Assembly District 39 serves northeastern communities of the San Fernando Valley, including Pacoima, Sylmar, Sun Valley, Sunland-Tujunga, Mission Hills, Arleta and San Fernando. Due to the resignation of former Assemblymember Raul Bocanegra in November 2017 related to sexual harassment allegations, the area will see a special election on April 3rd to fill the seat through the end of the current term (December 2018).

The district has relatively high rates of residents who walk and bike as their primary mode of transportation, and it is also has a number of streets and intersections identified in LADOT’s High Injury Network, including two streets labeled as Priority Corridors in need of safety improvements.

Luckily, candidates running to represent this district have a strong understanding of what can be done at the state level to increase access to bike lanes, sidewalks, and improve the safety of everyone.

Considering the large field of candidates in this special election, our AD39 committee decided to provide letter grades for candidates based on their responses and track record, with the possibility of making an endorsement for the special election runoff in June. Individual summaries for responding candidates are listed below, along with a link to each candidate’s full response to Bike The Vote L.A.

2018 CA Special Election Primary: Tuesday, April 3, 7am-8pm
Register to Vote: http://bit.ly/btvregister
Find your polling place: http://lavote.net/locator

AD39 Candidate: Yolie Anguiano

Yolie Anguiano is a familiar and engaged voice within safe streets advocacy in AD39. Anguiano lead the East San Fernando Valley Nature Parkway, providing much needed pedestrian improvements and improved access to open space in Arleta. She is a lifelong resident of the northern San Fernando Valley supplementing her community and volunteer service with work for State Assembly District 39, where she spoke out against alleged sexual harassment by Assemblymember Bocanegra. Anguiano’s response to Bike The Vote L.A. displays a superb understanding of the solutions needed to improve mobility options for Angelenos, including equitable funding of active transportation and full-fledged support for Vision Zero. We are confident that Anguiano will be a passionate advocate for safe streets at the state level if elected.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A

[Click HERE for Yolie Anguiano’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD39 Candidate: Luz Rivas

An engineer by education, Luz Rivas has a track record on safe streets during her tenure as a Public Works Commissioner. She provided support for many projects spearheaded by Pacoima Beautiful (a local advocacy group), including the Pacoima Wash initiative and the Pacoima Urban Greening Plan. As founder of non-profit, DIY Girls, Rivas has experience empowering women that is much-needed in the light of recent sexual misconduct allegations in Sacramento. Rivas’ response to Bike The Vote L.A. shows an excellent approach to improving mobility options in California, including support for complete streets funding and to clarify the rights of people on bikes under the vehicle code. Rivas is an inspiring candidate who has the prospect of being a strong supporter for safe streets within the California Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A-

[Click HERE for Luz Rivas’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD39 Candidate: Antonio Sanchez

Antonio Sanchez’s excellent understanding of the role that transportation takes in providing, healthy and sustainable communities is heavily informed by his expertise as an urban planner. In his response to Bike The Vote L.A., he highlighted his family’s own experience biking in the San Fernando Valley, noting both the regular harassment from motorists and the lack of cohesive bike infrastructure that is all too familiar to Angelenos who attempt travel by bike. Bike The Vote L.A. appreciates Sanchez’s commitments for equitable funding of active transportation and to improve the vehicle code’s clarity on the rights of people on bikes, which are evidence that he would make a vital supporter of safe streets in the California Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A-

[Click HERE for Antonio Sanchez’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD39 Candidate: Patrea Patrick

Documentary filmmaker and environmental activist Patrea Patrick identifies as a regular cyclist, and expresses enthusiastic support for more bicycle infrastructure and tax credits for people using active transportation. Her response to our questionnaire didn’t clearly show a depth of understanding of the challenges to provide safer streets within California, but she nevertheless offers a positive platform on active transportation for voters within the northeastern San Fernando Valley.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: B+

[Click HERE for Patrea Patrick’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

AD39 Candidate: Patty Lopez

Patty Lopez served as Assembly Member for District 39 from 2014-2016 and seeks to take back the seat in this 2018 special election. While Lopez did not establish a track record that was particularly supportive or responsive to local advocacy efforts on safe streets during her assembly term, we are encouraged by her response to our questionnaire, in which she displays a commitment to support a more sustainable transportation system that serves all Angelenos equitably.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: B

[Click HERE for Patty Lopez’s questionnaire response to Bike The Vote L.A.]

