State May Strengthen Transit Board Grip : Lawmakers Agree to 2 Appointees to Proposed L.A. County Agency

In a move that would shift greater influence over the future of Los Angeles County transportation to the state capital, legislative leaders said Thursday that they have agreed to give themselves a second appointment to the governing board of a proposed transit superagency that would take over the troubled RTD.

While some lawmakers said the change would shore up votes for controversial legislation to create the new agency, other observers said it could make passage more difficult because local governments would work harder to repel what they see as an intrusion on their authority.

After a meeting Wednesday with Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) and the authors of the transit reorganization bill, Senate President Pro Tem David Roberti (D-Los Angeles) said Thursday that an amendment is being drafted to allow two legislative appointments to the 11-member board. The board would oversee a consolidation of the Southern California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission.

State Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys), a co-author of the bill, had already inserted a Legislature-controlled seat for an elected official from the San Fernando Valley. Robbins has said he wants to fill that seat himself.

Bus Companies

The second state appointee ostensibly would represent the interests of the county’s small municipal bus companies, who fear that their funding may be threatened by the reorganization. It would be filled by an elected official representing an area with a municipal bus system.

Both appointments would be made by a joint Assembly-Senate Rules Committee, meaning that the leadership of each house would effectively have one appointment.

“They’re carving up the pie in Sacramento,” said one Los Angeles City Hall official who has been tracking the legislation.

But Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sepulveda), the bill’s other author who has been critical of Robbins’ effort to get on the transit board, said it was Robbins, not Brown, who sought the second legislative seat. Katz suggested that with two legislators on the board, it may give Robbins “some protection” from criticism that he is out for personal political gain.

Robbins denied those were his motives, saying he sought the amendment to “line up support and to fulfill a commitment that had been made earlier to the Speaker.”

“I don’t need any protection,” Robbins said.

Roberti had another view.

“I think Sen. Robbins wanted it more than the Speaker,” he said. “The Speaker wanted it too, though.”

Rail Projects

The new board would have unprecedented control over county transportation decisions. It would issue billions of dollars in contracts on already planned subway and light-rail projects and determine placement of future highways and commuter rail projects.

The loser under the new amendment would be the Los Angeles County chapter of the League of California Cities, which previously could have named two members of the transit board but would have one appointee under the proposal.

“Our opposition would be hardened,” said Ken Emanuels, the league’s legislative director.

He said that while the small cities have 44% of the county’s population, one seat would only give them 9% of the representation on the transit board.

The new amendment, though, could pick up support from cities with municipal bus lines--generally the larger of the suburban cities.

“It eliminates a good chunk of the current opposition in the Legislature,” Roberti said.

The reorganization legislation is scheduled for a final vote on the Senate floor next week, possibly on Tuesday or Wednesday. A final vote by the full Assembly is expected by the end of next week.