Update (June 25, 2012): On June 22 the Sacramento Bee reported that Gov. Brown has confirmed that he’ll be back with a CEQA-weakening proposal for rail.
The Brown administration has decided to abandon for now its proposed trailer bill to weaken California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions for the High Speed Rail project (see previous article and Sierra Club letter).
This is a victory for the environmental community and Sierra Club California particularly, since we led the charge on pushing back on the CEQA weakening. This does not mean that the administration won't look for other relief later (and we've heard rumors of such already), but at least it won't be through a trailer bill that doesn't get full public review and debate. The Sierra Club's position remains that a public-works project as large as this must go through full CEQA review.
The administration has also asked for our support on the budget trailers that will appropriate the bond funds to match the federal grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for construction of the first length of the rail from Merced to Fresno. Sierra Club California's policy has been to support High Speed Rail, generally and we supported Prop 1A to provide funds for HSR construction. We will support appropriating the bond funds.
Kathryn Phillips, director, Sierra Club California
What Happened to the Shiny New Yellow, Blue and White Choo-Choo?
In 2008 promoters of the California High Speed Rail project advertized an 800 mile passenger rail system with 220 MPH high speed trains connecting Sacramento, San Francisco and San Diego for a cost of $33 billion. In November 2008, 52% of California voters approved the 800 mile project but the cost had increased to $45 billion. Federal stimulus and grant funds were allocated for the project to be used under specific conditions including matching state funds. On November 1st, 2011 the High Speed Rail Authority released a draft business plan that reduced the scope of the project from 800 to 520 miles. The Sacramento and L.A. Basin to San Diego sections of the project were removed and the cost had increased to $98.5 billion.
In April 2012, The Authority issued another business plan that claimed a project cost reduction from $98.5 billion to $68.4 billion. Disturbingly, another expensive 40 mile section of the project between Los Angeles and Anaheim was eliminated, reducing the scope of the project to only 480 miles. “That is what helped us slash the price tag for the project by $30 billion” stated High Speed Rail Authority spokesperson Lance Simmens.
The current “Blended” system substitutes high speed rail construction for upgrades to slow speed conventional passenger rail systems in the San Francisco Bay Peninsula and L.A. Basin with a wink and nod promise that high speed rail systems will one day be constructed from Merced to the L.A. Basin. The plan also eliminates another 110 miles of previously planned exclusive high speed rail tracks that will now be shared with existing conventional passenger rail systems. The current plan does not include track electrification or high speed rail rolling stock.
The $33 billion, 800 mile high speed rail system the Authority promised before the 2008 vote cost $41.25 million per high speed mile. The $45 billion, 800 mile high speed rail system that voters approved in November 2008 cost 56.25 million per high speed mile. The current $68.4 billion, 480 mile blended high speed/low speed rail system pencils out to $142.5 million per mile.
The Authority and their happy band of blind cheerleaders expect us to believe they have reduced the costs of the project when it is only the amount of high speed rail systems they have reduced. It is a fact that the Authority has increased the cost per mile of the current blended project over 289% since 2008, and much of the drastically reduced project is no longer high speed. Californians have been deceived by the California High Speed Rail Authority with a series of creative bait and switch gimmicks disguised as business plans. The high speed rail project has become a do and say anything in order to spend the Federal stimulus and grant money project.
Environmentalists support the high speed rail project because they believe the green electric powered system will reduce green house gas emissions. Experts contend that it will take 30 years or more for the green electric powered train to offset carbon emissions produced during the construction process. The disturbing fact of the matter is that the California High Speed Rail project will not be the 800 mile, green electric powered, 220 MPH train system voters approved in 2008. The project has been changed to a 480 mile long blend of upgraded low speed diesel powered conventional rail systems and an unbelievable promise of high speed trains somewhere in the far distant future.
So, what happened to the shiny new yellow, blue and white choo-choo train? The California High-Speed Rail project has turned into a nonsensical utopian dream, a figment of imagination among progressive thinking, an idealistic fantasy and an extremely expensive lie that will never be a reality especially in this kind of economy.
