The Brief

Southern California has more than a few uncompleted freeways. But have you ever noticed the one that has a 40-mile gap?

We’re talking about the 90 Freeway and transportation officials’ grand plan to connect Marina del Rey to Yorba Linda in Orange County.

It’s one of the region’s timeless examples of what happens when residents get angry about transportation, and how a multi-million-dollar project became a bit of a dumpster fire.

A brief history of the freeway

Today, Route 90 is split in two. There’s a few freeway miles in Marina del Rey that primarily lets drivers connect to the 405 Freeway. Then there’s a few miles way to the east that start as street-level Imperial Highway. But further into Yorba Linda, it quickly turns back into what resembles a freeway that ends a few miles away at the 91 interchange.

It’s one of those things that make you scratch your head and wonder, “Who thought this was a good idea?”

You could say it works for each section’s current purpose, but they’re slices of what could have been. The freeway master plan from the 1950s called for a route that would have given inland Orange County a straight shot to Pacific Coast Highway.

Parts of it have gone by different names over the years: The Slauson Freeway, the Richard M. Nixon Freeway and the current Marina Freeway on the Westside. At one point, the whole freeway was named after Nixon because he was born in Yorba Linda, but officials removed it in 1976 after the Watergate scandal.

It’s unclear whether Caltrans officially ever acquired the entire route, but some of their sections were relinquished back to their respective cities over the decades, which removed the Route 90 designation. That’s why it’s so split apart on maps. (Fun fact: The Yorba Linda City Council opted to bring the name back for its portion as the Richard M. Nixon Parkway. And yes, that means they don’t officially call it a freeway anymore.)

The master plan got mixed reviews depending on who you ask. In the beginning, there was excitement for new areas to get high-speed access — the 90 was even called “one of the most vital elements in the freeway system.” But that love quickly soured as the paths were drawn.

Problems with the path

The project was plagued by an alleged bribe.

In 1965, West L.A. Assemblymember Lester McMillan was indicted by an L.A. County grand jury on a charge of soliciting a $10,000 bribe. The charge stemmed from a secret recording during a discussion between the lawmaker and Culver City business leaders about introducing legislation to reroute the freeway.

McMillan admitted to taking action against a proposed route that would have gone through a business district in the neighborhood because “people were up in arms about it,” but money never changed hands. The charges were eventually thrown out after his lawyers argued it would have been a fee for his expenses.

A panoramic view of the Los Angeles Freeway system, taken from a blimp at an unknown date.

(

Security Pacific National Bank Collection

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

Meanwhile homeowners who would have been displaced in other areas if the freeway was fully built also got angry and protested votes on the path. Residents argued that there was a serious lack of oversight in the state’s freeway planning process.

As opposition grew, county Supervisor Kenneth Hahn asked then-Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1967 to intervene in the “Slauson Freeway fight” and cancel a key public hearing that was slated to happen with his administration shortly after he took office.

However, the meeting was held, and added to concerns that the freeway was being developed too fast and without much thought. Residents and local officials grew concerned that a commission, which was in charge of reviewing freeway recommendations from the state division of highways, was improperly making decisions. Opponents claimed the division used “questionable practices” and gave inaccurate traffic predictions. (Early figures estimated at least 170,000 drivers a day by 1970.)

Ronald Reagan and several officials look at a freeway monitoring system in 1971. The map monitored the San Diego, Santa Monica and Harbor freeways.

(

Herald Examiner Collection

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

As residents worried L.A. would become a patchwork of freeways, demands grew for an overall state transportation study that included rapid transit planning.

At the end of 1967, city leaders banded together to come up with better ideas. While the state highway department still had jurisdiction, the hope was that they could try to ensure a route that didn’t “wipe out the middle of a city,” said La Mirada Mayor Edward Le Clair.

But disdain for the freeway solidified in the early '70s, in part because there wasn’t enough money to build it, and other freeways with similar routes were already happening, such as the 105 Freeway. The L.A. County Board of Supervisors, which had previously backed the Slauson Freeway, moved to kill portions of it in 1973, and two years later, so did the state.

The 90 Freeway plans died that decade in part because money dried up, inflation was high and there was a major gas shortage. Groups hope to reuse some of the space. Plans have proposed in recent years to turn the Westside’s Marina Freeway into affordable housing and green space.

Topline:

The case: In September, the city settled a lawsuit brought forward by two brothers in their 70s who said they suffered serious injuries after an LAPD officer crashed into their car. Days before the $18 million settlement was reached, lawyers for the brothers said Feldstein Soto called an expert witness testifying for the plaintiffs and “attempted to ingratiate herself with him and asked him to make a contribution to her political campaign,” according to a sworn declaration to the court by the plaintiffs’ attorney, Robert Glassman.

The response: Feldstein Soto did not respond to an interview request. Her spokesperson said the settlement “had nothing to do” with the expert witness. Her campaign manager told LAist the city attorney had been making a routine fundraising call and did not know the person had a role in the case, nor that there were pending requests for her office to pay him fees.

