The Challenge for New GM of LADOT: Transit Gridlock & Funding

As general manager of the L.A. Department of Transportation, you have been asked by the mayor to collaborate with others in City Hall, e.g., the Planning Department and DWP, to implement the city's green agenda. How will you proceed to do so?

We're certainly all on the same page with the mayor on the green initiative. Whether it's Sanitation or Transportation, I think the whole city is on the same wavelength. I've already met with Gail Goldberg and her team, who are very eager for us to be a part of the new community plan she is working on. She has accelerated the community plans to fit within a certain time period, she is committed to those goals, and she is certainly moving in that direction.

Within each one of those plans is a transportation concept, and the whole commitment is to make us strong enough to be able to have our part of her plan be under Transportation's ownership. That way, it's a totally collaborative plan with regard to the community and land use issues and each one of the community plans. So that's already on its way, and we're very excited about working with Gail on that.

We haven't had an opportunity to meet with DWP yet because they've been going through their own transition, just as I have been. My hope is that, based upon my work with David Nahai, both at the Regional Water Quality Board and in his work at the Department of Water and Power on the commission, the door is already open. I know that that's a huge job to take over. We'll definitely have our doors open, and the knowledge of each other and trust in each other will go a long way.

I've worked with Mercedes Marquez at the Department of Housing, and I've worked with Cecilia Estolano at CRA/LA before as a city attorney, and now at CRA/LA. We're definitely going to sit down with them. There are a lot of task forces that the Department of Transportation is a part of, because in any plan, traffic has to move. Whether it's a special event, a community plan, a housing development, or parking issues, all of those things have to have us at the table.

How have you had time since your appointment to orient yourself to this behemoth called the Department of Transportation?

It's a place I've been before. I know it's a major, major task. It's a job that makes no one happy, and everybody thinks they're the experts. There is no one fix for traffic. The message I'll be sending in the future is that we are traffic. We're the ones that have six cars in our driveways. When a child turns 13, they begin salivating for their first car. It used to be a family car mentality; I haven't heard that since Leave It to Beaver. Now, everyone has his or her own vehicle, every single person. It used to be a bicycle, a bus, and then a car, and now everybody just has a car from day one.

To say that we can turn the ship in the direction the mayor wants it to go in is a lot to take on. He has his own direction and vision. I told him that I would only try to capture his vision, just as I tried to capture his vision for Sanitation, build a team to see it through-because you have to have the team-and then ask the people in the room.

I didn't know who Baykeepers were before I worked for the Bureau of Sanitation; I didn't know that much about Heal the Bay. But the major thing that was on my side then was that I didn't have an agenda already lined out in my head, so I was more open to things. I don't really have an agenda in transportation, except to try to see through the things that the mayor, the City Council, and the community think are important. That will help me to do the job that much better.

We have a $40 billion statewide traffic congestion problem and responsible officials are now fighting over the allocation of $2 billion. Limited funds make it very difficult to prioritize investments. Are the funding resources sufficient at the state level, the federal level, and the local level to address our present and future traffic problems?

I think we have to start somewhere. We didn't start when we saw the problem. If it's $2 billion and we've got a $40 billion problem, then we better put that $2 billion to a place where it can be leveraged and show some results so that people will trust us to do something with the $40 billion problem.

I think, just like in Sanitation with Prop O, we knew we had a huge problem. There were some people that stuck their necks out-Councilmember Perry, Councilmember Garcetti, and a lot of environmental groups-to support a $500 million project to solve a thumbnail of a bigger problem. But if we do something effective with that money and people see it, they will trust us to do more. We have to show results. If we don't show results, it doesn't matter how much money we have.

Almost immediately after you took your position at the Department of Transportation, Governor Schwarzenegger joined Mayor Villaraigosa and yourself in announcing a $150 million traffic signal synchronization plan. How important is this money and this ongoing project?

Huge issue, huge money. For the first time, they come together. The mayor campaigned and lobbied for it; he got it, and we're able to celebrate that. But we still have to show results; I don't care if we invest $150 million or $15. Our job now is to show results. The only thing I've ever promised to people is that I will show results.

