Twenty-two years after San Bernardino County’s transportation officials committed to using taxpayer-approved funding to extend what has now become the world’s longest light-rail system across the Los Angeles County border to ultimately reach Ontario International Airport and points eastward, the City of Montclair on September 2 Filed suit against the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority over its recurrent pattern of funding and defunding its share of the undertaking in a way that has delayed the project and raised its completion costs to the point of threatening its viability altogether.
In its lawsuit, Montclair is alleging that the transportation agency made and then broke multiple commitments to proceed with the light rail project, and that those commitments included ones made to the public at large when it asked voters to extend a half cent-per-dollar sales tax to pay for transit improvements in 2004 and an accompanying explicit expenditure plan relating to project. The suit maintains that the county transportation agency prioritized other projects at the expense of the Gold Line Extension to Montclair, directing San Bernardino County Transportation Authority staff to dedicate funds committed to the Gold Line Extension to Montclair to other regional projects, funneling funds to more affluent areas with lower minority populations and negatively impacting low income populations. According to the suit, the county transportation agency’s action to defund the Gold Line Project violated the City of Montclair’s procedural rights relating to the city deriving its fair share of the benefit it was to receive as a result of its participation in the transportation agency as a member.
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, also referred to as Metro, after presenting the concept of a light rail link between Union Station in downtown Los Angeles and Pasadena in the 1980s, succeeded in constructing that system, then referred to as the Gold Line, in the late 1980s and 1990s. Previous and simultaneous work was then being carried out in creating a light rail extension westward from Union Station, referred to as the Blue Line, that ultimately reached Long Beach.
Consisting of trains that were lighter and more efficient than commuter trains being pulled by freight train engines, the dual tracked light rail system allowed for departures going in either direction every ten minutes to fifteen minutes or at peak usage time every eight minutes. This reliability and constant availability with only minimal wait time for consumers ultimately led to a usage pattern with the trains carrying over 1,000 passengers an hour, a significant enough ridership that as the rail commuting system was capable of providing congestion relief on the freeways that corresponded to the routes where the light rail lines existed. .
In 1998, the California State Legislature created the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority to resume and expand the line eastward from Pasadena. At that time, Los Angeles County politicians, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority committed to seeking, generating, creating and appropriating sufficient money to extend the Gold Line from Pasadena to Sierra Madre,Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, Irwindale, Azusa, Glendora, San Dimas, LaVerne, Pomona and Claremont at the extreme east end of Los Angeles County.
In San Bernardino County, the MetroLink System began operating its San Bernardino Metro Rail Line onOctober 26, 1992, though that initial service did not extend all the way to San Bernardino, running only from Los Angeles Union Station to Pomona. Seven months later, on May 17, 1993, MetroLink began full service to San Bernardino.
There were limitations to the MetroLink System which limited its effectiveness. A primary factor in this regard was that MetroLInk trains and engines are heavy rail manifestations, which consumes energy at twice the rate or more than light rail. A further limitation is that the lines used are not dedicated solely to passenger conveyance but are shared with freight trains. This necessitated that the arrivals and departures of Metro Rail trains be restricted, even at peak usage, to no more frequently than once every fifty minutes to an hour. Consequently, the ridership on the MetroLink System in San Bernardino County was insufficient to put a dent in the congestion on the San Bernardino County east-west freeway system, consisting of the I-10 and Route 60 Freeways and then the 210 Freeway after it opened from Glendora eastward to Rialto on November 24, 2002 and then was extended from Rialto to Redlands on July 24, 2007.
As a consequence, San Bernardino County transit officials were not enthusiastic, initially about rail commuting options in San Bernardino County. However, with the demonstrated success in obtaining substantial passenger numbers on the light rail Gold Line in San Gabriel Valley, the interest of some San Bernardino County officials, in particular those with cities located within the the furthest westward projection of San Bernardino County at its south end – Fotana, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, Ontario, Montclair, Chino and Chino Hills – saw a real potential that a well-utilized light rail commuting option would divert upwards of 220,000 passengers off of the 210, 10 and 60 freeways, translating into somewhere between 180,0,000 to 190,000 fewer vehicles. That carried with it the possibility of, if not ending gridlock during rush hour on those major east-west arterials daily, at the very least substantially attenuating it.
