StreetSmart

StreetSmart 15: Homes Before Highways

In StreetSmart 15, Damien Newton spoke with Yesenia Perez of the Greenlining Institute about the connection between freeway expansion and California's housing crisis. Perez discussed research behind her recent story at Streetsblog [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2025/12/03/displacement-and-dollars-down-the-drain-the-data-behind-californias-highway-expansion-crisis], which found that more than 800 homes have been demolished in the past six years to make way for highway projects, highlighting how transportation investments can reduce housing supply and destabilize communities. The conversation explored how new state data, made available through SB 695, is helping quantify these impacts for the first time. Perez said the Greenlining Institute's "Homes Before Highways [https://greenlining.org/homes-before-highways/]" project aims to make that data more accessible, allowing residents and policymakers to better understand where displacement is occurring. Newton and Perez also discussed how these impacts are often overlooked in housing debates, which tend to focus on new construction rather than homes lost to infrastructure projects. Perez argued that clearer data is helping shift the conversation toward real community impacts. Looking ahead, Perez emphasized the need for policies that prioritize avoiding displacement, including alternatives to highway widening and requirements to replace lost housing. Both agreed that aligning transportation spending with California's housing and climate goals will be critical moving forward. A lovingly edited transcript of our discussion can be found below. And last, catch up on old episodes or subscribe: Streetsblog CAL [https://cal.streetsblog.org/category/streetsmart], Apple [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/streetsmart/id1795541010], Spotify [https://open.spotify.com/show/7ceumwus56s3oZhaIET7EQ], Libsyn [https://sites.libsyn.com/565515]. Damien Newton: As I said in the intro, I'm here with Yesenia Perez from the Greenlining Institute, and we're going to be talking about displacement issues and the Institute's "Homes Before Highways" program. If her name sounds familiar, that's a good thing—it might be because back in December she wrote a piece for Streetsblog California, which we'll link to in the text accompanying this podcast, called "Displacement in Dollars Down the Drain: The Data Behind California's Highway Expansion Crisis." I should note she didn't originally write it for Streetsblog California—she wrote it for the Greenlining Institute, and they were kind enough to let us cross-post it. So, thank you for being here today, Yesenia. Let's start by talking a little bit about that article—what it covered, since it was based on a lot of research—and then we can get into the Homes Before Highways program you've been working on. Yesenia Perez: Yeah, happy to start with an overview of the article. The core argument I made back in December is that freeway expansion isn't just a transportation issue—it's also a housing issue. It's one of the most overlooked drivers of California's housing crisis. Based on data released in the past year or so, we know that over 800 homes were destroyed to make way for highway expansion projects in just the last six years. Across the state, highway projects have divided communities for decades. A good example is the proposed 101/92 connector in San Mateo, where around 33 homes—and dozens of families—could be displaced in a region already struggling with some of the highest housing costs in the country. The core point is that if California is serious about solving its housing crisis, it has to consider how transportation investments affect housing supply and community stability—even when projects don't ultimately get built, like the 710. The state needs to account for the long-term impacts of investing in freeway expansion. Damien Newton: Yeah, and for anyone not familiar with the L.A. area, there was a decades-long plan to connect the 710 and the 210 freeways. People called it the "unfinished freeway." Metro and Caltrans finally abandoned it around 2018 after years of opposition. But as part of that project, they had purchased a bunch of homes back in the '70s. Many of those homes are still vacant or in poor condition. Some were occupied during the pandemic, and now there are ongoing issues around how to treat those residents fairly. It's been a real mess for the northwest San Gabriel Valley—and it's still being dealt with today. Yesenia Perez: Yeah, and one more thing to highlight is the cost. Even after the project was canceled, Caltrans has spent something like $17 million just maintaining and guarding those empty properties—homes that could be housing people. Damien Newton: Right, and that's something we've covered a lot. We've interviewed residents in those homes multiple times—usually once a year on our SGV Connect podcast. Joe Linton, our Streetsblog L.A. editor, has also done extensive reporting on freeway widenings and their housing impacts. It's something we talk about often, but it still gets lost in broader conversations—even among journalists. There's a section in your article called "Displacement by Design," and it really stood out to me. Legislation like SB 695 has helped quantify that impact, and the numbers are still shocking. Between 2018 and 2023 alone, we're talking about hundreds of homes and businesses—most in L.A. County. So how has your work evolved since that article? Yesenia Perez: SB 695 was really foundational for our work. It required Caltrans to report on highway expansion impacts—lane miles, emissions, and displacement. For decades, we didn't have a statewide picture of how many homes and businesses were being demolished. The data shows that in the last three decades alone, there have been around 10,000 displacements in California tied to highway projects. But it also shows the limits of transparency—it only captures a narrow window and doesn't reflect the full history or future impacts. That's why we created the Homes Before Highways site—to make this data visible and accessible. Between 2018 and 2024, more than 850 homes and businesses were demolished, alongside about 760 miles of highway lanes added. To put that in perspective, that's longer than the distance from Oregon to Mexico. Our map helps people visualize where these impacts are happening in their own communities. Damien Newton: And I think there's real value in that, especially since so much of the housing conversation is focused on building new housing—particularly near transit. The discussion about housing lost to freeway expansion often gets overlooked. When you talk to policymakers or advocates, do you feel like this data is changing the conversation? Yesenia Perez: I do think it is. When people can actually see where displacement is happening, the conversation shifts from abstract policy to real community impacts. You start to see how families are pushed farther from job centers when housing is demolished, and the connection between transportation and housing becomes clear. You can't solve a housing crisis while demolishing homes for freeway expansion. The next step is for policymakers to ask: now that we have this data, what are we going to do with it? Damien Newton: And I think a lot of people assume this kind of displacement only happened decades ago—not that it's still happening today. Once people realize it is, there's usually a strong reaction. So what do you see as the solution? Should we stop highway expansions altogether, or rethink how we approach them? Yesenia Perez: There's no single solution—it will take a range of actions. California has already made commitments through its climate action plans, including acknowledging these harms and calling for policies to reduce displacement. But we haven't seen those policies fully implemented yet. One key recommendation is to change how projects are evaluated. For example, requiring alternatives that avoid displacement—like converting existing lanes into bus or express lanes instead of widening highways. And if displacement can't be avoided, there should be requirements to replace lost housing, ideally with affordable housing in the same community, so there's no net loss. Damien Newton: That makes sense. We're getting close to the end, so I'll ask for any closing thoughts. And just a reminder to listeners: links to everything we discussed will be available with the podcast at cal.streetsblog.org. Yesenia Perez: One thing I want to highlight is that while these conversations can feel discouraging, there's also a lot of positive work happening. In the latest State Transportation Improvement Program cycle, over 300 safety and active transportation projects applied for funding—but most didn't receive it, even though they scored highly. Meanwhile, regions continue proposing highway widening projects that cost more and can worsen congestion. So it's important to recognize that communities want these safer, more sustainable projects—they're ready to go. The question is whether the state will prioritize them. At the end of the day, this is about aligning transportation investments with California's stated goals—on housing affordability, climate action, and equity. The state has made strong commitments. Now it's about following through and making sure investments support those goals instead of undermining them. Damien Newton: Great. Thanks so much for your time today. This is clearly an issue we'll keep covering—freeway expansion has been a major Streetsblog theme for years. But as you pointed out, there are also positive developments worth highlighting. Yesenia Perez: Thank you so much.

StreetSmart 14.2 - The Governor's Race and High-Speed Rail

Following up on yesterday's podcast [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2026/03/04/streetsmart-14-1-what-to-look-for-from-the-2026-legislature], today Damien Newton speaks with Adriana Rizzo of Californians for Electric Rail [https://calelectricrail.org/] and Eli Lipmen of Move California [https://www.movecalifornia.org/] about two major statewide issues: the California governor's race and the future of high-speed rail. The conversation focuses on what transportation advocates should look for in gubernatorial candidates, including commitments to transit funding, affordability, project delivery reform, and standing up to federal attacks on rail and transit. The group also discusses the newly released high-speed rail business plan, potential legislative changes to funding restrictions, and the broader political and fiscal challenges facing transit agencies across the state. A full transcript of the podcast follows below. Edited Transcript Damien Newton: As I mentioned in the intro, earlier this week's podcast focused on legislation specific to the organizations involved. Today, I'm back with Adriana from Californians for Electric Rail and Eli from Move California to talk about two big statewide stories: the governor's race and high-speed rail. Before we start, a quick note: we all work with nonprofits, and this podcast is produced by a nonprofit. We won't be endorsing any candidates today. Streetsblog and Move California cannot make political endorsements, and while Californians for Electric Rail isn't currently a 501(c)(3), we're steering clear of endorsements to keep things clean. If the first letter of every sentence we say happens to spell out a candidate's name, that's purely coincidental. Since we're not talking endorsements, let's talk about what we should look for in candidates. Personally, I often find that when candidates share personal stories about how transit or bicycling has impacted their lives, it gives insight beyond policy statements. That's not foolproof — one of my favorite former L.A. councilmembers, Bill Rosendahl, famously hadn't ridden a bike since childhood — but it's one lens. Eli Lipmen: That's a great segue. Part of our mission as nonprofit leaders is getting candidates onto transit and talking about it from a rider's perspective. Lived experience matters. In this race, though, everything is being framed around affordability and the federal administration. That actually works in our favor. Transportation and housing are the number one and number two expenses for most households. Affordable housing near high-quality transit is central to affordability. This is a kitchen-table issue. It might not dominate headlines every day, but people talk about their commute, car payments, insurance costs. We need multimodal options, and we need a governor who will champion them. We also have a huge opportunity right now. California is building high-speed rail — something almost no other state is doing. What happens under the next governor will be critical for transportation project delivery, active transportation, and safety. Ten people die every day in California traffic crashes. That's unacceptable, and leadership matters. Adriana Rizzo: Transit is key to affordability — and also to standing up to Trump, or at least coping with his administration. We've seen federal transit funds clawed back. High-speed rail has long been a target. Supporting high-speed rail is a way for California to assert its priorities. When the administration announced its intent to revoke funding in early 2025, we helped organize a protest at Union Station. It was one of the first major public pushbacks, and it mattered symbolically. Standing up for high-speed rail and making sure it succeeds is a way the next governor can defend California's vision. Eli Lipmen: That protest definitely rattled them. There's also an immigration angle. During ICE raids in Los Angeles, we saw a 15% drop in transit ridership in one month. Fear impacts ridership, traffic, and system operations. These federal actions ripple through transportation. Meanwhile, Congress must reauthorize the federal transportation bill this year. Caltrans released draft principles that didn't even mention transit operations funding — which is the number one issue for agencies facing fiscal cliffs. That omission was frustrating. Adriana Rizzo: This isn't just California. SEPTA, Chicago Transit — it's a national crisis. In California, agencies are scrambling, and the Bay Area is pursuing a ballot measure to stabilize funding. But historically, state and federal governments provided more operating support than they do now. Since the pandemic, transit advocates have had to fight annually to get operating funds into the state budget. That needs to change. SB 1 is also up for reauthorization in 2027 — another major issue for the next governor. Eli Lipmen: If any gubernatorial campaigns are listening: we have a questionnaire ready. We'd love candidates to talk about their relationship to transit and active transportation. We're even planning a transportation-focused debate. This is something every Californian deals with daily — cost, congestion, safety. Candidates should treat it that way. Adriana Rizzo: Another big issue is project delivery reform. We need new transit lines and service improvements, but costs are escalating. Tariffs, federal funding instability, permitting challenges — it's harder than ever. Reform requires political capital. Dealing with utilities, permitting, entrenched interests — that's tough. But if we want projects delivered on time and at reasonable cost, leadership is essential. High-Speed Rail Discussion Damien Newton: Quick note before we pivot: there's ongoing news involving the High-Speed Rail Authority CEO. We're recording March 2, and things may change before this airs, so we won't speculate. But we're not ignoring it. Let's talk about the new business plan. Adriana Rizzo: The big headline is that the Central Valley initial operating segment is no longer fully funded because of the loss of $4 billion in federal funds. They're also considering removing the Merced stop from the initial segment, potentially adding it later. That will be controversial. More exciting: they're discussing a potential Los Angeles connection by 2040, assuming funding. That includes reducing tunneling between Palmdale and Burbank and sharing more track with Metrolink, including possibly on the Antelope Valley Line. This aligns with our push to electrify that corridor. There's also SB 1411, sponsored by Senator Henry Stern, which would lift restrictions limiting high-speed rail spending to the Merced–Bakersfield segment. That could accelerate work in Southern California or toward the Bay Area. It's promising — but the devil is in the details. We don't want the Central Valley segment abandoned, and we don't want funds diverted to unrelated projects. Eli Lipmen: This is California's opportunity to prove we can still build big projects. Accelerating connections to major urban centers makes sense because that's where ridership is strongest. We're already investing in complementary infrastructure. Aligning those investments is smart strategy. Damien Newton: We've been at this for a while, so let's wrap. Thanks to both of you. Links to your organizations and related coverage will be included alongside this podcast. If you're not listening through Streetsblog California, head to the site for the full list of resources. Thanks again — and I'm sure we'll talk again soon.

StreetSmart 14.1 - What to look for from the 2026 Legislature

*]:pointer-events-auto scroll-mt-[calc(var(--header-height)+min(200px,max(70px,20svh)))]" dir="auto" tabindex="-1" data-turn-id= "request-698cf232-0d38-83e8-8a26-70865a1647f6-5" data-testid= "conversation-turn-88" data-scroll-anchor="true" data-turn= "assistant"> Episode 14.1 of the Streetsmart Podcast [https://cal.streetsblog.org/category/streetsmart] focuses on the active transportation and transit legislation moving—or stalling—in Sacramento. Much of this year's legislative energy around safety for bicyclists and pedestrians is centered on regulating e-bikes, including efforts to distinguish legal e-bikes from high-speed electric motorcycles. CalBike's Jared Sanchez, reviews three pieces of legislation one that deals with licensing and another with clarifying what is and isn't an e-bike, and legislation that would allow municipalities room to create separate speed limits for different vehicles. You can read Streetsblog's coverage of e-bike legislation here [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2026/02/18/new-e-bike-legislation-that-includes-mandatory-license-plates-panned-by-bike-safety-advocates], here [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2026/02/19/calbike-enforce-existing-laws-dont-create-new-nuisance-ones], and here [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2026/02/23/new-legislation-backed-by-bike-safety-groups-proposed-to-regulate-e-motos-e-bikes]. Also joining the conversation were Eli Lipmen with Move California [https://www.movecalifornia.org/] and Adriana Rizzo with Californians for Electric Rail [https://calelectricrail.org/]. Lipmen advocated expanding automated bus-lane enforcement to include bike lanes, creating a statewide transit stop registry to improve data consistency. Rizzo expressed frustration over delayed state reports that have stalled broader transit reform proposals. While a few promising bills are advancing, larger structural fixes—especially around transit governance and project delivery—may have to wait. A lovingly edited transcript of our discussion can be found below. And last, catch up on old episodes or subscribe: Streetsblog CAL [https://cal.streetsblog.org/category/streetsmart], Apple [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/streetsmart/id1795541010], Spotify [https://open.spotify.com/show/7ceumwus56s3oZhaIET7EQ], Libsyn [https://sites.libsyn.com/565515]. Damien Newton: As mentioned in our pre-show, I'm here with Adriana, Eli, and Jared. In the first half of our podcast, we're going to talk about legislation that is moving—or not moving—in Sacramento that will have larger impacts. We discussed a lot of this offline before we hit record. Jared wanted to talk about some of the e-bike and e-moto bills we've been covering at Streetsblog. I'll link to those stories, including CalBike's action alert, which I think is still live on one of them. Jared, why don't you briefly describe what those pieces of legislation are and how CalBike feels about them? Jared Sanchez: A lot of the political energy around biking and walking in Sacramento—at least in the legislative space—is going toward e-bikes, and not much else, unfortunately. We're co-sponsoring SB 1167 alongside PeopleForBikes, Streets For All, and Streets Are For Everyone, authored by Senator Blakespear. The bill is trying to better distinguish what e-bikes are legally and what other devices are—devices that are really illegal and being operated on our streets. These are often called "e-motos," often go beyond 30 miles per hour, and skirt registration or insurance requirements. The bill aims to better define what is legal on our roads and tackle the e-moto issue—making sure these devices aren't masquerading as e-bikes. It goes after manufacturers and sellers by requiring stronger disclosure documents at the point of purchase and adjusts the vehicle code to better classify these out-of-class devices into appropriate motor vehicle categories, such as mopeds or motor-driven cycles. That would require them to be licensed, registered with the DMV, and insured—just like any other motor vehicle. This bill does other smaller things as well, but we're co-sponsoring it because we see it as the best response to what we're seeing on the roads. Many other bills focus on new limitations or prohibitions on legal e-bikes, and we don't agree that's the right approach. To solve the underlying issue—illegal devices—we need clearer definitions. One of the other important bills is AB 1942. It would require Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes to have a license plate affixed. Damien Newton: Can you briefly explain what Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes are? Jared Sanchez: A Class 2 e-bike can go up to 20 miles per hour and allows throttle use—you can pedal, but you can also reach top speed using just the throttle. A Class 3 e-bike can go up to 28 miles per hour. The throttle works up to 20 mph, but beyond that it must be pedal-assisted. Riders must be 16 or older and wear a helmet to ride a Class 3. This bill focuses on the faster devices. Bike East Bay and others, including us, are concerned about licensing. Bicycle licensing hasn't gained support in California, and there hasn't been much interest from the DMV in creating such a program. We were surprised by the bill and hope to work with the author to amend it. Another bill we're watching would require additional written descriptions of e-bike classes, add speedometers to all e-bikes, update lighting systems, and—most concerning to us—create new speed requirements for sidewalks and Class IV bike lanes. It would give local agencies authority to set speed limits from 15 to 20 mph on bike trails and lanes. Many cities already have discretion to do this. We see this as overreach and a distraction from the real issues—illegal e-motos and traffic violence caused by cars. We don't need more enforcement targeting people riding legal e-bikes. Unfortunately, there hasn't been strong legislative energy this year around funding active transportation, addressing traffic violence, or expanding the Active Transportation Program. Most energy has gone toward e-bikes. Damien Newton: There still seems to be confusion—partly because of marketing—about what is an e-bike and what is essentially a small electric motorcycle marketed as an e-bike. Clarifying that could solve a lot of issues. Jared Sanchez: Exactly. That's why we're co-sponsoring SB 1167. The Mineta Transportation Institute released a study recommending better distinctions between legal e-bikes and illegal electric motorcycles. Many of the other bills we're seeing weren't part of those recommendations. Eli Lipmen: Last year, a pilot program allowed cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles to use bus-mounted cameras to enforce parking violations in transit-only lanes. It's been successful—Los Angeles generated about $16 million in ten months. The new bill would make the program permanent and extend it. It would also add stopping or parking in a bike lane as a violation. Surprisingly, that's not clearly defined as a stopping violation under state law right now. This bill would fix that. We're also supporting legislation that would ease regulatory burdens in coastal zones, making it easier to build bike paths and improve transit without lengthy Coastal Commission processes. And there's a transit stop registry bill that would create a statewide unique identifier for every transit stop. It's wonky, but important. Right now, data is inconsistent across agencies and mapping apps. This bill would standardize it and improve the rider experience. Adriana Rizzo: Last year, advocates engaged heavily in the SB 125 Task Force, which was supposed to deliver recommendations to transform transit. The final report came out late—around New Year's—leaving little time to draft legislation. One recommendation was to grow state capacity for transit design and engineering. Studies show in-house staff can be much cheaper than consultants. California has thousands of employees working on highways, but very few focused on rail and transit. We also explored utility permit streamlining, since delays and cost overruns are often driven by utility coordination. But we weren't able to secure authors before the deadline. Another delayed study involves governance reform for the LOSSAN corridor—the Los Angeles to San Diego rail corridor. The report was due in February and hasn't been released. That makes it difficult to pursue reforms this year, even as we prepare for the Olympics. Damien Newton: So in short, some targeted legislation is moving, but broader structural reforms may have to wait—possibly for a new governor and a new legislative session.

StreetSmart Episode 13: Marty Beard, CEO of Hayden AI

On this episode of StreetSmart, Streetsblog California editor Damien Newton talks with Marty Beard, CEO of Hayden.AI, about the rapid expansion of automated camera enforcement on buses and city vehicles across California and beyond. Hayden.AI's technology uses forward-facing cameras mounted on transit buses and parking enforcement vehicles to identify cars blocking bus lanes, bus stops, and bike lanes. Beard explains how the data has repeatedly surprised cities, revealing widespread violations — and how enforcement has led to faster bus speeds, fewer collisions, and more reliable transit service. The conversation also explores how camera-based enforcement fits into post-2020 efforts to reduce police traffic stops, addresses common concerns about data privacy and surveillance, and examines why cities see these programs as performance tools rather than revenue generators. Beard also previews emerging uses for the technology, including identifying unpermitted construction that disrupts transit operations. During the podcast Damien references coverage of Hayden AI at Streetsblog and Santa Monica Next several times. Since Next syndicates Streetsblog's coverage of related issues, you can see all of both publications coverage at Santa Monica Next's page for Hayden AI. [https://santamonicanext.org/?s=Hayden+AI] A transcript of this podcast can be found below. It has been lightly edited for readibility and clarity. Damien Newton So we're recording this podcast remotely on Zencastr. I'm Damien Newton, and I'm joined today by Marty Beard, CEO of Hayden.AI. Thanks so much for being here. Marty Beard Thank you very much for having me. Damien Newton I'll be honest with listeners: in the pre-show I told Marty that Hayden has a lot going on in California right now. Rather than firing off a bunch of narrow questions, I figured it made more sense to let him lay it all out. We've covered some of this work in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica on our local Streetsblog sites, but not as much yet on Streetsblog California. So if you're not following those city sites, you might not have the full picture. Marty, why don't you start by giving us a short overview of what Hayden.AI is and what you're working on right now? Marty Beard That sounds great. At our core, we're a technology company — you could call us an AI company, and that's true — but more importantly, we're a public transit company. Everything we do is focused 100 percent on improving public transit. The way we do that is by installing cameras on transit buses, parking enforcement vehicles, and similar fleets, and pairing that hardware with our software. The goal is simple: keep bus lanes clear, keep bike lanes clear, and allow public transit to do what it's supposed to do. That's our entire mission. We don't do anything outside of that. We operate across the U.S., internationally, and of course here in California. In California specifically, we work with LA Metro, AC Transit, and cities like Sacramento, Culver City, and Santa Monica. While the locations vary, the common thread is always the same: how can technology help improve bus speed, reduce collisions, and ensure bike lanes are usable? Damien Newton Most of the coverage we've done has focused on your cameras being installed on buses — and now sometimes on parking enforcement vehicles — to help cities enforce bus lane and bike lane laws without relying on traditional police traffic stops. Is that a fair way to describe it? Marty Beard Yeah, exactly. Agencies bring us in to do just that. The cameras are installed inside the vehicle — usually a bus — and they're designed to do one thing only: look ahead at bus lanes, bus stops, and bike lanes, and identify vehicles that are illegally parked or blocking access. The system does not identify people. It doesn't analyze broader traffic patterns. It's optimized for a very narrow task: identifying a vehicle obstructing transit infrastructure. When a violation is detected, an image or short clip of the vehicle is captured. That information is then reviewed by the appropriate enforcement agency, which makes the final decision about whether a citation is issued. The benefit is that it's extremely efficient, very accurate, and — most importantly — it works. Damien Newton I covered the Santa Monica pilot when that report came out, and we used the phrase "an epidemic of scofflaws" in the headline because the numbers were pretty staggering. This was along just seven bus routes, over a short pilot period, and the number of vehicles blocking bus and bike lanes was astronomical. Are you seeing similar results elsewhere — that moment of "wow, this is happening all the time"? Marty Beard One hundred percent. There are two things that happen almost universally. First, agencies are surprised by the sheer volume of violations. They know it's a problem, but once they start seeing daily, route-by-route data, the scale becomes undeniable. The second thing is what happens after the data starts coming in over time. Agencies can look at trends and ask: are we changing behavior? And the answer is yes. Bus speeds improve, collisions go down, on-time performance gets better. In some cases, the improvements are dramatic — we've seen 20 percent or more increases in bus speeds on certain routes. That network effect is huge. So first it's "wow, this problem is worse than we thought," and then it's "wow, this is actually working." Damien Newton I imagine timing plays a role here too. After 2020 and the George Floyd protests, there was a push to reduce police interactions for minor infractions, including traffic enforcement. A lot of these so-called nuisance laws just weren't being enforced anymore. So now you have a way to enforce them without those interactions — and maybe also correct some bad habits people picked up along the way. Does that sound right? Marty Beard I think you nailed it. It's also safer for enforcement staff. Parking enforcement is a tough job — you're not exactly the most popular person in the neighborhood. Technology helps because it's consistent and focused. There's this perception sometimes that cameras are spying on everything, but that's really not what this is. The camera is optimized for one specific task: is a vehicle where it shouldn't be? If there's a legitimate reason for that vehicle to be there, the citation won't be enforced. But if someone blocks a bus lane to grab a latte and 45 people can't board the bus, that's a real problem. This helps address that. Damien Newton Last week, our Streetsblog Los Angeles editor noticed something interesting during a SCAG presentation. LA Metro quietly announced plans to expand its AI camera program from 100 cameras to 400. No details beyond a slide. Can you tell us anything about that, or do I need to bug Metro's PR team? Marty Beard You'll need to ask LA Metro directly. What I can say is that we love working with them, and the results speak for themselves. But it's best for them to talk about their plans. Damien Newton They were one of your first major transit agency partners, right? Marty Beard Yes, absolutely. Along with places like New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., LA Metro has been an anchor customer for us. Damien Newton I just want to note for listeners: those are also all cities with Streetsblog sites — purely coincidental, I'm sure. Are you in Boston too? Marty Beard I can't comment on that one. But yes, we do follow Streetsblog very closely — clearly our expansion strategy. Damien Newton We're eyeing San Diego for a Streetsblog site in the next year or two, so keep that in mind. Marty Beard That's actually where I live. Damien Newton Well, there you go — I had no idea. Marty Beard The company's headquartered in the Bay Area, but we're spread across California and the East Coast. Damien Newton Welcome to 2026 — we don't all have to be in the same city anymore. Are there any other expansions or developments you can talk about? Marty Beard What I can say is that we've passed 2,100 installations, and every market we're in is expanding. We're also seeing growing interest beyond bus lanes — particularly bike lanes and parking enforcement vehicles, like in Santa Monica. And we're starting to look at new use cases: where else can this kind of focused, privacy-respecting technology help public transit? Damien Newton Cities do generate some revenue from this, but as I understand it, that's not the primary goal. The goal is improving bus speed and bike lane reliability. I'd guess transit riders and cyclists are overwhelmingly supportive, while drivers are more skeptical. Marty Beard Our biggest supporters are transit riders and cyclists, by far. What surprised me when I entered this space is how little agencies focus on revenue. What they care about is performance: speed, reliability, safety. As a vendor, that means you have to prove it works — and show the data. Damien Newton I don't bike as much anymore, but just walking or running along corridors in Santa Monica where the cameras are installed, things feel noticeably calmer. Less honking, fewer blocked lanes. It's tangible. Marty Beard We see that reflected in the data as well. Damien Newton One concern that always comes up with camera technology is data privacy — especially with fears about data being shared beyond its original purpose. So what happens to the data you collect? Who owns it? Who can access it? Marty Beard It's a completely valid concern. Hayden does not own the data. The transit agencies do. We only collect the violation itself — typically a short video clip or still image of a vehicle obstructing a bus lane, bus stop, or bike lane. No facial recognition. No human identification. Nothing beyond that. The data is captured on the vehicle and sent to the enforcement agency, which makes the final decision. We don't issue tickets. If a government agency asked us for broad location data, we wouldn't even have it. Damien Newton Before we wrap up — is there anything we didn't cover that you want to mention? Marty Beard One emerging area is road construction. Cities want to know: is construction permitted? Is it happening where it's supposed to? Is it unexpectedly blocking transit? Our cameras are starting to help identify unpermitted or unplanned obstructions so agencies can respond more quickly. Damien Newton So the cameras are catching unpermitted construction? Marty Beard Exactly. It's a newer area, but one that could really benefit transit riders. Damien Newton That's fascinating — not something I'd even thought of. Marty, thanks so much for your time. Next time I'm in San Diego, I'll reach out and we'll grab coffee. Marty Beard Sounds great. Thanks again.

StreetSmart 12: The AMA with Damien Newton

In a special AMA episode of the Street Smart podcast, Streetsblog California editor Damien Newton reflects on his first year leading the site while answering reader-submitted questions on politics, transportation policy, and advocacy. Newton opens by thanking listeners for helping the nonprofit newsroom reach its annual fundraising goal, then explains why, as head of a 501(c)(3), he cannot endorse candidates or say who he is voting for in upcoming elections. Newton discusses key transportation debates facing California, including skepticism toward an Uber-backed ballot measure he argues is framed as a safety initiative while limiting legal accountability in crash cases. He contrasts that with the growing urgency of transit funding measures, particularly in the Bay Area, as agencies face looming fiscal cliffs with limited federal support. Asked which cities are doing the best job on street safety, Newton highlights Santa Monica, Long Beach, Oakland, and San Francisco for progress on protected bike lanes and automated enforcement, while sharply criticizing Los Angeles for resisting voter-approved safety reforms. He also identifies e-bikes as one of the most misunderstood transportation issues in the state, citing inconsistent laws and lack of clear guidance. Throughout the episode, Newton emphasizes the power of grassroots advocacy, urging listeners to stay engaged with local officials, organized campaigns, and community groups. He closes by reaffirming Streetsblog's mission to connect transportation, climate, public space, and equity—and by thanking readers and listeners for their continued support. A transcript of the podcast can be found below. During the podcast, Newton promises some links to old stories: Streetsblog interviews Antonio Villaraigosa in 2012: part 1 [https://la.streetsblog.org/2012/07/24/the-villaraigosa-interview-i-building-a-new-transportation-system], part 2 [https://la.streetsblog.org/2012/07/25/the-villaraigosa-interview-ii-the-subway-mayor-triumphant]. First coverage [https://cal.streetsblog.org/2026/01/06/ubers-controversial-ballot-measure-seeks-caps-on-lawyers-fees-in-traffic-crashes] of Uber ballot measure. Damien's interview introducing Chris Greenspon [https://la.streetsblog.org/2022/04/28/sgv-connect-92-meet-chris-greenspon]. SGV Weekly Podcast [https://sgvweekly.com/]. Street Smart Podcast AMA – Lightly Edited Transcript Speaker: Damien Newton Damien Newton As promised during our annual fundraising drive, I'm doing an AMA based on questions you all sent in. I'm Damien Newton, editor of Streetsblog California. This is our first Street Smart podcast of the year—and the guest is me. We did reach our annual fundraising goal. Thank you—that's awesome. So here we go. Question one: Who are you voting for governor? Damien Newton We got a lot of political questions, so I'm going to address this upfront. Streetsblog California is part of a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and I'm its executive director. On an official podcast, saying who I'm voting for would legally be considered an endorsement—so I can't do that. I can share professional impressions. The only current gubernatorial candidate I've ever met is Antonio Villaraigosa. When he was mayor of Los Angeles, his office was responsive, regularly provided quotes, and he did a long sit-down interview with me and one of our interns at the time. I'll post links to that coverage with this podcast. If you run into me on the street and want to ask who I'm voting for, I'm happy to tell you—but not here. Similar questions came up about Phil Brock, Eric Garcetti, and others. I know it's an AMA, but nonprofit rules still apply, and I take them seriously. Question two: What surprised you most in your first year as editor? Damien Newton Tomorrow marks my one-year anniversary as editor. I'm not easily surprised by politicians saying one thing and doing another—but something did surprise me. My predecessor, Melanie Curry, would listen to entire California Transportation Commission meetings. I tried to do that, and honestly, I can't sit through the self-congratulation. The first few hours are often commissioners thanking each other and legislators endlessly. It's mind-numbing. I usually don't start listening until later sessions. That said, the CTC does important work, and we cover it—sometimes positively, sometimes critically. I just can't sit through all the applause. Question three: Thoughts on upcoming ballot measures? Damien Newton It's early, and we don't know all the details yet. My gut feeling is that the Uber-backed ballot measure we covered recently is probably bad—maybe because Uber is pushing it. It claims to be about safety, but it caps what lawyers can recover in crash-related lawsuits. That doesn't strike me as a meaningful safety measure. I'm skeptical. In contrast, Bay Area transit funding measures—even without full details—are likely necessary. Transit agencies face real fiscal cliffs. The state's one-time infusion helps, but long-term funding will require local taxes. Federal help isn't coming. We're going to have to do this ourselves. Question four: Which California city is doing the best job on safer streets? Damien Newton "Best" depends on how you define it. Oakland and San Francisco deserve credit for speed cameras. Santa Monica is rapidly building a connected bike network and expanding camera enforcement. Long Beach has also been a leader among mid-sized cities. There's a pattern—though not universal—that cities with younger councils tend to be more progressive on transportation. I can tell you who's doing the worst: Los Angeles. The city is actively resisting implementation of a voter-approved street safety ordinance. Guerrilla crosswalks exist because residents are filling the void left by inaction. Question: What can regular people do to influence transportation policy? Damien Newton Know who your elected officials are. Join local bike and transit advocacy email lists. When it's time to email or call, flood the inboxes. Communicate constantly—not just about legislation, but about broken signs, unsafe streets, and poor DOT performance. Legislators often hear from fewer constituents than you'd expect. A lesson from Santa Monica: organized community opposition can outweigh formal city council support. That influence works both ways—mobilized people can move policy. Question: Least understood transportation issue in California? Damien Newton E-bikes. People confuse them with electric motorcycles. Cities don't know how to regulate them, and the state hasn't provided enough guidance. The result is a confusing patchwork of laws. We ran an op-ed on this recently and plan to cover it more deeply in a future podcast. Question: Biggest transportation issue lawmakers overlook? Damien Newton The connection between transportation, air pollution, and climate change. Many lawmakers think technology alone—EVs, futuristic transit, high-speed rail—will solve it. I'm generally supportive of EVs and autonomous technology (not Tesla), but they won't get us all the way there. We need more walking, biking, and transit now. Question: How are your kids doing? Damien Newton They're great. They're 13 and 16 now. I don't post photos anymore, but time really flies—I was editing Streetsblog Los Angeles before my son was born. Magic wand question: What would you change? Damien Newton If I could wave a magic wand, I'd get ICE out of Los Angeles, California, and beyond. Transportation and urban policy are deeply tied to who feels safe using public space. That's my answer. Closing Damien Newton If you stuck with me for 26 minutes of me talking to myself—thank you. Email me anytime at damien@streetsblog.org with story ideas or questions. Thanks for supporting Streetsblog, helping us hit our 2025 fundraising goal, an