The following excerpts appeared in the Claremont Courier on September 4, 2025. To read the full article (may require subscription), click here.
Gold Line bombshell: Claremont to Montclair segment in limbo – Claremont Courier
The Pomona Metro A Line station. Photo/courtesy of Metro Gold Line
By Andrew Alonzo | aalonzo@claremont-courier.com
September 4, 2025
[excerpts]:
The long planned Claremont to Montclair segment of the Metro A Line light rail extension was thrust into limbo Wednesday when the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Board of Directors voted 15-11 to stop negotiating a memorandum of understanding with the Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority.
The SBCTA Board also voted against spending $15.2 million to cover design procurement costs for the new segment, and directed staff to study other transit options to Montclair beyond the Gold Line, using the $37 million in local funding the agency had earmarked to go toward construction of the Gold Line segment to Montclair.
…
“As I stated last week, the Construction Authority has been working closely with SBCTA over the past several months to come to agreement on a working relationship in which the Construction Authority has the authority to design and build the project and SBCTA has significant opportunities to provide input into the process,” [Foothill Gold Line CEO Habib F.] Balian wrote. “But SBCTA did not accept the terms of that agreement; and today their board confirmed their fundamental concern – not wanting an outside agency having authority to make decisions in their county. This is despite the Construction Authority’s statutorily mandated role to plan, design and build the project; as well as our successful track record of completing $3 billion of projects on time and on budget.”
…
“In terms of L.A County [Pomona to Claremont] and moving forward, we’re getting proposals next month, we are continuing to move forward,” [Foothill Gold Line Chief Communications and Strategic Development Officer Lisa] Levy Buch said. “And where there’s a setback is with the Montclair piece of it. We have to figure out what our next steps are and if there’s a way to continue to have Montclair be in in sync with Claremont. As of today, it seems like that’s not going to be the case.”
To read the full article (may require subscription), click here.