Bike the Vote L.A. volunteers made repeated efforts to reach all candidates in this race, but after multiple attempts, the Ricardo Benitez did not respond to our questionnaire. Due to a lack of information about his transportation platforms and his available track record, we gave each him a grade of C-. While Ricardo Benitez did not indicate an opposition to active transportation projects, we are disappointed that he did not respond to our questionnaire.

Candidate campaign page: https://www.yolieanguiano.com/

Yolie Anguiano is a familiar and engaged voice within safe streets advocacy in AD39. Anguiano lead the East San Fernando Valley Nature Parkway, providing much needed pedestrian improvements and improved access to open space in Arleta. She is a lifelong resident of the northern San Fernando Valley supplementing her community and volunteer service with work for State Assembly District 39, where she spoke out against alleged sexual harassment by Assemblymember Bocanegra. Anguiano’s response to Bike The Vote L.A. displays a superb understanding of the solutions needed to improve mobility options for Angelenos, including equitable funding of active transportation and full-fledged support for Vision Zero. We are confident that Anguiano will be a passionate advocate for safe streets at the state level if elected.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A

(See below for full candidate questionnaire response)

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California’s annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

I would move California forward by championing legislation that reduces the use of pollution emitting internal combustion engines. Consequently, there will be less single occupant vehicles on the road, which will curtail our transportation infrastructure costs. I would also strengthen legislation that promotes the benefits of creating healthier neighborhoods. Our children who live or go to school adjacent to freeways are victims of policies powered by the automotive and fuel industry. I will be a watchdog in the Assembly who strengthens the Sustainable Community Act of 2008. California is leading the way for the rest of the nation to follow, but we have a long way to go. I will not support developing more highways which only sustains/increases urban sprawl. Assembly District 39, similar to many other communities of color have been waiting for a leader with the political will to bring home safe and equitable multi-modal transportation system policies. It will enhance the health of all living things. This is where my focus as a legislator will be. I have the vigor to not be in the auto industry or any fuel lobbyist’s pocket.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Absolutely. In my district, children suffer from high rates of obesity and asthma. When the Active Transportation Program is fully funded the well-being of our children will be enhanced. Additionally, these active modes of transportation will create new behavior for children to continue to follow for decades to come. This can be the beginning step to strengthen a new culture that is not dependent on a vehicle for transportation.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Yes! I’m relieved to know this year Complete Streets became part of the Highway Design Manual. As a legislator I will be paying attention to the funded investment projects that will rebuild our roads to be safe and shared by all users.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Yes. However, when I use a bike to commute on LA streets, I feel safest when there is a protected bike lane. I would champion for our streets to have a network of protected bike lanes similar to Mexico DF’s Paseo de la Reforma.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

Yes, I’m a Vision Zero supporter. I want to strengthen policies that will result in 0 traffic related fatalities. However, on a different note I would want to see equitable citation reform.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

I am for public transit oriented development but since grass-root organizations like: L.A. Community Action Network, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, United Neighbors in Defense of Displacement/ Inquilinos Unidos, Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance, and the L.A. Black Worker Center who fight for the human rights of our most vulnerable populations are against it, I must stand with them. This solution has to include reassurance that it will meet housing demands of the houseless and those who can’t keep up with today’s cost of living. A policy that includes the proper requirements to prevent displacement and secure affordable housing in TODs will have my support.

