Judge Orders MTA to Buy 248 Buses to Relieve Overcrowding : Transit: Ruling is a victory for bus riders and a defeat for agency, which had defied an earlier decree to expand its fleet.

In a major victory for bus riders, Chief U.S. District Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. on Thursday ordered the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to immediately buy 248 buses to relieve overcrowding and improve service on the nation’s second-largest bus system.

Although MTA chief Julian Burke declined to assess the ruling’s impact, top agency officials have testified that it can’t afford to operate additional buses without affecting other operations, including light rail and subway lines, construction of carpool lanes and other highway improvements.

The five-page order firmly establishes that the federal court will play a major role in setting mass transit priorities in Los Angeles by requiring that the MTA make promised improvements in bus service, which is heavily used by poor and minority riders.

Two months after a lengthy hearing, Hatter ruled that the MTA has failed to comply with a landmark consent decree that set strict deadlines for reducing the number of MTA passengers forced to stand on buses. To ease overcrowding, Hatter gave the agency 30 days to acquire 248 buses on a temporary basis until new buses can be built and delivered.

In the meantime, he suggested that Donald T. Bliss, the special master he appointed to oversee compliance with the 1996 consent decree, consider moving buses from less heavily traveled lines to those with the most overcrowding. He urged Bliss to consider the possibility of reducing or eliminating MTA bus service on routes where it duplicates the county’s 16 municipal bus lines.

By such intense oversight, Hatter served notice that the federal court will enforce the consent decree the MTA signed with bus rider advocates in October 1996.

The agency entered into the agreement to avoid a federal court trial on a civil rights lawsuit filed by the Bus Riders Union and argued by attorneys for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. The case alleged that the MTA discriminated against poor and minority bus riders by pouring billions of dollars into construction of the Metro Rail subway and light rail lines.

Civil rights attorney Constance L. Rice embraced the decision.

“What it means for bus riders is that we are one step closer to making the decree a reality in their lives. It should mean improved service, expanded service and a more comfortable ride for bus riders who don’t have cars and are transit-dependent.”

Rice said the MTA must face the fact that it should make its bus system the priority. She urged the MTA board to accept the decision, buy the buses and not appeal the ruling.

Burke said only that he was grateful that Hatter had modified the earlier order of the special master that the MTA buy 481 buses to ease overcrowding.

County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, who is chairwoman of the MTA, said Hatter’s decision was much more realistic than the special master’s determination that nearly twice as many new buses were needed.

“It’s very obvious to me that he looked at all of the facts,” she said.

Burke said she will call a special meeting of the MTA board next week to discuss the decision and whether the agency will appeal. “We all want to improve bus service,” she said.

In his ruling, Hatter directed Bliss to reconsider whether 49 additional buses are needed as spares. He noted the “apparent increased reliability of MTA’s current fleet” because of the agency’s acquisition of buses to replace its aged and unreliable fleet.

Hatter also said it is too early to determine whether the MTA is capable of meeting the requirement that by June 30 no more than 11 passengers, on average, are standing on buses during any 20-minute peak period.

County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a member of the MTA board, said Hatter’s decision was “tough, but fair and reasoned,” and the agency should not appeal the ruling. “This is not an extreme decision,” he said

Yaroslavsky said Hatter is telling the MTA: “If you can’t figure this out for yourselves, I’m going to figure this out for you.”

At a lengthy hearing in July, the MTA challenged the authority of both Hatter and the special master. Hatter flatly rejected the MTA’s arguments.

“By the clear language of the consent decree, the MTA had the initial responsibility to devise and implement a plan to reduce bus overcrowding,” Hatter wrote. “Since the MTA failed to meet the obligations imposed by the consent decree, it is now up to the special master and the court--through the court’s equitable powers--to enforce the consent decree.”

The decree requires the MTA to reduce the overcrowding on its buses by certain deadlines. At the end of 1997, no more than an average of 15 passengers were to be standing on an MTA bus during any 20-minute peak period. The limit gets progressively tougher over time.

After finding massive violations of the overcrowding limit on virtually all of the MTA’s bus lines last year, Bliss ordered the agency in March to buy 532 buses. The MTA challenged the order, and Bliss reduced the number of new buses needed to 481. He told the agency to take immediate steps to buy the vehicles and lease buses while the new ones were being manufactured.

The MTA ignored the directive. Angered by the erosion of its ability to set the county’s transportation priorities, the MTA board voted to appeal Bliss’ order to Hatter.

Mounting an aggressive attack, the MTA’s new attorneys, Shirley M. Hufstedler and Patricia Glaser, told Hatter in July that neither he nor Bliss have the power to order the MTA to buy more buses.

The agency also argued that it is in substantial compliance with the overcrowding limits.

Hatter, who has presided over the case since it was filed in 1994, took sharp exception to the MTA’s arguments.

“I question anyone who questions the authority of this court,” Hatter said from the bench.