Water Education Foundation
This is just one post in the San Onofre Toll Road Category
Click here to view all posts

San Onofre Toll Road: Attorney general asks for North County hearing; LA Times says let the public be heard, and Rep. Gary Miller has financial ties to the toll road

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on July 16, 2008 at 6:53 am

From the North County Times:

California’s attorney general is urging federal officials to reschedule a public hearing in September in North County on the proposed San Onofre toll road. Federal officials said they are considering the request.

The hearing to review an appeal of the state’s rejection of the four-lane toll road was scheduled for July 25 at UC Irvine. It was cancelled after university officials withdrew their offer to host the event because of concerns attendance could exceed 10,000, potentially overwhelming the 4,758-seat facility as well as nearby streets and parking lots.

Jamee Jordan Patterson, supervising deputy attorney general, sent a two-page letter Monday to the U.S. Commerce Department on behalf of the California Coastal Commission. It was addressed to Jane C. Luxton, general counsel for the Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The Coastal Commission voted in February to withhold a key approval for the $875 million highway project. A short time later, the road builder, Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, appealed the decision to Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez. A decision on the project is expected by the end of the year.

Commerce officials said they may not reschedule the hearing because of concerns about the expense of renting a larger venue, and they said there is no requirement to hold a hearing.

Patterson said the estimated meeting attendance of 10,000 is a strong indication that the federal government ought to find a way to have one.

Read the full text of this story from the North County Times by clicking here.

The Los Angeles Times editorial agrees that the Commerce Department needs to find a venue for the public hearing:

The Commerce Department has a great obligation here — all the greater because of the intensity of public concern — and it should be taking whatever steps are necessary to ensure a full, open hearing. If that requires a bigger venue, such as the county fairgrounds in Del Mar that the Coastal Commission used (and was somehow able to afford), so be it. If it means holding several hearings so that all have a chance to attend, that’s fine too. We hope the department’s apparent reluctance doesn’t stem from the Transportation Corridor Agencies’ complaints about the Coastal Commission hearing, which also drew thousands of boisterous opponents. Toll road supporters stand to benefit if the size and vehemence of the opposition is kept out of sight.

Full text of the LA Times editorial by clicking here.

Meanwhile, from the O.C. Register, Rep. Gary Miller has an investment in Foothill/Eastern bonds, but says that’s not why he supports the tollway extension:

One of Congress’ strongest supporters of the Foothill tollway’s controversial southern extension steered taxpayer money to and lobbied for the project while holding a financial interest in a connected tollway. Financial disclosures for Rep. Gary Miller, a land developer who represents Orange, San Bernardino and Los Angeles Counties, show he purchased $20,000 in Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency bonds in 2000. The bonds pay investors a fixed rate and are repaid by drivers’ tolls.

The Eastern and Foothill (SR-241) toll roads run from the 91 Freeway to Irvine and Rancho Santa Margarita. The Southern extension is the final 16-mile segment of SR-241 and would run from Rancho Santa Margarita to the I-5 near San Clemente, if it overcomes public and official objections.

In an interview, Miller acknowledged getting an $8 million appropriation for Foothill-South’s construction in 2005. He has subsequently signed letters to the state Coastal Commission and the Commerce Secretary as part of a lobbying effort in support of the tollway agency’s plan to build the road through a coastal park. Though Miller has repeatedly signed financial disclosure forms listing the bonds. he expressed surprise when asked about that investment. Miller said his wife must have purchased the bonds and added that she is largely responsible for the family’s investment decisions.

Miller said he’s not backing the tollway because of any personal interest. “It’s a privately funded project with tremendous public benefits and that’s the only way I’m looking at it,” he said.

More from the O.C. Register by clicking here.

July 16, 2008 · Filed Under San Onofre Toll Road

Comments

Leave a Reply