Statement on Proposed
June 2011 Metro Service Changes

This statement was submitted to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board of Directors regarding the proposed service changes for June 2011, which included significant reductions to bus service frequency and the elimination of several routes in the San Fernando Valley. The statement argued for a different approach to addressing LACMTA's budget gap that would preserve service quality for transit-dependent riders.

Summary of Proposed Changes

The June 2011 service change proposal, as presented to the Board in early 2011, included the following categories of service modifications:

• Frequency reductions: Reducing peak headways on several Valley routes from 12–15 minutes to 20 minutes, effectively eliminating their "show-up-and-ride" frequency.
• Late-night service cuts: Eliminating or truncating owl service on routes serving the Van Nuys and Reseda corridors after midnight.
• Route eliminations: Proposed elimination of several local bus routes in the northeastern Valley, with passengers directed to Metro Rapid routes with longer walking distances to stops.
• Express service restructuring: Proposed modifications to commuter express routes from the Valley to downtown Los Angeles affecting peak-hour commuters.

The Problem with Across-the-Board Cuts

Transit agencies facing budget constraints often respond with across-the-board frequency reductions — reducing every route by a small amount rather than making targeted decisions. This approach appears equitable but is often counterproductive: it spreads service thinly across the entire network, reducing quality on high-performing routes while continuing to fund low-performing ones.

The June 2011 proposal reflected elements of this pattern. The frequency reductions proposed for high-ridership Van Nuys Blvd and Ventura Blvd corridors would have affected far more riders than the elimination of low-ridership routes serving dispersed suburban areas.

Recommended Alternative Approach

Rather than across-the-board frequency reductions, this statement recommended that LACMTA focus budget reductions on the lowest-performing route segments while protecting frequency on high-ridership corridors. Specifically:

1. Preserve frequency on trunk routes: Van Nuys Blvd (Routes 233/761), Ventura Blvd (Routes 150/240/750), Roscoe Blvd, and the G Line feeder routes carry the vast majority of Valley bus ridership. Frequency on these corridors should be protected even if coverage routes must be reduced.
2. Rationalize coverage routes: Routes with very low ridership per revenue hour — particularly in low-density residential areas where car ownership is high — are appropriate candidates for service reduction or restructuring to connecting shuttles.
3. Maximize G Line utilization: The G Line's capacity was significantly underutilized during off-peak periods. Rather than cutting feeder bus service, the agency should invest in increasing G Line feeder frequencies during midday and evening hours to drive G Line ridership.
4. Pursue alternative revenue sources: LACMTA had not fully explored advertising revenue optimization, property revenue from surplus agency-owned parcels, or federal discretionary grant opportunities that could have partially offset the budget gap.

Equity Considerations

The Board's service change decisions were subject to a Title VI analysis under federal civil rights law, requiring LACMTA to assess the disparate impacts of service reductions on minority and low-income riders. The Van Nuys and Pacoima corridors proposed for frequency reductions serve some of the Valley's highest concentrations of transit-dependent riders — households without access to a personal vehicle who rely on Metro for commuting, shopping, and medical appointments.

Any service change analysis must weigh the impact on these riders, not just the system-wide budget arithmetic. Frequency reductions that save $2 million in operating costs but cause 10,000 daily riders to spend an additional 30 minutes waiting for buses have a human cost that must be weighed alongside the fiscal cost.

Outcome

The Metro Board ultimately approved a modified version of the June 2011 service changes that preserved frequency on several high-ridership corridors while making targeted reductions on lower-performing routes. The final package was less severe than the initial proposal, in part due to public comment and advocacy at Board meetings.

The episode reinforced the importance of the public comment process in shaping LACMTA's service decisions. For background on the legislative and funding context of Metro's budget structure, see the Transportation 101 guide. For information about the author's qualifications and experience with Valley transit advocacy, see the biography page.