Cross-Valley Rail Line

On June 8, The Times Valley Edition published letters from Richard Stanger, executive director of the agency that operates Metrolink, and Supervisor Michael Antonovich, presenting contrasting views of how a cross-Valley rail line should proceed.

Stanger provides the historical perspective of the acquisition of the Burbank-Chandler right of way from Southern Pacific. It should also be noted that the route that has been adopted for the Valley rail line--on more than one vote by the MTA board--is Burbank-Chandler.

Nevertheless, “Monorail Mike” continues to cite a 7-year-old referendum as justification for building rail down the center divider of the Ventura Freeway (the right of way to which the MTA does not own). In your Tuesday feature “On the Issue,” he continues to cite that referendum, choosing to ignore facts that, if the public knew them, would make it clear that the MTA is on the right track (pun intended) with Burbank-Chandler.

Antonovich continues to compare rail down the freeway to a subway. It is obvious that whatever is built across the Valley will not be a subway. . . . The MTA appears to have every intention of operating an at-grade, Blue Line-style, light rail system on Burbank-Chandler.

Antonovich has also proposed partnerships between the MTA and the private sector to build a light rail system. What he fails to mention is that the 1990 referendum he is so fond of quoting didn’t include language to inform voters that a rail system, built under such a partnership, might carry a fare structure higher than the bus system it is designed to unburden. The result: a rail system no one would ride. Compare this with a light rail system, built by the MTA, at grade along Burbank-Chandler, with a fare comparable to the rest of the Metro system.

If the supervisor is so convinced of his position, I suggest he place a new referendum on the ballot, fully disclosing facts, and then see what the voters have to say.

KYMBERLEIGH RICHARDS

Van Nuys