Advertisement

710 Freeway Hits New Snags in Pasadena Council, State Senate

Share
SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

Just when it seemed that local leaders were putting the pedal to the metal in determining the fate of the Long Beach Freeway extension, they locked their brakes and skidded into a political SigAlert.

Pasadena City Council members could not make up their minds Monday night whether to allow voters to decide the city’s position on the project. Now the measure is one more jam in the gridlock that has mired the project since the 1960s.

And on Tuesday, the project suffered another setback when the state Senate voted 30 to 2 to approve a bill that requires Caltrans to get South Pasadena’s approval for the project before continuing--a virtual impossibility.

Advertisement

The controversial extension would complete the final leg of the Long Beach Freeway, closing a 6.2-mile gap between the San Bernardino and Foothill freeways. Three generations of opponents have railed against it, arguing that it would eliminate 6,000 trees and 900 homes in cherished historical neighborhoods in South Pasadena, El Sereno and Pasadena. And an equally passionate coalition is scrambling to get it done, saying that it would relieve crippling congestion in neighboring cities in the San Gabriel Valley.

Last year, a federal judge issued an injunction against further construction until a lawsuit over the project is settled.

While that lawsuit was working its way through the courts, the Pasadena City Council voted last month to reverse its long-standing position and oppose the extension. Although Pasadena would be less affected by the extension than other cities, the move was significant; state and federal transportation officials have long relied on the city’s support for the roadway in the face of the opposition.

A week later, the council agreed in principle to place the issue before voters Nov. 7. But late Monday, they slammed into another sea of brake lights, deadlocking 4 to 4 over the wording for ballot measures and timing of the election.

Council members Chris Holden, Joyce Streator, Sidney Tyler and Bill Crowfoot voted in favor of calling a special city election in which voters would be asked to respond to two questions: whether they support construction of the freeway, and whether they oppose its construction.

Council members Steve Haderlein, Paul Little, Steve Madison and Mayor Bill Bogaard voted against the proposed ballot measure.

Advertisement

Madison, whose district would be most affected by the freeway, said passing the buck to voters would be “an abdication of our responsibilities” that would make Pasadena the battleground in the war over the project. So far, that fight has largely pitted South Pasadena, which is against the extension, against neighboring Alhambra, where the freeway ends and dumps cars onto Valley Boulevard. Both sides have spent several million dollars pushing their causes.

Haderlein, the swing vote on the issue, said the initiative would interfere with other potential measures in the November election, including school district reform. He said he would support it if the vote occurred in March.

But Holden questioned the wisdom of that timing, citing the high turnout for a presidential election in November. “Quite frankly, it is an opportunity for the greatest number of people to participate in the democratic process,” he said.

Others believe the vote could become moot if the freeway bill passed by the state Senate is approved by the state Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Gray Davis.

Introduced by state Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), the legislation would reverse a 1994 law that specifically denies veto power to South Pasadena. Caltrans is generally required to negotiate agreements with any city if a proposed freeway would result in local road closings.

“I am pleased that my Senate colleagues from across California joined me in supporting restoration of a fundamental right of home rule to South Pasadena,” Schiff said.

Advertisement

Antonio Rossmann, attorney for South Pasadena, said that he believes the legislation will ultimately kill a “concrete dinosaur.”

“I believe that by the end of this year, we might see this 40-year dispute come to an end,” he said.

Advertisement