Board Feud May Delay Clearing of Channels

Permission to clear out Los Angeles County’s clogged flood-control channels is expected to be granted Friday by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the agency’s top regional official told the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

But in an ironic twist that played itself out in a nearly two-hour debate Tuesday, political differences among supervisors may prevent the work from starting immediately, raising fears that winter storms could cause the channels to overflow.

The Army corps chief for Southern California, Col. Larry Davis, came to the meeting with two colleagues, intending to brief the supervisors on plans to speed up the agency’s slow-moving permit process so the county could clear the channels before the rainy season begins.

But instead of welcoming the corps’ determination to move faster, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky opened the debate excoriating both the corps and public works officials for moving too quickly. Hurrying the process along, Yaroslavsky said, has meant that environmental needs in the channels might not be properly considered.

Other supervisors weighed in with their own concerns: Gloria Molina, who favors clearing the channels, demanded that the corps return to the board next week with detailed proposals on how the work ought to be done and whether vegetation that is torn out should be replaced.

Mike Antonovich, who has led the move to speed up channel clearance, declared his opposition to any requirements that the county replace vegetation that is torn out as the channels are cleared.

In the end, it appeared that while the permits might indeed be ready on Friday, the board might not agree on a policy for clearing the channels until at least the following Tuesday, when several motions on the subject will be considered and the Army corps will return for another round.

“It’s a hurry-up-and-wait sort of thing,” said Molina, who blamed the Army corps for the potential delay. The corps, she said, was disorganized in its presentation. She accused chief regulator Richard Schubel of “acting like a used-car salesman” in his attempts to reassure the supervisors that mitigation costs would not be astronomical and that additional permits would not be difficult to obtain.

Harry Stone, the head of the county public works department, said that if the permits do come through as promised, he will push for starting work that weekend.

But before a single plant can be cut back, Stone will have to notify the supervisors that the permit has been received and develop a work plan. He has already promised not to do any work in Yaroslavsky’s district without consulting the Westside and Valley supervisor as well as the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy.

“I don’t know if we’ll start anything on Friday,” Stone said. “If anything starts, it’s more likely on Saturday.”

Any work that does begin right away will probably be limited to surveying the flood channels and reviewing the permits, Molina said.

To a degree, the slowdown at the county level is a replay of some of the competing elements that brought the process to a standstill in the first place.

Last month, Jim Noyes, chief deputy director of the Department of Public Works, told the board that the county had been trying for two years to obtain permission to clear out 95 flood-control channels, many of which had lost more than half of their capacity to weeds and debris.

If El Nino brings anticipated storms and the channels overflow, Noyes warned, massive flooding could result.

The channels, which have concrete sides with natural bottoms, were dug out by the Army Corps of Engineers, private developers and others over about 60 years, and used to keep Los Angeles County’s meandering rivers on a safe and predetermined course during a flood.

The county is required by law to keep them clear. But eight federal and state agencies have asserted dominion over the channels in the last two decades. And since a court decision in 1993 gave the Army corps regulatory control over work in stream beds, the permits have been held up as environmental agencies, special-interest groups and local governments have argued about how--or even whether--to keep the channels clear.

And the longer it takes to get a permit, the more vegetation grows in the channels, making them a habitat for birds and other wildlife.

The corps speeded up the process last month in an effort to help the county prepare for flooding that could come with the El Nino weather conditions expected this winter.

But, citing environmental concerns, the corps wants to make the county promise to build hundreds of acres of new wetlands--in many cases, 3 acres for every acre that is cleared--if public works officials go in with bulldozers and clear out the channels.

Such requirements, which would cost an estimated $35 million to $50 million, would be reduced if the county agrees to give the channels a “haircut” instead of a shave, going in with saws and shovels instead of bulldozers.

The disagreements among the supervisors hinge in part on how that work would be done.

Antonovich and Supervisor Don Knabe have advocated full clearance of the channels and say the county should not be liable for mitigation. Molina says she would like to mitigate, within reason, but that she wants to see the details of the requirements.

Yaroslavsky, who calls the concern over El Nino “hysteria,” wants to slow the whole process down and make decisions on each channel one at time.

“It’s a very simple thing,” Yaroslavsky said. “It just takes a little more time.”

But time, according to Stone and public works officials in other parts of the state, may not be available once the winter rains set in.

“I don’t want to see the safety of the people in the county sacrificed because of bureaucratic squabbles,” Stone said.