Council backs Pasadena Blue Line extension amid debate over buses, bonding and a consent decree
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The council voted to express support for the Pasadena Blue Line extension while members pressed staff on funding shortfalls, the interaction with MTA’s consent decree and whether money would be better spent on buses for transit-dependent corridors.
The Los Angeles City Council debated and then moved to record formal support for the proposed Pasadena Blue Line extension and related requests for state and regional funding. Council discussion centered on tradeoffs between building light rail and buying buses, how a court consent decree affecting MTA spending could consume available funds, and where Prop A/Prop C and other matching monies would be applied.
Councilmember Hernandez summarized financing issues, saying most MTA-contributed funds for the line had already been spent and that a remaining shortfall required new infrastructure funding applications to the California Transportation Commission; figures discussed included an $80 million shortfall referenced for MTA contributions and approximately $280 million of additional infrastructure money available via the state JPA mechanism. Members pressed staff and the Chief Legislative Analyst to clarify whether adopting a council position would bind MTA board members (it would not) and how assessment and bonding actions interact with levying assessments later in the year.
Several councilmembers voiced concern about the timing and message of a council endorsement. Councilmember Walters and others asked whether the Blue Line support would signal less urgency for acquiring more buses — a point of contention because a court-ordered consent decree and related litigation could require substantial bus-related spending. Staff said the motion simply registers the council’s view that the Blue Line is a high-priority project and does not legally bind MTA decisions; actual levies, bonding actions and project funding remain dependent on later votes and matching funds. Councilmembers requested a follow-up report from DOT and CLA on transit-dependent corridors and a briefing on how the assessment and bonding processes operate together.
After discussion, the council recorded a vote in favor of the Blue Line motion (vote recorded as 11 ayes, 1 no). Members emphasized that supporting the Blue Line did not mean opposing more bus purchases and asked staff to return with clarifying information on impacts and interactions with the consent decree and bus procurement.