Skip to main content

Is Public Transit in L.A. a Humane Experience?

Support Provided By

| Photo: Courtesy MS

Carmen Mendoza and her two school-age children used to take the bus every weekday to school (for the kids) and to work (for Carmen). They walked to their first bus at 5:35 a.m. and got off the last one, according to Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez, sometime after 7:30 p.m.

As many as nine buses connected the places of their lives, stitching home in Bell Gardens to an Atwater Village charter school for Carmen's son, another charter school in Chinatown for her daughter, and work for Carmen in downtown's garment district. Afterschool activities and collecting a 7-year-old grandson were fitted somehow into their transit routine.

Lopez gave this story the sheen of American aspiration -- Carman Mendoza and her husband working long hours at low-wage jobs; the kids attending schools miles from their working-class neighborhood. It's the hopeful story we want to hear -- unrelenting effort in one generation so that the next might -- might -- have something better.

This being the season to warm hearts at any cost, the follow-up to Lopez's column brought news that business owner Hector Delgadillo and his employees read Carmen's story, dug into their generosity, and bought her a 2004 Kia Sedona minivan so that Carmen and the kids might be freed from public transit.

Smiles and tears and expression of genuine gratitude followed.

Too bad. If the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (called Metro) had provided Carmen with a better transit experience, she might not have wanted to join the car-bound millions who commute in Los Angeles. But I can hardly blame her for taking the car rather than the bus.

After all, her KIA minivan, although no luxury vehicle, includes loads of passenger leg room, a driver's seat with lumbar support, adjustable air conditioning and heating, one-touch power windows, front and rear reading lights, and an AM/FM radio and CD player with six stereo speakers.

Compare that to the knees-against-seat-back benches on even the newest Metro buses, where a thin layer of upholstery conceals stamped metal, where a TV monitor up front mutters continuously, where everything you need for the day has to be carried on your back, where heat and cold are facts rather than personal preferences, and where you have no control over any part of the experience except the choice to get on and get off the bus.

Transit advocates (and I'm one of them) argue that drivers in Los Angeles face hellish traffic. They have insurance, gas and other consumables to buy. They risk the health of the planet. And over time, the local option to use public transit is becoming more pervasive (although Carmen's choices left her riding eight or nine buses with layovers and transfers in between).

I don't actually know the reasons why Carmen Mendoza chose the KIA over the maze of buses she rode, but lack of access to public transit wasn't one of them.

No Metro ride will ever be as comfortable as even a 10-year-old KIA, but Metro could have spent just a little of the billions Metro collected from taxpayers since 1990 to make Carmen's ride (and mine) a little better.

All of her bus stops could have been fitted with seating, trash receptacles, security lighting, and canopies to shield waiting passengers from the sun and the rain. Her stops could have been made minimally safe, minimally accessible, and minimally clean. Those minimal standards could have been applied to the buses themselves.

That wouldn't have reduced the number of transfers or the length of Carmen's waiting at bus stops, but it would have made the experience so much more humane. Good public transit isn't measured solely by accessibility or even by frequency. It can be measured by the degrees of Carmen's weariness.

She's happy she has a car now, but she might have preferred the bus.

Support Provided By
Read More
An oil pump painted white with red accents stands mid-pump on a dirt road under a blue, cloudy sky with a green, grassy slope in the background.

California’s First Carbon Capture Project: Vital Climate Tool or License to Pollute?

California’s first attempt to capture and sequester carbon involves California Resources Corp. collecting emissions at its Elk Hills Oil and Gas Field, and then inject the gases more than a mile deep into a depleted oil reservoir. The goal is to keep carbon underground and out of the atmosphere, where it traps heat and contributes to climate change. But some argue polluting industries need to cease altogether.
Gray industrial towers and stacks rise up from behind the pitched roofs of warehouse buildings against a gray-blue sky, with a row of yellow-gold barrels with black lids lined up in the foreground to the right of a portable toilet.

California Isn't on Track To Meet Its Climate Change Mandates. It's Not Even Close.

According to the annual California Green Innovation Index released by Next 10 last week, California is off track from meeting its climate goals for the year 2030, as well as reaching carbon neutrality by 2045.
A row of cows stands in individual cages along a line of light-colored enclosures, placed along a dirt path under a blue sky dotted with white puffy clouds.

A Battle Is Underway Over California’s Lucrative Dairy Biogas Market

California is considering changes to a program that has incentivized dairy biogas, to transform methane emissions into a source of natural gas. Neighbors are pushing for an end to the subsidies because of its impact on air quality and possible water pollution.