Candidate campaign page: https://www.luzforassembly.com/

An engineer by education, Luz Rivas has a track record on safe streets during her tenure as a Public Works Commissioner. She provided support for many projects spearheaded by Pacoima Beautiful (a local advocacy group), including the Pacoima Wash initiative and the Pacoima Urban Greening Plan. As founder of non-profit, DIY Girls, Rivas has experience empowering women that is much-needed in the light of recent sexual misconduct allegations in Sacramento. Rivas’ response to Bike The Vote L.A. shows an excellent approach to improving mobility options in California, including support for complete streets funding and to clarify the rights of people on bikes under the vehicle code. Rivas is an inspiring candidate who has the prospect of being a strong supporter for safe streets within the California Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A-

(See below for full candidate questionnaire response)

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California’s annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

As an assemblymember, I will work to improve access to public transportation in the San Fernando Valley. In the 39th District, my vision is for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor to become a reality. The project will include result in a light rail system that will improve transportation options for residents of the East San Fernando Valley. This rail system will connect to other regional transportation systems such as the Metrolink. I will work with local elected officials to help create these sustainable transportation solutions.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

We need to assure that environmental justice communities are benefiting from cap and trade. I support using cap and trade funds to be allocated towards the ATP to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure especially in low-income neighborhoods.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Our streets should be planned and designed to allow safe access for various mobility modes such as walking and biking. I would support a ‘complete streets’ policy addition to SB1 to assure that the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists are incorporated in street and highway projects.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

The confusion on whether a bicyclist is allowed to use a full street lane needs to be clarified. We need to educated the public and law enforcement agencies to understand that law. I do support re-wording traffic law in a way that till clarify and educate the public of the right of bicyclists to ride safely.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

I would support implementation of automated speed enforcement that assures privacy and civil liberties are met.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

I support transit-oriented housing development. Transit hubs are where it makes sense to build housing and will result in less traffic and an increase in public transportation use. I would work to ensure that not all housing built near public transit is luxury housing. We need Californians of all income levels to benefit from transit-oriented housing.

Candidate campaign page: https://www.antoniosanchezca.com/

Antonio Sanchez’s excellent understanding of the role that transportation takes in providing, healthy and sustainable communities is heavily informed by his expertise as an urban planner. In his response to Bike The Vote L.A., he highlighted his family’s own experience biking in the San Fernando Valley, noting both the regular harassment from motorists and the lack of cohesive bike infrastructure that is all too familiar to Angelenos who attempt travel by bike. Bike The Vote L.A. appreciates Sanchez’s commitments for equitable funding of active transportation and to improve the vehicle code’s clarity on the rights of people on bikes, which are evidence that he would make a vital supporter of safe streets in the California Assembly.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: A-

(See below for full candidate questionnaire response)

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California’s annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

As a trained urban planner, I wholeheartedly support building a sustainable transportation system because it improves the standard of living for all residents, including communities of color. The East San Fernando Valley does not score well in the air quality index. With the Interstate 5, the 101 Hollywood freeway, and local highway network passing through the district, every resident lives within three miles of a highway.

The daily traffic congestion has an adverse impact on the health of residents due to gas emissions. Because of the nexus between traffic and adverse environmental impact on residents in my district and throughout Los Angeles, I helped lead the efforts with labor and affordable housing advocates to pass Measure JJJ. This measure incentivizes Transit Oriented Development (TOD) along major public transportation hubs.

As an Assemblymember, I will prioritize additional investment in transit-­‐oriented communities, so we can ensure public transportation becomes a major platform for commuters to reduce gas emissions. I’d also continue working with affordable housing and homelessness groups to ensure transit-­‐oriented communities do not displace low-­‐income Californians or centers for homeless services.

