Metro statement on favorable court ruling in Measure M lawsuit

The lawsuit was brought by seven cities (Carson, Commerce, Norwalk, Torrance, Santa Fe Springs, Ranchos Palos Verdes and Signal Hill), alleging the language in the sales tax ballot measure language was misleading. A Superior Court judge today rejected their petition. From Metro:

Metro is appreciative of the court’s ruling today. For the past three years and throughout the entire process, this has been a bottoms-up approach that included input from the public and our stakeholders in crafting a Measure to go before the voters of this region. The tax is a new half-cent sales tax which is expected to generate a projected $860 million per year. Also, once Measure R is set to expire in 2039, that half-cent sales tax would be replaced and combined with the new sales tax for a full cent that would continue until voters decide to end it.

Click here to learn more about the projects and programs that are included in Measure M.

Categories: Policy & Funding

Tagged as: , ,

3 replies

  1. The PDF file at does give a better description of each proposed project.

    However, I feel it is still too sketchy and Metro should add information on how each project impacts the others and the benefits and rationale for each. More critical is the missing data on relative priority and estimated cost and time frame for each. If Project A reduces traffic congestion in Area B or on Highway C, so state.

    I am particularly interested in accelerating the construction of the West Santa Ana Branch LRT and having it built in a continuous motion, starting at Union Station end and working south from there. It would probably reduce the traffic load on the Blue Line and in the Regional Connector. I realize that your charter prevents extending it to Santa Ana and even to Irvine, but at the very minimum it should be constructed right up to the Orange County Line. This just might then encourage OCTA to extend the line further south.

    I still question why a regressive sates tax should fund highway projects. I realize the OCTA did the same with their Measure M, but shouldn’t highway projects be funded by the more progressive Gas Tax. If these highway projects are really required, then the Gas Tax or something similar should be created and/or increased to fund them.

  2. People living in the South Bay are not happy that we seem to be left out of any plans to extend the Green Line in the near future. Speaking for myself I am not happy with one extension after another of the Gold Line to sparsely populated areas of East LA County when there is many areas of the county with high density population that would be better served. Not only the South Bay, but also the San Fernando Valley and West Hollywood as well. Having a permanent sales tax of 10% throughout LA County is too much for some working families to be able to handle.