Plan to Repair Valley Streets Sends City Council Off Track

A City Council vote on a routine street repair project erupted into a nasty cross-town battle Wednesday when lawmakers from the central city protested because the work is scheduled to take place in the San Fernando Valley.

The debate over the $570,000 program to remove and pave over old railroad crossings grew so heated at one point that council President John Ferraro had to sternly reprimand council members for arguing with each other.

“We have to realize that we are one city, not two or three cities,” he said.

Nonetheless, council members Mike Hernandez, Nate Holden and Jackie Goldberg questioned why the Valley was to benefit from the program while other parts of the city continue to suffer.

“Do we really believe in equity?” said a visibly angry Hernandez, who represents parts of East Los Angeles.

But transportation officials said that the Valley program is just the first phase of a citywide effort to pave the old crossings to improve traffic flow.

“You have to start someplace,” said Richard Jaramillo, an engineer with the city’s Transportation Department.

He also warned that unless state funds for the program are spent soon, they could revert to the state.

After a brief but acrimonious debate, the council decided to delay a vote on the program until Friday.

But the debate revealed the ill will that lingers from previous feuds between representatives from the Valley and the central city.

The tensions date back to the 1994 Northridge earthquake, when representatives from South and Central Los Angeles complained that earthquake damage to areas outside the Valley was largely ignored.

Since then, lawmakers from the Valley and central city have clashed over council decisions to set new water and sewer rates that benefited Valley residents.

The two sides also squared off along geographic lines over a state bill that would have made it easier for the Valley to secede from the city. Most Valley representatives supported the measure, but a majority of the council voted to oppose the bill.

The $573,600 street improvement program would pay to rebuild streets at 37 abandoned railroad crossings throughout the Valley. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has already approved 80% of the funding with state transit dollars, leaving the city to pay the balance with local transit money.

City transportation officials praised the program, saying the abandoned tracks slow traffic because city shuttle buses are required by law to stop at the tracks even though they are no longer in use. In addition, Valley council members said they are inundated with complaints from commuters who must regularly drive over the bumpy tracks.

But during the debate, Goldberg and Hernandez asked why the Valley project was given priority over other parts of the city.

Jaramillo said there was no political agenda in selecting the Valley for the first phase of the citywide project. Because of staffing shortages, he said, street maintenance crews can repair only two railroad crossings per month and cannot do the entire city at once.

He also warned that under state law, transportation funds that are not spent on local projects within three years can revert to the state. Money for the railroad repairs was approved in 1993.

Councilman Mike Feuer, whose district stretches from the Valley to the Westside, said a list of transportation projects shows that most transit money in the city is not going to the Valley.

*

Councilman Richard Alarcon, who represents parts of the northeast Valley, said he believes the Valley deserves high priority because the MTA recently decided to delay construction of an east-west Valley subway line.

“The fact is that the Valley lost millions of dollars when the east-west line was re-prioritized,” he said.

But that did not appease Hernandez.

“Why should the Valley leave the city when they get all of the funds?” he said, referring to the threats by some Valley residents to secede from Los Angeles.

Toward the end of the debate, Councilwoman Laura Chick, who represents parts of the West Valley, blew up at her cross-town colleagues, criticizing the “noxious and inflammatory comments made around this room.”

“I’m sorry that I have engaged in some of the lecturing that I accuse my colleagues of, but my restraint broke,” she said.