Rail’s Benefits to Southland Disputed

The Times continues to echo folk tales about the wonders of fixed rail (“Commuting by Rail on Fast Track in O.C.,” Dec. 24 editorial), contrary to the facts from around the world.

President Reagan knew that rail didn’t have cost benefit and so slowed the waste of scarce federal monies for such construction. For the same reasons, Congress is currently cutting funding for fixed transit; ask the Orange County Transportation Authority. Southern California was not built as a mirror, thank goodness, of New York or London--often cited as prime examples for fixed transit; consequently, our environs are built for freeways. We do not have an early subway underground about which the development arose.

The citizen is in debt, which means that every level of government is broke. The yuppie user of MetroLink is not paying [full] cost for their ride, as has been the experience for the blue, green and red lines of Los Angeles [County’s] Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

You cite “OCTA’s willingness to spend $93 million in Measure M funds in 1992 to purchase rail right of way from the Santa Fe Railroad” [as a] “step in the right direction.” Actually, now: 1. Santa Fe has the rights to continue using the track; 2. OCTA must do the rail bed maintenance forever; 3. Maybe OCTA will be stuck for new “sound walls” [as] noise abatement for the increased train routing by Santa Fe over right of way now owned by OCTA; 4. Is Santa Fe laughing all the way to the bank?

Reread the questions of “the UC Irvine survey that suggested rail’s time had arrived. A full 69% . . . favored commuter service.” Were statistics stacked with trick questions? This happens.

The ridership of such [systems] as the MetroLink will be relative to a flea on the back of an elephant, in regards to Southern California traffic!

CHRIS EMA

Santa Ana