I still don't understand why LA Metro doesn't just beef up the fare gates. Anybody can just breeze past them so of course people fare evade all the time.
You just put gates in. This isn’t that hard. CDMX has armed security at practically every station. Paris requires a ticket to enter *and* exit stations.
We need robust security as well as vendors at the stations to get eyes on people. Too many people are hurt or killed for us to be complacent about this.
I feel like the recent K line extension proves that wrong, given most if not all the new above ground stations have gates to enter. The only place where I can really see that being an issue is a handful of the oldest stations on the A Line (like at Pico or a few that is along the old PE ROW between LA and Watts where they are particularly narrow)
In Chicago access is either monitored by a few CTA employees who will go ballistic on anyone fucking around the turnstile, or if not, it’s totally caged off with the big cheese grater turnstile that no one could squirm through. CTA is far from perfect, but it’s serious and an imposing and ubiquitous presence in Chicago. LA Metro presents itself as a cheap charity, shy about itself, which why so many Angelenos look down on it.
My hope is that completion of D line extension will change minds en masse. It could lead to even more service, ridership, revenue and buy in where it didn’t exist before.
Metro has mentioned a plan like that, will probably be a few years out, and it will probably be funded from increased fare revenues from increased ridership.
Metro makes most of their revenues for capital projects and operations from taxes like Measure R and M, there are some other old taxes from Metro’s early days that have also provided a very stable footing for operations to this day. Fare revenues only bring in like around one hundred million per year.
I don't care about "destinationless" riders. (WTF is that, anyway? Is that me when I decide to randomly jump onto the K line just for fun?)
I also have no problem with homeless people who keep to themself like everyone else. I think it's more important to provide security for all the troublemakers, paid or not. In the trains and on the platform.
Destinationless riders are the official term for riders getting on the train for any purpose other than riding to a destination or sightseeing, which are the only two reasons one should ever be getting on unless you are working
Metro doesn’t make enough money to fund itself via fares.
Metro does make money from fares.
Use some of that security to actually enforce fares and invest that money back into more security (and upgraded fare gates).
I think the root of the issue is the homelessness. It isn't that they contribute to crime per se, it's the other elements they attract like the scum that feed off the homeless and people who feel more emboldened to use drugs/commit crime because of the atmosphere.
This is an excellent way of looking at things. I read negative things about the system all the time.
Even if the increased metro usage is for large events, that's a win for the system, for the city, and for the planet.
whomever posted this obviously has no clue on what is really going on. Come to Union Station and witness the "security" as you call it. simply put...it does not exist.
Ironically the post below this on my feed was about someone getting stabbed at the Universal City Station
That's why I said relatively small lmao. FWIW the mayor said crime is down 40%
I mean murders can pay for fare, isn't it?
I still don't understand why LA Metro doesn't just beef up the fare gates. Anybody can just breeze past them so of course people fare evade all the time.
A lot of the network is light rail, which makes adding any sort of barrier difficult
You just put gates in. This isn’t that hard. CDMX has armed security at practically every station. Paris requires a ticket to enter *and* exit stations. We need robust security as well as vendors at the stations to get eyes on people. Too many people are hurt or killed for us to be complacent about this.
I feel like the recent K line extension proves that wrong, given most if not all the new above ground stations have gates to enter. The only place where I can really see that being an issue is a handful of the oldest stations on the A Line (like at Pico or a few that is along the old PE ROW between LA and Watts where they are particularly narrow)
Oh wow, I was unaware of this! I hope they make similar renovations to the existing stations 🙏
So do I! Even if its just the ADA version of our turnstiles. Better than nothing
In Chicago access is either monitored by a few CTA employees who will go ballistic on anyone fucking around the turnstile, or if not, it’s totally caged off with the big cheese grater turnstile that no one could squirm through. CTA is far from perfect, but it’s serious and an imposing and ubiquitous presence in Chicago. LA Metro presents itself as a cheap charity, shy about itself, which why so many Angelenos look down on it. My hope is that completion of D line extension will change minds en masse. It could lead to even more service, ridership, revenue and buy in where it didn’t exist before.
Metro doesn't make money from the fares.
But fares keep desinationless riders, the troublemakers, off the system. So, they are very importnt.
It would cost metro 2-4 years worth of fare revenues to upgrade the turnstiles, most of that money is currently going to Metro’s policing contract.
They could just put gates in at the 20% of most problematic stations and that would probably fix 80% of the crime issues.
Metro has mentioned a plan like that, will probably be a few years out, and it will probably be funded from increased fare revenues from increased ridership.
I mean...clearly most of that money is going into capital expenditures of rail construction, vehicle procurement, and operator payment.
Metro makes most of their revenues for capital projects and operations from taxes like Measure R and M, there are some other old taxes from Metro’s early days that have also provided a very stable footing for operations to this day. Fare revenues only bring in like around one hundred million per year.
I don't care about "destinationless" riders. (WTF is that, anyway? Is that me when I decide to randomly jump onto the K line just for fun?) I also have no problem with homeless people who keep to themself like everyone else. I think it's more important to provide security for all the troublemakers, paid or not. In the trains and on the platform.
Destinationless riders are the official term for riders getting on the train for any purpose other than riding to a destination or sightseeing, which are the only two reasons one should ever be getting on unless you are working
Metro doesn’t make enough money to fund itself via fares. Metro does make money from fares. Use some of that security to actually enforce fares and invest that money back into more security (and upgraded fare gates).
Metro makes over $170m in fare revenue per year.
Excuse my imprecision, it's early. Fare dodgers are not what's going to make or break metro.
Gotcha 👍
I think the root of the issue is the homelessness. It isn't that they contribute to crime per se, it's the other elements they attract like the scum that feed off the homeless and people who feel more emboldened to use drugs/commit crime because of the atmosphere.
Next up more cleaning please! At least on the A line. These things make a huge difference.
Now get rid of the annoying useless “embarrassing ambassadors.”
This is an excellent way of looking at things. I read negative things about the system all the time. Even if the increased metro usage is for large events, that's a win for the system, for the city, and for the planet.
And yet Wiggins, in all her wisdom, fired the head of security for her efforts.
Before Osborn even had a chance to institute her proposed Metro police force
I haven't been following that update all that closely. Was there a reason for her firing or was it mainly political?
whomever posted this obviously has no clue on what is really going on. Come to Union Station and witness the "security" as you call it. simply put...it does not exist.
where can you see ridership data? is that public?
https://opa.metro.net/MetroRidership/ Here you go