Measure M Extension – OCTA Speaks Out
by Dale Tyler

I wrote a recent article opposing the extension of Measure M and criticizing the Mission Viejo council for voting to impose this new tax on Mission Viejo citizens.

Well, it seems that Monty Ward, who works for OCTA, was quite upset about my article and decided to claim what I said were “lies.” Now, most people recognize that calling your opponent a liar is often an admission that you are losing or have lost the argument on its merits. Nonetheless, Monty decided to brand four of the arguments against the new tax, known by OCTA as the ”Measure M Extension,” as lies. Unfortunately for Monty and OCTA, his arguments show just how out of touch OCTA is with the people of Mission Viejo and Orange County.

In this article, I'll take on Monty's claims and show how ludicrous they really are. For each point, I will list my original point as he listed it, show parts of his response, then respond to his argument.

Dale Tyler: “M renewal will ‘raise funds for OCTA operations.’”

Monty Ward (OCTA): “Lie number one. Measure M renewal funds will go to specific projects or programs detailed in a voter-approved plan. By law, no more than one percent of revenues can be used for administration of the program and by law one and one half percent is allocated to the Board of Equalization to collect and distribute the revenues. Can we find another public or private program with lower administrative costs? In 1991 when Measure M started, OCTA had 10 percent MORE administrative employees than it does today, 15 years later. Measure M goes for projects, not bureaucracy.”

The Truth: First, all of the Measure M tax today goes to the OCTA. They spend it on various things, including freeways, roads, transit, engineering, public outreach (propaganda), bond interest, staff salaries and so on. Anyone who knows accounting realizes that one can classify expenses in many ways. Would you consider interest on borrowed money an administrative expense or a project expense? What about PR? The bottom line is that even if you buy the argument about only a small percentage being spent on “administration,” it is still true that the more money you give them in taxes, the more money they have to spend on bureaucracy. Also, even though their so-called administrative employee count may or may not have decreased, they have more than 1,900 employees doing something. As to specific plans being approved by voters in the new tax, what about the more than $1.3 billion in Projects S and V? These are really just big “slush” funds for OCTA to spend on light rail (like Centerline). There are almost no limits on what the money can be spent on as far as transit goes.

Dale Tyler: “Yet, four supposedly fiscally conservative council members voted to impose a new tax on Mission Viejo residents without even having a final document specifying how the tax was to be spent.”

Monty Ward (OCTA): “Lie number two. The Mission Viejo council members voted to approve a 30-year transportation investment plan that details how the proceeds from extending a half-cent sales tax will be spent (available on the web at www.octa.net). The plan the council approved is exactly what will be presented to the voters in the voter pamphlet. It is the “final document.” Moreover, the council did not vote to impose a tax, only the voters (by a two-thirds majority) can do that. The council endorsed the spending plan that will accompany the Measure M renewal on the ballot.”

The Truth: Let's be clear. The council's approval (4-1, Ledesma opposing), means the new tax (not an extension) is one step closer to the ballot. Our council, if they were really fiscal conservatives, would have said “No new taxes!” To claim that it is simply a formality is disingenuous. If it were so unimportant, why have the council vote at all? As to the notion that this is the final document, the last version I saw and what was approved by the OCTA board on April 24, is still labeled a “Draft.” If this were the final document, why not label it “Final Ordinance XX”? The reason OCTA does not do this is that some last-minute changes may be needed to get cities' approval or pacify some other group. Of course, this may be the final document, after all. We'll only really know when the new tax comes up for a vote.

Dale Tyler: “OCTA had different ideas than most Orange County residents about what they should do to relieve congestion. They built carpool lanes and tried to build a light-rail system called 'Centerline.’”