What Jurado says: In a statement to LAist, Jurado said she wants to “make sure that the city’s legal leadership is guided by integrity and accountability, especially when their choices affect public trust, civic rights and the city’s limited resources."

What’s next: The motion needs to go through a few committees before reaching the full City Council. If it passes, the motion calls for the city attorney to “report to council in closed session within 45 days regarding the ethics breach violation and give updates to the City Council."

Every year in Santa Ana, Luis Cantabrana turns the front of his home into an elaborate altar in honor of La Virgen de Guadalupe that draws hundreds of visitors.

Along the front of the house, the multi-colored altar is filled with lights, flowers and a stained-glass tapestry behind a sculpture of the Lady of Guadalupe. Cantabrana’s roof also is lit up with the green, white and red lights that spell out “Virgen de Guadalupe” and a cross.

Visitors are welcomed with music and the smell of roses as they celebrate the saint, but this year’s gathering comes after a dark year for immigrant communities.

Luis Cantabrana stands in front of the stunning altar he built in front of his home in honor of La Virgen de Guadalupe. Every year, his display draws hundreds of visitors.

(

Destiny Torres

/

LAist

)

Why do they celebrate? 

In 1513, the Virgin Mary appeared before St. Juan Diego between Dec. 9 and Dec. 12, asking him to build a church in her honor. Her image — a brown-skinned woman wearing a green veil with her hands together in prayer and an angel at her feet — miraculously appeared on his cloak.

To celebrate in Santa Ana, worshippers gathered late-night Wednesday and in the very early hours Dec. 12 to pray the rosary, sing hymns and celebrate the saint.

Cantabrana has hosted worshippers at his home for 27 years — 17 in Santa Ana.

The altar started out small, he said, and over the years, he added a fabric background, more lights and flowers (lots and lots of flowers).

“It started with me making a promise to la Virgen de Guadalupe that while I had life and a home to build an altar, that I would do it,” Cantabrana said. “Everything you see in photos and videos is pretty, but when you come and see it live, it's more than pretty. It's beautiful.”

The Santa Ana home's elaborate altar in honor of La Virgen de Guadalupe draws hundreds of visitors each year.

(

Destiny Torres

/

LAist

)

Gathering in a time of turmoil 

Many also look to the Lady of Guadalupe for protection, especially at a time when federal enforcement has rattled immigrant communities.

“People don’t want to go to work, they don’t want to take their kids to school, but the love we have for our Virgen de Guadalupe,” Cantabrana said. “We see that la Virgen de Guadalupe has a lot of power, and so we know immigration [enforcement] won’t come here.”

Margarita Lopez of Garden Grove has been visiting the altar for three years with her husband. She’s been celebrating the Virgencita since she was a young girl. Honoring the saint is as important now as ever, she said.

“We ask, and she performs miracles,” Lopez said.

Claudia Tapia, a lifelong Santa Ana resident, said the Virgin Mary represents strength.

“Right now, with everything going on, a lot of our families [have] turned and prayed to the Virgen for strength during these times,” Tapia said. “She's a very strong symbol of Mexican culture, of unity, of faith and of resilience.”

See it for yourself

The shrine will stay up into the new year on the corner of Broadway and Camile Street.

California’s unemployment agency kept paying cellphone bills for 4 1/2 years without checking whether its workers actually were using the devices.

That’s how it racked up $4.6 million in fees for mobile devices its workers were not using, according to a new state audit detailing wasteful spending at several government agencies.

The Employment Development Department’s excessive cellphone bills date to the COVID-19 pandemic, when it shifted call center employees to remote work and faced pressure to release benefits to millions of suddenly unemployed Californians.

It acquired 7,224 cellphones and wireless hotspots by December 2020. State auditors analyzed 54 months of invoices since then and found half the devices were unused for at least two years, 25% were unused for three years and 99 of them were never used at all.

The investigation, which auditors opened after receiving a tip, identified 6,285 devices that were unused for at least four consecutive months, and said the department spent $4.6 million on monthly service fees for them.

From the beginning, the department had about 2,000 more cellphones than call center employees, according to the audit. The gap widened over time after the pandemic ended and the department’s staffing returned to its normal headcount.

As of April, the audit said the department had 1,787 unemployment call center employees, but was paying monthly service fees for 5,097 mobile devices.

“Although obtaining the mobile devices during COVID-19 may have been a good idea to serve the public, continuing to pay the monthly service fees for so many unused devices, especially post-COVID-19, was wasteful,” the audit said.

Department officials told auditors they were unaware of the spending, but auditors pointed to regular invoices from Verizon that showed which phones were not being used.

“We would have expected EDD management to have reconsidered the need to pay the monthly service fees for so many devices that had no voice, message, or data usage,” the audit said.

The unemployment department began acting on the auditors’ findings in April, when it canceled service plans for 2,825 devices. It has since implemented a policy to terminate service plans for devices that go unused for 90 days.

The California state auditor highlighted the mobile devices in its regular report on “improper activities by state agencies and employees.” The audit also showed that the California Air Resources Board overpaid an employee who was on extended leave as he prepared to retire by $171,000.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.