In 1989, Measure I, which called for a half-cent sales tax countywide to fund transportation improvements, was placed on the ballot. A slew of San Bernardino County elected officials, including all five members of the board of supervisors – Marsha Turoci, Jon Mikels, Barbara Cram Reardon, Larry Walker and Robert Hammock – and no fewer than 77 of the county’s then 110 mayors and council members threw their support behind the measure, which called for the funds generated to be administered by San Bernardino Associated Governments, a panel with board members consisting of all five county supervisors and a representative, that is, a mayor or council member, from each of what were then the county’s 20 cities and one incorporated town. Measure I passed.
San Bernardino Associated Governments, known by its acronym SANBAG, was created by the cities and the county government of San Bernardino County in 1973 as a joint powers agency to function as the county’s council of governments and metropolitan planning organization to coordinate regional governmental services, and serve as the county’s council of governments and as the county transportation agency. As a consequence of its role as the county’s transportation agency with virtual autonomy over revenue of what at the outset was at least $97,932,111 annually, SanBAG in 1990 became a more significant and impactful bureaucracy than it had been previously. By 2000, ten years later, by which point the revenue from Measure I had grown to at least $129,048,843 annually. County and city officials asserted that funding they were receiving for transportation, road and circulation needs provided by the State of California through gasoline tax pass-throughs and other subventions and the revenues they were able to generate on their own were inadequate to meet the needs they individually and collectively had available to maintain existing and build needed new transit infrastructure within their jurisdictions. In this way, they maintained, the continuation of Measure I was indispensable going forward.
County and city officials, working in tandem with one another as well as with the financial support of the business community, consisting primarily of developers who perceived the prospect for future construction projects to be threatened if adequate transportation infrastructure was not put in place to accommodate incoming residential and commercial subdivisions, made a request utilizing the authority of SanBAG as a governmental joint powers authority to place a Measure I extension proposition, likewise dubbed Measure I, before San Bernardino County voters on the November 3, 2004 ballot. Because the application for the measure’s placement on the ballot originated under the authority of governmental entities, in this case from SanBAG representing its constituent members, the need to obtain what would have otherwise been well over ten thousand valid signatures of county residents requesting a vote on the matter was bypassed.
In promoting the new Measure I to the county’s voters, the proponents – consisting primarily of elected officials and top level governmental administrators together with SanBAG – made commitments to the voters and the San Bernardino County community at large with regard to how the Measure I revenue was to be spent.
At that time, the conceptual extension of the Gold Line into San Bernardino County called for it reaching Ontario Airport, with its massive parking facilities and provision of arrivals, many of whom were looking to travel into Los Angeles. The concept included seeing the extension built in phases on the east side of the Los Angeles/San Bernardino County border, with the first phase running from Claremont to Montclair, roughly a 0.65 mile span, extending the line’s eastern terminus from the Claremont Station to the Montclair Transit Center.
SanBAG included the Montclair segment in its 2004 request for voter reauthorization of Measure 1.
The four major entities funding the project – the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority, SanBAG, the State of California through its Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program and the Federal Government from its Federal‑State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rai funding – avoided the need to purchase right-of-way for the dual tracks, as there was already a rail line swath running between the two cities. The primary expense was to consist of moving the heavy rail lines along that span, which included the lines used by MetroLInk, to one side to make way for the two new sets of track for the Gold Line.
Over the years, from 1998 until the present, the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority found or otherwise generated $4 billion in funding to extend the Gold Line to its present terminus in Pomona, having reached Pasadena/Sierra Madre as of July 26, 2003, then extending through Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte and Irwindale to Azusa as of March 5, 2016, then through San Dimas, Glendora and La Verne to Pomona on September 19, 2025. The line is currently in the process of being extended to Claremont.
