Najarian Motion on 710 Cost Estimate Subsumed, Delayed as Board Includes All MTA Projects 1

MTA Board member Ara Najarian’s motion to obtain a cost estimate for the 710 Tunnel proposal before proceeding with a multimillion dollar EIR was first amended by John Fasana to extend the motion to all MTA projects, then subsumed in a substitute motion by Gloria Molina who proposed asking staff to report back on whether the blanket requirement would delay any projects going forward.

Najarian’s motion on today’s MTA agenda drew 21 speakers during public comment, 19 speaking in favor and only 2 against. Excerpted comments:

Donald Voss, Mayor, La Canada Flintridge – “Developing a reliable cost estimate will indicate whether it is appropriate to proceed before taking on the great cost of an EIR.”

Dr. Bill Sherman, Chair, South Pasadena Transportation Commission – “How can you buy something if you don’t know how much it costs? PPP [public private partnership] funding is a magician’s trick – the public pays one way or another. This project is just too expensive.”

Susan Boland, La Crescenta – “Give the taxpayers a window sticker.”

Damon Nagami, Natural Resources Defense Council – “Metro is committing its resources to the wrong approach.”

Sherry Stubbs – “This board has already authorized, spent, and will spend almost $86 million on this project. You are gambling with the taxpayers’ money.”

Representatives of both the Eagle Rock and Historic Highland Park neighborhood councils spoke in support of the motion,and also presented resolutions opposing the project.

The two speakers against the motion were Lee Campbell, who claimed that SCAG had already done a cost study which indicated a $4.8 billion cost (a subsequent speaker disputed that and said SCAG’s latest figure was $11.5 billion), and Barbara Massina of the Alhambra City Council.

During the board’s discussion, Najarian noted that the 710 Tunnel proposal is “a significant project – one of the largest in the country. Because of its size, we owe it to the taxpayers to come up with a good cost estimate before spending $80 million on an EIR.” He concluded that the MTA’s practice of developing cost estimates after EIRs are completed is wrong.

No one on the board disagreed, although chair Don Knabe called the motion “another delay.” After a discussion of Fasana’s amendment, the board passed Molina’s substitute motion directing staff to return with a report on which, if any, projects would be delayed by a cost estimate requirement. The report will be presented at the next MTA Board meeting in February 2011.