Supervisors’ Call for RTD Investigation Boomerangs

A Los Angeles County Grand Jury investigation of the troubled RTD has boomeranged on the county Board of Supervisors, which demanded the inquiry.

In a sharply worded report obtained by The Times Friday, the grand jury places much of the responsibility for the transit agency’s reported problems squarely at the feet of the five county supervisors, who each appoint members of the Southern California Rapid Transit District board.

Noting that the supervisors and Mayor Tom Bradley control a majority of the 11-member RTD Board of Directors, the grand jury said: “Ultimate responsibility for the operational dysfunction of SCRTD lies with inadequate monitoring and supervision of those charged with making and implementing policy . . . the general manager and the SCRTD board. . . .

“The SCRTD problem is a case where the bottom line is actually the top line--where the Board of Supervisors and other appointive powers have the ultimate responsibility for the way the SCRTD is operated and the power to change the operation if there is a problem.”

The supervisors, on a motion by Kenneth Hahn, had called for a grand jury probe in December, after months of revelations and accusations of mismanagement. In what has become almost a weekly ritual at their Tuesday meetings, supervisors have attacked the RTD and demanded investigations of problems reported in the news media, without publicly assuming responsibility for the agency.

However, the five-page grand jury report, sent to county supervisors this week after a six-week review of RTD’s management and organization, notes that the RTD board, and indirectly General Manager John Dyer, can be quickly replaced by Los Angeles city and county elected officials if their performance is faulty. In addition to the five appointees of the supervisors, Bradley appoints two RTD board members and four are selected by suburban cities.

The grand jury chose not to conduct its own detailed review of the day-to-day workings of the huge transit agency and sidestepped recommendations for specific changes. It said numerous studies have already identified problems that “are real and must be addressed” in the areas of safety, employee absenteeism, communication between managers and allocation of resources.

It also skirted the issue of reorganization, noting the Legislature is studying that issue and may impose a major shake-up within a few months.

In the meantime, the “most immediate and most urgent” need is to tighten up management of daily operations and that remains largely the responsibility of the conservative-dominated county supervisors and liberal Bradley, who often do not see eye-to-eye on how the RTD should be run. “We are asking the Board of Supervisors and the other appointive powers to put political considerations aside and . . . put the SCRTD house in order,” the grand jury said.

Ed Roseman, grand jury foreman, declined to elaborate on the brief report. “This represents the reply to the request we got from the board,” he said.

A spokesman for county Supervisor Hahn said the grand jury report was “unfortunate.”

“(Hahn) wanted them to get into the whole thing,” said press aide Dan Wolf. “The grand jury is in a unique position to do a thorough, objective investigation. Apparently they are saying they are not going to do it and are throwing it back to the board.

“The fact the board has the power to do something is not much of an answer,” Wolf said. “There’s no consensus at this point as to what the problems are and what the solutions are.”

Supervisor Mike Antonovich, one of the board’s most persistent RTD critics, was not available for comment.

Officials at RTD headquarters declined to comment, saying they had not seen the report.

But one RTD board member, Nikolas Patsaouras, at least partially agreed with the grand jury report. “They’re right . . . the ultimate authority lies in the hands of out appointing bodies.”