Beyond making a commitment to the public that it was to participate in providing funding for and coordinating with the Foothill Gold Line Extension Construction Authority in the extension of the Gold Line to Montclair with the submission of the Measure I tax renewal in 2004, SanBAG over the next 22 years made references, affirmations and reaffirmations of the intent to fund theGold Line Extension to Montclair through official actions, public statements, public meetings and official documents.
The original Measure I Expenditure Plan identified two rail projects, “the extension of passenger rail to Redlands and Gold Line Extension to Montclair … to be funded …”
During development of the Measure I Strategic Plan in 2008, SanBAG’s transit committee (formerly the commuter rail and transit committee) recommended approving the use of bonding and re-scoping of the passenger rail program and prioritization of the capital investments based on funding availability. The Measure I Expenditure Plan and Strategic Plan identify .. . the Gold Line Extension to Montclair as project[s] to be funded from this program.
SanBAG in 2012 supported then-Assemblywoman Norma Torres in her sponsorship of AB 1600, designating (i) the Montclair Transit Center as the eastern terminus of the Gold Line, (ii) the Foothill Gold Line Extension Construction Authority as the project administrator in San Bernardino County, and (iii) Metro as the transportation agency responsible for post-construction fare operations. AB 1600 passed through the State Legislature without opposition.
In a May 2013 presentation to the Montclair City Council, SanBAG Executive Director Dr. Raymond Wolfe committed SanBAG to extension of the Gold Line to the Montclair Transit Center.
In February 2014 members of SanBAG’s transit committee made a recommendation that the Gold
Line extension to Montclair and Metrolink doubletracking projects identified in Schedule D5 of Measure I’s Expenditure Plan be defunded. In response, the SanBAG Board of Directors rejected that option, instead approving maintenance of the board’s commitment to each of Schedule D5’s transit projects for the San Bernardino Valley Subarea, which included the Gold Line extension to Montclair, Metrolink doubletracking and the Redlands Passenger Rail project, elevating all three as equal-tier transit projects to be funded and completed by SanBAG.
In 2015, ballot measure, R2, was put before Los Angeles County residents asking them to extend the half-cent sales tax measure to support transportation projects, introduced by the nonprofit Move L.A. as a follow-up to the 2008 Measure R., which was calculated to provide an estimated $5 billion for transportation-related projects. The executive director of SanBAG, Ray Wolfe believed the voters of Los Angeles County would reject Measure R2. Accordingly, Wolfe, anticipating that Los Angeles County transportation officials would back out of further construction of the Gold Line, recommended that the SanBAG board provide no further funding for the Gold Line “white elephant.” To prevent the defunding of the project, the City of Montclair stepped in and committed to provide $3 million to be used for advanced conceptual engineering environmental consulting and oversight work for the Claremont-to-Montclair of the Gold Line with the proviso that if Measure R2 did pass, SanBAG would reimburse the city. As it turned out, Los Angeles County voters passed Measure R2 overwhelmingly.
In 2017, SanBAG rebranded itself from San Bernardino Associated Governments to the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, with the acronym of SBCTA.
Further funding for the Gold Line Extension Project had been contingent upon the passage of the Los Angeles County Measure M, which was approved on the November 2016 ballot and provided funding for the Gold Line extension to the Los Angeles County/San Bernardino County line.
At that time, SanBAG declared “Funding for the design, right-oj-way, and construction phases in San Bernardino County to Montclair are being added to the Gold Line Extension Project in the 2017 update. In response to the Board’s desire to advance delivery of the Downtown San
Bernardino and Redlands Passenger Rail Projects and the Gold Line extension, the 2014 Update indicated a need to bond for the program. Bonding will be used only for capital investments. [. .. .] Measure I funds can only be used to fund operations of a new passenger rail service between the cities of San Bernardino and Redlands or the extension of the Gold Line to Montclair.”
