The Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council issued an ultimatum to the Aliso Viejo-based Surf Industry Manufacturers Association: stop sponsoring environmental groups opposed to the 241 Foothill-South toll road or face the mighty wrath of more than 100,000 union workers “who build the roads, hospitals and schools that keep our communities strong.”

The letter is not signed by the council's executive secretary, Richard N. Slawson, who is shown at a March rally in L.A. calling for an end to violence at construction sites (violence that apparently was not foisted on them by Nazi surf punks wearing brand-new Volcom tees). Instead, council rep Jim Adams got the John Hancock honors for the letter dated Aug. 19, two days before SIMA held its 19th annual Watermans Weekend fundraising events at St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach aimed at raising thousands of dollars for a variety of environmental causes.

Adams pulled a quote from SIMA'S website that said a significant portion of the proceeds from the event would be used by two recipient organizations “exclusively for litigation and legal activities battling the expansion of the 241 toll road” and “dedicated to the fight to save Trestles.”

If you're burning $2,000 for a VIP table at Surfer Magazine's 36th annual Surfer Poll and Video Awards ceremony Tuesday night at the Grove of Anaheim, at least you can feel warmed that you are helping two worthy causes. Proceeds from VIP table sales at the annual, invite-only event that honors the best in surfing and surf cinematography will be shelled out to the Save Trestles campaign and Surfers for Cetaceans.

Surfrider Foundation's Save Trestles has been one of the leading opponents of the Transportation Corridor Agency's plan to extend the 241 Toll Road along a 16-mile route that straddles San Mateo Creek and cuts into San Onofre State Park. Surfrider fears that construction and road runoff directly threatens the world-class surf break at and around Trestles, and that habitat critical for the survival of at least seven endangered species, including the Southern Steelhead trout, will be critically degraded.

The on-again, off-again hearing on the 241 Foothill South toll road extension by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce is back on, from 10:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Sept. 22, and in an old/new home, O'Brien Hall at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, or the same place the California Coastal Commission met, took testimony and ultimately voted 8-2 against paving Lexus lanes over state park land.

The hearing was to go off last month in the Bren Events Center until fears about the expected crowd size, coupled with a slew of competing gatherings that were expected to draw cars to the same parking spaces, caused UC Irvine to back out. More than 3,500 people showed up at the Coastal Commission's Del Mar hearing in February, and toll road foes were spreading the word on the 'net to get 5,000 out to the Bren.

Just like before, the hearing is open to all members of the public, but if you want to address the gub'ment folks, you must submit a written request via U.S. mail or commercial carrier to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration by Sept. 12.

Congressman Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar) has jack-assed his way back into the news. Seems he owns $20,000 in toll road bonds. What's the big deal? Miller is a big-time toll-road supporter, putting his signature on letters of support to the project as well as garnering earmark after earmark of pork-barrel tax-payer dollars for the project, the completion of which is necessary for the return of Miller's money.

The Register tried out a new tactic this week and actually did some reporting for a change:

"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."

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.

The whole kerfluffle is reminiscent of a 2006 Weekly piece, "Ken Ryan and Friends," regarding then-mayor of Yorba Linda (and chair of the Foothill/Eastern Board) Ken Ryan:

As a principal for EDAW (Eckbo, Dean, Austin and Williams), Ryan is working on the Carrari Ranch Project in San Bernardino County, on land belonging to G. Miller Development Co., owned by Congressman Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar). Miller is the same congressman whom Congressman Ken Calvert (R-Corona) thanked for his work on the 2006 Transportation Equity Act, which diverts $8 million in federal funds to the 241 project—despite the fact the toll road is supposed to be a private venture. It was classic pork: The act also included $2 million for sound walls in Yorba Linda and Anaheim. Ryan, Miller and Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle gathered on Feb. 17, 2004, in an Anaheim mobile-home park to commemorate the occasion.

In a 2002 Riverside Press-Enterprise article, Ryan is listed as a spokesman for Lytle Development. In the 2004 election, Lytle Development was Miller's top donor.

In 2003, Congressman Miller requested more than $3 million to build a pedestrian bridge over the Imperial Highway in Yorba Linda, where his friend Ryan was known as "Mayor Ryan." Miller was also one of five signatories to a Feb. 17 letter to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in support of the 241. The other four? Calvert, Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach), Darrell Issa (R-Vista) and John Campbell (R-Irvine). Miller, Calvert and Rohrabacher all list real-estate firms as their top campaign contributors in 2004.

Congressman Miller phoned up the Weekly when that article was published, sounding mighty pissed off—butt-hurt, as the kids would say. He claimed we were manufacturing information, alleging impropriety where none was to be found. In short, he was dancing around accusations of libel. We said we had no idea what he was talking about. He said how there was nothing wrong with getting money for the toll road, declaring, "I wish it had been TEN million!" Of course he did. The more federal money he earmarked for the project, the faster it might get built and the sooner he'd get back his twenty stacks.

