About six months ago, an article appeared in these pages urging Los Angeles Jews that “it’s time to get on board with transit.” In the article, supporting public transit was seen as a “Jewish” thing to do.
The argument was made that public transit in Los Angeles is “good for Israel,” because it would decrease our reliance on foreign oil.
Admittedly, it would be hard for any reader to resist anything that is “good for Israel,” but let’s get something straight. Public transportation in and of itself is hardly a mitzvah. More than anything, public transportation is a necessity, considering traffic and our reliance on foreign oil. But that hardly makes it convenient; it doesn’t make it the “ideal” form of transport (the way that the common experience of seeing a movie makes it an ideal form of entertainment), and it certainly doesn’t make it “democratic” or fair.
No, ideally, we’d live in a society where there would be no dependence on foreign oil (electric or hydrogen cars, anybody?), where we had clean and inexpensive sources of renewable energy, where traffic would be reasonable, where poverty was eliminated and where everybody had the resources to get from point A to point B in the most convenient — yet also affordable and eco-friendly — manner. For some, that might be public transport; for others, personal vehicles or other forms of transportation.
Since this jam-free, electro-autopia is nowhere on the horizon, it is undoubtedly good policy to develop an effective public transportation system that makes sense for the region, for the individual cities and neighborhoods, and for the taxpayers.
But it also makes sense to take local concerns into account when making decisions. While the concept of public transportation may be a good one, no right-minded person, Jewish or non-Jewish, should support a public transit project that uses bait-and-switch tactics or Big Brother’s stick of eminent domain in dealing with residents to dismiss reasonable local concerns when it comes to the planning and execution of that project. “The end justifies the means” is not exactly a Jewish principle.
Yet when it comes to the proposed location of the Westside extension’s subway station in Century City, we have a number of “transit advocates” who are trying to ram a subway alignment down an entire community’s throat, despite the existence of a perfectly viable alternative which, in fact, will save the taxpayers upward of $55 million.
Moving away from the Santa Monica Boulevard and Avenue of the Stars station, which for the better part of a decade had been part of Metro’s Century City alignment and which was the basis for gaining community support in Beverly Hills, many Metro advocates are now pushing for a station at Constellation and Avenue of the Stars. This alignment would involve tunneling under Beverly Hills High School and, in addition to being more intrusive, would be significantly more expensive than the original alignment — all for the sake of one block. Naturally, Beverly Hills residents are perturbed. Some of the transit advocates are seriously suggesting that the entire subway extension will not be viable if the Century City station is placed at Santa Monica and Avenue of the Stars. Where were they during all the years when the only option regularly discussed by Metro was the Santa Monica station?
Yes, it’s a long block — about the same length as a crosstown New York City street or a downtown L.A. street. But it’s a block. And Century City itself is all of four square blocks.
What is behind this bait-and-switch? As there aren’t a lot of logical reasons, we’re left with speculation that wealthy Century City developers see an increase in their property values, and perhaps an excuse for further densification if the subway station is closer to their properties. There has also been speculation that the Los Angeles Country Club wants the subway alignment as far away from its golf course as possible.
So, Century City developers and the Los Angeles Country Club align their interests to change the alignment — at an estimated cost of more than $55 million in taxpayer money. And they suddenly garner the support of the politicians. Is it any wonder that people have become disillusioned with politics?
This bait-and-switch calls into question the credibility of the entire Westside subway, as do arguments that attempt to make a Santa Monica alignment “unsafe” due to seismic concerns. The seismic argument seems self-serving, if nothing else. Did the master planners at Metro, who for years sold the community on the Santa Monica alignment, suddenly wake up one morning to discover that we live in an earthquake zone? And if there is such concern about seismic activity along Santa Monica — on a fault with a recurrence rate of once every 7,000 years or so — then why do Los Angeles city planners feel so comfortable about allowing the construction of massive skyscrapers right along the purported fault line?
No, trying to sell the residents a bill of goods is not a particularly Jewish thing to do.
