Committee Rejects Efforts to Block Above-Ground Line of Metro Rail

Legislation sought by California Federal Savings & Loan Assn. to limit construction of an elevated extension of Metro Rail along Wilshire Boulevard’s Miracle Mile and in front of the company’s 27-story headquarters building was rejected this week.

At issue was whether the Legislature could prohibit an above-ground line down Wilshire Boulevard, despite a federal law that blocks building a subway through areas with heavy concentrations of potentially dangerous underground methane gas.

The Assembly Transportation Committee on Monday shelved the measure, carried by Assemblyman Tom Bane (D-Van Nuys), with all but one of the committee’s 16 members abstaining. The bill was rejected on an unusual vote of 1-0, with only Assemblyman Tom Hannigan (D-Fairfield) in favor of the proposal.

Because Bane is chairman of the powerful Rules Committee, which assigns bills to committees, lawmakers are sometimes reluctant to directly oppose his legislation, especially on a controversial local issue. Bane said he did not lobby committee members for their support--another possible reason for the committee’s action.

Spending Prohibition

Under Bane’s proposal, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, unless overruled by a majority of the Los Angeles City Council, would have been prohibited from spending public funds for an elevated or ground-level rail line on Wilshire Boulevard between Highland Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, where California Federal’s headquarters is located.

California Federal is identified in the committee analysis as the sponsor of the bill. Les Cohen, California Federal’s lobbyist, said his client is not the bill’s sponsor, but acknowledged that he asked Bane to carry the measure on behalf of a coalition of business and civic groups, including California Federal, opposed to an elevated rail line.

James Hurley, senior vice president of CalFed Inc., the savings and loan’s parent firm, said: “We have a longstanding commitment to the Miracle Mile . . . and we are not about to see the values, economic or cultural, denigrated by an above-ground structure.”

In the past 17 months, California Federal and its affiliated firms have contributed $8,500 to Bane’s campaign committee, according to reports filed with the Secretary of State.

Hurley dismissed the suggestion that the contributions had anything to do with the Metro Rail issue. “We’ve supported Tom Bane for many, many years,” he said. “It’s not something we’ve done to get this bill through.”

Last year, Bane pushed for similar but more far-reaching legislation, also with the support of California Federal and the coalition. That bill would have prohibited any elevated mass-transit line within the city unless approved by the Los Angeles City Council.

Deukmejian’s Veto

However, that Bane measure was vetoed by Gov. George Deukmejian, who said it singled out the Los Angeles City Council for authority over transit issues in other jurisdictions. At the time, Deukmejian said: “I believe the veto authority proposed in this legislation elevates the concerns of city residents over the overall transportation needs of the county.”

This year, Bane narrowed the scope of his legislation, maintaining that an elevated line would blight Wilshire Boulevard, especially near such attractions as the Los Angeles County Art Museum, the Page Museum and the La Brea Tar Pits.

The bill was opposed by officials of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, who said an elevated line is a potential alternative for a Wilshire Boulevard spur line. They argued that there is too much danger associated with methane gas to tunnel under Wilshire Boulevard.

The high costs of tunneling, coupled with environmental concerns associated with the methane gas, have prompted transit planners to consider building segments of elevated track.

Supporters of the bill said an elevated line would destroy the Art Deco architecture on the street. Cohen, the California Federal lobbyist, told the Assembly Transportation Committee that an elevated line would turn the area near the Miracle Mile into an “eyesore.”

Cohen proposed that transit planners review alternate routes on Pico or Washington boulevards. But Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee, said: “The whole purpose of running it down Wilshire in the beginning was the fact that’s the corridor where the bodies are. Ridership does not exist on Pico.”

Timothy Egan, a lobbyist for the County Transportation Commission, said Wilshire Boulevard is the preferred route for a western extension of Metro Rail to be built in about 10 years. He said no decision has been made on whether the line would be built above ground or at street level.

In a letter to Katz, Commission Chairwoman Christine E. Reed, argued that the Bane proposal “conflicts with existing federal law, which prohibits the construction of a subway line” on that portion of Wilshire because of the danger posed by methane gas in the area.

Further, Reed said Metro Rail already is subject to extensive environmental reviews and that the city is adequately represented on the commission. “The commission’s current processes ensure that the cities and the county participate in design and construction decisions for the countywide rail systems,” she told Katz.

Because of his clout as Rules Committee chairman, Bane normally would have been expected to win approval for his bill.

But he cautioned against reading too much significance into the loss. “It’s apparent that the opponents of the bill worked the committee thoroughly and the proponents did not. That says it all. I did not work the committee for votes.”

Bane was granted the right to have the bill reconsidered at another hearing but said he does not plan to seek another vote on the measure.

After the committee action, lobbyist Egan suggested that Bane may have been “surprised” by concern expressed by committee members over the Metro Rail alignment.