Moreover, although we are an extremely innovative state, most of our vulnerable communities often don’t have affordable access to the clean tech innovation that is helping to drive our economy and fight climate change. I know that AD39 has not received the same amount of monetary benefit and incentives as other more affluent assembly district and therefore still bears a lot of the burden caused by pollution. This must change. I will advocate to increase the amount of Cap-­‐and-­‐Trade dollars invested in AD39, particularly in our disadvantaged and low-­‐income neighborhoods.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Yes, I would support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program. Even though the City of LA has built 4,821 bike lane miles, I know that it is not enough. Cyclist continue to get into accidents and suffer injuries. There have been multi­‐million dollar settlements paid out by the city to cyclists—millions of dollars that could have been invested in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure while creating safe streets for our residents. As an Assemblymember, I would actively find ways to achieve safe biking and walking infrastructure in our communities.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Yes, I will support. As a teenager, I used to bike around my neighborhood and learned to map out and avoid the dangerous potholes. As a graduate student at UCLA, I used to commute on my bicycle from the San Fernando Valley to UCLA. I learned that commuting on my bicycle would either take the same amount of time or less than driving my automobile. Although not as frequent because of my campaign, my wife, daughter and I, are avid cyclists not just for exercise, but also as a form of transportation. We cycle to the grocery store, the park, and to dinner. We must traverse through unrepaired roads to get to the bike lanes, which in some cases are also in disrepair. It’s an issue that is important to me. Our communities deserve walk-­‐able and bike-­‐able streets. We need to ramp up efforts to prioritize sustainable transportation at the state level.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Yes. I support. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been flipped off, honked at, or purposely and dangerously tailed by an automobile close because I am riding my bicycle in a traffic lane. Sometimes it has happened when my wife, daughter, and I are riding together.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

Yes. I would support legislation like AB 342 (D-­‐Chiu) to allow pilot programs for ASE to begin and demonstrate to Californians their effectiveness in reducing collisions and traffic fatalities. I’d also be interested in the feasibility of raised junction traffic calming that builds awareness and habits for drivers to slow down at every intersection, which are often the most dangerous places for walkers and cyclists.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

Absolutely. Along with organizations like the LA County Bicycle Coalition, I have been at the forefront of the efforts to build transit-­‐oriented-­‐development. I served in the Build Better LA Coalition, a collaborative made up of organizations with national, statewide, regional, and local expertise engaging in grassroots organizing, community economic development, affordable housing development, public health, environmental justice, and policy and legal advocacy, to pass Measure JJJ.

The measure requires low-­‐cost housing to be included in developments receiving zone changes and General Plan Amendments. It also has a local-­‐hire component to ensure jobs go to members of our communities. As Los Angeles updates its 35 Community Plans, the measure will be a tool that advocates can use to ensure the plans promote affordability in low-­‐income communities. These same requirements need to be incorporated in state legislation to help ensure such construction serves the needs of the communities.

Candidate campaign page: https://heartfeltfilms.wixsite.com/patreapatrick-ca39

Documentary filmmaker and environmental activist Patrea Patrick identifies as a regular cyclist, and expresses enthusiastic support for more bicycle infrastructure and tax credits for people using active transportation. Her response to our questionnaire didn’t clearly show a depth of understanding of the challenges to provide safer streets within California, but she nevertheless offers a positive platform on active transportation for voters within the northeastern San Fernando Valley.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: B+

(See below for full candidate questionnaire response)

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California’s annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

To be working towards fossil free California we need more safe and direct bike lanes. A tax break/ refund for those using bicycles should be given. Bicyclists could be rewarded with credits. Affordable housing is part of this conversation that considers bicyclist get first claim on housing closer to work as they are not contributing to annual carbon emissions.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

YES

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

YES

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

YES

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

YES

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

YES. It is essential to have a clean California. All new construction of affordable housing should include traffic/ housing plans geared toward cleaner transit and to empower more residents to get around on transit, on foot, and by bike by having high-quality transit near to them. As Assembly-member I would work with the city as well so it would receive incentives to allocate land for this betterment of the community.

Candidate campaign page: http://pattylopez2018.com/

Patty Lopez served as Assembly Member for District 39 from 2014-2016 and seeks to take back the seat in this 2018 special election. While Lopez did not establish a track record that was particularly supportive or responsive to local advocacy efforts on safe streets during her assembly term, we are encouraged by her response to our questionnaire, in which she displays a commitment to support a more sustainable transportation system that serves all Angelenos equitably.

Bike The Vote L.A. 2018 Primary Grade: B

(See below for full candidate questionnaire response)

1. The California Air Resources Board estimates that transportation accounts for 37% of California’s annual carbon emissions. What actions would you take as assemblymember to ensure that California creates a more sustainable transportation system?

