and operate your own car, with the possible exception of dedicated busways, riding the bus regularly gives you nothing but added inconvenience.

It has nothing to do with Metro's crappy service. Even if Metro provided amazing service, it would still be true. Riding a normal bus is always slower and less convenient than driving your own car.

As someone who wants Metro to improve its service, I'd rather have them hire people who are, you know, qualified, rather than worrying about their personal transportation choices.

[browne]

Oh please DS if me asking a Metro employee what bus does he take is a loaded question well there's something wrong with Metro.

Now I've said before once Metro admits that there is something fundamentally wrong with the agency/its service/one gateway then I will stop asking questions that a competent agency would have no problem answering.

Metro thinks it's fine. Metro thinks it's perfect. In fact in the alt transit world I'm viewed as being negative (BY PEOPLE WITH CARS) for saying Metro has problems, so for once I assume that one of Metro's employees is doing something decent and normal. I give Hymon the benefit of a doubt and assume he's tried something beyond taking the Gold Line on second Thursdays, possibly something like riding the bus once a month and I'm asking a loaded question?

No my friend Metro has a major gas sucking private vehicle addiction and the first step to getting help is admitting that you need help. Metro needs help. It's effed up.

My question to a Metro employee about what bus that he takes shouldn't be viewed as a major big deal, but it is, because it's Metro and people who work for Metro ride it at an even lesser rate than even the typical car loving Angeleno.

How is a person who has never been on pt qualified to run it? Metro is the worse run major city system in the US and I don't mean finances I mean just trying to take it and get around the city. SF, NY, Chicago, DC all do a better job than the joke of a system we have in LA, do you know why, because in those cities the people who run it have been on public transit.

I'm never going to be ok with the fact that less than two percent of Metro employees use public transit. Metro is located in the most easily accessible by public transit places in Los Angeles.

Obviously the people who run Metro aren't competent. Have you been on that thing, so the whole "you can not take it and still run it competently" theory has been proven wrong.

Metro is run like shit, so possibly they need to try the whole riding it and experiencing it for themselves so they can do something about that piece of crap that they expect us to ride with a happy smile on our face.

Browne

[Chewie]

I agree with your criticism about the private car fleet Metro owns. I saw one of their private cars the other day and had to ask myself, "why aren't you using your own product?"

Now, I understand that for maintenance work you may need to buy a few trucks. But for white collar workers, those people should be on the bus/train, multitasking with their Crackberries if they need to go somewhere.

And if that takes to long, Metro needs to realize that that's what people without cars face every day.

[Christina]

Unbelievable! I just visited the Source and Scott Hymon's reaction is so ridiculous. What a waste of a blog entry. Only someone who is embarrassed about not using the product he represents would act so defensive.

[Robert]

Browne,
You seem to love attacking Metro so much that you ignore basic fundamental facts about public transit. In normal street running operations, buses ARE much slower than rail. Why would you attack a Metro employee for taking RAIL instead of a bus? Especially when rail is much more convenient for them and offers a lower travel time (and less transfers)? It is very simple minded to just come out and say "which bus do you take regularly". Why not ask which transit lines do you take regularly? Do you have some kind of anti-rail bias that makes you think rail isn't even a viable form of transit? Or are you just trying to puruse the false idea that only wealthier/non-minority residents use rail? You should be ashamed of yourself - in a city where we are looking to unite residents behind effective public transit, you are trying to attack someone based on their mode preference (something that he shares with 99.9% of the population). Until buses are given a FAIR SHOT in our transportaiton system (as a COMPETITIVE mode), of course people who have the means will AVOID them, including Metro employees. You think just because someone works for Metro they should take the bus everywhere? Guess what - Metro is not a private entity that is able to simply do what they want to improve public transit service. Transit provision is HIGHLY POLITICAL and Metro employees have to succumb to the whims of a Board of Directors that gets to decide which transportation modes are given priority in our County. Do some research before you start attacking the employees - you seem to think they have much more power than they do. You also seem to think they are not behind the overarching goal of improving transit service in LA County. Believe me, if Metro employees had their way, things would be a lot different. For one, Metro would not be spending so much money on highway improvements. But guess what - Metro employees have VERY LITTLE POWER. You should know that by now, with all of your supposed "experience" in the public transit realm.