Another tactic used by this alliance of special interests and self-styled “transit advocates” to try to deflect this criticism is to write off Beverly Hills as a group of “rich NIMBYs.” Forget the fact that more than half of Beverly Hills residents are renters, the proposed subway intrusion goes nowhere near the “rich” part of Beverly Hills, and the Westside extension will have two subway stations directly in Beverly Hills. The community has supported the extension through and in our city. As we have respected the larger needs of the region, so should our locally preferred alternative be respected; it’s an alternative that clearly is more than viable, as it was the primary Metro route for the better part of a decade. It’s not a question of NIMBY-ism, but a question of WOBAST-ism (WOBAST, of course, standing for “We Oppose Bait-and-Switch Tactics”).
Unless you’re the biblical Laban, bait-and-switch tactics are not an especially Jewish way to get things done.
Furthermore, irony looms large when, amid all the attacks on Beverly Hills and the hullabaloo about how the entire Westside extension will be endangered if some people have to walk a block, there is a gaping silence from this same group of “transit advocates” when it comes to the planned location of the “UCLA/Westwood” station. The Santa Monica station is a block from Constellation. The “UCLA/Westwood” station is the better part of a mile from UCLA.
Double standards are not exactly known to be a highly prized Jewish value.
Jewish support (including that of new House Majority Leader Eric Cantor) for the 30/10 Initiative, by which Congress would loan Metro the money to expedite the subway construction, should indeed be predicated on the application of Jewish values in making the subway a reality. We should insist on respect for local control and fiscal responsibility, rather than swallow half-baked rationalizations with political expediency at their core. The unnecessary tyranny of the purported majority is not a particularly Jewish concept.
We should be able to expect Metro to do the right thing by respecting the locally preferred alternative — which it has presented and propagated for years — and by choosing the least intrusive, least expensive viable route. We should demand fiscal responsibility as well as consistency and fairness.
And we should be able to expect that Metro, in making a pitch to Westside Jews to support the subway expansion, would also take into account our transit needs.
It’s all well and good for the Metro advocates to try to entice you to support the subway by dangling a Langer’s pastrami sandwich in front of you, but when they’re effectively ignoring measures to make the subway a more viable option for Westside residents considering the realities of life in Los Angeles, it’s a bit disingenuous.
None of the stations between Western and the Veterans Administration have park-and-ride lots planned, meaning with the underdeveloped network of bus lines serving the residential areas on the Westside, if you don’t happen to be within walking distance of a subway station, you’re pretty much out of luck. The mavens at Metro who preach “convenience” as a guiding principle have done nothing to make it convenient for Westside residents who might like to take advantage of this multibillion-dollar public works project.
So, while we should all support the subway as a concept, as Beverly Hills has said, let’s qualify that support by insisting we do it right. Let’s not squander an opportunity to really benefit the Jews and non-Jews of the Westside, while respecting the principles of local control and the views of the people who actually live in the affected neighborhoods. Metro needs to rethink the utility of its plans to the residents in the area of the extension. Park-and-ride lots at several Westside locations could significantly increase Westside ridership by increasing access. With my colleagues on the Beverly Hills City Council, I intend to look into various ideas to present to Metro to address this very issue.
When it comes to the subway station in Century City, political insiders say that consummating the bait-and-switch tactics of Metro, ignoring the locally preferred alternative and ramming a more intrusive, more expensive subway under Beverly Hills High School is already a done deal. If that’s true, so much for due process. It is my hope, however, that we can convince the decision-makers to take a course of fiscal responsibility, while actually respecting the locally preferred alternative. In principle, at least, it should behoove local politicians to be very respectful of the principles of local control. But perhaps given the track record of a number of L.A.-area politicians and their connections with special interests, this hope is simply naïve.
Before we give Metro our unqualified support, let’s remember that tikkun olam starts at home. Now there’s a Jewish principle it would be great to get Metro, and the politicians standing behind it, to support.
John Mirisch is a member of the Beverly Hills City Council.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.