Monty Ward:(OCTA): “Lie number three. OCTA has delivered the Measure M Plan exactly as presented to and approved by the voters in 1990 (yes, it included carpool lanes, carpool lane connectors and light rail). OCTA’s fidelity to the Plan has been well documented, audited and certified every year for 15 years by a fully independent Citizen’s Oversight Committee charged with overseeing Measure M’s implementation. More recently these findings were reinforced by yet another independent assessment done by the Orange County Business Council and which led to their endorsement of the Measure M renewal Plan. ... (listing of proposed new tax benefits deleted)”

The Truth: In this case the devil is in the details. Sure, OCTA can claim the voters approved something, but there was not a lot of specificity on the ratio of car pool lanes to general use lanes, for example. When people voted in 1990, car pool lanes and light rail were not really pressing issues and so people voted for the tax as a whole, even though they might have preferred no light rail or car pool lanes. Remember, in 1990 very few freeways had carpool lanes. Yet, OCTA spent much of our freeway money on adding carpool lanes and extremely expensive, almost unused flyover ramps for carpool lanes. They also spent more than $30 million on Centerline, despite a scathing Orange County Grand Jury report on the waste at OCTA. The audits they speak so highly of are done by a group of well-meaning citizens who have little real power and who are manipulated by OCTA into “going along to get along.” If this Citizen's Oversight Committee had any real teeth, it would have stopped Centerline in its tracks, long before a vast public uprising put a halt to the “trolley to nowhere.” Even OCTA's own reports on Centerline showed it would make traffic worse, yet the COC did nothing. I believe that the Oversight Committee is just window dressing for OCTA's bureaucracy. On the OC Business Council's so-call independent report, remember that the head of the OC Business Council is a former OCTA staffer and that this “independent report” was done at no charge to the OCTA.

Dale Tyler: “OCTA continues to plan for too much transit and, despite the overwhelming rejection of the Centerline boondoggle, they include almost $1.3 billion for new “high-tech transit,” which are code words for light rail in their new proposal.”

Monty Ward (OCTA): “Lie number four (and pure invention). The Measure M renewal contains no references at all and no funding allocation to “high-tech transit” or light rail. ... (listing of proposed new tax benefits deleted)”

The Truth: Look carefully at Projects S and V in the proposed new tax. Compare those sections to earlier drafts, and you will find that they are largely the same as the current “Final Draft,” with the exception of the words “high tech transit” being removed. Just because you do not call it a duck, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck. OCTA has a transit mentality. During the last Measure M, they spent more that $30 million, with many mailings, public meetings and other so-called “outreach” to try and convince the public that they (the public) really wanted light rail, even though it made no sense, according to OCTA's own studies. Yet they kept coming back and coming back until they were finally shut down by massive public pressure. If OCTA were really a good steward of our tax money, they would have heard what the people of Orange County were saying, instead of putting their fingers in their collective ears and singing loudly whenever someone opposed Centerline. OCTA wasted a lot of staff time on a project that never made sense, except in the minds of the OCTA execs who love rail and want us all to live in high-density projects around rail stations. Perhaps they grew up in Chicago or New York, where that might work, but this is Orange County and light rail will never be cost-effective here. A recent study shows that OCTA's plans for the new tax will spend about $8.62 per person mile/year for transit and only about $0.25 per person-mile/year for streets and roads. That's OCTA spending about 35 times as much to move a person by rail or bus than for the folks in their own cars and trucks. Talk about waste!

I encourage everyone to look at the facts and make up your own mind. It is clear to me that OCTA has wasted much of our money on programs that are not cost effective, like Centerline, and wasted more of our money on things like carpool lanes, which actually hurt total traffic flow. There are more and more studies that prove having a carpool lane is less effective for moving the most people per hour on an entire freeway past a given point than a regular (general purpose) lane would be. Put another way, carpool lanes move more people per hour in that lane only while hurting the people per hour for the rest of the freeway. Even the studies of the first carpool lanes built in 1985 on SR-55 showed that. Yet, OCTA continues to press their social agenda on the people of Orange County and tries to force us into using buses, trains and carpool lanes, even though they do not fit the lifestyles most of us choose.

Stay tuned for more facts on the new tax and OCTA.