In September 2017, in reprising its Measure I Strategic Policy, SBCTA stated the “Valley Metrolink and Passenger Rail Program shall follow the intent of Ordinance 04-01 … to extend the LA Metro Gold Line to the Montclair Transit Center” and that “Eight percent (8%) of the revenue collected in the Valley Subarea shall be made available to the MetrolinklPassenger Rail Program. Eligible expenditures include: …construction and operation of an extension of the LA Metro Gold Line to the
Montclair Transit Center.”
In 2018, the State of California, in response to an application by SBCTA which was facilitated by the had made which was facilitated by the Gold Line Extension Construction Authority, provided the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority with a $41 million Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program grant to cover what was calculated to be 52.5 percent of the then-estimated $78 million cost of the Claremont to Montclair extension of the Gold Line.
At the conclusion of the September 4, 2019, SBCTA Board Meeting, Wolfe stated that he would
return to the Board in November 2019 “with a recommendation that we [SBCTA] throw in the towel” on bringing the Gold Line light rail system into the Montclair Transit Center and pursue” another alternative.” At the October 10,2019, SBCTA Transit Committee Meeting, Wolfe, citing the escalation of the cost of the Claremont-to-Montclair span from $78 million to upwards of $90 million, recommended that SBCTA dispense with constructing the Gold Line into San Bernardino County and instead introduce a hybrid plan which he dubbed “I Gold Link.” Gold Link would run on existing Metrolink tracks using diesel multiple unit trains that would run between the Gold Line terminus station in Claremont east to the San Bernardino County Metrolink station cities, and back to the Gold Line terminus station in Los Angeles County. SBCTA would return the $41 million in Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program funds received from the California State Transportation Agency. Eight of the transit committee’s 11 members – Third District San Bernardino County Supervisor Dawn Rowe and Rancho Cucamonga Mayor Lloyd Dennis Michael, then-Big Bear Councilman Bill Jahn, then-Yucaipa Councilman David Avila, Highland Councilman Larry McCallon, Fontana Mayor Acquanetta Warren, Colton Mayor Frank Navarro, and Rialto Mayor Deborah Robertson – voted to back Wolfe. Only Montclair Mayor John Dutrey, Ontario City Councilman Alan Wapner and Chino Hills Mayor Ray Marquez opposed his plan to scrub the county’s support of the Gold Line.
At the November 6,2019 San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Board meeting, the board discussed the Metrolink Gold Link hybrid-rail as an alternative to Gold Line toMontclair. By a vote of 23-1, the board directed staff to study the Gold Link alternative as outlined in the agenda report, putting the Gold Line extension to Montclair into limbo.
In January 2020, California Assemblyman Chris Holden introduced AB 2011, which was to create the West San Bernardino County Rail Construction Authority to design and construct an extension of the Gold
Line from Montclair to Ontario International Airport. AB 2011 implied restoration of the Montclair Segment. Holden delayed committee action on AB 2011 to further engage the SBCTA Board. Before the close of January 2020, then-SBCTA Board President Darcy McNaboe released a statement opposing the creation of the new West San Bernardino County Rail Construction Authority under AB 2011 to extend the Gold Line to Ontario Airport, arguing a new authority would make the extension to the airport “more costly and serve to increase time for project delivery.”The McNaboe statement also opposed construction
of “a multi-billion transportation project that has not been approved by the SBCTA Board or by the voters of San Bernardino County through Measure I.” Based on his engagement with the SBCTA
Board, Assembly Member Holden allowed AB 2011 to die in committee.
A semi-commitment to the eventual establishment of the Gold Line on the east side of the Los Angeles County/San Bernardino County line was given indication on pages 13 and 19 of SBCTA’s Countywide Transportation Plan 2021, which stated “A 30-year extension of Measure I was passed by the voters in 2004 with an unprecedented 80 percent of the vote in favor. Much of the success of that Measure could be attributed to the continued focus on congestion relief and safety … . The Measure also increased the county’s emphasis on transit, with commitments to initiating passenger rail service to
Redlands, extension of the Gold Line to Montclair … . If
SBCTA’s 2021 10-Year Delivery Plan on pages 58-63continued to identify the Gold Line Extension to Montclair as a project to be funded from available sources, including Measure 1. It stated,”During development of the Measure I Strategic Plan in 2008, the SBCTA Transit Committee” identified the Gold Line Extension to Montclair as a project” to be funded” from” the use of bonding, re-scoping, and prioritization of the MetrolinklRail Service Program based on funding availability.”
Meanwhile, some SBCTA board members made an issue of the consideration that the Gold Line extension project is not currently federalized, limiting the types of funding available to fund the project and making unmanageable the cost escalations that will occur with the passage of time.
On September 3, 2025, the San Bernardino County Transportation Agency’s board of directors, by a 15-to-11 ratio of those participating, opted out of extending the Gold Line light rail transportation system into San Bernardino County.
The constant on-again, off-again approach of the San Bernardino County Transportation Agency toward the Gold Line undertaking had proven too much for Montclair officials.
On December 1,2025, Montclair issued what was titled, a “Demand to Cure Unlawful Defunding of the Gold Line Extension Project” to the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority.
Montclair is the gateway into San Bernardino County from Los Angeles County and stands next to Pomona and Claremont, the gateway into Los Angeles County from San Bernardino County. As such, according to Montclair officials, much of its planning has hinged on the eventual arrival of the Gold Line at its Montclair Transit Center and the city’s economic development is equally dependent on the completion of that project.
On September 2, 2026, one day short of the anniversary of SBCTA’s vote to abandon its commitment to extending the Gold Line into San Bernardino County and just over nine months after it had issued its demand to cure the defunding, Montclair, represented by Montclair City Attorney Diane Robbins and attorneys Michael Colantuono, Stephanie Cooke and Heather Stroud of the Pasadena-based law firm of Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, filed suit against the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority.
“Defendant San Bernardino County Transportation Authority has broken its decades-long promise to extend the Metro Gold Line (also known as the ‘Metro A Line’) from the City of Claremont at the Los Angeles/San Bernardino County line to the Montclair Transit Center.” the suit states. “This decision, and the manner of it, violate the intent and procedural requirements of San Bernardino County’s voter-approved Measure I and SBCTA’s own, long-term commitment to build the Montclair Segment, on which the City has detrimentally relied.”

The suit continues, “The consequences of SBCTA’s unlawful abandonment of the Gold Line Extension Project have been particularly harmful to the city, which in reliance on over 20 years of SBCTA assurances that the Montclair Segment would proceed, incurred over $120 million in expenses for transit-related planning, design, infrastructure and development projects in and around the Montclair Transit Center. Montclair will also lose $320 million in property value increases not related to development activity, over $500,000 annually in anticipated annual property tax revenue, and over $5 million in anticipated annual revenue from other tax sources. In addition to reneging on over 20 years of promises to Montclair, its residents, property owners, developers, inter-agency partners and to San Bernardino County voters, SBCTA has also engaged in unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, and ethnicity. SBCTA has unlawfully diverted funds from Montclair, a lower-income community with higher minority and immigrant populations, to more affluent, ‘whiter’ communities. SBCTA has also disparately impacted minorities and immigrants by funneling funds from the Metro Gold Line to the Metrolink commuter rail, which historically serves fewer minorities and immigrants than does the Metro Gold Line. The City seeks a writ of mandamus compelling SBCTA to comply with Measure I and to honor its commitment to fund and complete the Montclair Segment, declaratory and injunctive relief prohibiting SBCTA from continuing to engage in unlawful discrimination and retaliation, and damages to reimburse the City for harm resulting from SBCTA’s actions.”
The Montclair Transit Center, also called the Montclair Transcenter, is Montclair’s main intermodal transportation hub, connecting regional rail and multiple bus services, located in the 5000 block of Richton Street, between Central and Monte Vista Avenues, just north of the Montclair Plaza shopping center, at the north end of the city. The facility is jointly owned by the City of Montclair, Caltrans, and the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority. It features 1,600 parking spaces for riders on the busses and trains, making it one of the largest such existing facilities in San Bernardino County. It entails land upon which more parking accommodations could be established.
According to Montclair City Manager Ed Starr, the City of Montclair in recent years has allowed extensive development of high-density housing in the area around the transit center, in an area refereed to as the transit district, on the assumption that such residential uses would be compatible with proximity and access to a heavily-used means of passenger rail commuting into Los Angeles.
“Light rail is important to development of our transit district, Starr said. “It is key to not just the development itself, but to securing financing for that development to take place and for the economic development of the city far into the future.”
Star interchangeably used the identifiers “Gold Line” and “A Line” in referring to the light rail project. LA Metro renamed the Gold Line the L Line in 2020 and then changed its bran to the A Line in June 2023.
“We based our planning, our general plan, specific plans and zoning code on the eventual arrival of the A Line in Montclair,” Starr said. “The expectation was there would be $7.6 billion in construction activity in north Montclair as a consequence of the A Line reaching the transit center. On top of that would be property improvements and increased property value leading to increased property tax, not just in Montclair but carrying over into Claremont and Upland. San Bernardino County and the adjoining cities would see benefits and sales tax increases from people who moved into Montclair.
Montclair fully bought into the game plan surrounding the eastward extension of the Gold Line/A Line, Starr said.
“The city purposefully set about providing the largest parking field out of Union Station along the projected Gold Line,” Starr said. “The concept behind that remains valid to this day. They [SBCTA and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority] need it for Metrolink. They [SBCTA and LA Metro] need it for the Gold Line. No one else offers that.”
It is Starr’s contention that SBCTA shot itself in the foot by not remaining evenly committed to the completion of the Gold Line, thereby causing delays which upped its cost, caused the loss of critical subsidizations of the cost by the state such as the $41 million Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program grant and has prevented outright or deferred into the future the reception of the $3.2 million in annual tax revenue accompanying the development that would come about as the consequence of the light rail project’s extension into San Bernardino County. This does not take into consideration, Starr said, the value of the transportation system itself, which will alleviate a fair degree of congestion on the region’s freeway system that is an everyday reality at present.
LA Metro is fully committed to extending the line from its present terminus, in Pomona, to Claremont. The Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority awarded a construction management contract to the Kiewitt Corporation, a combined construction and engineering firm that has been involved in completing previous portions of the project, for the extension of the line from Pomona to Claremont in May. That actual work is to begin in 2027 and is anticipated to be completed by late 2031.
The suit also calls “SBCTA’s reallocation of Measure I funds” an “unlawful expenditure of Measure I revenue.”
An issue that prevented SBCTA from signing on to the completion of the extension in recent years was the composition of the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority. While San Bernardino County/SBCTA had a representative on the board, consisting of Montclair Mayor John Dutrey, it was a non-voting position. SBCTA executives and board members objected to turning control of a project within the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County entirely to an entity composed of Los Angeles County officials. Some adjustments were made, including the City of South Pasadena agreeing to have its seat on the board – one with full voting rights – filled by Ontario Mayor Paul Leon. There ensued discussion relating to, before the work on the line in San Bernardino County actually taking place, utilizing the legislative process in the California Assembly to give San Bernardino County two of the voting positions on the board. That invited countervailing concern from Los Angeles County-based officials that the construction authority – originally a creature of Los Angeles County – would, if the arrangement by which the mayor of Ontario was voting on behalf of the City of South Pasadena, have three fifths or potential control over the authority. This descended into further acrimony.
Starr pointed out that upon the Gold Line reaching Pomona, when considered in conjunction with the light rail line extending westward from Union Station to Long Beach, constituted the lengthiest section of light rail in the world, having at that point passed a light rail span in Sweden that previously claimed that distinction. Starr said an achievable advantage to not just Montclair residents but a good portion of the population of Southern California is being lost as a consequence of the failure to move forward with the Gold Line extension effort.