"Rep. Gary Miller says he will sell his investment in the Foothill/Eastern tollway if the Transportation Corridor Agency is ever successful in building the southern extension to the road…. Miller's congressional spokesman, Scott Toussaint, said in an e-mailed statement that Miller wants to 'make clear that he is committed to upholding the ethical responsibilities of his office.'

"'If TCA ever completes Foothill-South, I will sell my bonds before completion of the project to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest,' Miller said in the statement."

Is there anything illegal about Ken Ryan, Yorba Linda City Councilman and sometimes-mayor, working for a company which then became top donor to a Congressman who earmarked money for projects to benefit Ken Ryan's town and toll road? Probably not. Does it sound bad when phrased that way? Hell yes.
What's odd is that Miller staunchly defended his relationship with Ryan in 2006; what could have changed to make him so sensitive? So tender? So raw? Could it be that, in terms of appearances of impropriety, Congressman Miller's toll road bond investment is Strike Two?

In fact, we're being generous by limiting the strikes to toll-road-related impropriety. Why is Gary Miller a vertex on the California Democratic Party's Triangle of Corruption? Look it up here but I'll give you a quick summary: garnering earmarks to support the projects of his top donors, not to mention pursuing public funds for the purchase of land he owned. No wonder Miller assumed I was alleging impropriety when I made the Ryan-Lytle-Miller connection; it seems to be something with which he's overly familiar.

Social Distortion, the Adolescents and even bubblegummy Blink-182 are among the bands whose scheduled UC Irvine shows were canceled at the last minute over the years because fraighty cat campus security fretted onslaughts of scary, leather-clad, facially pincushioned punk rockers.

A quick glance at the surfers, beachcombers and plain ol' average folks lined up against the extension of the 241 Foothill South toll road extension through San Onofre State Beach and other environmentally sensitive areas does not produce evidence of an overwhelming punker presence. But they are apparently just as menacing to UCI officials, who have backed their Bren Events Center out as the venue for a July 25 U.S. Commerce Department hearing on the toll road.

"They feared that the turnout from supporters of San Onofre State Beach and Trestles would overwhelm the facilities at UCI, estimating that over 10,000 of you would show up," reports the San Clemente-based Surfrider Foundation's Save Trestles blog.

"Clearly there is strong community opposition to this destructive highway project, and those voices need to be heard. Unfortunately no other venue has been identified, and the Commerce Department has made no definitive decision on how or when to move forward with the hearing."

The Orange County Register's Pat Brennan reported Friday that the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration may postpone or cancel the hearing altogether. The NOAA is weighing the toll road builder's appeal of the state Coastal Commission's February denial of the project.

Like the Bren, which only has 5,000 seats, the NOAA says it does not have the funds in its budget to cover the cost of an increased police presence needed to handle the large crowd expected.

But an audience of 10,000 mostly surfers, beachcombers and plain ol' average folks would not be as unruly as, say, the occupants of your typical Adoloescents mosh pit. Then again, the Save Trestles blog's "The Great Toll Road Swindle" opening logo does resemble "The Great Rock & Roll Swindle" logo employed by the punk pioneering Sex Pistols. Hmmm...

By Alex Brant-Zawadzki

The TCA's new number for the cost of construction for the 241 extension is $1.14 billion. However, they've tacked on additional costs not associated with the previous $875 million figure, hence the $1.3 billion figure cited in a recent LA Times article.

What follows are a list of direct quotes, in a format very suitable for bullet-pointing, from TCA spokesperson Jennifer Seaton, who was kind enough to take personal time after work to call and make sure I got the information I requested. Being the TCA's mouthpiece must be like being Dr. Hunter S. Thompson's cigarette holder. I'm not saying I trust the lady, I just appreciate the call-back is all.

The Department of Commerce has stated their interest in holding a public hearing on the Foothill-South toll road extension, disregarding the impotent raging of Transportation Corridor Agencies counsel Robert Thornton. The LA Times reported on the road's construction cost leaping from $875 million to $1.3 billion and that ridership is down on the Foothill-South by "nearly 4 percent." The Army Corps of Engineers has declared that there could still be potential alternatives to the favored route, one which would carve through the Donna O'Neill Land Conservancy and inland San Onofre State Beach, potentially exterminating the Pacific pocket mouse and annihilating any sense of tranquility at the Acjachemen sacred site of Panhe. One has to ask, what hasn't gone wrong for the TCA lately?

This toll road debate is starting to feel like Clue—who's going to kill the project? Was it Colonel Magness, in the media, with cold, hard facts?

