Critics ask attorney general to investigate state rail officials who also hold local offices

Critics of the California high-speed rail project Tuesday urged the state attorney general to investigate whether two prominent officials in Los Angeles and Anaheim have conflicts of interest because they sit on the bullet train’s board of directors while holding other public offices.

Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design in Palo Alto asserts that Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle and Richard Katz, a board member for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, might be violating a state law that forbids public officials from simultaneously sitting on boards, commissions, committees or any other government body with interests that are likely to clash.

The group is armed with an opinion from the Legislature’s legal office, which concluded in April that a court would likely rule that Katz and Pringle, chairman of the high-speed rail board, hold incompatible offices, a finding that could force them to resign from one or more of their positions.

Anaheim City Council members and the MTA board make decisions related to segments of the high-speed rail project planned for Los Angeles and Orange counties, where a leg of the system would terminate in Anaheim. Pringle also is a member of the Orange County Transportation Authority board while Katz sits on the board of Metrolink, the commuter rail line that serves six counties.

“Local office and service on the high-speed rail board just don’t mix.” said Elizabeth Alexis, a co-founder of Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design. “The biggest problem is maintaining public confidence in the integrity of the process. The project needs to be not just clean. It needs to be squeaky clean.”

Alexis pointed to recent concerns expressed by state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), who chairs the Senate’s transportation committee, which monitors the high-speed rail project.

In June, Lowenthal addressed a proposed deal -- backed by Pringle -- to use $200 million in high-speed rail money to complete a huge, canopied transportation center next to Angels Stadium in Anaheim at the southern terminus of the bullet train's first phase. Lowenthal said it looked like parochial interests were taking precedent over statewide interests.

Pringle said the incompatible office question “is a gray area,”  and it remains speculative that there would be a disqualifying conflict between the interests of the local agencies he represents and the high-speed rail authority. Until there is a ruling to the contrary, he said, his understanding is he may continue to serve in multiple roles.

Katz, a former state legislator and an experienced transportation official, recently discounted the April letter from the legislative counsel, saying the office “always takes the middle ground.” He said the matter will be clearly resolved only if and when a court rules on the question.

Both Katz and Pringle argue that their local government experience has been a significant help to various agencies coordinating bullet train plans and trying to integrate them with local rail systems and communities along the route.

“There’s been more access to high-speed rail from local government in Southern California since Pringle and I got on the board than there ever has been before,” Katz said. “I don’t see how just sitting on the MTA or Metrolink board is inherently incompatible.”

-- Dan Weikel and Rich Connell

Comments

[Marcia Twane]

Headline on the front page :

"Bullet-train critics ask point to possible conflicts"

I have a reasonable command of the English language and this phrase seems to make no sense to me.

Am I missing something?

[Lifelong LA Resident]

Enough dancing around. These NIMBYs have done enough damage to our ability to say "No" to traveling by automobile the length of our fair state. The article documents another ploy of the "No I don't want real rail transportation".

Maybe we should look for the monetary ties of these unprogressives to the Koch Brothers and their petroleum infused wealth.

We need high speed transportation alternatives now.

Stop being obstructionist. If you can not lead forward... Get out of the way!

[Big Jim Slade]

As much as I think this high speed rail system is a complete boondoggle I can't help but think this effort to taint the characters of these transit leaders is even more of a sham.

Ridiculous!

[Jake]

Public integrity my foot.

More likely that a very small number of very well connected, very rich people want to kill the high speed rail project by circumventing the democratic process, so they have invented a flimsy justification to remove Katz and Pringle (by claiming that a highly dubious conflict of interest exists) for the purposes of replacing them with their own puppets.

[Scott Piotrowski]

My reason for voting AGAINST the HSR bond a year ago was that after 10+ years, the HSR commission had very little to show for the tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars spent on the project. Further, the bond seemed to me to primarily fund more studies, without acquiring rights of way or land, and without providing for construction.

I am in favor of high speed rail. However, my priority for getting it is with reasonable, accountable expenses. It seems that perhaps our costs to date are not necessarily accountable, and continue to be questionable. I guess I voted correctly in November 2009.

[Robert NO longer in LA]

'ells Bells....the political insiders will simply have their toadies 'Excuse' themselves from voting, but use their bully pulpits to bludgeon 'non-belivers.' The incestuous circle jerk of politics.......

[Logic and Reason]

Scott's comments about the lack of any real progress are spot on. Perhaps there needs to be a committee that actually supports the completion of a HSR project, not merely study it. We need to get a program like the old Apollo space program, one that goes full speed ahead. A connection of San Diego, Los Angeles, the bay area and perhaps Sacramento would be amazing. Southwest airlines might be unhappy about it.

[Jennifer555]

This high speed train line is an incredibly wasteful boondoggle, at least as to its unnecessary detour to the Lancaster/Palmdale area.

That detour from the San Fernando Valley to Santa Clarita to Agua Dulce/Acton to Lancaster to Palmdale to Mohave to Tehachapi to Hart Flat to Bakersfield requires the train line to traverse incredibly difficult terrain (cliffs, deep canyons, rivers) with incredibly expensive bridge and track building, let alone the cost of buying the land for that route from private parties.

Forget the appearance of conflict of interest which these two public officials have. Somebody should be investigating which engineering contractors will benefit from this unnecessary construction and which real estate agents will receive representing the High Speed Rail Line in purchasing the land for the detour.

On a cost/benefit basis this detour to Lancaster/Palmdale is a ridiculous waste of tax payer money.