trojan
Volume LXXXIX, Number 12	University of Southern California	'%yesday, July 25, 1980
Public reacts to county transportation proposal
Vote seen on sales tax to pay for improvements in county system
By John Iki
Staff Writer
The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission held the first of nine countywide public hearings in Hancock Auditorium Tuesday.
The hearings are designed to allow the public to react to a transit improvement proposal, which would be financed by government funds, as well as a 1/2% increase in the Los Angeles County sales tax. Such a tax increase would be subject to voter approval in the November 4 County’ election.
The proposal would make immediate and long-term improvements in countv public transportation. Expanded local and freeway express bus service, as well as increased security and relief from severe fare increases, are proposed. Other improvements would be made in carpools and park-and-ride bus systems.
At least half of any funds would go toward construction of a mass-transit guideway system, either a bus or rail line, to be totally operational in about 25 years.
The LACTC wanted to get the public to involved in the proposal. The the public hearing was designed to find out attitudes on whether a bus or rail transit system would be best to serve the public's needs, whether local governments should receive a portion of the revenues for local improvements, whether the proposed corridors would be most effective, and should any sales
tax increase have a "sunset provision," which would automatically end the tax upon the completion of transit construction.
Councilwoman Pat Russell was chairman for the hearing. Among the LACTC members present were Wendell Cox, citizen's representative for the city of Los Angeles; Ray Remy, deputy mayor of the city of Los Angeles; Robert Geoghegan, representing Countv Supervisor Edmund Edelman, and Robert Reeves, representing County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn.
Dr. Abraham Falick, representing the Coalition for Rapid Transit, told the panel he welcomed the proposal. "I only wish something like this had been proposed 10 or 12 years ago," Falick said.
He added that, while he favors relieving traffic congestion in the Wilshire area, the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys and South Los Angeles, he was against waste in planning and the omissions of certain areas from the proposal.
L. J. Cherene, a university economist, thought that not all the alternatives had been proposed. "Among all the alternatives to the automobile, what's missing are 'two feet/ " he said.
Cherene continued to speak on less dependence on mechanical modes of transport, saying, "There are more ways to go than diesel."
"Peoplemovers seem a poor substitute for (your own)
two feet," he said.
While testimony was generally favorable, there were also protests to proposals such as sales tax increases.
Ruth Heller of Bet Tzedek Legal Services criticized the sales tax proposal, saying that the poor will have to pay twice, for both the fare and the tax.
Merchants won't be charged their share, she said. "It'll be the businesses who'll benefit."
Larry Gross, from the Coalition for Economic Survival, criticized the sales tax proposal as "regressive." He pointed out that there were no guarantees that fares would not be increased as well.
"It's inconsistent ... It would be a hardship on the transit-dependent," Gross said.
"It'll be like a 'mini-Proposition 9'!"
He added that "those able to pay aren't paying." He advocates a business tax, since he said their employees and customers would be stranded without bus service. Businesses should be responsible enough to subsidize transportation, he said.
Noting the poor public turnout, Gross questioned the effort of the LACTC. He also criticized the fact that there is onlv one hearing scheduled for the inner-city. Since "mass transportation is the most important question of the day," hearings should also have been sched-
(Continued on page 8)
Community input urged in tech park
By Matthew Kane
Staff Writer
The University-Neighborhood Relations Commission was concerned, and some members were openlv suspicious, as the group discussed a proposed technology park. The commission was intent on assuring that the park would be built onlv after full consultation with the communitv.
The technology park would bring corporate research and development centers together in one area near the university, providing an interchange of ideas between engineers and scientists in industry and in the university.
The park could be built only if large companies are interested in the project and the communitv also finds it of value. Community representatives on the commission said they wanted to have input on any plan before a deal is struck, but Rov Carlson, assistant dean of the School of Engineering and chairman of the Technology Park Working Group, said he would need to talk with business first, to see wrhat kind of interest there was, before there would be any sort of plan on which the community could comment. Carlson said he is already talking with "a large computer company."
Before any plans can be made for a technology park, Carlson said, the university must establish some sort of relationship with companies in which the companies and the university would agree cooperate in research and development. The park would then be proposed as a wav to facilitate that cooperation.
Marnesba Tackett, executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, said that would be "putting the
(Continued on page 8)
By Terri Bingham
Political money affects the democratic process. Herbert E. Alexander has been studying the details of political finance for over two decades. He has been referred to as "the most prolific writer on political finance in the United States today," and he is knownas an expert on election finance. For 20 years, his achievements have centered around the documentation of how Americans spend their money in politics. His position as director at the Citizens' Research Foundation has led to funding that makes possible his extensive research and numerous publications.
Alexander is a professor of political science at the university, where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in the areas of political finance and election reform. Personally, he is known to be a stout advocate of full disclosure of campaign funds, tax credits for small political contributors and partial public funding.
Before joining the facultv of USC, Alexander taught at Princeton and Yale universities. (He received his doctorate from Yale.) The foundation was based in Princeton, N.J., before its move to USC in 1978.
From the quiet of his office (closelv resembling an overstuffed library), he has authored more than a hundred books, articles, and related literature. The most recent publications are Financing the 1976 Election (Congressional Quarterly Press, 1979) and Financing Politics: Money, Elections and Political Reform, second edition (Congressional Quarterly Press, 1980).
Financing the 1976 Election discusses election reforms and, more specifically, it illustrates the role of public finance in the last presidential election; while Financing Politics is revised to include the latest in election laws and campaign data from the 1976 and
1978	elections. The book is is used widely in university courses across the country.
Aside freom the volumes Alexander has authored, he has also produced an variety of articles. "PACs: What Thev Are, How They Are Changing Political Campaign Financing Patterns" and "Public Financing of Congressional Campaigns" are two of his 1980 publications. When he is not lecturing or writing, chances are he will be providing informaton on political finance to anyone from a TV Guide reporter to a New York Times correspondent or a concerned member of a grass roots organization.
(Continued on page 2)