Col. Thomas Magness wrote a little letter the Transportation Corridor Agencies didn't like. The letter disclosed that the TCA's preferred, certified alignment for their Foothill-South (241) toll road extension was not in fact the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). In layman's terms, LEDPA means "that which is least idiotic." In legal terms, it means "the only option you can legally choose."

Magness felt obliged to clarify certain "misrepresentations", such as the TCA's suggestion that everyone involved had agreed that their Green Alignment was just super. In fact, Magness's agency—the Army Corps of Engineers (COE)—is solely responsible for determining the LEDPA and they haven't made a final decision yet. Naturally, this created a flurry of media attention. Why? Who cares about this issue besides me? Well, it turns out California law requires the 241 extension be built using the route that will cause less environmental devastation than all others, as determined by the COE and ONLY the COE, as Col. Magness asserts.

So what business had the TCA in certifying their so-called "Green Alignment", running through San Onofre State Beach, the Donna O'Neill Land Conservancy and the Acjachemen sacred site of Panhe? None whatsoever, it would seem, if the road was not the final choice of the COE.

Col. Magness has a response to recent comments in the media discussing his letter, possible motives for its composition, and the meaning of certain statements. It is available on the COE Los Angeles website, but I leave you with a salient excerpt.

As part of the collaborative of federal, state and local agencies, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did identify a preliminary LEDPA in 2005 based on information available to us at the time. My intent in the letter, as a neutral arbiter in the environmental review, was to make clear that our process has not run its course. There has been no final, formal decision on any of the remaining practicable alternatives. More analysis, public review and comment are needed and are ongoing.

See the full letter below.

When supporters of the 241 (Foothill-South) toll road and its builder, the Transportation Corridor Agencies, hear opponents claim they'll stop the project, the reply is usually along the lines of, "You and what army?"

The United States Army, assholes. That's right, the Army is finally providing the necessary firepower to blow the TCA's lies clean out of the sky.

Colonel Thomas H. Magness is District Commander of the Los Angeles District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). You may remember their fine work on the levees in New Orleans. Colonel Magness sent a letter (Download file) dated April 7 to Thomas Street, staff attorney for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, "to clarify and augment the project's administrative record before you...." The project in question is the Foothill-South extension.

"My staff consistently endeavors to render fair and balanced decisions within the bounds of our implementing regulations and based on the best available information. For this reason, I am compelled to highlight a few areas of the public record where I have found inaccurate statements as well as inferences that misrepresent the Corps preliminary determinations within the context of our CWA and NEPA statutory responsibilities."

Would you believe it gets better?

Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi has just fragged Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger over the 241 (Foothill-South) toll road. The road, proposed by the Irvine-based Transportation Corridor Agencies, would cut through the Donna O'Neill Land Conservancy, itself mitigation for the Talega development, and the inland portion of San Onofre State Beach, not to mention disturb a site sacred to the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians.

In Vietnam, it was not unheard of for unhappy soldiers to toss a fragmentation grenade into the tent of, or "frag," the lieutenant or commanding officer. The enemy could always be blamed, and while it did not guarantee superior leadership in the future, at least it made for a nice change of pace.

Garamendi, along with State Senate President pro tem Don Perata, Senate Natural Resources Committee Chairman Darrell Steinberg and Senator Christine Kehoe, signed a letter to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez. (Download file)They made three simple demands:

1) You reject TCA’s appeal and uphold the California Coastal Commission’s legitimate authority to deny consistency certification for the Foothill-South Toll Road; 2) Should you take up the issue, hold a public hearing in Southern California and extend the public comment period accordingly; and 3) You prohibit federal agencies from meeting or negotiating with the TCA on this matter while the appeal is pending.

The last politicians who vocally opposed the toll road, Santa Monica City Council Bobby Shriver and his former colleague on the State Parks Commission Clint Eastwood (that's right, Dirty Harry fights to protect dirt), were not asked back to their seats on the Commission. But luckily these new politicians are not the Governor's appointees, and cannot be unjustly sacked in such a fashion.

Governor Schwarzenegger remained publicly undecided about the toll road for years before sending the Coastal Commission a letter of support for the project in the run-up to their February meeting in Del Mar, at which they soundly vetoed the project to the tune of an 8-2 vote against as well as a ruthless grilling and embarrassment of the TCA's new Grand Poo-bah, Tom Margro.

Margro recently penned a Sacramento Bee editorial purported to be a response to the Bee's criticism of Schwarzenegger's replacement of Shriver and Eastwood, but in fact it amounted to little more than the same tired old lines TCA hacks have parroted for decades.

What is much more intriguing is the request that the TCA not meet or negotiate with federal agencies until this is all over. Watch for more on THAT juicy piece of meat.