[James]

Hey Browne,
Why don't you attack the politicians that are actually behind Metro policies and spending, rather than the employees who are only trying to improve public transit in a city/county they care for. You are wasting your time attacking a Metro employee that has little control or say in the effectiveness of transit in LA County - the Board of Directors makes the ultimate decisions and they are to blame for why buses are so slow and are not given exclusive or HOV lanes on our roadways. Why don't you put all your anger, time, and energy into something that will actually improve transit in LA rather than attacking employees that have to work for a POLITICAL Board.

[Peter K]

Wait a second, you think that just because someone works for a certain agency or company they should use that specific product? Are you crazy? So someone who works at a tobacco company should automatically smoke? Would you go ask someone there, clear out of the blue, "which cigarettes do you smoke regularly?" Wow, you seem to just love to pick a fight without actually thinking about how you phrase things and the underlying assumptions.

[Common Sense]

What is wrong with you???? Of course Metro knows that it is "effed up" (your words). Can you guess what the answer is? Hint: it's the answer to most problems in our society... MONEY!!!! Metro doesn't have nearly the amount of money it takes to create an effective transit system, let alone sustain operations. Guess where public money comes from? POLITICIANS!!! Not Metro employees. Not even the CEO! Wow, what a concept, Browne - political infighting, a lack of sufficient funds, and a lack of political leadership behind effective public transit (and away from an auto-dominated transportation system) are the reasons why Metro is left with running such a sub par system. Metro does not think it's perfect - where the hell did you get that stupid idea from? But guess what, in the face of such hardships you have to remain POSITIVE and promote your services instead of just coming out and saying "our transit service sucks but please please ride Metro!" You seem to lack basic facts about how government agencies work. Why don't you direct your attacks to where they can actually make a difference. You think some blogger at Metro is going to improve our transit system? You're better off attacking Supervisor Antonovich for his anti-transit policies than someone who is just trying to do his best to advocate for better transit in LA (without any resources other than his ideas and motivation).

[Jerard]

Browne conveniently forgot to mention the 2nd question she posed to Steve: And if you don’t take the bus regularly, why not?

Obviously she was trying to attack Steve from the very beginning. What a great way to approach someone, instead of engaging in a productive, respectable dialogue! Why doesn't he take the bus regularly? Because bus service is terrible ANYWHERE in the world where it operates in mixed traffic. Anywhere, from Paris to New York to Tokyo. This is why dense urban areas need RAIL. Too bad Browne doesn't concentrate on securing more rail funding by writing her congressional reps rather than ranting about how metro employees don't like taking the bus. Guess what - NO ONE would choose a trip by bus over a much quicker trip by rail. Your battle is futile Browne, put your energy into something that will actually improve transit in LA. Simply attacking different Metro employees for not taking the crappy bus service they are FORCED to contend with (last i checked metro employees weren't able to wave a magic wand and improve transit service, I think that requires political power and money - not just wishful thinking).

[Daniel M]

Hey Browne: guess why more transit employees in New York, Chicago, San Francisco and DC use their transit system regularly?? KEY WORD: DENSITY. Yes, density is needed for effective transit, because you can't simply run buses from one boonie to another. Effective transit comes about from linking major high density destinations with another. Now guess what Los Angeles County lacks?? DENSITY!!! Transit in those other systems NATURALLY works better because it is much easier to connect high density origins (residents) AND destinations (employment, services, retail, etc.) with fixed transit lines (especially rail). In an ideal world, there would be rail on every single major arterial in LA - but even then, one would have to transfer several times on a typical trip. LA transit is so ineffective because we are trying to connect far flung destinations with each other over a very large land area. Do some homework Browne before you start comparing LA with NYC or SF or Chicago (or any other city that was built in a MUCH DIFFERENT fashion than LA).
Go google "sprawl" and see what you can learn. Also google "auto/highway subsidies" and maybe even do some research on how federal money has been divided up between auto-infrastructure vs. transit infrastructure. Also look at the LAND USE patterns of LA versus those other cities you love to compare LA to.
Then, maybe, just maybe, you'll understand, at least to some extent, why it is so hard to provide effective transit in LA. But probably not - you'll just continue complaining about a system (and attacking the wrong people; people who have NO CONTROL over these factors) without understanding the underlying facts of why and how that system works within the urban fabric of LA.

