Officials Lobby for Port-to-L.A. Transit Corridor : Finances: Mayor Riordan, lawmakers put on bipartisan push for $700 million in U.S. funds for Alameda Corridor.

In an impressive show of bipartisan support, California trotted out its big political guns Tuesday to shoot for $700 million in federal transportation funds to help build a proposed rail-and-truck corridor from Los Angeles and Long Beach harbors to the Civic Center.

Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, a Republican, joined Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer and a dozen other congressional, state and local elected officials in appearing before a House public works subcommittee to promote the $1.8-billion project as a major economic boon for Southern California and the nation.

“This is not only a Los Angeles and Long Beach project, but it has national significance from the perspective of trade,” said Rep. Norman Y. Mineta (D-San Jose), chairman of the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation who will play a key role in deciding the amount of funding the project receives.

The so-called Alameda Corridor, a decade in the making, has become a top priority of the pro-business Riordan Administration. It is designed to greatly accelerate cargo shipments by loading dockside freight directly onto high-speed trains bound for destinations throughout the state and country.

It would create 10,000 construction jobs and permanent employment for thousands more. The streamlined delivery system would also alleviate traffic delays at train crossings and improve air quality in the region, officials say.

Riordan announced Tuesday that his office negotiated an operating agreement last week with Santa Fe Railway, the second of three railroad companies set to run trains on the 20-mile corridor along Alameda Street. A similar deal, covering cargo fees, the sale of track, cleanup costs and operating expenses, was struck in December when the two ports agreed to purchase Southern Pacific right of way for $240 million.

Riordan said he is hopeful of reaching an agreement with Union Pacific soon in order to begin construction next year. The corridor is scheduled for completion in 2001. By 2010, annual trade activity at the San Pedro Bay ports is expected to jump to $253 billion, compared to $116 billion in 1992.

Of the corridor’s $1.8-billion price tag, $535 million is already committed by the two ports and local, state and federal agencies. Transportation officials are counting on $700 million from Congress and $600 million in debt service supported by user fees.

On Tuesday, California lawmakers requested $170 million from federal fiscal 1995 transportation funds. Although the state is well-represented with eight members on the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, Boxer on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and Feinstein on the Senate Appropriations Committee, officials admit that getting the entire $170 million is unlikely.

“This sounds like a tall order,” Riordan told the subcommittee, “but I’m an optimist.”

Privately, Riordan Administration officials said they were hoping for $110 million in next year’s budget and that they would make up the difference in future years.

The 15 California witnesses ticked off reasons for financing the Alameda Corridor, including increased trade within the Pacific Rim, reduced highway traffic, cleaner air, expansion of the Los Angeles-Long Beach ports and the survival of the shipping industry.

“Without this corridor, it is my belief that we will see a megaport developed in Mexico and we will see the ports of Los Angeles and San Pedro obliterated,” Feinstein warned the panel.

Rep. Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles) said: “This comes at a time when the California economy needs a shot in the arm. The Alameda Corridor is that shot in the arm.”