House Debate on Metro Rail Funds Stalls : Congress Row Ties Up Funds for Metro Rail

Sharply divided over financing levels for major transportation services including Los Angeles’ proposed Metro Rail subway, a two-house conference committee, where approval is essential, broke off deliberations Thursday over a crucial appropriations bill.

During an initial two-hour session Wednesday, the conferees, who are trying to resolve differences on an omnibus transportation bill for 1986, revealed several areas of controversy, principally the level of funding for the Coast Guard, the Federal Aviation Administration and urban mass transit.

The $10.8-billion House version of the bill is nearly $1 billion higher than the Senate version. Both have been labeled by the Reagan Administration as too costly.

The committee had been scheduled to return to the negotiating table Thursday morning, but the session was postponed to allow more time for staff and committee members to resolve differences. The committee is expected to meet again next week at the earliest.

After conference committee approval, the normal procedure is for the bill to go back for a full vote in both houses of Congress before being sent to the President.

It became clear Wednesday that a multiyear financing guarantee being sought by House supporters of the Los Angeles subway, as well as for projects in Miami and Seattle, could be a major stumbling block.

Sen. Mark Andrews (R-N.D.), who is leading the Senate negotiators, told the conferees that “locking in” future-year expenditures for transit projects such as the Los Angeles subway would “fly in the face” of the current congressional struggle to craft a deficit-elimination plan calling for cutting spending over the next several years.

And, in a letter to the conferees, James C. Miller III, director of the Administration’s Office of Management and Budget, called the proposed financing guarantee for the three cities “highly inappropriate” because it would “ignore future federal and local cost implications.”

Miller, who replaced David Stockman as the Administration’s top budget watchdog, said that nearly $4 billion in federal funds will be needed to complete several new transit projects proposed in both the House and Senate bills. He called the Los Angeles project an example of “fiscal irresponsibility” because it could cost federal taxpayers $2 billion if the entire 18.6-mile, downtown-to-North Hollywood line is built.

Supporters of the Los Angeles project are seeking language ordering the Urban Mass Transportation Administration to issue a so-called “letter of intent” and a full-funding contract for the $429 million in federal aid still needed to build the first 4.4-mile section of the subway from Union Station to Alvarado Street.

Construction is ready to begin and supporters of the project say the multiyear guarantee is needed to begin construction early next year. Without it, state, county and city agencies that are helping to finance the project would have to reach a new agreement on how to deal with the possibility of future shortfalls in federal aid.

Under the House version of the bill, the $429 million would include $129 million being withheld by the Administration from 1984 and 1985 appropriations, $117 million set aside by the House in 1986 and $183 million in 1987 or as soon as funds are available.

The Republican-controlled Senate version provides only for the $129 million withheld by the Administration and about $84 million for 1986, without mentioning the more than $200 million remaining that also is needed.

Despite the dispute over earmarking future financing, there appears to be considerable support among conference committee members to give the Los Angeles project substantial funds next year. In both versions of the bill, the Los Angeles project would receive more than any other city in the country, except Washington, which traditionally receives favored treatment from Congress.

Congressional sources said a possible compromise in the multiyear financing dispute would be for the Senate to agree to instruct the Urban Mass Transit Administration to negotiate a funding contract with Los Angeles, but without requiring a letter of intent that would specify what levels of future financing would be provided.

As part of a stepped-up lobbying effort for Metro Rail, a coalition of Los Angeles business and labor interests last week held a $1,000-a-plate campaign fund-raiser for Sen. Andrews of North Dakota at a Beverly Hills restaurant. Pamela Williams, a spokeswoman for the Central City Assn., an organization of major downtown businesses, said the dinner was attended by Andrews and about 30 Metro Rail backers. It is expected to net the senator’s’ campaign coffers more than $20,000.

To Show Appreciation

Rapid Transit District President Nikolas Patsaouras, who attended, said the dinner was “more of appreciation, rather than trying to influence” the senator. “Obviously, we told him that we want the (full-financing) language,” he said. “He said it would be difficult.”

Meanwhile, it remained unclear whether financing for the Los Angeles project will be affected by a bitter turf battle between two powerful transportation panels in the House.

“The problem is still there, nothing has been resolved,” said John Shelby, a spokesman for Rep. William Lehman (D-Fla.).

Lehman, who is leading the House negotiators in the conference committee, has warned that he may not fight hard for money for the Los Angeles subway because of a dispute with Rep. Glenn M. Anderson (D-Hawthorne), a strong advocate of Metro Rail. Lehman, who chairs the appropriations subcommittee on transportation and has been a powerful advocate of the subway, is angry because Anderson’s public works transportation subcommittee is trying to wrest billions of dollars in highway trust funds from the control of Lehman’s subcommittee.

Anderson and Lehman met this week, but no settlement was reached. Some congressional sources familiar with the dispute said that while Lehman and his subcommittee members, who make up the House side of the conference committee, are “very distressed” with the Anderson panel, it is unlikely that they will take it out on the Los Angeles project, which many have supported for years.

Finance Route Study

In a related development, the California Transportation Commission, meeting Thursday in Costa Mesa, authorized $904,500 as the state’s portion of a $2-million study to find new Metro Rail routes that would steer clear of underground methane gas pockets, such as the one that exploded in the Fairfax district of Los Angeles earlier this year. As currently drawn, Metro Rail routes pass through portions of the Fairfax area.

The balance of the study money would come from the federal government if Congress gives the go-ahead, an RTD spokesman said. The study, which officials said could take up to a year to complete, was demanded by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) as part of a compromise to get his support for the proposed subway.