Motion approved to study adding gates to Expo Line phase one stations

The Metro Board just voted to approve the motion below by Board Members Zev Yaroslavsky, Pam O'Connor and Ara Najarian to study the possibility of adding gates to some stations along the first phase of the Expo Line, which runs from 7th/Metro Center to Culver City.

Gate latching at Red/Purple Line stations is currently underway and will then continue with some stations for the Gold, Green and Blue lines. Gates are scheduled to be built at the National Palms, Sepulveda, Bundy stations for phase 2 of the Expo Line with Colorado/4th under discussion.

 

Categories: Projects

24 replies

  1. The only people who have a problem with a gated system are those have been abusing the honor system at the expense of taxpayers. It should’ve never taken this long to fix this. Who in their right mind designed a system without gates and would think it would work in Los Angeles! Hasn’t anyone working at Metro taken a trip to cities like Hong Kong, Seoul, Tokyo or London or even to San Francisco, Boston, Philadelphia, NYC, or Washington DC?

    And don’t give me the “we didn’t know it wouldn’t work” excuse either. LA has had all these people from other cities in the US and from the world like from Britain, Canada, Mexico, Thailand, Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, and the rest of the world who all come from places with better transit system than LA.

    LA should be listening to what they think we should be doing because they know how better their mass transit are than ours. LA should stop wasting money all the time by trying to reinventing the wheel with ideas that don’t work! Listen to the people who used to live in San Francisco. Listen to those who used to live in New York. Ask the British and Canadians for advice. Learn from the Asians who know first hand how transit is run successfully and profitably in places like Bangkok, Tokyo and Osaka, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei, and Hong Kong. Do all of that and LA would have a great system instead of listening to people who know absolutely nothing about how mass transit and keep messing everything up.

    Like

  2. I am glad that someone finally had the guts to move things forward by actually doing something to fight fare evasion. Metro had run things under the honor system too long. This is despite the years of complaints from the public to fix the fare evasion problem. But it has always fallen on deaf ears.

    Unfortunately, I think it’s too late. Gate latching all the stations is going to cost a lot of money to do. This is exactly why poor planning costs more money to fix down the road.

    Since it’s their fault for this mess, the cost of installing fare gates to all the stations should be funded by slashing the pay of all the Metro executives by 20% for the next ten years and have their paychecks fixed and capped without raises.

    I mean, look at the Metro executive compensation table:

    http://www.metro.net/about/board/executive-compensation/

    Why should the Metro CEO be paid $325,500 a year for running Metro under the honor system? Why should the Metro Treasurer be paid $160,000 a year for his (or her) lack of financial knowledge that the honor system would even work? Everyone who are in these positions are being paid way too much for their lackluster performance of their jobs. It’s common sense that people should be paid based on their performance. And this whole honor system mess and the costs that are going to be needed to fix this shows that Metro’s performance were not to expectations.

    These people can easily afford 20% paycuts as punishment for their past actions. If everyone on that executive compensation table gets a 20% pay cut for the next 10 years, that’ll at least in some way, help pay for the cost of adding faregates to each station and making necessary upgrades to do so. They need to be held liable for their actions. This 20% pay cut for 10 years with no pay raise will serve a lesson for Metro employees to stop making stupid decisions, stop wasting taxes and start doing their job.

    Like

  3. Erik,

    “Josh, Google “attractive nuisance” please.”

    I did and I see nothing there that has to do with gates. What you’re trying to say is so out of proportion, it’s just like saying fire trucks attract the attention of children and if children get too close to it, they may get run over by a fire truck, therefore fire trucks should be banned and the city should be sued for buying fire trucks.

    Furthermore, you have another California city up north called San Francisco where they run perfectly fine under a gated system. If it clearly works in another city in California, why do you think it won’t work in Los Angeles which is a city in another part of California?

    Like