(Digg this post HERE)

In a move so non-rare it could be called well-done if it weren't less crispy and more slimy, Transportation Corridor Agencies counsel Robert Thornton has resorted to erroneous presumptions and dubious assertions in a pointless attempt to prevent the Department of Commerce from holding a hearing on the Foothill-South toll road extension. Who ever thought a lawyer would be sleazy?

Let us begin not with Thornton's bitchy March 28 letter (Download file) to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, written on Nossaman Gunther Knox & Elliot letterhead, but with the April 3 response Download file on behalf of a coalition of environmental groups, including Surfrider and the California State Parks Foundation, who took a pantload of umbrage at the TCA's request:

This remarkable request is not based on the absence of controversy in this project, but on the very existence of controversy. TCA claims that providing a forum to the public will “drown out” discussion of the project. In fact, it is TCA —which has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money on public relations and lobbying firms in an effort to promote the project—that is seeking to drown out meaningful discussion by foreclosing an important public forum on the issues raised by its appeal.

In addition to the Coastal Commission's request for a hearing, the environmental coalition requested one as well, citing 15 C.F.R. § 930.128(d):

(d) Except in the case of appeals involving energy projects, the Secretary may hold a public hearing in response to a request or on the Secretary's own initiative.

Well, that seems pretty straightforward. A hearing has been twice-requested. You can check the law yourself but take my word for it, there's nothing about requests to deny hearings. Thus Thornton's whining seems pointless. But what may be more important to note is that his whining includes falsehoods—falsehoods reported to a governmental agency. Stick with me past the jump for more on the lies as well as an alternative to the 241 from none other than Mike Dukakis, who is not only a visiting professor of public policy at UCLA during the winter quarter, but is also actress Olympia Dukakis's cousin. And something of a politician I hear.

Governor Schwarzenegger sent a message to every one of his appointees this week by effectively firing the chair and vice-chair of the California State Parks and Recreation Commission. Bobby Shriver, chairman of the Commission, is a Santa Monica City Councilman and the Governor's brother-in-law. Clint Eastwood, vice-chair of the Commission, is Clint friggin' Eastwood. Earlier in the week, both men learned they would not be asked back to their chairs, despite both having submitted requests to be re-appointed.

Schwarzenegger must be feeling lucky. Either that or butt-hurt.

Shriver and Eastwood both actively oppose the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension, a project proposed by Irvine's Transportation Corridor Agencies which would bisect the inland portion of San Onofre State Beach. Eastwood released a video criticizing the project in the build-up to last month's Coastal Commission hearing on the project, and Shriver testified at that hearing in opposition to the project. The Coastal Commission overwhelmingly vetoed the road, despite Governor Schwarzenegger's support for the project.

Despite his canning, Shriver is surprisingly chipper. If anything, he sounds proud. "I guess they felt Clint and I were being effective," Shriver told the Weekly. "Earlier in the year he reappointed commissioners [Paul Witt and Caryl Hart] who had opposed the toll road; there's also precedent for people serving more than two terms." As far as potential for reappointment is concerned, "it depends on the person."

At the end of the day it's all just politics, something Shriver has known for most of his life. Just business, nothing personal. "I've known Arnold since before he met my sister," said Shriver. "He's an old buddy." But still Shriver and Eastwood, an actor-turned-politician like the Governor, stand by their vote, "and we would do it again," asserted Shriver. He joked how the pair might go on tour together - "Clint and I have decided we're going to go on the lecture circuit and conduct our own hearings as independent citizens. We'd go all over Orange County, speaking to parks groups about why [the 241] is a bad idea."

The 241 is more than just a bad idea; "That project represents everything bad about our society, without any redeeming value whatsoever," said Joel Reynolds, counsel for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "The fact that Schwarzenegger supports it means that he is no green governor."

The Southern California Association of Governments has issued a warning that the California Coastal Commission's veto of the 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension could spell doom for our air quality. Or at least our air quality credits.

It's hard to imagine how a road which would increase cars on all our roads, encourage development, foster industrial as well as commercial complexes and require extensive construction just to be built could possibly have a positive impact on air quality. Still, according to SCAG:

A letter sent to Orange County transportation planners by the Southern California Assn. of Governments warns that if the Foothill South tollway is not built, another project must be substituted in SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan. Otherwise, the region runs the risk of violating federal emissions standards and losing funding, because projects not included in the plan are ineligible for state and federal dollars.

The 16-mile turnpike that would have cut through San Onofre State Beach was designated as a transportation control measure because it would have promoted carpool use and provided emission credits, said Hasan Ikhrata, SCAG's executive director.

Violating emissions standards? How is this possible? It seems there are these magic doohickeys called "air emission credits". As David Reyes succinctly puts it in the Times:

The region receives air emission credits for increasing the number of people in vehicles on freeways. Though there is a carpool lane on the I-5, it doesn't extend to the county line -- it ends in San Juan Capistrano. The average vehicle occupancy for the I-5 is 1.1 people per car, compared with about 1.5 persons for the proposed toll road, Ikhrata said.