[Sammy K]

Last I checked, Metro doesn't just provide funding for, plan and build/design TRANSIT, but also the Highway/Roadway System. Soooo, why didn't you ask him which highway he uses regularly? Or, better yet, which Carpool lane he uses regularly (also funded by Metro). If he's a Metro employee, shouldn't he use ALL of the 'services' his agency provides? Seems like you don't know much about Metro, Browne. Which is very surprising, seeing as your blog seems to be dedicated to Metro-bashing. Too bad you're energy/anger isn't directed at actually improving transit or rallying behind politicians to provide more funding. Rant all you want - it's not going to do anything! Do something that actually might be effective!

[Josh]

Hey B, while you're wasting your time conducting these meaningless surveys, why don't you go ahead and survey EVERYONE at Metro on their transportation habits. But make sure not to mention any of the employees that DO use transit everyday - we wouldn't want to show Metro in any other light than the terrible, evil agency it is (with evil employees that secretly want to destroy all transportation throughout LA and make it harder for everyone to commute - we must expose all Metro employees, including the bloggers, janitors, transit planners, etc. for the EVIL EMPIRE they have created).

[writer]

Steve must have friends in low places. You are all hilarious. I'm a jerk for asking Steve what bus he takes??!!

 

And in regards to the question "if you don't why not," so what. That's what I wanted to know. What's the big deal. He works for Metro. I am not trying to hide the question. I linked the post and a screen shot of it.

 

I get the Metro issue is a huge issue, but it's not going to ever get fixed by Metro employees being offended by someone asking what bus they take.

 

 

 

Browne

[writer]

Also this post isn't about Steve, it's about Metro. Less than two percent of them use the train or bus and that's unbelievable.

 

Browne

[David Galvan]

Browne, your analogy to Ford is flawed. Ford only produces Ford motor products. Metro produces and manages buses, trains and carpool lanes. Hymon stated that he uses the Dash to get around downtown regularly, so in that way he answered your question about what bus he takes regularly. That was a completely fair question on your part, and I don't agree with Steve saying your phrasing of the question was loaded.

But framing Steve has some sort of traitor to Metro (as you appear to do in this Bus Bench post) for not taking the bus is a little disingenuous. He explained that he takes the trains more than the buses, because they are more reliable, again answering your second question ("why not") fairly. But don't act like he is a traitor to Metro because he doesn't take the bus very often. Why don't you ask him if he takes a carpool lane?

I think that Steve's numbered responses to your fair question were also fair. The extra paragraph that Hymon added to his response, suggesting you rethink how you ask questions, was unnecessary. But I also see why he would think that your question was loaded, given the discussion that ensued on the Streetsblog post in which Hymon was quoted as saying that he could "afford to drive." I think he was probably trying to counter what he expected to happen: You'd take his response to your question and post it here on Bus Bench to show how Hymon (and other Metro employees) shouldn't be running a transit agency when most of them don't take transit, because he doesn't take a bus. Another point: as an experienced reporter, Hymon does probably have a good idea about how phrasing questions a certain way can indicate that you expect or want a certain response. And, honestly, you probably did.

"SF, NY, Chicago, DC all do a better job than the joke of a system we have in LA, do you know why, because in those cities the people who run it have been on public transit."

Maybe that's part of it. But another reason these cities do a better job is that they have more rail infrastructure that has been invested in over a longer period of time than Metro has, and their topography is less variable over their service area than it is around L.A.

Browne, as usual I like your intentions and your efforts to report, but you do have a penchant for hyperbole and oversimplification. Metro is not a "joke" of a system. It's actually pretty decent given the sprawl of the city it serves. And it is getting better.

