What’s a Suitor to Do? : MTA--rejected again--and legislators cast about for solutions

Now that another candidate for chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has turned down the post, Mayor Richard Riordan and the MTA board seem to have made the best of an awful situation. Rather than start yet another abortive national search, the board turned the reins over to a corporate “crisis management” specialist, Julian Burke, on a temporary basis.

Burke does not appear to be the usual chain-saw consultant, brought in to slash, strip and burn. His specialty is rehabilitation, general and financial management, strategic planning and reorganization. Burke’s resume includes a list of accomplished rescues of companies, investment funds and other entities with combined assets of more than $26 billion. He’s familiar with big numbers, and the MTA might not be the worst he has seen.

Meanwhile, Sacramento is searching for solutions for the MTA board. The legislators should understand that this, in all likelihood, will be the last time that anyone has the stomach for trying to employ legislative fiat to fix Los Angeles County’s transit oversight. It’s been attempted three times before, and the last, which resulted in formation of the MTA, was only 4 1/2 years ago.

Three reform bills have either been passed or are still up for consideration. One, by Assemblyman Kevin Murray (D-Los Angeles), would give the MTA chief executive a four-year term and set strict limits on the board’s ability to oust a CEO without just cause. It has been signed by the governor, but it was not enough to reassure Michael C. Ascher, the latest pick for a permanent chief executive, who dropped out in mid-negotiation.

A bill by Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles) aims to eliminate the influence of financial contributions at the MTA. It might help. But the big-ticket item is reform of the MTA board. An amalgam of proposals by Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and Assemblyman Steve Kuykendall (R-Rancho Palos Verdes) would reduce the current 13-member board to nine, three each appointed by the League of Cities, Mayor Riordan and the county supervisors.

If the professed goal is to eliminate elected officials, then why allow the League of Cities to appoint them to the board? Even if the members were not elected officials themselves, they still would be beholden to their communities and to the elected officials who appointed them. In other states, the governor appoints the oversight board or the role is filled by the state department of transportation. The best boards contain some members with transportation experience and officials who are willing to think and vote for regional interests.

The selection of Burke shows that people without parochial interests can be found. That’s probably more important than bills that change the framework of the MTA board.