Gold Line Official Calls Metro's Ballot Measure Illegal

Transcription

1 Gold Line Official Calls Metro's Ballot Measure Illegal Metro approved a ballot initiative to extend Measure R 30 years, but it includes no money to fund the Gold Line Foothill Extension to Claremont, according a Gold Line official. By Nathan McIntire the author June 28, 2012 Recommend 3 Tweet 3 Print 21 Comments Sponsored By Related Topics: Foothill Extension and Gold Line Do you think Metro is breaking the law by not funding the Gold Line to Claremont? Tell us in the comments. The Metropolitan Transit Authority board of directors voted Thursday to move forward with a ballot initiative to extend Measure R--the half-cent sales tax that funds Los Angeles transit projects--without providing any funding for the Gold Line Foothill Extension to Claremont, according to a Gold Line official. Calling the decision "contrary to law," Gold Line Construction Authority CEO Habib Balian said in an Thursday that Metro is not abiding by the original terms of Measure R by leaving Gold Line funding out. "The many who have advocated on the projects behalf stressed that Metro is not meeting the 2008 voter mandate; a congressional letter read during the (Metro) meeting called attention specifically to provisions of the enabling legislation which 'delineated the Gold Line Foothill Extension as terminating in Claremont,'" Balian wrote. "Unfortunately, contrary to law, the board did not amend the expenditure plan to include the project to Claremont." The ballot initiative was passed by Metro's board in a 10-3 vote, with Supervisor Mike Antonovich as one of the dissenters. Before it goes on the November ballot, a state bill must be passed by the legislature and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown and Metro's resolution must be approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. Metro's blog The Source said Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa supports the ballot measure as it stands. "...Villaraigosa said after the vote that the extension proposal was backed by a wide coalition who viewed an expanded transit system as a way to make Los Angeles County look and function better while creating jobs in the process," the blog reported. 1 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM

2 2 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM Follow comments Submit tip 21 Comments 11:35 am on Friday, June 29, 2012

3 3 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM

4 Daryl Hons 8:17 pm on Friday, June 29, 2012 Flag as inappropriate LAofAnaheim, I know nothing about the Robbins Bill--I'll concede the point. It sounds like fun reading, so if you have a particularly good link handy, do share. And regarding your premise about the population density of the Valley not justifying a subway, why was one built out to North Hollywood? 4 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM

5 5 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM your list, along with the Santa Ana Corridor, is suspect. The fact that the Gold Line extension wasn't included in the master plan, and the fact that Tony

6 6 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM AGAIN, the downtown connector is a good idea, and is part of what was supposed to have been built when the original blue/gold line was originally planned as one line. AGAIN, there's a big difference between proportionality and "winner-take-all." Santa Monica isn't complaining because its a small rich city surrounded by Los Angeles and the one line that will be built there will likely suffice. Most people who live there probably won't abandon their cars anyway. If Los Angeles wants all the rail projects, Los Angeles should pay for them. The next vote should be a city initiative. Reply Leave a comment Submit

7 7 of 7 7/1/ :16 PM Advertise Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information. Volunteer If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here. Contribute Send us news tips Put an event on the calendar Announce something to everyone