Politics & Government

SGV Legislative Caucus Joins Call for Metro to Specify True Cost of Gold Line

A coalition of 12 local state senators and assembly members supports the Gold Line's push to get the Metropolitan Transit Authority to include the full cost of the Gold Line in its expenditure plan.

The San Gabriel Valley Legislative Caucus sent the following letter to Metro last week:

As members ofthe San Gabriel Valley Legislative Caucus, an organization of 12 State Senators andAssemblymembers representing more than 2 million county residents living in the San Gabriel Valleyr we are writing to urge postponement ofthe proposed Measure R Expenditure Plan Amendment (amendment) hearing until the proposed Expenditure Plan Amendment can be updated to reflect the latest information known by your agency. 

We are supportive ofthe idea of accelerating critical transportation projects throughout Los Angeles County, including and especially the Gold Line Eastside Extension, which would provide much needed light rail transit in the southern San Gabriel Valley. The amendment as currently presented by staffhowever, is based on a nearly ñve-year-old expenditure plan and contains information that is outdated and inaccurate for a number of the Measure R projects. We respectfully request that the status and costs be updated for every Measure R transit capital project to reflect the most current information available before any plan to accelerate funding is considered. Two examples ofthe lack of updated information in the proposed amendment include: 

l) Cost estimates for the l-405 /Sepulveda Pass and Santa Ana Branch corridors are still listed in the amendment as "TBD," despite the fact that Metro's own documents identify the cost as $2.5 billion and $65 million respectively. 

2) The Gold Line Foothill Extension to Claremont is still identified in the amendment as having a total cost estimate of $758 million and a completion year of 2017, reflecting the initial segment ofthe project to Azusa only. Although no additional Measure R funding is expected for this project, any expenditure plan should include the true "estimated total cost" of $1.714 billion to complete the project to Claremont (as defined by the state legislature in AB 2321), as Well as an updated completion year.

In addition, we also ask that any project acceleration plan provide cost estimates for the acceleration ofeach project and clear details on how Metro intends to fund said acceleration. Key details that should be addressed as part ofan updated proposed amendment include: 

How much additional funding is needed to accelerate projects? Will Measure R funds be used to accelerate projects? If so, how much for each project? What other funding sources is Metro anticipating to use, and at what funding level? Will acceleration result in earlier project completion? lfso, what are the new completion dates? 

What are the potential savings per region with acceleration? lf any, savings should be detailed in the draft Expenditure Plan. 
Without updated project status and costs for all Measure R projects, as Well as a detailed funding strategy for the acceleration ofthe five projects, we believe the proposed amendment lacks transparency and does not meet the intent of AB 2321: 

"The expenditure plan shall include, in addition to other projects and programs identified by the MTA, the specified projects and programs listed in paragraph [3) of subdivision (b), the estimated total cost for each project and program, funds other than the tax revenues that the MTA anticipates will be expended on the projects and programs, and the schedule during which the MTA anticipates funds will be available for' each project and program. The MTA shalì also identify in its expenditure plan the expected completion dates for each project described in subparagraph [A] of paragraph (3) of Subdivision 03)." (Pub. Util. Code, 130350.5(f), emph. Added.) 

We would also like to reiterate another requirement of AB 2321 that is referred to in Footnote] of Attachment A in your Proposed Amendment: for all projects funded from other sources on or before December 31, 2008, the funds freed-up by passage of this sales tax shall remain in the subregion in which the project is located for projects or programs ofregionai significance. 

As members ofthe San Gabriel Valley Legislative Caucus, we stand in support ofthe idea ofaccelerating vital transportation projects throughout Los Angeles County and look forward to working with Metro to make this happen. However, we respectfully request that Metro postpone any planned hearing on the proposed Measure R Expenditure Plan Amendment until Metro staff updates the expenditure plan to reflect the most current information available for all Measure R transit projects and provides a more detailed explanation ofthe funding strategy to accelerate project completion and how that will impact completion of other Measure R transit projects.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

More from Arcadia