[Keren]

Thank you David - very well put. Hopefully Browne reads every word of what you said, along with the posts before. Browne fails to realize the complexities of providing effective transit in an urbanized area like LA County, where development is spread out across a huge land area and where, thus, travel patterns are extremely diverse and don't follow major corridors, like in San Francisco or New York. Browne also fails to acknowledge that Metro employees have extremely little control over the public transit system in LA County. Metro employees simply do the RESEARCH that indicates where transit investments are needed and how they should be provided - they do not in any way get to make the final decisions NOR dole out the money needed to actually provide this infrastructure and service. They are NOT the decision makers. Browne should go after the decision makers - she is wasting her time attacking Metro employees. You don't have to ride a bus regularly in LA to know all of the problems with our bus transit system. You can just ride it a few times and know (or even ride in other cities and know). And guess what - I'm sure most Metro employees have at least ridden a bus in LA a few times in their lifetime. Enough to know how bad it is, but their hands are tied as to solutions. Browne seems to think that Metro's transit system will magically improve if all or most Metro employees used it. That is obviously not the case - Metro employees don't control the purse strings that dictate how effective and convenient the system is.
It is interesting to note that most transportation/transit bloggers (that actually want to make some difference) go after the POLITICIANS that control the decisions and funding - yet Browne seems to think attacking the powerless employees at Metro will get us anywhere - it won't and she needs to realize that fact before she continues to waste time on such an unnecessary effort. Browne, your intentions may be good but your methods of pursuing them are extremely disparaging and ineffective.

[Reza]

Browne's statistic is completely false and hopefully someone at Metro will identify the correct figure - much more than 1.6% of Metro employees use transit to get to and from work. Browne, were you just looking at METRO buses, because aside from Metro RAIL, there are also numerous bus agencies that provide service to Union Station along with Metrolink, which I know for a fact, many Metro employees use for their commute. I don't know how Browne managed to come up with such a false statistic. Maybe she only looked at the proportion of employees that applied for bus passes - well then she doesn't know that Metro employees already get to ride Metro services for free and thus do not have to apply for a pass (unless they use other agency services). Stop quoting your false figure, Browne. You need to go back and do proper research before you start spreading false information and basing all your "arguments" around it.

[Reza]

Browne: "I get the Metro issue is a huge issue, but it's not going to ever get fixed by Metro employees being offended by someone asking what bus they take."

LOL, so HOW exactly is it going to get fixed? If one certain Metro employee wasn't offended then you wouldn't go on your rant? I don't think so. You of all people should know that the only way to improve the Metro system is not by attacking Metro employees, but rather lobbying the Board of Directors. They are the ones with power, not Steve Hymon.

[writer]

The less than two percent is not false, check the report I sited ---I'll scan it and post it one day, it's not in Wikipedia sorry :(--- and email Metro's PR deparment. I did that's how I got confirmation. If it was false don't you think Metro would be on it. I mean hell they were on it when I sent them a "mean" email asking what bus they took, wrote a whole post about it, so rest assured it's right or they'd let you know.

 

Browne

[Jeff Whitmore]

"You are all hilarious. I'm a jerk for asking Steve what bus he takes??!!"

I don't think anyone attacked you for asking what bus he may take - it's HOW you interpreted his reaction and how you are using it to attack Metro as a whole. Go ahead and ask people what bus they take, that's fine. But why do you have to be such an A about it and phrase it so that you are automatically implying "Hey Steve, do you even TAKE the bus and why the hell not?" Why can't you just ask what transit lines he uses??? Why does it have to be bus?! You are the one that's hilarious - you fail to recognize that there many forms of transit (and also walking and biking, by the way). I think anyone would recognize how terrible the bus system is, but that's a classic characteristic of any bus system that has to deal with private auto traffic. Until we PRIORITIZE buses, and transit in general, it will ALWAYS be this way. So why don't you go after THAT, instead of attacking one particular person at Metro personally?

[Karen S]

Browne, no one was attacking your intention of asking what form of transit someone at Metro uses. Go back and read ALL the comments - they were attacking you on the basis that you are using that simple incident to make huge inferences of Metro and transportation in general. You of all people should have some background knowledge of how transit systems work, and why they are successful in some places and not in others. You should also know how transportation policies and priorities are extremely political and controlled much further up than any Metro employee or Art Leahy himself. Do some basic research and you will see what all these commentors are saying. Get over your simple question - it's not about that - it's about why transit service in LA is so dismal and HOW it can actually be improved (and no, the answer is not having Metro employees all ride the bus so that they see how terrible it is - they KNOW that already, it's WHY they don't take the bus!!!!).

