Some mayors are merely bureaucrats, some are caretakers and others are incorrigibly corrupt. A few have and are willing to talk about their vision for the city they lead. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's "Green LA" plan brings together many of his initiatives and interests and creates a vision that is actionable if the money and political will can be found.

The plan to reduce the city's greenhouse gas emissions 35 percent below baseline 1990 levels by the 2030 is broad based. It includes actions city departments can take to become more energy-efficient; water conservation; expanded mass transit; more transit-oriented development; and proposals to green both the Port of Los Angeles and the airports.

Of primary interest to me and my transportation background are the mobility components of the mayor's plan. The only way to reduce highway and street traffic congestion is to get people off the roads. No one wants to spend a third of their waking day stuck in traffic, and that's why we're seeing shifts toward remote work environments, telecommuting, and home-based businesses. It's also why there's a renewed interest in urban living.

"Angelenos spend too much time—more than 90 hours per year—stuck in traffic," the plan states. Among the items designed to alleviate that problem are: completing traffic signal synchronization; expanding the FlyAway bus services; and expanding the regional rail network. That last element is key, because as I've often pointed out, a rail network becomes increasingly valuable and viable as it expands and offers more routes, greater frequency and more connections.

As more and more residents flock to Downtown Los Angeles, they benefit from the MetroRail and bus systems, and the ability to simply walk to many of the places in the community. "As the city continues to redevelop and grow, there is an unprecedented opportunity to rethink the urban environment," the mayor notes. "Accommodating continued growth will require taking advantage of infill opportunities and increasing density along transit corridors."

Los Angeles has already come a long way in keeping a lid on its carbon footprint. Per-capita CO2 emissions are only two-thirds of the U.S. average, and declined 13 percent from 1990 to 2004. The city is more than halfway to meeting the 2010 emissions target set by the unratified (in the U.S.) Kyoto Protocol. But the mayor's plan is not simply about meeting carbon targets; it's about creating a more livable city for all of us.

All told, some $100 billion worth of public property could change hands in the next two years, up from less than $7 billion over the past two years; a lease for the Pennsylvania Turnpike could go for more than $30 billion all by itself.
(Business Week, May 7, 2007)

That figure includes roads, bridges, airports and ports, and the deep-pocketed buyers of public infrastructure, fattened by sweetheart deals and with close ties to state and local politicians, will create a new class of highway lobbyists eager to prevent competition from passenger rail and mass transit projects.

It's no wonder private investors are eager to jump into the road-running business: the costly and time-consuming investment in construction has already been done for them, and they are getting long-term deals on monopoly properties. No one is going to build a parallel Pennsylvania Turnpike to offer competition and lower profit margins.

Mass transit and intercity passenger rail operators have no such angels in the wings. Farebox revenues don't cover operating costs and infrastructure ownership is often complex, involving government agencies and freight railroads.

At a time when environmental and congestion issues require increased use of efficient rail-based transportation, public policy will be decided by the money flowing from the new highway lobbyists.

Is it time to change the equation and look at privatization of Amtrak and commuter rail operations?