The TCA's claim that their project would reduce emissions "defies all logic" according to one response to their Environmental Impact Report.

The Transportation Corridor Agencies, whose Foothill-South (241) toll road extension was recently vetoed by the California Coastal Commission, sent out the following letter to its supporters. My edits are in italicized bold.

Dear Supporter:

Thank you for your ongoing support for the completion of the 241 Toll Road. Such willful ignorance is to be commended. Special appreciation goes to all those who attended the February 6 Coastal Commission hearing in Del Mar. Sorry we only paid you for half the day. Hundreds of supporters showed up to take a stand against the traffic congestion that hurts the quality of life of all Southern Californians. We weren't quite dwarfed by the thousands of opponents who fought the road, making it by far the most widely-attended Coastal Commission hearing ever. More than 1,000 letters, 2,000 postcards and 7,600 emails were sent to the Coastal Commission in support of the project. We have lots of computers here at TCA.

In what could be seen by some as an admission of previous mistakes, the Transportation Corridor Agencies recently posted a job listing on the American Planning Association's website, HERE.

Rather than go off on a diatribe about the TCA's claims that the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension was the most studied road in the history of everything ever, or wax psychotic on the TCA's fingers-in-ears attitude towards environmental agencies, all of whom identified the 241 as the environmental holocaust it was, I think I'll just re-post the ad.

You're welcome, TCA. Flying Spaghetti Monster knows you need the help.

Toll Roads Agency Job Description
Senior Environmental Analyst Salary Range $58,504 - $84,831

The Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), public agency formed to plan, design, finance, construct and operate toll roads in Orange County, is seeking highly motivated, experienced environmental planning professional with a focus on transportation projects.

Must have excellent verbal/written communications skills and enjoy working with a multi-discipline team of dedicated professionals to manage environmental planning and review. Required: Knowledge of state and federal laws/regulations governing submittal/ approval of EIR/EIS for large-scale transportation projects and workable knowledge of mitigation measures.

Will interface directly with consultants, public officials, and resource agencies on specific complex environmental projects including permitting and biological habitat issues. Must have familiarity with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other regulatory compliance statutes.

The Foothill-South (241) toll road extension, as we know it, is dead.

Bold claim, you say? Presumptuous, maybe? Not so.

Recently, mi hermano Gustavo Arellano pinpointed the root cause of the Transportation Corridor Agencies' failure to gain Coastal Commission approval for their Final Solution to San Onofre State Beach: ARROGANCE. The TCA presumptuously and sometimes even indignantly refuted the majority of criticism of their project, as reflected in the Response to Comments section of the Environmental Impact Report. A juicy excerpt:

Comment Number: O19-13

Commenter: Terrell Watt Planning Consultants

Comment: There is a remarkable claim made that PM10 emissions will increase but that PM10 levels will not and that violations of state standards will not worsen (AQR 4-69, 4-70, 5-10). This defies all logic. And of course that is without accounting for most of the PM10 emissions. Obviously any increase in emissions will increase PM10 levels. The large emissions increases that would actually occur would increase the levels substantially, quite possibly above the federal standards.

Response: The comment is incorrect in summarizing the statements in the Draft EIS/SEIR...."

The comment is incorrect. The impacts are insignificant. You're wrong. We're not listening. Nya nya nya. This has been the general tone of the TCA's response to criticism in the past, and it continues today.

Full disclosure: I'm not too informed on the 241 Toll Road. I don't see how extending it to San Onofre will reduce traffic on the 5 Freeway. I don't surf so don't particularly care if the legendary waves of Trestles disappeared. I do know that the Transportation Corridor Authority is one of Orange County's worst governmental agencies, and that environmentalists care a bit too much about nature at the expense of other issues.

But after hearing both sides go at it yesterday on AirTalk with Larry Mantle on KPCC-FM 89.3, I know why the TCA didn't get its plans approved by the California Coastal Commission: arrogance.

One of the people interviewed was Lance MacLean, chairman of the Foothill Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency and a member on the Mission Viejo City Council. MacLean told Mantle he was "disappointed" in the Coastal Commission's decision, said "there was no winners" and went on to claim commuters were "doomed," our air quality would "degrade" and state parks would no longer receive $100 million that the TCA promised them if the Coastal Commission allowed the 241.

A couple of minutes later, Huell Howser of California Gold called, "compelled to call in with my two cents" he told Larry through his trademark twang. Huell acknowledged Southern California needed to alleviate traffic but then went into an impassioned defense of state parks and a vicious critique of those who want to tamper with them. Trestles, he said, "wasn't set aside for a park until something better came along; it was set aside FOREVER." View clips from Huell's Trestles special here.

MacLean's response? He called Huell's statements "alarmist."

Alarmist. Saying Huell Howser is an alarmist when it comes to California state parks is like saying Vin Scully overreacts during Los Angeles Dodgers broadcasts, that John Wooden cheers too much whenever the UCLA Bruins play at Pauley. Lance: You don't question Huell when it comes to California treasures; you shut up, learn, and hope you can ever have an ATOM of the respect Howser commands amongst Californians. By the way, it's pronounced "Cristianitos Road," not "Christianitos." And how's the sign stealing treating you these days?

The California Coastal Commission voted at 11:18 p.m. Wednesday night to deny a coastal permit to the Transportation Corridor Agencies. It will now be much more difficult for the TCA to construct the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension.

The vote was 8-2 in favor of denying certification. More to follow!

VOTES BY COMMISSIONER:

Blank – NO
Burke – YES
Clark – NO
Kram – YES
Neely – NO
Reilly – NO
Shallenberger – NO
Wan – NO
Kruer – NO

(some voters were inaudible due to cheering)

UPDATE: Some Coastal Commissioners had very tough questions and very tough language for the TCA. Here are my favorite excerpts:

Commissioner SARA WAN, herself a scientist, was "appalled" at what she called the TCA's "false science." She even suggested that the TCA's management plan for the mouse was "not a management plan at all except perhaps as a plan to drive the Pacific pocket mouse into extinction."

Commissioner MIKE REILLY cited the "limited value" of the TCA's $100 Million offer, and declared that "there is no legal way for us to concur with certification of this project."

The real kicker was Commissioner STEVE BLANK, who grilled the hell out of new TCA CEO Tom Margro...

Clint Eastwood is Vice-Chair of the California State Parks and Recreation Commission. He also used to surf down at Trestles in San Onofre. Thus it's little surprise he appears in the following video urging Southern Californians to save Trestles and San Onofre State Beach. This can be done by opposing the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension at this Wednesday's Coastal Commission Hearing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds; over 2,000 opponents and supporters of the road are expected to show.

Brought to you by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), who I now forgive for not accepting my application for a summer legal internship.

Earlier this week the Transportation Corridor Agencies filed a complaint against Smart Mobility, preparers of planning studies for opponents of the TCA's Foothill-South (241) toll road extension. The complaint alleged that Smart Mobility's engineers, who are unlicensed in California, "are violating California law by practicing civil and traffic engineering without legal authorization." It seems the agencies don't like the Vermont-based firm firing spitwads at the TCA's toll road from the far side of the country.

When we last reported on this, the TCA was described as "playing a bit dirty and grasping at straws", and even "the pot calling the kettle black." TCA even undermined its own argument when a spokesperson claimed the study contained no engineering whatsoever. But what say Smart Mobility? And where?

The Transportation Corridor Agencies has filed a complaint against Vermont-based Smart Mobility alleging that "the company's engineers are unlicensed in California," and are breaking the law by "practicing civil and traffic engineering without legal authorization." Opponents of the TCA's plans to build the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension through inland San Onofre State Beach have used Smart Mobility's reports in the past to refute TCA claims that widening I-5, an oft-cited potential alternative to the toll road, would require the condemnation of hundreds of homes and businesses.

This complaint is not in any court of law, mind you. The TCA registered it with the (drumroll, please...) Board for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors. Ta-dow. The complaint alleges that Smart Mobility is in violation of The Professional Engineers Act.

"The Professional Engineers Act, which regulates the profession. states that an out-of-state business may only practice engineering in California "if it has a branch office in California, has a part owner or officer in charge of the engineering work in California, who is registered in California and is physically present in California." (Business and Professions Code section 6738(a)(3))"

This is hysterical because TCA spokesperson Jennifer Seaton was quoted in the Register and on msnbc.com on January 25 making a claim that seems to contradict the TCA's position.

"There's no engineering behind this study," said Seaton, the toll road spokeswoman. "We're still confident our numbers are accurate."

No engineering, no violation, right?

While I wait for a response from Smart Mobility, a quick perusal of their website suggests that they do not in fact engineer as much as provide advice about engineering. Also, if they sit in Vermont and study a road in California, is that actually conducting engineering within the state? Any engineers or planners are welcome to comment.

The Coastal Commission has had to change its February meeting venue to accommodate the expected 2,000-odd attendees. This is bad news for the Transportation Corridor Agencies, who already sent out an email to their contractors begging for support. The issue is the 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension; the Governor's recent letter to the Commission in support of the project has reinvigorated both the supporters and opponents of the project. Ergo the new venue, Wyland Hall at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, which can hold up to 3,000 people. That’s a whole lot of subcontractors.

From the letter to contractors:

In an effort to fill the room with supporters of the FTC-S [Foothill-South] project; the goal is to bring 250 people to the event from the Design Build team member firms; 50 of whom are willing to speak. Kleinfelder has committed to having at least fifteen people attend the meeting, with five willing to speak on the importance and value of completing the SR-241 extension.

The previous venue, the Oceanside City Hall, can hold 150 people. Kleinfelder Geotechnical Engineers is a “design sub-consultant” for Saddleback Constructors, who hold the design-build contract for the 241 extension.

Did Arnie's lawn suddenly sprout itchy red bumps? No, it's only volunteers from Sierra Club, Friends of the Foothills and Surfrider - all members of the Save San Onofre Coalition. Each red tent on the lawn represents one of the campsites the Transportation Corridor Agencies would destroy by building its 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension through San Onofre State Beach.

Sierra Club and Friends of the Foothills would like to thank volunteers Jerry Collamer, Ed Schlegel, Jack Eidt, Mike Hazzard, Deborah Fry, Amanda Fry, Candice Mize, Kyle, Steve Netherby, Janine Robinson, Carey Strombotne, Stefanie Sekich, Marty Benson, Rick Erkeneff, and Brian Alper.

Check out this slideshow of OC activists reppin' the county in Sacramento:

The Save San Onofre Coalition really hopes the Coastal Commission is a buncha voyeurs.

See, the SSOC (made up of Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Endangered Habitats League, Laguna Greenbelt, Surfrider Foundation, Audubon California, the California State Parks Foundation and probably some ninjas) has compiled hundreds and hundreds of videos on YouTube for the purpose of convincing Coastal Commission members that a poorly-planned toll road built by a shoddily-run agency through a pristine watershed and over Native Americans is a bad idea.

You'd think the Commission wouldn't need much convincing. From the Coalition's press release:

“Siting a toll road through the middle of a state park, when other, less destructive options are available is not only a horrible idea, but it also sets a dangerous precedent for California’s 278 other State Parks,” said Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation. “YouTube provides one more avenue for those opposing the toll road to reach the Coastal Commission and personally voice their concerns about the devastating impact this toll road project would have on a true California treasure, San Onofre State Beach.”

This marks the first time YouTube has been leveraged by a grassroots organization on a matter before the California Coastal Commission. The Commission votes in early February on the proposed 241 Toll Road extension’s consistency with the Coastal Act. A Coastal Commission staff report sited numerous inconsistencies with the Act saying, “it would be difficult to imagine a more environmentally damaging alternative location for the proposed toll road.”

Well over 500 fresh faces can be found on YouTube under the user "SaveSanOnofre", including everyone from Kelly Slater to the Crandall family. Below are some of my favorites:

Or, How to Fool a County.

To soothe concerns that their 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension would rape the environment, destroy endangered species and habitat, pave over archaeological and sacred sites, close the San Mateo Campground, bisect inland San Onofre State Beach and possibly impact the world-famous surfing at Trestles, the road-building Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) offered the state a real oogie cookie. They propose a scant $100 Million to be used towards state parks, specifically San Onofre and Crystal Cove. The oogiest part of this cookie is that it's about 70% horse crap, but that didn't stop Governor Schwarzenegger from endorsing the offer. Still, if we make sure he's the last to spout off on the merits of the 241, then he has to eat it.

The cookie, that is.

Nevermind that State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, State Parks Foundation President Elizabeth Goldstein and local park supporters find the offer grossly inadequate. Nevermind that no amount of money WOULD be adequate, as both State Parks and the Coastal Commission staff consider the impacts of the project unmitigatable (as in, too serious to be covered by any amount of money). What's REALLY FANTASTICALLY FUNNY is that only a measly 30% of the TCA's pathetically small sum would go to the parks. The other 70% would supposedly cover the renewal of San Onofre State Beach's lease, due to expire in 2021.

Read on to see how even THAT $70 million estimate is horribly wrong.

Below is a video of Ken Calvert on his support of the 241 Toll Road. Nevermind that his reputation is on the line. Nevermind that he worked to garner earmarks (see Of Pork and Ken, Feb. 16 2006) so that taxpayer money could be spent on "environmental studies" for the toll roads - millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars, despite the Transportation Corridor Agencies' continual assurances that no taxpayer money will go to the CONSTRUCTION of the toll road - a legally defensible claim. But, just like the road itself, wouldn't we rather have something that was actually substantial, something proper and appropriate, rather than just something that's ... legally defensible?

Watch the congressman speak below the fold.

Governor Arnold Schwarnzenegger thinks the TCA's 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension (which would bisect San Onofre State Beach, impact an Indian burial ground, mess with Trestles and possibly bring about Apocalypse) is about as tasty as steroids or a married woman's breast. The TCA (or Transportation Corridor Agencies) promise to atone for dicking with the environment by donating $100 Million as mitigation (which basically means damages) to California State Parks, not just for San Onofre but also to spruce up coastal sage scrub and the cottage program at Crystal Cove Beach.

In his support of the 241, Governor Schwarzenneger is wrong, according to three interested parties:

1) Bill Lockyer, State Treasurer and former Attorney General
2) Elizabeth Goldstein, President of the California State Parks Foundation;
3) Laura Davick, Founder of the Crystal Cove Alliance.

As an immigrant to our shores, it's little shock that Governor Schwarzenneger has a hard time understanding the plight of our indigenous peoples. Maybe that's why, in his letter supporting the TCA's 241 Foothill-South toll road extension, he makes his support conditional on the TCA's protection of cottages, coastal scrub and a surf spot. No mention is made WHATSOEVER of the Juaneno village-site of Panhe, threatened with severe and illegal impacts from the road, nor the lawsuit filed on its behalf by the Attorney General of the state of California.

What gives, I wondered?

So I called the Governor's press office to find out. Brad Maile was good enough to speak with me, although the conversation quickly degenerated. To, like, the 19th century. . .

Photo by Craig Coppola/Courtesy Surfrider.

A poll released this morning shows that OC voters are generally in favor of more toll roads, but not when they go through protected state parks.

The poll, which was financed by the California State Parks Foundation, asked 400 voters from each of the county's five supervisorial districts several questions in hopes of measuring opinions about toll roads and, in particular, a proposed extension of the 241 Toll Road through San Onofre State Park. The group that funded the study is opposed to the extension.

This latest skirmish in the battle of the polls contradicts polls taken by the Transportation Corridor Agencies several times in the past which concluded—surprise!— people actually do want the road completed. Those polls have been criticized for only asking the question of South Orange County residents.

Elizabeth Goldstein, State Parks Foundation president, said although other polls have been done by the Transportation Corridor Agencies, this poll is the best one.
"This is the most thoroughgoing and unbiased poll put forward," she said.

The results will be included in a presentation by the parks foundation, an environmental coalition created in 1969, at a hearing before the California Coastal Commission on Oct. 11. The hearing is regarding whether the proposed toll road extension violates the Coastal Act, a set of laws passed in the 1970s designed to protect the state's roughly 1,100 miles of coast.

In a conference call with the Weekly and several other local news organizations, California opinion researchers Jan van Lohuizen and David Binder said that most Orange County residents weren't very informed about the proposed toll extension, but when presented with details about their construction on protected lands, they were opposed.

Last week the LA Times wrote a piece about OCTA's South Orange County Major Investment Study. Its results directly contradict the Transportation Corridor Agencies' claims that its planned Foothill South (241) Toll Road extension would relieve traffic in south Orange County. Steve Lowery cites the new study in this week's Diary of a Mad County:

The study, titled "We Are So Screwed: Seriously, Royally Screwed" says that if the toll road is built, traffic will be alleviated on the Santa Ana Freeway to the point of being "severely congested" by the year 2030, which would be about the year the toll road would open, what with the expected work delays, cost overruns, mob extortion and unearthing of dinosaur/Native American/guy who wouldn't pay the mob bones.

He's right—maybe not about the mob, but certainly about work delays and cost overruns. The implications of the study (which, incidentally, this blog discussed with the study's instigator, Cassie DeYoung, about a month ago) are simply this: the toll roads are not a form of traffic relief. If anything, the 241 toll road will only serve as a traffic alternative, while functioning to help make traffic worse. DeYoung put it best:

…traffic in Orange County will increase by one thousand percent on the streets and roads, and over two hundred percent on the I-5 South—with the fully completed 241 extension, given the alignment they came up with. There would be virtually no traffic on the 241.

While traffic on both the 5 freeway and nearby arterials crawls to a halt, the rich and careless will be able to cruise down a traffic-free toll road while the rest of the county thinks back to a time when cars actually moved on the road. As far as work delays are concerned, well, let's just say construction was initially scheduled to begin in 1997; now they're hoping for 2008. So we're already looking at a decade plus one.

And cost overruns? I'm glad you asked. Since last year the TCA has claimed the Foothill-South extension will cost $875 Million to construct. But in the last two years the cost of highway construction material has skyrocketed.

Recently Fitch Ratings, one of several agencies which evaluates the TCA's bonds, affirmed the Foothill/Eastern TCA's bond rating at BBB. Still, their evaluation assumes a "high likelihood of future construction increases." According to Fitch spokesman Mike McDermott, "We've seen in the last couple of years dramatic increases in production costs for projects like this. In the southeast and parts of the west costs have gone up dramatically – 40, 50, 60 percent."

What's $875 Million plus 50 percent? A healthy $1.3 Billion – just a million over the TCA's minimum estimate for the cost of widening the I-5, an option they admit will do a better job of relieving traffic but which they claim is too expensive compared to the 241 extension.

One final note--according to