[writer]

Jeff,

 

Of course there are many forms of transport and if you don't work at Metro feel free to be insulted about me asking about the bus you use, but if you work for Metro and not only do you not really use the bus, but you're insulted by me asking well..I'm sorry. It's not like he's some lay person. I don't even know why what bus you take is such a big deal. The fact he wrote a post about it makes him the A not me.

 

And Jeff I'm on defense he fired the first shot, I'm responding. Is it my fault that I'm more funny? I don't think so.

 

Browne

[Joshua Barlett]

Browne: "Steve must have friends in low places."

Wow, I would hope you wouldn't sink that low, but obviously you are indicating that you don't want to have an informed discussion of the underlying reasons why the transit system in LA is so flawed and what we can actually do to improve it. Instead you'd rather personally attack someone who works for an agency where they have no power to do anything substantial?? Instead of focusing on which Metro employees do and do not use the bus, why don't you go after the POLITICIANS that do and do not use the bus or rail or any other form of transit or "green" mode of transportation (walking, biking) and WHY they don't and what we can do to remedy these underlying factors that dictate travel movement in Los Angeles. THEN you will get to some meaningful answers and action to improve the situation.

[writer]

Why are Karen, Reza, Jeff and Sammy all from the same IP address? Oh lord...

 

You see the kind of bullshit LA transit is up against.

 

Browne

[Jeff]

Why are you so caught up on this bus issue??? Metro funds MANY forms of transportation, ONE of which are buses. There is also something called light rail, heavy rail, carpool lanes, highways, sidewalks, bikeways, etc. He wasn't offended by you asking which bus he takes, it's the WAY you asked it. Why do you not realize that? Look at the wording of your questions. It's like you are ALREADY attacking him before he even gets the chance to respond. NO ONE is attacking you for asking him what transit lines he uses!! You are focusing on the wrong (insignificant) part of this. And since you want to focus on that part, then RECOGNIZE that Metro is a TRANSPORTATION agency, not a BUS agency.

[writer]

Josh,

 

Again why do all of you have the same IP address? I do know how many people people at Metro use Metro 155.

 

Browne

[Chewie]

You want a loaded question? This is a loaded question: "when are you going to stop failing to take the bus regularly?" :)

[DJ]

Snarky question gets a snarky answer yields a snarky blog post. I think both sides of "busgate" are missing a chance to do anything constructive here.

[spokker]

I actually thought Steve Hymon was too defensive.

"What bus do you take regularly?"

"Oh, I don't take the bus I take the train and I also drive."

That's the answer. Haha, but he gets uptight about how she asked the question. Who cares? He's an adult and he should feel secure with the decisions he's making in life. But maybe browne is right in that he's insecure or that he feels guilty about it.

If asked the same question I would say, "Well I take the OCTA 54, 57, 47 and 26 a couple times a week for school. I use Metrolink or the Surfliner, Metro Purple Line and the 20 (or the 720) a couple times a week for my part-time job. I also take recreational trips on transit and drive maybe 5-15 miles per week for various reasons."

There. If anyone had a problem with that I would be puzzled about why they would care so much, but I would ultimately ignore their criticism.

I don't know why Steve Hymon can't handle that.

[CJ]

Keep it up Brownie,

Some of the worst aspects of taking the bus that are not that difficult or expensive to fix, like the lack of information at bus stops, the lack of infrastructure and commerce at bus stops, the unreliability and physical danger of many bus lines, would become priorities if any of the highly paid people at LACMTA actually took the bus, especially if they took it to new locations on a regular basis.

[Andrew Barton]

"Metro is the worse run major city system in the US and I don't mean finances I mean just trying to take it and get around the city. SF, NY, Chicago, DC all do a better job than the joke of a system we have in LA, do you know why, because in those cities the people who run it have been on public transit."

I'm not from Los Angeles or the US, for that matter, but I'd still like to comment on this anyway - because I really think you're oversimplifying the matter here. The other cities you mention are rather representative of 19th century cities in terms of density and layout. LA is the most sprawling city I've ever been in, and its sheer size coupled with the inherent limitations of buses in mixed traffic mean that Metro will be at a disadvantage because of that. Though they would do well to increase Rapid frequencies - my first encounter with the 714, where it didn't show up after half an hour of waiting and then took another ten minutes to overtake the 14 that eventually showed up, did not particularly endear me to the Rapid system.