Congestion pricing has emerged as a hot topic of debate. The federal government has provided incentives to New York and San Francisco to study the implementation of similar plans. Is congestion pricing a solution for relieving L.A.'s gridlock?

I know that Richard Katz has commented on it. It is a complex issue, and I know we got slammed for not getting in on the bandwagon from the very beginning. But I agree that L.A. is a very complex issue. We use that often times as an excuse, and we use that often times as a justification. It's true; we are complex. But I think that we have to look at ideas that are out there and try something new, because if we don't try anything, we'll never get anywhere. I'm willing to try new ideas, which that scares people sometimes. But we've had more wins than losses, so I'm willing to take my winning rolls and continue to grow.

From the little bit I know about it, and I hope to learn more (I'm going to TRD in January so I can learn more; there are a lot of meetings on that issue), congestion pricing may have pocket places in the city where it could work. I know that the mayor is very open to listening to ideas about the city in the long run. There is still a possibility for utilizing that program within Los Angeles, but we really have to carefully monitor how it works, where it might work better, and of course use the stakeholders as a part of the role in planning for it so we're not imposing it on people. Instead, people will see it as an asset.

Some writers in the L.A. area have begun to challenge the concept of smart growth, and in a recent issue of TPR, Council President Eric Garcetti acknowledged that there might be some justification to some of their complaints. What are your thoughts about that interface between planning, transportation, and development?

I think he is absolutely right. I think we, as a city, are sometimes victims of our own success. If people see themselves as successful, it's very difficult to change. Change is hard for everybody; for any of us, it's very difficult. What we have got to change if we're going to see change in the behavior of people is to try new things, I agree that smart growth is just another collaborative process. It really is a very smart phrase to use for a process that's really talking about collaboration-people coming together, thinking.

We often call them "challenges," but I call them "competing goods." If you see a parcel of land, it could be a school; it could be a library; it could be a parking lot. It could be a number of things, but they're all competing goods. We have to come together and determine what the best use of that particular parcel of land is. Smart growth is just a bigger picture of how to make this city better based on what we have now.

You were recently a panelist at the GreenXchange Global Market Conference in December, talking about the choices and knowledge required to connect the green dots and meet city sustainability goals. LADOT is a buyer of goods and services; what must you know about the green marketplace to accomplish your green goals?

I think we have to know where it is that we can be green, and then be willing to deal with it. A lot of times, we know the information but we just don't access it, because it's too hard, too expensive, or too difficult-change is just difficult for people. I think that once we know where it is that we can contribute to the sustainability issues of the city, we then will be able to buy into it-and that means a collaboration with the Bureau of Engineering, Bureau of Street Services, Planning, CRA/LA, Housing, Rec and Parks. That's where I can play a major role.

I know I can get everybody in the room and then we can have the talk. It's easier to talk outside of the room about each other than it is to bring everybody in the room and talk to each other. I know we hide behind our four-inch screens on our Blackberries; we hide behind our 17-inch screens on email. But when you bring everybody into the room, you see a whole different side of folks. That's exactly how we have to do this: face-to-face, step-by-step, let everybody win. We can't have one winner; it has to be everybody. People out there that are depending on us, they do not care whether we come from the county, the city, CRA/LA, Rec and Parks, or anywhere else-they're looking for somebody to do something. I don't care what department gets credit for it as long as something is done, and I know that's how the mayor feels.

If TPR interviews you again a year from now, what might you be talking about regarding LADOT?

A year from now, I hope I know a little bit more about transportation issues so that I can share more with you. I know that the $150 million synchronization will be well on its way. We will have done some major things that will show results and change. The 30-30 Program will be over in December. Left-hand turns will be very viable.

My hope is to shore the staff up so that the film industry (and hopefully the strike will be over very soon, because that industry is so important to this city) will have a streamlined process so that they'll feel protected, the public will feel protected, and we can get things done more efficiently with them.

I'm sure there will be big pictures like the Subway to the Sea and one-way streets and all of the other projects on the board-they have to go online.

###