Metro has hired an outside consultant to assess its worth.
The transit agency is paying Los Angeles firm Aecom/Economic Research Associates $200,000 to make what Metro calls a "business case" for providing mass transit to the region.
The idea is to go beyond the rides the agency provides each day. Instead, Metro hopes to measure how much development has cropped up around its stations, how many new roads and parking lots won't need to be built and how much less greenhouse gas is being emitted from cars because of its trains and buses.
"Whenever you talk about expansion of transit, you're focused on cost. How much does this rail line cost, how much does this bus service cost?" said Nat Bottigheimer, Metro assistant general manager of planning. "We have not in the past measured benefits to go along with that. You could say the rail line costs $1 billion, but it creates $2 billion in value."
This becomes especially relevant because House Republicans have threatened to cut the $150 million contribution to Metro's capital building program. That could unravel $150 million more in contributions from local jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the jurisdictions are balking at paying $72 million more in subsidies to close a gap in next year's Metro budget.
The consultant's study was in the works before the latest threats began, Bottigheimer said. The results, though, aren't expected until October, after the start of the fiscal year. Bottigheimer said the study is worth pursuing, despite the timing and cost.
The region was reminded of Metro's value in February 2010. After snowstorms shut down aboveground Metro service and the federal government for several days, the Office of Personnel Management estimated the closures cost $100 million in lost productivity per day. Advocates pointed to that as a reason why the region needs to keep Metro running.
But Bottigheimer said Metro needs something more systematic.
Metro's stations, buses and trains have been estimated to be worth about $25 billion. But the broader value hasn't been evaluated recently, Bottigheimer said. "We don't want to a Ph.D. research estimate. We don't want to do a back-of-the-envelope one. We want to do something that is rigorous, doable in a couple months' time frame."