Ignoring the reality of California’s $16 billion plus deficits, Governor Brown released his revised budget proposal on May 14th that includes $6.1 billion for his beloved blue, yellow and white train project. Perhaps the California Legislature can wake our Governor up as they create the actual 2012-13 budget before his fanciful utopian dream becomes every taxpayer’s worst nightmare.
Jeff Taylor – Chair, “Save Bakersfield Committee”
I agree that it is a victory that CEQA will remain intact (for now) with regard to the High Speed Rail Project. What disappoints me is that the Sierra Club has now decided to support appropriating bond funds for this ill- planned project that Californians cannot afford.The plan does not even resemble Prop 1A ! Does the Sierra Club realize that it will destroy the valley south of Fresno to allow needed improvements to the Bay Area and LA Basin? What about all of the farmland it will destroy or render useless? What of the plan of 40-60 elevated rails through valley cities and towns producing noise, vibration, air pollution and a quality of life no one would hopefully wish upon another?
This plan sacrifices the southern valley to improve the bookend points in the SF Bay Area and LA. It will remove the southern valley’s regional AMTRAK rail route that currently runs to small town stations. Amtrak will be moved to the new segment that will not be electrified and will not have a high speed train. Outlying towns will now have to take buses or travel to Bakersfield or Fresno to catch Amtrak. How is that an improvement?
The new alignment tracks will reach to an outlying area far from downtown Bakersfield and may never connect with Palmdale or the LA basin. There is no further funding available and no private interest will come into view unless it is fully complete and functional. This could be decades or this could be never. Even the Peer Review notes that worse case scenario, we will AT LEAST get the bookend improvements, even if the rest is never built. I ask you ..is it worth sacrificing prime farmland and valley cities/towns for this ridiculous alignment that may not even be completed in our lifetimes, if ever?? If we do not accept the Federal monies, the HSRA will have to rethink the alignment and plan something that MAKES SENSE! This “use it or lose it” mentality with regard to the Federal funds (which provide a very small fraction of the full build cost out of this project) is a BIG problem. It makes more sense to block the appropriation of the bond funds, even if it means losing the Federal dollars. They need to go back to the drawing board on this, unencumbered by some Federal stipulation to mandate that the first initial segment must go through the middle of the CV (central valley). Having the CV be the first segment NEVER made any sense. They tried to sell it to us that it would be the “test track”.
The track won’t be electrified and there is no high speed train. There is no funding for either…therefore there is nothing to test.
PLEASE RETHINK YOUR POSITION and do check with the Sierra Club Chapters in the Southern
part of the valley. They may be able to enlighten you to what is truly going on. Currently there is little support of this project amongst city councils and boards of supervisors south of Fresno. They are trying to fight back, but no one seems to be listening. Will you please inquire and listen?
The concept of high-speed rail is a good one but the execution of this project is not being done responsibly or as represented to the public in 2008. You should not have to sacrifice farm and dairy lands which feed the country because the land is flat and cheaper to buy. Routes were selected because of politics not because it made the best sense. If owner/operators selected routing, it would be done sensibly. If environmentalists had their say in the routing, things would have been done differently.
According to the Legislative analyts will will be thirty years before the train has a positive effect on Green House Gases and up to 20 years a negative effect on the air do to construction impacts. These numbers are dependent on proper ridership and most who study the project know the ridership numbers are over-stated.
I think especially since Jerry Brown now says he’s taking back a promise not to reduce or exempt the HSR project, Sierra Club should take back support of funding. When is the cost too high? Certainly it’s not high-speed rail at any cost, including the future solvency of the CEQA laws for the state. Certainly if club members knew the details of this plan, they would like surveys have indicated, would pull back support. The higher the knowledge level, the higher the lack of support of this program.
support for this project. It’s time for a do-over. The concept is good, this project is bad.