Rail System for Southland

Re “The MTA’s Obsession With Rail Knows No Bounds,” by James Moore and Peter Gordon, Opinion, July 25: London, Berlin and Paris are all large, spread-out cities that suffer daily from gridlock. An important difference between these cities and Los Angeles is that they all have extensive and hugely popular urban rail systems.

Moore and Gordon completely ignore this. The point of rail systems in major urban areas is to provide an alternative to the unavoidable gridlock. It was shown 20 years ago that buses alone could not do the job in Los Angeles. They still cannot.

Sadly for Los Angeles, it will be decades (if ever) before we have the kind of rail system that will be extensive enough for rail to be a viable alternative for virtually everyone. That progress will undoubtedly be further delayed by the grossly misnamed Bus Riders Union and city planners who seem to believe that transit-dependent people like myself would prefer to ride buses than trains. This is why the MTA is right to consider further rail construction projects. Shoddy workmanship and corruption do not change the fact that we badly need a more extensive urban rail system.

MIKE WILLS

West Los Angeles

*

Moore and Gordon argue that any kind of rail system, surface or subway, will only worsen the transit dilemma for Southern California even if the trains are full. In other words, no level of performance or amount of patronage could possibly change their minds. If that’s not unreasonable bias, what is?

DONALD A. STANWOOD

Costa Mesa