If we build it, they will ride

THE RED LINE SUBWAY is like a stick man whose leg has been blown off by a political landmine, leaving only a stub where it ends at Wilshire Boulevard and Western Avenue. Thanks to Sacramento, there is now a chance to extend that lost limb to the knee -- but only if local planners have the courage to make it happen.

From a transportation standpoint, the new state bond proposal worked out by the Legislature is much better for Los Angeles than the old version proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The governor’s plan was to devote billions to freeway improvements and a small amount to inter-city trains, with nothing for urban public transit systems like L.A.’s bus, subway and light-rail lines. The Legislature produced four bond measures devoted to infrastructure, one of which would provide $20 billion for transportation projects statewide, with $4 billion for public transit.

If voters pass the measure, the transit money would be a godsend for Los Angeles; without it, there is almost no hope of getting a subway extension within the next decade or two.

Politicians and voters have thrown two hurdles in the way of L.A.’s subway, which by failing to run down Wilshire -- one of the densest corridors in the nation -- is not cutting traffic or reducing vehicle emissions as much as it could. A 1998 ballot measure prevents the Metropolitan Transportation Authority from spending county sales tax money on subway construction, while a federal ban on tunneling in the Fairfax District makes a Wilshire line an impossibility.

That’s changing. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), who imposed the federal ban, has introduced legislation to rescind it after a recent study found that tunneling in the area would be safe. And a successful state bond would make it possible to build the extension without any local contribution at all.

The MTA estimates it would cost $3.2 billion to extend the subway down Wilshire to Westwood. But the already cash-strapped MTA would have to come up with hundreds of millions to pay for construction, a challenge given the sales-tax constraints; in addition, it would have to pay for ongoing operations, which could be enough to break the agency’s bank.

A cheaper, less risky option would be to extend the subway to Wilshire and Fairfax Avenue. That would cost an estimated $1.2 billion, and, between the state and federal funds, it could be built with no local money. Though not as desirable as a Westwood extension, getting the subway to Fairfax -- a cultural, commercial and residential hub -- would be a boon.

L.A. politicians have not been especially courageous about the subway, which explains its current brainless configuration. Westside residents have worried that it would open their neighborhoods to undesirables; business owners have feared disruption during construction, and transit planners who remember the cost overruns of the last round of tunneling have for years prevented it from taking the most efficient route. An opportunity may be on the horizon to change that. L.A. shouldn’t let it pass.