San Diego’s publicly funded transit system bites the hand that feeds it
By Anna Daniels
MTS- you are a craven, pathetic mess. When Alliance San Diego launched a non-partisan effort to increase awareness about elections in communities with historically low voter turnout like my community of City Heights, they approached San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) with the intention of buying printed bus ads.
The ads would include the message Vote for San Diego, along with the date of the election. Images of native San Diegans were included with motivational messages such as “Vote for what’s best for your community.”
Did I say that Alliance San Diego’s intention was to buy bus ads? They weren’t asking for a public service freebee. MTS declined the request and herein lies the tale of how our publicly funded, public benefit agency proceeded to simply make sh*t up.
Excuse #1: MTS’ advertising agency Michael Allen and Associates, informed Alliance San Diego that their ads were too political. It should be a wake-up call to citizens when non-partisan efforts to get out the vote are deemed “too political.” This decision carries the taint of voter suppression efforts that are going on across the whole country.
Excuse #2: MTS general counsel replied with a different response–that the MTS policy only allows ads that serve a commercial purpose. Why is that? Doesn’t that give preference to one kind of protected speech over another? Alliance San Diego succinctly observes: “In other words, MTS will only allow messages that strengthen the corporate wallet, not our democracy.”
When Alliance San Diego pointed out that MTS has accepted non-commercial ads for City College, the non-profit First Five and water conservation ads, the argle bargle began. Here is how they resolved the contradiction/hypocrisy:
Excuse #1: The non-profit First Five ad “slipped through.” This is the “It was an honest mistake, never happen again” excuse.”
Excuse #2: The City College ad fit the criteria because it was ostensibly for commercial purposes because it invited a transaction to enroll in courses. This is the “I can see Russia from my house” exaggeration.
At the very least, MTS should make available the application for the water conservation partner. We want to know how they demonstrated that they would increase ridership. We also want to know the MTS methodology and reporting that is in place to track this increase.
Excuse #3: MTS makes exceptions, allowing for non-commercial ads with its partners. Simply paying for an ad, as commercial interests do, is not enough. Alliance San Diego must become a partner. And they must demonstrate how they would increase ridership in order to become a partner. This is the absolute bottom of the sack of lame excuses.
I suspect that MTS is really wading into the deep end on this one. But let’s go along with this “policy” for a moment. Does the demonstration of increased ridership only apply to non-commercial interests? If so, why is that? If every entity is paying for ads, why is one sub-set of this group singled out to demonstrate an increase in ridership?
What more does MTS want? To require transit dependent riders to buy a bus pass for their children while they are in utero?
At the very least, MTS should make available the application for the water conservation partner. We want to know how they demonstrated that they would increase ridership. We also want to know the MTS methodology and reporting that is in place to track this increase. This is called transparency and accountability.
Once you peel away the incoherence, a troubling residue remains. There is an inescapable irony or an abysmal ignorance in requiring Alliance San Diego to demonstrate how they would increase ridership. Remember, these ads would be on buses and trolleys with routes through neighborhoods with low voter turnout. Those communities with low voter turnout are also predominately low income and minority. They also happen to be transit dependent communities.
These communities feed MTS fare boxes seven days a week. Let’s be clear– MTS is unable to operate solely on fare box recovery and is heavily subsidized by public funds. But if all those transit dependent individuals decide to boycott MTS for a month, the agency would take a substantial financial hit. (The Number 7 bus in City Heights has historically had the highest bus ridership in the city.)
The target communities for Alliance San Diego’s get out the vote ads already have the highest ridership in the city. What more does MTS want? To require transit dependent riders to buy a bus pass for their children while they are in utero?
MTS willing to leave certain money– and individuals who use and support public transit– on the curb.
The February 2010 article “MTS May Be Leaving Money on the Curb” notes that San Diego City Councilman Todd Gloria, who was and still is an MTS board member, was the only board member who voted for accepting exterior ads on MTS buses. He justified his vote saying “Certainly the buses are prettier without the ads, but it’s a small price to pay to communicate that we’re all sacrificing during these difficult times.”
Gloria was also representing City Heights, which was in the old District 3 at the time. He was well aware of transit issues in his district because his constituents regularly showed up at meetings to advise him, as they had advised Council members Toni Atkins, Christine Kehoe and John Hartley over the past decades, on that critical issue.
Not only does Councilman Gloria sit on the MTS board, so do Council members Myrtle Cole, David Alvarez and Marti Emerald. Each one of these board members represents communities with high transit ridership. They also represent neighborhoods with low voter turn out. It is inconceivable that any of them would support MTS’ incoherent policy.
