Compromise Reached on Museum Plan : Budget: Legislators let L.A. project proceed by switching source of much of the money. Use of quake repair funds had raised an outcry from Northern California.

A major flap over the funding of a $45-million construction project at the Museum of Science and Industry was resolved for the time being Monday when state legislators voted to let the plan go forward by simply switching the source of much of the money.

The controversy, which has been one of the most contentious issues of this year’s state budget hearings, stemmed from the project’s use of millions of dollars originally designated for the repair and replacement of buildings damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.

The issue became inflamed during the last two weeks when Northern California legislators accused their counterparts to the south--particularly those in the Los Angeles area--of using shady tactics to get the money for the museum project.

Southern California legislators, in turn, bristled at the suggestion and said they had done nothing wrong. Instead, they said, the wording of the earthquake relief bill matched the needs of the museum, even if it happened to be by coincidence.

The matter was resolved Monday in a compromise designed to satisfy legislators from both ends of the state. A total of $16 million would be taken from the earthquake fund, the estimated cost for a basic retrofit of the museum. The rest of the $29 million would come from revenue bonds.

In effect, the joint legislative budget committee working on the problem approved the project, but with only a fraction of the earthquake funds originally designated. The decision by the committee is considered a virtual rubber-stamp for approval, but both the Assembly and Senate must approve the overall budget by a two-thirds majority.

“We were able to demonstrate to the naysayers that we had gone forward completely in compliance with the law,” said Assemblywoman Marguerite Archie-Hudson (D-Los Angeles). “I was offended by the allegations we had tried to put something over on the public.”

However, Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco) said he believes the budget conference committee had acted improperly and that other legislators had given in to the threat by black legislators that they would vote against the budget if money was not found for the museum.

“Its not acceptable to me,” Kopp said. “It’s good for Southern California at the expense of the rest of the state. And the sloth goes on.”

Meanwhile, museum Executive Director Jeff Rudolph said he hoped this would be the last of the opposition to the project, which has been in the planning stages for several years.

“We’re pleased with the committee’s action to allow the project to proceed,” he said.

But Kopp said the agreement only would hasten the destruction of an historical site.

“I think it’s ill-advised and one that circumvents the rules,” said Kopp. “I don’t know what historical groups will do or what actions might be taken judicially.”

The focus of the controversy at the museum centered on two structures, the Armory and the Ahmanson building, which make up two sides of the Exposition Park rectangle adjacent to the Los Angeles Coliseum. Both were built in 1912 and both have been closed since 1990, when the state architect deemed them unsafe in the event of an earthquake.

Museum officials said that in the course of their study, they determined that it would cost less to build a new structure than to retrofit both old buildings. But opponents said museum officials had toyed with the numbers by making the standards for retrofitted buildings too high, thereby artificially running up the cost of the old buildings to make a new one look more appealing.

*

The budget committee also said the language in the final budget should be such that the museum could lease the Armory to the Los Angeles Unified School District for the development of a science school. But that does not mean the Armory could not be razed if it was seen as the best way to go in the future.

“The Armory will at some time have to be severely redesigned or razed because of the school,” Archie-Hudson said. “That building is on the table for several years down the pike.”