I believe in the full expansion of public transportation that is underway in Los Angeles County and I support the Bay Area Rapid Transit system.  I also favor the creation of a broader regional transportation system similar to the RER in Paris or Cross Rail in London that will connect all of the greater Los Angeles region.  I would ideally like a system that links the outer San Gabriel Valley, the northern San Fernando Valley, the Santa Clarita Valley, the Conejo Valley, the South Bay, Orange County, the Inland Empire (both Riverside and San Bernardino) to Downtown Los Angeles, Beverly Hills/Century City, Hollywood, Warner Center, and Santa Monica.  These new high speed routes would help alleviate traffic, improve the environment, and provide a non-carbon-emitting alternative for transit for individuals spread out across a vast area.  Moreover, it would help reduce stress in the lives of individuals who now find themselves spending hours behind the wheel on a daily basis.  It will significantly reduce vehicle miles for most southern Californians.

Such a system would do more than simply be for transportation.  Park and ride stations in more suburban areas could be used to create revenue for local projects such as the preservation of open space and outdoor recreational areas as well as their maintenance.  Shopping center developments could be encouraged with park and ride stations in order to add to the convenience of daily life for individuals with the idea of reducing trips.  California has a large suburban population and many people enjoy living in single family homes in suburban neighborhoods.  We have to create options that will help these residents minimize the amount of time that is spent in cars.  Stations in urban areas could be used to help support vital urban infill developments and would provide the necessary infrastructure to build high density housing projects including much needed affordable housing.  Creating these types of neighborhoods and encouraging developers to build this way will allow hundreds of thousands of Californians the option of not having to get into their cars.  Our current public transportation system is a good start but many of our lines (particularly light rail and busways) do not have the capacity for the type of high density residential development that we in Southern California want and need.  We need to make sure that we have a system that can support the increased flow of individuals.

However, I add a very important caveat.  The planning and construction of this transportation system needs to be done in a way that is sensitive to the communities that it will ultimately run through.  I have opposed the current high speed rail project.  This is not because I oppose high speed rail but because the planned route currently will go through the heart of my district above ground without concern to the noise, blight, and potential safety concerns it will cause for local communities.  The current plans disregard the potential economic harm for my own hometown of San Fernando.  The City of San Fernando is a small, working class, overwhelmingly Latino city in the northeast San Fernando Valley with a large immigrant population.  We take great pride in our city and have worked very hard over the years to build it up.  Today, our public spaces are kept clean and well-maintained and our little city is home to hundreds of thriving, small, independent businesses, the majority of which are minority owned.  If you come and visit our city, you will find our main business section filled with boutiques, restaurants, cafes, even a cupcakery.  And you will find numerous professional businesses (lawyers, accountants, doctors, dentists, realtors, bankers, investment brokers) that cater to working poor immigrants and Spanish speakers like myself who otherwise do not have access to often much needed professional services.

The current high speed rail route proposes to bisect our city in half, create irreparable damage to the local business community, and does not plan for a stop in San Fernando (where presumably commuters from across the north Valley could use to access downtown Los Angeles and other areas).  We need this changed and we need this fixed.  Progress should not come at the expense of others, especially others who generally lack the resources to fight back.  But the concept is applicable to everyone.  If the best route for high speed rail ran through the middle of the Golden Triangle of Beverly Hills and the high speed rail plan called for building the project as is currently proposed for San Fernando, I would stand in solidarity with the good people of Beverly Hills to oppose such a project because of the harms it would create.

A regional transportation system (like that which exists in Paris and is under construction in London) is much needed and the amount of time, money, and even some inconvenience will be well worth the investment.  However, this investment must be built in a way that is beneficial to all and protects communities that it seeks to serve.  Progress cannot come at the expense of individuals, especially the most vulnerable like those of us who live in the 39th District.  While many will certainly resist building, we can get a system built far more quickly and efficiently if we allow neighborhood input and we listen to the concerns of those who we build for.

2. Cap & trade funds offer a unique opportunity to prioritize sustainable transportation, particularly in low-income neighborhoods negatively affected by pollution caused by cars. Do you support dedicating a portion of cap and trade funds towards the Active Transportation Program to help fund better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure?

Yes. Improved pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure will help lower carbon emissions.  The goal of cap and trade is to allow some polluting externalities, tax those externalities, and then use the revenue to pump back into the environment. Using cap and trade funds for the Active Transportation Program is just plain common sense.