[browne]

I wanted to use big cities in my example, because to me it's also about being a world class city. LA in my opinion is a world class, major, cosmopolitan city on the level with London, Paris, Munich and I think it's shameful how the public transit works out here, yeah it's big, so what? This isn't Jacksonville, Mississippi.

LA is the only major city in the entire world that has this heinous of a public transit system. We need to accommodate for being big. That to me isn't a valid excuse for a major city.

(Also DC is deceiving, it's bigger than DC. It brings in people from Maryland and Virginia to work and it's a pretty large distance and it runs great.)

We've accommodated the driving thing by putting up freeways all over the place. Portland, Seattle and Atlanta all do a better job at transit than LA and to me they aren't at the level of LA in regards to business, culture and art, so why are they so much better at transit? No disrespect to Seattle, Atlanta and Portland, but if LA we were a country we would be number 17 in regards to our economy.

The physical size of LA is no excuse and it doesn't explain the lack of bus shelters, the lack of clear schedules, the lack of customer service, the lack of having a competent way to collect fares and a multitude of other problems that Metro Los Angeles has.

And this brings it back to my point in other cities public transit is run by people who take it or have taken it at some point in their lives. The people of Metro LA have no idea how to fix it, because they've never used it and that's shameful. Union Station where One Gateway (Metro management) is located is the hub of LA public transit, almost anywhere in LA will get you to One Gateway in two busses or less or a train and a bus or less, but even that doesn't seem to encourage Metro employees to take it and that's a real problem.

Browne

[art]

These lame mta employees wasting more of our taxpayer funding to throw tantrums on the net are the epitome of why the company provides such poor service. They spend millions on a pr campaign to seduce "choice" riders while hundreds of places still need bus stops. They throw expensive community meetings while not responding to the comments that attendees ask, coments that oftentimes become reality. i have personally contacted the mta with some info about proposed lines and goten nothing beyond them bragging about what college they went to (kim lee amongst many)

The question is perfectly valid, and what Browne was implying is as well. it is ridiculous that so few MTA employees take public transit. If you walk past the metro builing at 9 or 5 you will see the hundreds of jettas and volvos leaving the car park, but you will not see the trains or busses inundated with metro employees.

when i speak to kids about environmental justice, i cite how few metro employees actually use their product. and how freaken dense is someone to try and compare using public tranist with smoking cigarettes? how pathetic is it for these clowns to try and find red herring debates about how she posed the question or her writing style to try and avert attention to the issue at hand: that metro employees dont use their product and it negatively affects the quality.

i'd challenge the lame mta employees trying to throw a temper tantrum to reveal their names and positions at metro, if it actually more than one person.

[art]

BTW,
Does metro check the education of their empoyees? LA has a large urban core with balnket densities above 15,000 people per square mile, with many areas above 30k. It has an area larger than chicago with more density than chicago, an area larger than 3 san franciscos with higher density than SF. the only city in this country with higher density is new york, even then much of LA's urban core is on par with every borough outside of manhattan. LA has numerous major corridors that all lead to downtown and are lined with dense communities full of public transit riders.

Its too bad that the mta employees never took an urban planning class or actually studied the city they live. nonetheless the community that generally rides public transit, they must be too busy with BS pr campaigns to seduce yuppies and throwing hissy fits on the intenet.

[Chewie]

The point about density is important, but it's not everything. As long as people own lots of cars, transit will need density to support frequent service.

However, it's a mistake to use the lack of density as an excuse for every little thing. First of all, there are places in LA that have lots of density. Secondly, as Browne points out, the state of bus stops, and the fare payment system on Metro really can and should be better.

Now, traditionally cities deal with bus stops, but maybe Metro should get more involved. At the end of the day, your product suffers when people don't have a decent and safe place to wait for a bus.

I think we need corridors with more density in LA but also a willingness to look at how Metro might be made to operate better with what it has. A dialogue with regular riders, like the people who post here, is an important part of that.

Riders are your customers, and your mindset should be customer service. Whatever happened to "the customer is always right"? This blog is treasure trove of ideas for how to make the service better, even if I don't agree with 100% of them.

I think Metro needs fierce critics who are also regular riders and care about transit. Taking that criticism can make you stronger.

