These developments put project supporters on the spot in two different ways.

The Los Angeles hearing suggests attitudes about the bullet train in Los Angeles County are moving against the project. That’s what happened in Silicon Valley, where voters supported Proposition 1A in 2008 to provide $9.95 billion for a statewide bullet train system but shifted to intense opposition when the real-life effects of building a high-speed rail system through wealthy communities triggered a powerful, well-financed campaign to force the state to back off.

This and $30 billion in cost savings led Gov. Jerry Brown and the rail authority to adopt a “blended”plan in which high-speed rail would extend from Fresno to northern Los Angeles County, with slower rail on each end connecting riders to downtown San Francisco and downtown Los Angeles, respectively.

But after the rail authority decided last year to accelerate construction in Southern California, community opposition began to build. This has helped fray the loose coalition of the region’s politicians who have long supported the idea of a bullet-train system but are uncomfortable with the emerging specifics.

Is Antonovich’s proposal actually a ‘poison pill’?

Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich — who once lobbied to make sure the bullet train’s route went through his district — now is the leading proponent of minimizing disruption to his district by tunneling through the San Gabriel Mountains for the train’s 15-mile Palmdale-to-Burbank link. Given that this would add billions of dollars in construction costs to a project that already can’t identify how it’s going to pay for its first $31 billion segment, that’s close to asking the rail authority to do the impossible. Such “poison pills” are one way for politicians to oppose a project in indirect fashion.

Antonovich’s 2014 proposal, in turn, led to concerns in January from two other elected Democrats who previously backed the bullet train project enthusiastically. This is from the Los Angeles Business Journal:

Rep. Adam Schiff came out in opposition on Thursday to a proposed alignment of the state’s high-speed rail project that would require a tunnel beneath the Angeles National Forest – damaging chances the plan will be carried out.

 

In a letter sent this month, Schiff, D-Burbank, and Rep. Judy Chu, D-El Monte, told California High Speed Rail Authority Dan Richard to scrap any consideration of a route under the San Gabriel Mountains between Palmdale and the San Fernando Valley because it would be harmful to the environment.

Wealthy environmentalists don’t like Antonovich’s plan. But some poor and middle-class homeowners of the San Fernando Valley don’t like the rail authority’s alternative, and they depict their fight as akin to David vs. Goliath. This is from Glendale resident Stephen Mills’ letter in Friday’s L.A. Times:

California High Speed Rail Authority board member Lou Correa said that he detected “a little bit of NIMBYism” regarding the reaction to bullet train plans. He should get used to it.

 

Affluent neighborhoods have successfully fought intrusive development that would have affected their quality of life, and now working-class neighborhoods are doing the same.

How much is CA project an Obama priority?

Meanwhile, in Washington, the House’s action to pull back federal funds from the state’s high-speed project may prove as consequential as the developments in Los Angeles County. The provision was included in the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal 2016, a multibillion-dollar measure that includes many provisions the White House supports.

If the Senate approves this funding bill, would President Obama actually veto it in the name of preserving federal grants to an embattled, increasingly unpopular project that would help only one of the 50 states?

That’s not clear. Doing so would likely prompt a sharp reaction from the Washington Post’s editorial page. It has long been a harsh critic of California’s project.

A 2011 editorial, headlined “California’s high-speed rail system is going nowhere fast,” noted that the state “hasn’t credibly identified a source of funds for the system” and questioned Gov. Jerry Brown’s enthusiasm for the project.

On Friday, President Obama carries his “executive orders” controversy to Southern California. In town since Thursday, he will redesignate half of the Angeles National Forest a national monument at the behest of Rep. Judy Chu, D-Monterey Park. According to the Los Angeles Times, “The designation will give the U.S. Forest Service greater ability to manage the crowds and protect its natural wonders.”

Chu is running for re-election against Republican Jack Orswell.

Republicans have criticized the president for using the executive orders to bypass Congress’s authority, under the U.S. Constitution, to pass laws.

In this case, Chu sponsored H.R. 4858, the San Gabriel National Recreational Area Act. Chu’s bill would designate the Angeles Forest a national recreation area, an even higher designation than a national monument.

But H.R. 4858 has been buried in the Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Subcommittee of the Committee on Natural Resources in the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives. However, if Obama signs the executive order, the new national monument may have no increase in its appropriation of funds unless Congress approves Chu’s bill.

More funding would mean more forest rangers to police the huge litter problem in the mountain canyons of the forest today.

After one Labor Day weekend in 2011, 40,000 pounds of trash was picked up. And in 2014, three campers started the Colby Fire by throwing toilet paper into a campfire; then the wind scattered the embers.

Not vetted

Kathryn Barger, chief deputy to Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich, said Chu’s proposal had not been fully vetted with all stakeholders.

Barger said Los Angeles County has camps, dams, reservoirs, roads and other public works inside the forest. About 33 percent of L.A.’s drinking water comes from the Angeles Forest watershed. Lake Castaic, the main reservoir for Los Angeles that is supplied by northern California water, is in the Angeles Forest.

“We welcome more resources,” said Barger. But the county has a lot of investment in the forest that might be wasted.  On Sept. 30, 2014, L.A. County sought to build a $600,000 water pipeline in a portion of the Forest.

Class warfare

According to the Times, environmentalists are cheering the executive order. But working-class locals are worried about losing access to a popular recreational area that also supports middle-class jobs.

In 2013, the San Gabriel Valley Tribune ran a story titled, “Mountain bikers, environmentalists clash over Angeles National Forest plan.” It reported, “For the past seven years, the the U.S. Forest Service has been attempting to find a way to protect 37 roadless areas while keeping the public happy.” It detailed discussions and hearings involving mountain bikers and environmentalists. Now Obama’s sudden designation of the area as a national monument short-circuits that democratic process.

Young people and families use the forest for a cheap recreation place instead driving down to the beach. But environmentalists want forest access limited.  The forest attracts 32 million visitors each year, more than Yosemite or Yellowstone national parks.

Mt. Baldy residents and businesses protested in front of Chu’s office on Oct. 6. The residents don’t want to live inside a national monument. They feel they would no longer be able to access their cabins in the forest, hunt, hike, bike and use off-road vehicles.  Thousands of Southern Californians travel to Mt. Baldy to enjoy the ski resort.

On Oct. 8, Chu announced only half of the forest would be designated a national monument, leaving out the Mt. Baldy area.

Funding

The result of Obama’s executive order will be a new national monument without any additional funding, but with legal restrictions imposed on access and use. Today, any parking along the roads through the forest requires a National Forest Adventure Pass.

However, L.A. County has declared that passes are not required on county maintained roads and other areas. That might end once the area declared a monument. The forest already is registered as California Historical Landmark No. 717.

President Benjamin Harrison established Angeles National Forest in 1893.