Funding Power Would Give Clout to Transit Agency

SACRMANTO â€” 

The proposed Los Angeles County transportation super agency moving toward legislative approval would become one of the most powerful governmental bodies in the state because of its ability to hand out the big amounts of money becoming available for highways and transit.

That was the view of legislators and transportation experts watching the progress of the reorganization bills.

“It would be extremely powerful because of the amount of money it would have,� said Roy Heatly, a Sacramento public relations consultant associated with groups backing more highway construction.

Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys), an author of one reorganization bill, agreed that the agency would become a dominant force. “But it has to be,� Robbins said, citing what he considers a weak planning process incapable of dealing with growing congestion.

That power to dispense funds for projects--often called pork barreling--is a side effect of the transit reorganization legislation sparked by disclosures of management failures in the Southern California Rapid Transit District and widespread concern about duplication of transit planning and construction in Los Angeles County.

Political leaders watching the progress of the legislation said the super agency’s board, consisting of the most powerful elected officials in the county, will be the envy of local politicians throughout the state. One backer of the legislation said mayors and council members of the county’s small cities are already fighting for places on the governing board, even though it has not yet been approved by the Legislature and Gov. George Deukmejian.

Robbins’ bill was approved unanimously Tuesday by the Senate Transportation Committee. A second reorganization measure, by Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sepulveda), passed the Assembly without dissent Monday. The authors said they will meet soon to work out differences between the bills in an attempt to agree on a single measure. Katz and Robbins said they predict final approval.

Both propose combining the RTD bus and anticipated Metro Rail subway operations, light-rail lines and highway planning under an existing organization, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission. (Robbins’ bill calls the reformed organization the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.)

The county Transportation Commission already has considerable power. It allocates transit money and is building a light-rail line from Long Beach to downtown Los Angeles. And it decides where federal and state highway funds are spent in the county, subject to the approval of the California Transportation Commission, which traditionally goes along with the local agenda. That latter responsibility has gone virtually unnoticed in recent years because of a shortage of both state and federal funds.

A coincidence of legislative timing in Washington and Sacramento will, however, give the board much more power, just as it begins the job of coordinating transportation in the county, legislators said.

More Money Available

Although the authors did not plan it, Congress, overriding President Reagan’s veto, passed a highway and transit bill greatly increasing funds for California and other states. And in Sacramento, legislation is moving forward to vastly increase the amount of state and local funds available.

One such proposal would place a $1.8-billion highway and transit bond issue on the ballot in June, 1988.

Another would give counties the power to increase the sales tax by 1% to finance transportation projects.

That legislation would eliminate a procedure that required each county to seek special legislative authorization to place a local transportation sales tax measure before its voters, as Orange County did before the 1984 defeat of Proposition A. That proposal called for a 1% sales tax for highway and transit projects.

The measure would make a vote on a similar ballot measure easier in the future, but Orange County transportation officials said Tuesday that none is being planned.

“There’s just a lot of talk and nothing specific,� said Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, a member of the Orange County Transportation Commission.

Los Angeles County already imposes a 0.5% tax for transit projects. If voters approve raising it to the proposed new limit, a source said, an additional $325 million to $350 million a year would be allocated by the super agency. That would be in addition to the new federal money and state bond funds, if the proposed bond issue is approved.

Thus although the super agency’s governing board would not have much more statutory power, it would have more actual authority because, as one source said, in government and politics “money is power.�

Stan Oftelie, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Commission, and Commission Chairman Harriett Wieder, said the Robbins-Katz legislation potentially would affect how the county receives about $48 million in public transit development funds that are funneled from the federal government through the Southern California Assn. of Governments (SCAG), a regional planning agency.

Under proposals currently being formulated in response to the Robbins-Katz legislation, the departure of Los Angeles from SCAG’s transportation planning process would be accompanied by a shift by SCAG away from short-range projects to long-range planning, allowing county commissions to take over the short-range work.

Orange County would save about $125,000 in administrative fees currently paid to SCAG if that sort of redefinition of SCAG’s mission occurs, Oftelie said. But the county would still receive the same $48 million in transit development funds.

“It’s a wash,� Oftelie said.

Another reason why the Los Angeles County super agency board would gain power is because its composition would change under both Robbins’ and Katz’s bills. At present, the five Los Angeles County supervisors, the mayor of Los Angeles and Los Angeles City Council members may sit on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, but they usually send alternates. The new legislation would require those leaders to attend the meetings.

‘Good Old Boys’

The new governing board would consist of the five supervisors, the Los Angeles mayor, two Los Angeles City Council members appointed by the council president, a Long Beach City Council member and two representatives of small cities in the county, appointed by city officials who meet under the auspices of the League of California Cities. In addition, there would be a non-voting member appointed by the governor and non-voting members from Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties.

The attendance of the top elected officials, coupled with the potential of many millions of dollars to hand out, has already spurred competition among small-city mayors and council members for seats on the new governing board.

Although previously there was not much interest in serving on the county Transportation Commission, one representative of a small city, Councilwoman Christine Reed of Santa Monica, said “the good old boys� in local government are trying to replace her and Councilwoman Jackie Bacharach of Rancho Palos Verdes.

“There will be more power and money on the board,� she said.

Meanwhile, some opposition appeared to Robbins’ bill. The Senate Transportation Committee removed a provision that would have allowed the new board to convert into an elective body after 1991. Robbins went along with that, but James Evans, representing the bus drivers’ union, said his organization would oppose the bill. Organized labor has favored an elective board, figuring that it could elect friendly members.

And Robbins said he opposes a key provision of Katz’s bill that would create a sub-board under the main governing board to run bus operations. Robbins said such a bus board would be organized much like the present RTD board, and he wants to begin with a clean slate.

Times staff writer Jeffrey A. Perlman contributed to this story.