3. In Los Angeles, low-income communities of color are disproportionately burdened by the impacts of streets designed primarily for cars, without receiving proportional funding for their mobility modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Would you support legislation to add a ‘complete streets’ policy to SB 1, California’s newly augmented gas tax, to require all street and highway projects to incorporate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit-dependent communities?

Yes. Many people do not realize how large a segment of the population of the City of Los Angeles (erroneously known as a “car city”) is dependent upon public transportation and has no regular access to vehicular transportation. Many of these individuals are working poor and they cannot get to work and support their families without this public transportation. Incorporating the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit-dependent communities will help the poorest Californians.

When I served in the State Assembly, I was able to take a small but very practical step towards benefiting the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit-dependent communities.  When I first arrived, the district Assembly office was located in an office building located next to a freeway in Arleta.  There was not even a bus-stop for over a mile for those who did not have cars.  It was in an out of the way location to begin with and had little parking but basically, no constituent (or staffer for that matter) could walk, cycle, or take public transportation to the office.  I moved to the office space to downtown San Fernando.  Individuals who lived in the city could easily walk and bike there.  And public transportation ran right in front of it.  If you were transit-dependent, you were no longer cut off from your State Assembly office.

4. California law regarding the position bicyclists can occupy in a traffic lane is written in a confusing manner. The typical condition – in which the rightmost lane is too narrow for a car and a bicycle to travel safely side-by-side and the bicyclist is thus allowed to use the full lane – is written as an exception rather than the default standard. As a result, despite public information campaigns such as “Every Lane Is A Bike Lane,” there is frequently confusion from the general public and even law enforcement agencies on the legality of bicyclists riding in traffic lanes on California roads. Do you support re-wording traffic law to clarify the right of people on bikes to ride to maximize their visibility and safety?

Yes. Our law currently specifies that pedestrians take precedent over cars when it comes to pedestrian crosswalks and the right of way when cars are seeking to make turns. We ought to make this clear when it comes to cyclists. I would support legislation making it clear that a traffic lane is a cyclist lane unless otherwise specifically provided for (For example, as much as I support cycling, I don’t think it’s a good idea to allow bike riding on freeways or drivers understand that it was the exception to the rule). This would clear up confusion and save lives.

5. A recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board found that speeding was one of the most common factors in crashes, and one of the highest contributors towards fatal crashes. Despite this fact, speed limits across California are consistently raised due to a state law that sets speed limits at the 85th percentile of measured driving speeds. Do you support reform to the 85th percentile rule to give local jurisdictions the ability to set speed limits to better promote safe driving?

Yes. This is a common sense solution that will help us save lives.

6. California’s ongoing housing crisis challenges cities and communities to provide solutions towards meeting California’s demand for housing. Do you support efforts at the state level to accommodate smart growth, transit-oriented development, and sustainable communities that empower residents to get around on foot, by bike, and on quality public transit? What specific policies you would pursue to promote sustainable and affordable living for Californians?

Senator Scott Wiener’s bill, SB 827, is quite brilliant. It is a massive step in the right direction towards solving the affordable housing crisis, which is a top priority of my campaign.  However, I am not committing, yet, to supporting it in its current form. There are details regarding local control and State Constitutional issues that need to be hammered out still. But to answer the question directly, I do support policies that will enable the construction of more affordable housing oriented towards transit use.

All affordable housing created within larger developments must be completely integrated. Separate entrances created (with the exception of separate entrances that would have been created for a few units that would have existed in all market rate housing developments) for market-rate tenants and affordable housing tenants must be prohibited. There also cannot be use restrictions on common areas. I also support requiring that developments be designed to favor pedestrian access and integration with the cityscape. I am also willing to look into ways in which CEQA policies can be relaxed in certain, limited instances for the purpose of building more affordable housing.  Finally, I support creating affordable housing minimums for certain jurisdictions where transit oriented housing can be developed. Communities that do not build their required share could be subject to fines that would go into a state affordable housing trust. Communities that built more would be rewarded.