Panel Report Criticizes RTD’s Safety Program

Improving safety at the Southern California Rapid Transit District may be costly and require making difficult choices between beefing up hiring, training and supervision of drivers on one hand and cutting back service on the other, officials said Saturday.

A panel of experts presented the RTD board with a report critical of many aspects of its safety program. Panel members told the RTD board that its drivers are not receiving adequate training or field supervision and discipline procedures are lax and slow.

In addition, the district’s hiring practices discourage the kind of stable, reliable applicants it needs most while experienced drivers are being lost because of early retirement incentives.

But the panel did not investigate a rash of bus accidents that heightened public concern over RTD’s safety record, explaining that those accidents involve legal and personnel matters that are outside the scope of their inquiry. Neither did the panel attempt to gauge the extent of drug use by drivers, which became an issue after reports of accidents involving drivers who had used drugs.

Generally, the panel found that the district, which carries nearly 500 million passengers a year in a sprawling countywide area, is spreading itself too thin and should cut back service, if necessary, to fund improvements in its safety program.

George Krambles, a transit consultant and chairman of the panel that spent three months studying RTD, told the board that to improve safety the district will have to re-evaluate its spending priorities. As an example, he said there is only one supervisor in the field during rush hour for every 80 buses--a ratio he said should be significantly improved. He added that field supervisors’ complain that they often are tied up dealing with mechanical breakdowns of buses, rather than monitoring the performance of drivers.

Also, in an 18-page summary of recommendations, the panel said the district’s staff of driving instructors is too small and accident investigation and prevention programs are inadequate.

RTD General Manager John Dyer agreed with the panel’s finding that “the district is overextended.”

“We are running far too many miles for the staff we have,” Dyer said.

Given the public’s concern about safety, RTD President Jan Hall said the board is “committed to a speedy implementation” of the panel’s recommendations. But she warned that “some of these things are going to cost money” and “there’s probably going to have to be adjustments in service.”

“I don’t think there are going to be easy answers,” she said. The RTD already is facing increasing ridership, reductions in federal operating assistance and pressures to economize from the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, which controls a large share of its funds. But efforts to free up revenue by fare hikes or cutbacks in service often trigger outcries from bus patrons and politicians.

Some members of the audience at Saturday’s meeting were sharply critical of the panel’s report, saying it omitted areas of pubic concern, such as an analysis of the driving records of RTD drivers and causes of some major recent accidents, including one last July when a bus overturned on the Hollywood Freeway.

“This board and committee has not put enough punch into what it has done,” said Robert V. D’Amato, a Los Angeles insurance consultant.

The safety panel will present a final report to the board in the next few weeks, after which Dyer is expected to develop recommendations for how and when the safety improvements will be implemented.

On a separate matter, it was revealed Saturday that the district attorney’s office is investigating the possibility of bribery in connection with the RTD’s 1984 award of a contract to an insurance claims adjuster. Although officials in the district attorney’s office refused to confirm or deny the investigation, it was learned that it centers on the possibility that bribery had been used to obtain the contract.

Joe Reyes, RTD’s safety director, said he was interviewed by district attorney’s investigators about decisions related to the awarding of a 1984 contract to Leonard J. Russo Insurance Services Inc.

He said the the investigators “seemed to suspect improprieties somewhere.”

The Russo contract, which totals more than $1 million this year, was for processing about $12 million in annual workers’ compensation claims.

The Russo firm was selected for the contract after the staff had recommended another firm.

“They wanted to know everyone involved in the decision-making process, the selection and the evaluation,” Reyes said.

While officials in the district attorney’s office would not confirm or deny a bribery investigation, they have acknowledged a separate investigation of possible kickbacks and other irregularities in connection with some personal injury claims against the RTD that are handled by the company.

Russo denied any wrongdoing, as did several RTD board members, including those involved in the closed-door committee meeting at which Russo was recommended for the contract--an action later ratified by the full board.

RTD board member Charles Storing, who records show argued for Russo’s selection in the closed-door committee meeting, said the news reports have “cast a cloud” over all 11 members of the board and demanded Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner clarify who is under investigation.

Reached at his home, Reiner said, “I just can’t respond to it until Monday.”