Harbor Department Agrees to Pay for Road Projects in Wilmington

The Los Angeles Harbor Department, facing the possibility of state legislation that would have it pay for public works outside the port, has agreed in writing to pursue a series of street improvements and other projects in Wilmington.

Although the nine-page agreement only formalizes projects already promised or started by the port, Wilmington residents and local officials described it as a breakthrough. The agreement offers a detailed outline by the Harbor Department of the steps it will take to offset the traffic and other impacts the booming port has had on the community.

Still, some said, the agreement is much less than they wanted.

“I’d be a damn fool if I didn’t hope for more than we got in the agreement . . . but at least the port is giving the community something,” Wilmington activist Bill Schwab said.

Port officials are pleased that they avoided a change in state law, which they maintain restricts use of port revenues to harbor-related projects.

“Finally, we have something that the port has committed to in writing,” Assemblyman Dave Elder (D-San Pedro) told the Wilmington Home Owners on Thursday night in announcing the agreement. “This is not the conclusion. This is really the beginning.”

The agreement follows months of talks between Elder and port officials, who were surprised in March when Elder introduced a bill that would have allowed the city of Los Angeles to use port revenues for street improvements in Wilmington and elsewhere.

Although that legislation was withdrawn at the urging of the port and Mayor Tom Bradley, a similar bill by Elder cleared the Legislature in late August and was awaiting the governor’s signature when the port agreed to pay for the improvements in Wilmington. Elder has said that he would ask the governor to veto the bill if an accommodation were reached with the port.

The port’s most significant commitment calls for completion of the long-discussed realignment of B Street by late 1995 unless the $26.2-million project encounters unforeseen legal or environmental obstacles. Previously, there was no date for completing that project, and it hinged on the port acquiring all the property needed for the street alignment.

In addition, the port agreed to repair Wilmington streets damaged by port truck traffic, and to provide additional port police to monitor trucks traveling through the community.

Although port officials declined to estimate the total cost of the projects, Elder guessed that the port committed itself to between $50 million and $60 million in public works and other projects in and around Wilmington.

The total includes the B Street realignment, $6.3 million already spent for the design of a rail corridor along Alameda Boulevard, and a variety of much-smaller projects such as $270,000 in landscaping John S. Gibson Boulevard.

In announcing the agreement, Elder acknowledged that like other Wilmington residents, he had hoped for even more out of the negotiations. “There is much that still needs to be done,” he said.

At the same time, Elder insisted that the talks were complicated by the practical and political realities of trying to push the port into promising more than it can or is willing to deliver.

“We attempted to get more specificity, but in fairness to the port . . . there is only so much they can guarantee,” Elder said, agreeing with the port that its commitments must await cost estimates and environmental studies.

Moreover, Elder noted that his ability to pressure the port was complicated because the port had powerful allies opposing the bill.

“These have probably been the most nerve-wracking negotiations I’ve ever been involved in,” the six-term assemblyman said, noting that he was asked by Bradley to withdraw his bill even after the City Council had endorsed it in June.

At that time, the port began talks with Elder to assure him that it was willing to commit to Wilmington improvements and that there was no need for state legislation that might open the Harbor Department’s budget to public works projects in Wilmington and elsewhere.

That prospect, in fact, troubled port officials in the last few weeks as much as the notion that the department is not a good neighbor to Wilmington. After the agreement was announced, port spokeswoman Julia Nagano said the department was concerned that the legislation was not only unnecessary but could force the port to pay for public works projects far from the harbor.

“One concern was that the bill could have far-reaching implications because it did not specify Wilmington. And under a very broad definition of port traffic, that could mean projects that include the (San Fernando) Valley,” Nagano said.

Now that the legislation has been avoided, Nagano said, the port believes that the agreement formally recognizes the Harbor Department’s commitment to make improvements in Wilmington. “I think it is a continuation of many of the things we have been planning and it shows the port is very concerned about the community,” she said.

Harbor Councilwoman Joan Milke Flores, who earlier pushed the council to endorse Elder’s legislation, is pleased that the bill pushed the port into the commitment to Wilmington, press secretary Karen Constine said.

“It does give us a little more detail and having something in writing is better than not having it at all,” she said.

But Constine said Flores will request further assurances from the port that it is making good on its promises to the community. “The bottom line here is that the clock doesn’t stop ticking just because the port has written a letter,” she said.

Likewise, Wilmington activists said they will seek assurances in the coming weeks that the port is making progress on its commitments.

“This is inching us closer to a real commitment from the port. Prior to this, the port was just planning or studying or projecting or promising to do a lot for the community,” said Peter Mendoza, president of Wilmington Home Owners. “Now, this brings us a little closer to what the community has been calling for all these years.”