California was one of the winners in the redistribution of high-speed rail money from states that refused the funds, to the tune of $300,000,000. Diane Feinstein was giddy at the windfall:
“This is great news for Californians, who have already made strong financial commitments to infrastructure projects,” Feinstein said. “I applaud Secretary LaHood for responding to our request and allowing the state of California to utilize these funds to advance high-speed rail. No other state is as ready and able to lead the way in demonstrating the viability of high-speed rail.”
Which brings us to last night, when the independent agency overseeing California’s high-speed “infrastructure” spending basically derailed the entire project:
State analysis slams high-speed rail plans
Some excerpts:
Among the recommendations, the report calls for:
• The state Legislature to reject the $185 million in state funding the project calls for this year for consultants and public outreach and approve only $7 million.
• Passing legislation this session that would shift responsibility from the High Speed Rail Authority to the California Department of Transportation.
• Re-evaluating where the first segment of the line is built – perhaps a more densely populated area with enough ridership to financially support the line.
Are you kidding me? $185 million for consultants and public relations? Middle-class jobs my butt.
Oh, and the recommendation that the first line of the train actually pay for itself. Brilliant!
There’s more:
The rail authority has about $3.5 billion in place from federal funds and about $6.3 billion overall. In total, the line has been estimated to cost $43 billion.
But Tuesday’s report determines that those costs might have risen substantially since that 2009 estimate. It also warns that funding could be too reliant on politics and could be cut off at any time based on whether leaders support high-speed rail. The $300 million California received Monday, for instance, came from the federal government after Florida leaders rejected the funds as wasteful spending.
Translation: we have no idea how much this is really going to cost.
Please, please Congress — end high-speed rail now. Oh, and California, give us the $300 million back.
$43 BILLION.
For a railroad.
A railroad that, correct me if I'm wrong, is strictly passenger and not freight.
How long would the train have to run to clear a profit of $43 billion? (2009 estimate of the project cost)
If you can make a "profit" of $5 per ticket to go to the costs (over and above operation/refurb costs)...you'd still need to sell eight billion or so tickets.
Are there any adults left in California?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGive it back? Yeah, right. As if.
Already spent, dude.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm wondering if the other states, would have a problem with California getting more time. Perhaps they may not have applied for the federal funds because of strict time requirements. I wonder about the legality of changing an approved route for which contracts were signed?
From the beginning there have been big conflicts in the federal vs. California state law and that's another issue that the Legislative Analyst is pointing out. The California law says the segment must have financial and ridership reports that prove financial viability. With the central valley that would be a lawsuit waiting to happen.
State law also says the entire project must be run without financial subsidy and with bad ridership number and no updated construction costs, there is no way this can be proven.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse300 million of money that really doesn't exist. We must starve the beast.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse