VALLEY RAIL FUNDING IN JEOPARDY : $58 MILLION STUDY REQUEST THREATENED BY MTA VOTE.

Byline: David Bloom Daily News Staff Writer

The MTA board put funding for the San Fernando Valley rail line in jeopardy Wednesday when it voted to appease East Los Angeles congressional members who insisted on support for funding an east-side rail extension.

At issue is $58 million in federal transit funds sought by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to finish an engineering study necessary to get the San Fernando Valley east-west rail line project under way.

The study is included on a $600 million transportation funding wish list the MTA will present to Congress.

But by adding a last-minute $44 million funding request for the east-side project on a 7-3 vote, the MTA board leaves it to Congress to set priorities, and could allow the Valley project to be passed over again.

``This jeopardizes any chance the San Fernando Valley has to have a rail line,'' said City Councilman Hal Bernson, who is Mayor Richard Riordan's alternate on the board.

``I think it's really basically saying, `Sorry, San Fernando Valley, we're going to do it to you again,' '' Bernson said.

Added Mel Wilson, a Northridge Realtor and MTA board member: ``On a number of occasions, the Valley's been leap-frogged over. I just feel we're going to get the short end of the stick again.''

MTA officials said the move was forced by U.S. Reps. Lucille Roybal-Allard, Xavier Becerra and Esteban Torres, who represent parts of the city's east side, East Los Angeles and neighboring communities.

In a meeting with MTA officials last week, the three raised concerns about the absence of east-side rail projects on the list Congress will consider as part of this year's reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, or ISTEA.

``What they said is they would not feel comfortable signing the letter of support if they didn't see something there for the east side,'' said Rae James, who heads the MTA's lobbying efforts.

ISTEA is Congress' five-year spending priority list for transportation projects from 1998 to 2003.

While getting on the list doesn't guarantee adequate funding, not making the list guarantees a project's death knell. And having only divided support from local members of Congress - as Becerra, Roybal-Allard and Torres threatened - can quickly knock a project off the list.

Faced with that political reality, the MTA staff then added the $44 million request to finish engineering on the second phase of the Metro Red Line's subway extension into the east side.

Several board members, particularly east-side representatives such as Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina and City Councilman Richard Alatorre, said the move would ensure a unified delegation in Washington at a crucial time.

``The reality is, it's somewhat idiotic not to include the east side (in the project list) given that one member serves on the (transportation subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee) and another is chair of the California delegation,'' said Alatorre.

``We need friends; we don't need enemies,'' he said.

Opposition to addition

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who joined Bernson and Wilson in opposing the addition, said that by including the project, the MTA will get less than it wants in Washington because of tight fiscal constraints.

``There's not going to be $102 million coming for those two projects,'' Yaroslavsky said. ``And we don't have any guarantees how it comes out of Congress.''

And funding the remaining engineering work for the east-side project could place it ahead of the east-west project when it comes time to set priorities for the next ISTEA funding cycle in 2003, Yaroslavsky said.

``If final design is done on the east side, they'll be back here and say we're ready to go,'' Yaroslavsky said.

``When the other line is ready to go forward, this board will be hard-pressed not to go ahead,'' Yaroslavsky said, despite repeated agency declarations that the east-west line will be the next line built.

U.S. Rep. Howard Berman, D-Mission Hills, said Wednesday that he is concerned about the pressures placed on the MTA, and he warned that asking for too much could cost the agency and the region.

``The MTA has had enough problems already and enough questions raised about it,'' Berman said. ``The last thing it should do is propose unrealistic suggestions or turn people from the area against each other.

``I'd certainly look askance at anything that jeopardized the Valley's ability to pursue its transit needs,'' he said.

U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Woodland Hills, could not be reached Wednesday.

Many lost battles

Valley rail backers have sought a train system for at least two decades, but have frequently battled each other and other regions over the kind of system, its route and its priority compared to other projects.

Frequently, the Valley has lost those battles.

Nate Brogin, vice chairman of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association, said the board's decision ``plays to those who would like to creep up on the Valley project and puts them in a position to leap ahead.''

The Valley east-west line, for instance, has continued to slip, with construction now not likely to start until sometime around 2007.

Under current plans, the line would run west along already-purchased rights of way along Burbank and Chandler boulevards from the North Hollywood terminus of the Metro Red Line subway.

The MTA board is scheduled to make a series of important decisions on the line in the next several months, including the March discussion of its construction start date and a late spring discussion of whether it will be a heavy-rail or some other kind of system.

Still unresolved is whether the line will run underground, above ground or below grade.