Dueling Federal Laws Cloud Red Line Funding

Stray language in a law setting federal transportation policy has slashed by half the federal construction funding for the Metro Red Line and 15 other mass-transit projects across the country, but congressional leaders are scrambling to remedy the problem with a new law.

The conflict has its greatest potential effect on Los Angeles, which could lose $65 million for the Hollywood leg of the Red Line subway, on which construction is about to start. That is more than the combined losses of the cities receiving the three next-largest grants.

But two affected projects in one of those cities, St. Louis, are in an area represented by House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt. Los Angeles transit officials said that his support and President Bush’s desire to create jobs should speed the passage of corrective legislation.

The problem grew out of conflicting clauses in the 1992 transportation appropriations bill, which allocates money for particular projects, and the 1992 Intermodal Surface Transportation Act, which maps out broad federal highway and transit policy for the next six years.

The Federal Transportation Administration, formerly the Urban Mass Transit Administration, decided last week that the appropriations bill, which included the higher spending levels, is superseded by the policy bill, which was passed later and appeared to limit grants.

The total shortfall created by the conflict, more than $200 million, is 49% of the federal funds allocated to help pay the cost of new rail-transit systems. It affects construction of light-rail trolley lines in Dallas, St. Louis and Portland, a driverless train in Honolulu and planning for projects in Houston, Boston, Atlanta and seven other cities.

The amounts actually cut from federal allocations were announced this week.

Two Los Angeles Democrats, Julian C. Dixon and Edward R. Roybal, said they will attempt to restore full funding to all 16 projects through technical corrections to the policy act or an amendment to an Emergency Job Creation Appropriations Act now being drafted.

Dixon said he was disappointed by the FTA’s decision, which he said “clearly contradicts congressionally approved funding levels” and threatens each project in every community.

“These communities rightly believed their projects were to receive full appropriations,” Roybal added, “and it is unfair to penalize them and delay their plans and construction timetables because of technical differences between these two bills.”