MTA DIDN'T REALIZE WORK ON BUSWAY COULD RESTART.

Byline: Lisa Mascaro Staff Writer

The MTA kept work halted on the Orange Line busway across the San Fernando Valley at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars because its lawyers didn't understand that an appeals court order stopping construction actually ended a week ago, officials said Wednesday.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials said they had become increasingly convinced that the order no longer was in effect, but feared mistakenly violating the court's intent - despite having lost $1.5 million during the 23-day shutdown and leaving a construction mess that has been a hardship to Valley residents and businesses across the 14-mile route.

It was not until the Daily News contacted the court's assistant administrator in Los Angeles directly Wednesday afternoon that it was clear the temporary stay was dissolved when the court's jurisdiction over the case ended last week.

``(The) stay order has been lifted by virtue of the case being final to us,'' said Daniel Potter, assistant court administrator for the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles.

``They didn't decide today the stay was lifted. Their intent all along was that the stay would remain in effect as long as we had jurisdiction over the case. The court assured me today it knew what it was doing. It was clear in their minds. They thought it was a given.''

Informed of the court's position, officials said the MTA board likely will decide today whether to resume construction on the $330 million busway, which was nearly 40 percent complete before the shutdown over whether a review was needed on the alternative of using Metro Rapid buses instead of a dedicated busway.

``This is great news,'' said Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, the MTA board member who has championed the busway through his district. ``I only wish the court had just said so when it issued its ruling last week.

``If it holds, and I assume it will hold, that would mean that the MTA could proceed to resume construction, which has been our objective since the stay was issued.''

The clarification came as legislative efforts to overrule the court by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine of Van Nuys failed to muster support in Sacramento.

Yaroslavsky hoped Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the residents group fighting the Orange Line, would quit fighting the project.

``COST has done enough damage to this project. They should leave it alone,'' Yaroslavsky said. ``Let this project be completed.''

COST Chairwoman Diana Lipari declined to comment.

The group won a temporary shutdown from the Court of Appeal on Aug. 2 after the court agreed that the MTA's environmental review of the Orange Line failed to consider a system of Metro Rapid buses as an alternative.

COST attorney John A. Henning said the group's intent is to stop busway construction until the new study is completed.

``We believe the busway should not be built while the MTA is going through that process. We also feel the busway should not be built while the MTA is exhausting its final, remaining appeal on that question.''

He declined to say whether the group would seek further court action.

The busway is a buses-only route being built along a former rail line between North Hollywood and Warner Center. It is expected to open next summer.

COST sued the MTA over the environmental review shortly after the project was approved in 2002, but lost in trial court later that year. It appealed to the state Court of Appeal, which agreed July 19 that the MTA failed to study the Rapid bus alternative.

The MTA is now conducting that study, which could take nine months. MTA officials said a delay that long could cost $100 million.

Both sides expected the court to rule Aug. 18 on whether the temporary work stoppage would remain in place while the new study was being conducted. But when the court failed to issue a decision last week, both sides scrambled to understand the court's intent.

Court clerks for the 2nd District in Los Angeles said at the time that the court no longer had jurisdiction over the case as of Aug. 18.

On Tuesday, the MTA's outside attorney sent a letter to the court asking for clarification.

The clerk notified the MTA on Wednesday that there would be no further orders or clarifications coming from the court, said the MTA's attorney, County Counsel Steve Carnevale.

What that meant was clarified when the Daily News inquired. The MTA said it would have been difficult for its hired attorney to press the court for such clarification because of court etiquette, as well as ethics rules that require both sides to be present.

Yaroslavsky said the MTA had been hesitant to resume construction in recent days for fear of mistakenly going against the court's order.

``They were treading gingerly on that conclusion,'' he said. ``The last thing the MTA wants to do is fly in the face of a court order. That's why our lawyers have been cautious in the extreme of doing anything that could have this agency and the board of directors in contempt of court.''

Lisa Mascaro, [phone]

lisa.mascaro(at)dailynews.com