[Andrew Barton]

Now that I think about it, you're right. Not being from LA, I have to ask - how pervasive is the assumption that, to put it bluntly, "buses are for poor people"? Given the degree to which automobiles rule the roost in Southern California, I can certainly imagine it being stronger there than in other cities. This, and Metro's exceedingly low percentage of employee usage - I saw the percentage you posted, and it floored me - might be one of these things that isn't entirely solved until there's a generational shift in the organization.

As a Torontonian, I've never really run into the assumption that some parts of society are "too good" for transit. Could this be part of the reason why Metro isn't doing as good a job, in terms of the bus network, as it could?

[Grimjack3299]

Remember two things: 1. Most MTA employees are products of the LAUSD and 2. MTALA does not have a customer "SERVICE" contact point just customer relations.

[Brian Davis]

Apparently Art himself doesn't have a decent educational background. He loves to throw out his facts about density in LA without putting them in context. Last I checked, the land area of LA is much much larger than other cities like San Francisco. Simply having dense areas within a large metropolis doesn't automatically mean providing transit to the entire area will be cheap and easy (nor does it guarantee funding for such). Also, I don't think the whole density issue is the only part of it - numerous other factors are also important (and were mentioned before by other posters).

If Art had any true idea of how transit service is provided, he would have some basic knowledge of politics, especially with regards to transit spending. I think everyone, from an MTA employee to a bus rider to Art to Browne, would LOVE to have all those amenities mentioned at each bus stop. Last time I checked, though, those amenities require money. Hmmm, where can we get more money for transit?? I'm not putting my bet on some MTA employee! Not even on the CEO or anyone with significant management power at MTA. I would think we ultimately have to look at the decision makers that get to distribute transportation funding in general. Looks like Art needs an introductory course on Civics. Throwing out random density facts isn't going to address the more substantial/core issues that dictate transportation spending and priorities at the County, Sate, and, ultimately, Federal levels.

[Brian Davis]

Art: why don't you try to answer your own questions first, then post them. If you did, you would realize that they have clear and obvious answers: why does the mta put money into luring choice riders while transit dependent riders need more/better bus stops? I would hope you would be smart enough to answer that! Have you heard of something called politics? Politics dictates public investments. Now let's see if you can figure out why the mta would try to lure choice riders - because that is precisely what is popular with politicians!!! Who do you think VOTES to keep these politicians in power? Choice riders that are fed up with traffic congestion!! Did you seriously not know that??? Maybe you need to improve your own education before you attack the lack of education as the reason why transit agencies like mta pursue choice riders over transit dependent populations (something they are forced to do by the politics that controls, among other things, their mere existence!).

[art]

Brian,
If you want to argue with someone like an adult, you need to stick to the discussion at hand and not pull red herring debates out of your arse.

What the HELL does politics dictating transit investment have to do with this discussion? How exactly is that fact relevant to Metro employees taking public transit or spending their time argiung with transit advocates rather than listening to them? do you honestly think that i or anybody else here doesnt understand that, or that it somehow lets metro staff of the hook for their ineptitude? I never said providing transit service is easy or cheap, you seem to be making things up things to be right, good job!

Let me bring your tangent filled idiocy back to the discussion at hand:

Several metro staff noted how LA is low density and sprawling as an excuse for why they dont use public transit, noting several cities. i responded that LA contains higher density that the noted places, because that is incorrect and a lame excuse as to why an employee cant use the product of the company they work for. Your comments about "putting LA density into context" and that "other factors are involved" are vague hyperbolic statement that prove nothing beyond you dont know how to argue like a mature adult. The fact that you pepper your idiotic red herring arguments with personal insults is a testiment to your arrogance and stupidity, and Ill leave it at that. At least when i talk smack about metro my basis is rooted in what they said, rather than some made up comments. I never said that providing transit service in an area as big as LA would be easy and cheap, you would hve to be an idiot to think that, or even think that someone in their right mind would believe that. I noted LA being dense, and that it is a shame that proffessional planners would not know that and use that misinformation as the basis for why they dont use the public transit they work to facilitate. And that is exactly part of the problem with public transit in LA. This fact along with politicans being key disctators of transit policy while being woefully ignorant of pragmatic transportation policy go hand in hand. you are not enlightening anyone about that, but rather making up shit so that you can be right about something and attack people about it.

Now let me tell you about myself, I grew up on the bus, am trained in transportation planning, and once worked in the field. Because of the fact that politicos dictate transit priority, and that most of them have no effin clue about sound policy choices, I left the field. But I still attend meetings, contact metro staff with FREE helpful info about LA's built environment, dynamics and commute/ridership patterns. I do that because I care about public transit in LA, and i ride it often, despite living in suburban alhambra and owning a car. When I used to contact metro staff and speak to them at meetings, I was treated very rudely and often dismissed. I eventually gave up for th emost part and began speaking to political officials on transit matters, as well as actively involving myself in campaigns for transit funding like measure R and transit advocacy orgs.

Your politics mantra has little relevance to the discussion at hand, and you are putting words in my mouth because otherwise you have no freaking point. Are you that dense to think that I dont realize how much political will dictates transit priorities. Im from East LA and had major involvement in getting rail to the eastside. i have spent my spare time helping politicos reach pragmatic stances on transit policy. Dont you tell me about such simple common knowledge like politicians make decisions about PT. That is no excuse for the ineptitude of metro employees, or why they dont use their own product. And quite frankly, you are using htese diversions to feed you ego, but they are irrelevant ot the discussion at hand.

And regarding your choice rider crap: Aside from political will, another tenet of transit funding is actual ridership (something that metro seems to not understand). The Feds (fta) have a matrix called cost benefit analysis that trumps any blubbering politico, and it is based on how many people will ride a conceputal line as well as cost. it is how they fund things, and the federal govt is the major source of funding to build new transit projects. When orgs like metro ignore the bulk of their riders and opt to lure choice riders at great cost, they create a climate that breeds groups like Busriders union who then sue the MTA and create consent decrees that hinders metro's ability to shape transit policy. When metro only worries about "choice riders", people begin suing the MTA and halting projects such as expo lightrail because of metro's incompetence. when metro only worries about choice riders, politicos like County Supervisor Gloria Molina begin becoming angry obstacles to metro prioritized projects.

So watch your mouth when you speak to me boy, you have no idea of who I am and what I know. And your bullshit red herring arguments have no place in this discussion to begin with. But if you bring them up I wil correct them or let you know that they are obvious facts that nobody is disagreeing on. The kind of logic stretch it must take to think that political influence on transit priorities somehow excuses metro employees of their incompetence and hypocrisy is over my head.

Now that you have been schooled please come correct if you address me again.

[Brian Davis]

Thanks for the comic relief, Art! Not only have you proven that you have extremely little knowledge of transit funding/politics and how it applies to LA County, but you have also proven that your extremely questionable methods for improving transit in LA are a complete waste of time, as even mta employees will not take you seriously. Can you blame them for being dismissive of you? I sure can't! I bet a lot of professionals in the transit world can't either! All that aside, however, the best evidence against your supposed transit advocacy efforts is that you are openly supporting the rants and attacks of Browne and this blog over actual advocacy efforts. I think I can speak for all educated planners and transit advocacy leaders when I say that this blog is probably the LAST place for such efforts. Go on and complain, no one is listening - I wouldn't blame anyone for being "rude and dismissive of you" (as you put it).
"watch your mouth boy" lol! I love it! I can't believe I decided to give this blog another shot - thanks to people like you, it will be erased as a transit advocacy blog (that deserves any further attention) in my list, and I'm sure other urban/transportation planners (the real ones, at least, not just those who claim to be, ahem) will agree (if they haven't so already). Thanks for the laughs, Art, it's been fun!

[art]

That's right, walk away like a scared little child. You havent been able to address my points so far, resorting to childish antics.

As if anyone cares that some pathetic loser who cant debate like an adult wants to covers his ears about a blog. If it was so insignificant then why are so many MTA employees coming on here to cry? Why is another contributor here, Damien Goodmon, the leader of a successful campaign to mitigate safety concerns on the expo line?

You havent contributed anything productive to this conversation to begin with, so please do walk away in shame. I have not read anything from you that would indicate any exceptional knowledge of transit issues anyways, which i guess is why you have to resort to childish shit talking. good luck with that! adios cabrone!

[Joey]

I can't believe bus bench advertising is also being targeted. I would've thought it would be different