Plan Seeks Employer Subsidy for Bus Riders

An ambitious bus fare and ride-sharing plan, inspired by mayoral politics and based on the theory that a small financial incentive will lure thousands of commuters from behind the steering wheel, was ordered drafted Tuesday by the Los Angeles City Council.

The plan would require the estimated 188 employers in the city that have at least 200 workers to offer $15 bus pass subsidies each month if they also provide subsidized parking. Transit officials said the subsidy, which must be offered although workers need not accept it, could cost these employers $16.1 million a year.

That cost could rise considerably, however. At the urging of Councilwoman Joy Picus, the council also voted to include in the draft ordinance an alternative provision requiring larger employers to offer car-pool or van-pool commuters the same $15 monthly subsidy offered to bus riders.

The plan would also offer businesses up to $5,000 in city Proposition A transit funds to lease or purchase employee commuter vans. If up to 1,000 van pools carrying an average of 12 passengers each participate in the effort, as many as 9,000 cars could be removed from city streets daily, officials said.

In order to offer cut-rate bus passes to even more commuters, employees of smaller businesses also could receive a $5 city-funded bus subsidy if their employers matched it with $15. The $20 saving would reduce the cost of a basic monthly pass to $22.

If all of the plan’s features are successful, transit officials say that up to 37,000 auto trips could be eliminated each day from traffic-choked streets. But they also have conceded that no one knows for sure how many people would participate in the largely voluntary plan.

In a related action, the council asked city and transit officials to study how to reduce bus fares and transfers that recently rose to $1.10 and 25 cents, respectively. At Councilman Nate Holden’s urging, officials will explore ways to cut the basic fare to $1 and transfers to a dime each.

Tuesday’s action followed bitter debate involving the two likely contestants in the 1989 mayoral race--incumbent Tom Bradley and Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky.

During budget hearings, Yaroslavsky first proposed spending millions to reduce the RTD’s basic fare by 35 cents for anyone riding the bus during peak hours. Yaroslavsky’s proposal met with strong resistance from Bradley aides who lobbied council members to oppose it.

Bradley later vetoed a $17.8-million Yaroslavsky-Holden peak-hour plan as “ill-conceived” and, a day after his veto was upheld, introduced his own ride-sharing/bus fare plan. Bradley’s proposals ultimately were incorporated into the plan adopted Tuesday and co-authored by Holden.

Although Yaroslavsky voted for the Bradley-Holden plan, he did so only after declaring that it accomplished the same sort of peak-hour bus ridership that his own proposal had envisioned.

On Tuesday, Yaroslavsky also accused acting RTD General Manager Alan F. Pegg of not exercising independence when Pegg earlier criticized as unworkable the peak-hour plan that the councilman had first pushed. Pegg had testified during budget hearings that, under Yaroslavsky’s ill-fated proposal, the RTD would need to buy too many buses to handle the added peak-hour ridership.

Pegg acknowledged under questioning by Yaroslavsky that two-thirds of the RTD’s current fares ride during the peak hours and that roughly the same percentage would be expected to take advantage of the Bradley-Holden plan during peak hours. Pegg said, however, that the Bradley-Holden plan would be phased in over a year and would probably not require new buses.