Distinguishing OCTA's Board from OCTA's Staff — pushing transit vs cutting it entirely

Here's the confusing thing about OCTA: it's a two-headed beast. Two heads. Its (1) staff seem to largely support bus service, while many of its (2) boardmembers want to cut transit service to its knees. Let's take one staff member in particular: the new CEO, Will Kempton.

OCTA's CEO takes Route 83 to work, and is very pro-transit...

OCTA staff recently posted a Youtube video of him chatting it up with one of their bus operators. Kempton says, "What I want to do is to make transit not just a service for the transit-dependent population, but make it a mode of choice for [others] to use on a regular basis. I mean, this is very comfortable, very easy; just get on the bus, and ride."

This comes as a surprise, as Kempton oversaw many highway and freeway projects during his tenure at Caltrans. However, to personally get to work, he would take Sacramento RT's light rail.

While I'm very happy that Kempton wants Orange County to have more liveable communities and sustainable transportation, I have a feeling his goals may not be realized. The previous CEO, Art Leahy, is adamantly pro-transit — he was a former bus driver in Los Angeles, after all. He came to OCTA to oversee the Centerline light rail project, but short-sighted voters — I hear especially in Irvine — shot the plan to pieces. The irony is that Anaheim and Santa Ana are pushing for rail expansion, and Leahy recently left OCTA to oversee Los Angeles's Metro, which is working furiously on 4 Metro Rail projects and 2 Metro Liner bus rapid transit expansions.

Kempton comments in a recent OC Register article about his desire to soften the bus cuts:

Q. You've been riding the bus to work at the OCTA. What if anything can be done about the OCTA's bus-service cuts?

A. First, let me talk about transit in Orange County, too. I understand that the Measure M program is roughly 75 percent highways and 25 percent of it going to transit. So I know that there's a significant interest on the highway side as well.

But on the transit side … I think that there's a lot that we need to do from a mobility perspective to encourage and develop alternative modes of transportation.

You're not going to be able to build highway facilities to accommodate all of the demand, and we have in this county a very significant transit-dependent population, (and) their needs have to be met. And that's important for the economy as well because a lot of the folks that are using the transit operations are the heart and soul of our service economy.

The challenge to me is to figure out ways that we can reduce that impact, soften that blow. I've had a lot of experience in my career in terms of moving dollars around. I know transportation finance pretty well. I will be turning over every stone to see if there is a way to come up with some dollars to avoid or minimize those additional cuts going forward, and that's a huge challenge, because it's not that there is a lot of money lying around.

Q. Here in Orange County there's a culture that's not particularly friendly to transit, even compared to L.A. right next door. How do you even try to change that mind set?

A. It comes down to viable options.

We're not talking about people having to get out of your car and get on a bus that's going to take you an hour and a half and three connections when you can get from point A to point B in half an hour by using your car. That isn't going to work. It's got to be market-driven, so people make a choice in terms of the cost (in both money and time).

I don't disagree with much of what you said about the culture down here and people being wedded to the automobile, but when they can actually gain some productive time using a mode that is going to allow them to do work while they're on the train or on the bus and make that trip in a comparable amount of time or at least a reasonable amount of time in comparison, then I think people will use transit. But we've got to do much more on the marketing and awareness side.

Q. What are some viable options?

A. I'll go back to rail. In looking for a residence in Orange County, we've been attracted to South County. One of the positive features of moving down there is the fact that there is rail service, a viable option, from Laguna Niguel/Mission Viejo to Orange, and it's half an hour. Now I would submit that competes very favorably with a drive during peak hours; then it's a 10-minute shuttle ride from the rail station in Orange to this office. So in 40 minutes I'm going to be able to – if we do end up locating down there – I'm going to be able to make my commute on a service like that. So there's a viable option.

Now, I think our marketing strategy needs to be focused on those viable options. I think we have a lot of education to do.

I'm not suggesting that I'm going to come in here and overnight change the culture in Orange County and that we're going to see everybody riding transit. That's not what I'm talking about. But I believe there are viable options that people are unaware of and for a variety of reasons aren't trying and we've got to get the word out so that we can get those people to try it out. My theory is that once folks try it out, they'll be hooked.

Here's Will Kempton riding the 83 from Anaheim to Orange:

...while some politicians controlling OCTA want to completely slash all bus service...

...such as OCTA director John Moorlach, who wants the agency to study abolishing bus service. In yesterday's Orange County Register article:

Board member John Moorlach, also a county supervisor, said the transit agency's board should look at whether it should even offer bus service. He asked the agency's staff to find out what percentage of the county's population regularly rides the bus, and how that compares with other counties. He also asked for data to compare ridership declines with drops in population and job losses.

"Is there a point where maybe a bus system isn't even necessary?" Moorlach said in an interview. "That's maybe a radical thing, but it seems to me every once in a while you need to have that kind of dialogue."

He commented on this after OCTA boardmembers learned that bus ridership has plummetted 20% from the same year, despite the fact that:

1. the economy has gone sour, taking away many jobs,
2. OCTA has been on a service-cutting spree since 2008 — so of course you're going to have fewer riders — and
3. OCTA recently raised fares (e.g. $95 versus $0 for a UC Irvine annual bus pass).
4. If we're going to get rid of bus service, shouldn't we also get rid of Metrolink? And all the other "entitlements" that taxpayers give to freeway users?

One commenter, brentocr, on the OC Register site rattles off other reasons why Moorlach's lack of "fair and balanced" transportation ideas is bad public policy:

If we want to complain about buses and public transit being subsidized, then we need to do so with eyes wide open to the full extent of our subsidies for EVERY common form of transit, public or private. Consider:

*) Most roads that private automobiles, trucks, and buses use are paid for 70 percent (or more) from the general fund. Gasoline taxes and user fees don't come close to covering costs.

*) Our domestic auto industry is now partially owned by the taxpayer. We paid about $50 billion for GM, when the market valued it at $500 million just before nationalization. We may get that money back, but if not, we made a 100x subsidy to our private car industry.

*) The $3 billion "Cash for Clunkers" program will directly subsidize about 750,000 auto buyers, or about one-fourth of one percent of the population.

*) Private airlines benefit from taxpayer funded FAA air traffic control systems and taxpayer built airports.

*) The private rail system was originally built in exchange for land grants. It couldn't exist today without these rights of way.

These are just the direct subsidies. One could go on about externalities like pollution and oil wars, whose costs end up being borne by the taxpayer in other ways.

If we ultimately shut down the OC bus system, it shouldn't be because we subsidize it and nothing else. Give me a better reason. Otherwise, give me a better public transit system!