• measure m, los angeles traffic, ethan elkind, Edward Humes, Patt Morrison,

      measure m, los angeles traffic, ethan elkind, Edward Humes, Patt Morrison,

      Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Edward Humes spoke to the Los Angeles Times’ Patt Morrison to complain about the just-passed Measure M sales tax measure to boost transportation in Los Angeles.

      By Ethan Elkind

      Humes argues it won’t help traffic and is missing out on big technological shifts:

      But what’s missing are transformative visions that are necessary to get people to really change the way they get around. There was a survey done last year of transportation planning for the largest municipalities and counties in America, and something like only 7% of their plans even addressed the big changes that have arrived recently in mobility or are coming soon — ride-sharing services, automation, driverless cars.

      We know they’re coming — there’s nothing in Measure M that even addresses these transformative developments that 1980s-style transportation plans wouldn’t know to address. It’s like we’re not acknowledging that things are changing very rapidly in the transportation space. We’re going to just go out and lay down more asphalt and lay down more rail and hope for the best. It’s not going to work.

      He recommends doubling down on these technology changes with first/last mile automated vehicles, putting big rigs in carpool lanes, and relying on automated buses in dedicated lanes.

      We can agree that Measure M won’t solve traffic by itself: the only way to do that, barring huge spikes in fuel costs, is congestion pricing.

      But nothing about Measure M precludes what Humes advocates. And in the meantime, it will pay for important new infrastructure — including maintenance of existing infrastructure — that a growing population will rely on for mobility. We need the new capacity to move people that rail and buses bring, and Measure M will boost ridership across all rail lines by finally giving the region comprehensive rail coverage to fill in the missing pieces.


      On automation, Humes doesn’t seem to acknowledge that more driverless cars could mean a huge spike in traffic, which could push more people to want to use the rail or bus networks that Measure M will fund. His solutions (such as encouraging shifts in employment hours) will only provide temporary respite from induced demand.

      Not enough by itself

      Meanwhile, we can acknowledge that Measure M is probably not enough by itself to address all the mobility challenges in Los Angeles, but it’s a necessary part of the solution. For example, the region will need smart policies on automated cars.  But these vehicles will still rely on and complement improvements in infrastructure from Measure M, just like investments in bus-only lanes funded by the measure can eventually accommodate the automated buses that Humes envisions.

      Land use

      Humes never discusses land use in this interview, but that issue is central to the mobility concerns. The region needs to concentrate all new growth around transit corridors, and Measure M can provide the network to get new residents and workers to move about without adding to congestion.  Measure M also provides new development opportunities to channel growth around transit, which is the only sensible recipe for future growth.

      Finally, it’s worth thinking through the issues that Humes describes, and a visionary voice can be powerful.  But we shouldn’t dismiss so readily the incredible funding tool that Measure M gives the region to address its transportation challenges.

      Ethan Elkind directs the climate program at UC Berkeley Law, with a joint appointment at UCLA Law. His areas of focus include land use, transportation, electric vehicles, energy storage, and renewable energy, and his book “Railtown: The Fight for the Los Angeles Metro Rail System and the Future of the City” was published by the University of California Press in 2014. This article was originally published on ethanelkind.com.

      We hope you appreciated this article. Before you move on, please consider supporting the Colorado Boulevard’s journalism.

      Some wealthy, hedge fund owners, and local journalistic charlatans, have a powerful hold on the information that reaches the public. Colorado Boulevard stands to serve the public interest – not profit motives.

      While fairness guides everything we do, we know there is a right and a wrong position in the fight against racism and climate crisis while supporting reproductive rights and social justice. We provide a fresh perspective on local politics – one so often missing from so-called ‘local’ journalism.

      You can access Colorado Boulevard’s paywall-free journalism because of our unique reader-supported model. People like you, informed readers, keep us independent, beholden to no outside influence, and accessible to everyone.

      Please consider supporting Colorado Boulevard today. Thank you. (Click to Support)


      Leave a Reply

      Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *