On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx was in Los Angeles to celebrate the groundbreaking of the Crenshaw/LAX line. One of the chief causes for celebration is the potential to finally connect our rail system to the Los Angeles International airport.

Thursday, the staff of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority will present Metro’s board of directors with its initial options for connecting the upcoming Crenshaw/LAX line to the airport.

None of them include a train that actually runs through the airport with a stop at the passenger terminals. Instead, Metro’s staff wants to look main at variations of two options: One is to build a station about a half-mile from the terminal area, the other would land even farther out at Aviation Boulevard, nearly two miles from the Tom Bradley International terminal.

To get to the terminals, passengers will eventually board a tram, or “people mover.” But the people mover isn’t likely to be completed when the Crenshaw rail line opens.

So for perhaps several years, rail passengers will have to use a shuttle van to get to the terminals, much as they do from the Green Line today.

We are running in place.

In our current discussion about LAX, our leaders will tell you it’s doubtful we can raise the money to build a train into the terminals. Even with no study by Metro staff, they’re saying it’s too expensive. So expensive we shouldn’t even study the possibility.

I hope we don’t rule out the most ambitious option simply because it looks too difficult, without much evidence.

That is why Supervisor Don Knabe and I have introduced a motion to have Metro study two options the staff has recommended be shelved. Both would have the light rail line routed into the airport with a stop at the terminals.

Metro’s own studies show these options will generate the most riders. Before we pre-emptively decide such options cost too much, we should consider this: At some point in the near future, a ballot initiative to raise funds for public transportation will be put before voters. I believe voters may be more hungry for a rail connection to LAX than our leaders assume. .

Meanwhile, we can unify around a set of principles, even if we don’t yet agree on the best location for a station. We’ve not done so in the past, and the lack of a common mission led to the stalemates and settling among those pursuing their particular agenda. Along the way, we forgot to define success as completing the most useful airport rail connection.

I propose we guide our decision-making by using these three principles:

1) Riders rule. Every discussion and decision must be based on what will make travel faster and more convenient for the passenger. Today, our discussions on the rail connector are sometimes dominated by details such as who pays for what, or how one agency or constituency will react to a proposal. These are all important factors, but they must not become the principal drivers of the discussion.

2) Recognize value as well as cost. When evaluating what we can afford, we must understand this: We cannot afford another white elephant. If we spend less to build a system no one will use, we have saved nothing.

3) Innovate, don’t obfuscate. In Los Angeles, we sometimes expend as much energy and resources battling for the least ambitious choice as we could to develop creative solutions. Metro must actually study the costs and benefits of connecting rail passengers to the terminals at LAX.

We should not sell ourselves short due to a lack of confidence or ambition. The discussion now needs to be intensified and elevated to connect Los Angeles to the rest of the world by the standard we expect and deserve.

Mark Ridley-Thomas is a Los Angeles County supervisor and a director of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.