No on Proposition A

Even though this newspaper has long criticized the Metropolitan Transportation Authority for poor management and reckless spending, we oppose Proposition A on the Los Angeles County ballot in the November election. That’s the measure--inspired by Zev Yaroslavsky, a county supervisor and MTA board member--that would forever forbid the use of county transit sales tax money for subway construction beyond the Red Line link to North Hollywood.

Proposition A, which would also set up annual audits and a citizen oversight panel, has obvious appeal: no more sinkholes or $300-million-a-mile boondoggles. Merchants would never again face slow financial ruin from construction snafus on their streets. Bus riders could drop their fight against underground rail.

But the ballot box is a poor conduit for such a far-reaching and permanent decision. Circumstances change. Miracles do sometimes happen. Los Angeles might get through a year without any natural disasters. The Los Angeles Dodgers might win the pennant. And the MTA just might get its finances in order. If the MTA eventually does do so, it should have every transit option available to it, including subways.

Yaroslavsky argues that his colleagues and the MTA can’t be trusted, but much has changed. The MTA and its board, surrounded by watchful pit bulls now, are hardly in charge.

The MTA’s current long-range plan was largely imposed by federal transportation officials. The federal court and the bus riders union are clearly in the drivers’ seat in forcing the MTA to focus on buses until overcrowding is reduced and service and reliability are restored. And the state Legislature stripped the MTA of construction respons-ibility for the Pasadena Blue Line to downtown Los Angeles.

Los Angeles does not need Proposition A to keep the MTA and its board in check. In its rigidity and permanence it is the sort of measure that gives ballot initiatives a bad name. Vote no on Proposition A and keep the county’s future transit options open.