These council members are all politically astute enough to know that the fiscal health of the agency relies upon public transit users and advocates. The only other constituents who seem to consistently weigh in on the issue are public transit bashers like Richard Rider and the San Diego Taxpayers Association who are quick to remind elected representatives that they vote.
Council member Gloria has taken interest in the ad policy and alluded to the upcoming MTS board meeting on Thursday October 30 in a SDFP tweet last week. The reality is that a decision in favor of Alliance San Diego will be moot three days before the election and that is shameful.
MTS’ ad policy must be revised and there needs to be citizen input on the issue. This input is important because the MTS board of directors does not have any representation by transit riders themselves. The resulting policy must be transparent and equitable in its application.
San Diego Free Press has been running a series called “Who Runs San Diego?” It’s worth keeping in mind while reading the series that there are individuals in San Diego who are in a position to interpret policy and believe that non-partisan efforts to get out the vote are “too political.”
(h/t Doug Porter for writing The Slippery Slope to Get Out the Vote in San Diego)
Anna Daniels
Latest posts by Anna Daniels (see all)
- Bob Dorn: Rest in Power! - December 3, 2018
- The Urgency of Transgender Safety, Legal Protections - November 27, 2018
- Chaos and Cruelty at the Border - November 26, 2018
Anna: clearly you feel very passionately about this disgraceful behavior displayed by MTS. They don’t seem to have a legal leg to stand on so the big question is: when will you file the lawsuit?
And perhaps while you’re at it include the airport authority with this action. They also required ridiculous arm-twisting before allowing an ad regarding sea world to be displayed in a terminal earlier this year.
Both the airport authority and MTS operate under similar public private structures. Both serve basic public functions and satisfy transportation needs. And both boards seem to need swift kicks in the behind to help them understand they cannot ban or censor or restrict – whatever you want to call it – speech.
So please file the briefs and get moving on this very important topic. It may be too late for the election this year, but we will have another one very quickly and I’d love to see more of your advertising in these communities and on the buses.
One note regarding exterior advertisements on busses: I remember when an art project featured ad’s describing San Diego as America’s finest Tourist plantation, complete with images of hands washing dishes. They created quite a stir but they made it important point. Perhaps officials don’t want those points to be made again.
Yeah, a lawsuit should be filed on this ridiculous policy. If transit is a public function, citizens should have input and be able to define policy not some well paid coalition of muckety mucks. The same could be said for a lot of these boards that run the city in their own interests.
Why on Earth would MTS care whether an ad is commercial or non-commercial so long as the advertiser is paying and its content is not objectionable? What a ridiculous policy! Inside-bus ads are largely non-commercial – military recruitment, Social Security related, etc., the exceptions being a few for-profit colleges. Now, I definitely do not want to see electioneering ads on buses touting initiatives or candidates. But it seems like there should be a way to promote voting without having to accept candidate, party, or special interest group ads.
Imagine. A public agency refusing to advocate voting. Imagine. A public agency refusing to advocate enlisting in the Army. Now, that’s hard to imagine.
Does voting threaten the MTS? The City of San Diego? Has voting become unpatriotic?I’d like to see a lawsuit, but let’s face it, insults to humane intelligence have been enforced by imperial AND democratic courts since laws were first written and adjudicated. Some narrow legal point will be argued and the MTS will be allowed to accept ads paid for by convicted insurance fraudsters but not for Homeless encampments, and we’ll all shake our heads in wonder and befuddlement.
What we need to do is get out the spray cans and blow VOTE all over the buses.
Anna, please call me when you have a moment. I have some questions. My number is 619-497-0021.
This is an outrage and I sincerely hope that Alliance San Diego can and will take action. This goes against everything we were taught in school about a democratic society. Not allowing paid ads that advocate voting? C’mon MTS: get your act together and soon.
I have been a devoted MTS rider for many years. It is totally unacceptable that MTS would refuse to display a public service ad about voting. It is irresponsible to show so little concern for information that is important for their customers to know. I wonder how many of the policy makers at MTS actually ride the bus. A month of riding the #7 line might be a useful experience for them.
If TRANSIT is truly the interest of MTS, SANDAG and advocates, the concentration should be on BUSES, not commuter rail. Buses, are FAR less costly both purchase and operate per passenger mile, and far more flexible as to routes.
But sadly, buses aren’t sexy. Trains are. So we sink BILLIONS into trains to carry a tiny fraction of commuters at tremendous total cost per passenger mile. An expanded bus system would better meet consumers’ needs, but makes for poor photo ops.
Whadda think about the story, anti-tax man?