Passenger Trains > CAHSR Authority loses appeal

I don't recall seeing this item from last week being mentioned on TrainOrders:

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/04/16/3604768/high-speed-rail-loses-appeals.html

Here is a link to a site that has some details on the legal proceedings:

http://calwatchdog.com/2014/04/22/gov-browns-legal-strategy-to-prop-up-bullet-train-faltering/

I don't know the POV of this group, so please don't jump me if it does not match yours.

Since the completion date of this project is 30 years in the future--I don't think folks really expect this project to produce high speed rail.

But there is a lot of money available for lawyers (as these articles show); and for corporations who do impact studies, etc., etc.,; and no doubt the money (in billions) WILL be spent.

However, I for one, don't expect high speed trains from this project. No project requiring 30 years can be taken seriously; because of inflation alone, costs will have grown to unimaginable heights by the time a long 30 years go by.

Joe

In 30 years auto-pilot for cars will have been perfected, find your way to the freeway, push some buttons and away you go. That will be a major impact for the CaHSR market. Unless there's some major changes that cause's all of California to be apolitical mindless drones with no money left to buy cars or travel beyond the local food store.

hmmm, wait a second....

Many European cathedrals took hundreds of years to complete, and the Washington Monument was started in the 1840s, but not completed until the 1880s.

The French, German, and Spanish high-speed rail systems are not even complete today, more than 30 years after construction started.

I guess the interstate highway system is the exception....authorized in 1956, it was completed by 1960.

In any case, court cases need to be litigated, but will likely be sidestepped even if adverse because they only apply to the bond funds, and not to federal funds or the likely new permanent source from cap and trade revenues, which can reasonably be expected to be in place as early as approval of the new state budget on June 15. So, does it even matter?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/23/14 11:03 by reindeerflame.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I guess the interstate highway system is the
> exception....authorized in 1956, it was completed
> by 1960.
>

Hardly...completion of the originally defined system came in 1992 when the Glenwwod Canyon (CO) double-deck roadway opened. Of course there have been hundreds of additions and changes since authorization in 1956 that keep it a work in progress, much like many of the world's HSR systems.

Dave

DavidP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reindeerflame Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > I guess the interstate highway system is the
> > exception....authorized in 1956, it was
> completed
> > by 1960.
> >
>
> Hardly...completion of the originally defined
> system came in 1992 when the Glenwwod Canyon (CO)
> double-deck roadway opened. Of course there have
> been hundreds of additions and changes since
> authorization in 1956 that keep it a work in
> progress, much like many of the world's HSR
> systems.
>
> Dave


I don't know....that like 36 years later...seems we should be able to build highways quicker than that.

This is all apples and oranges again The Interstate, we are talking abut the whole system, not one segment. Same for Europe. HSR not just sitting there uncompleted. The cathedrals were often used, just not finished.
But we do not know. The whole thing could get a kick start, become a priority and be completed earlier.

The relationship here:
What usable sections will be completed earlier and what will value will of those be.
Will what is designed today even be relevant anymore 30 years from now.
Will they be rebuilding the initial sections even before the project is completed.

Interstate as an example: 30 years ago is obsolete and being rebuilt.

This is not to mean it will be a complete waste. You will have a ROW and hopefully not for a bike path.

Bob Jordan

robj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is all apples and oranges again The
> Interstate, we are talking abut the whole system,
> not one segment. Same for Europe. HSR not just
> sitting there uncompleted. The cathedrals were
> often used, just not finished.
> But we do not know. The whole thing could get a
> kick start, become a priority and be completed
> earlier.
>
> The relationship here:
> What usable sections will be completed earlier and
> what will value will of those be.
> Will what is designed today even be relevant
> anymore 30 years from now.
> Will they be rebuilding the initial sections even
> before the project is completed.
>
> Interstate as an example: 30 years ago is
> obsolete and being rebuilt.
>
> This is not to mean it will be a complete waste.
> You will have a ROW and hopefully not for a bike
> path.
>
> Bob Jordan


True enough. The San Joaquin Amtrak services would use the new alignment in the interim, until a HSR service can be offered, so perhaps it's not quite almonds and apricots.

TCnR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In 30 years auto-pilot for cars will have been
> perfected, find your way to the freeway, push some
> buttons and away you go.

I first heard this over 50 years ago.

A lot has happened in those 50 years, I was promised a flying car by now though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car

> -----
> > In 30 years auto-pilot for cars will have been
> > perfected, find your way to the freeway, push
> some
> > buttons and away you go.
>
> I first heard this over 50 years ago.

CA HSR, and all the hoopla they've been proposing for years, and now this, what a joke!

Many segments of the interstate system were de-mapped years ago. The remainder of I-395 into downtown DC, I-278 in NJ and NY, I-495 in NJ, I-95 in Hillsborough / Princeton NJ, just to name a few.

De-map enough, and you can declare the rest completed!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CA HSR, and all the hoopla they've been proposing
> for years, and now this, what a joke!


Of course, a national road system like the interstate had been proposed for years before it finally took off in the 1950s.

Meanwhile, some states self-financed their own projects, essentially the turnpikes we still have today.

Even Rome wasn't built in a day.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Many European cathedrals took hundreds of years to
> complete, and the Washington Monument was started
> in the 1840s, but not completed until the 1880s.
>
> The French, German, and Spanish high-speed rail
> systems are not even complete today, more than 30
> years after construction started.
>
> I guess the interstate highway system is the
> exception....authorized in 1956, it was completed
> by 1960.


HAHAHA...The Interstate Highway System was still under construction in the early 1990s, namely Interstate 70 through Glenwood Canyon, it was a bitch to build because the Rio Grande had all the prime real estate.
Cheers,
Nick

What is with all these rediculous comparisons to the Interstate Highway System! It's so silly. The Interstate System is hundreds of thousands of miles long.

The mileage we are talking about with hsr is what--500 miles!

There is no 500 mile stretch of Interstate Highway, within the State of California, that EVER took 30 years to build!

Joe



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/23/14 17:10 by floridajoe2001.

The court ruled that the issues brought before it are worthy of a trial:

- That the blended system is substantially different from a line of dedicated tracks for high-speed trains that some hard-core advocates and project opponents both say was what voters were promised in Proposition 1A.

- That sharing tracks with the Caltrain commuter line between San Francisco and San Jose will keep high-speed trains from achieving Proposition 1A’s mandate for a 2-hour 40-minute nonstop ride from downtown San Francisco to Los Angeles’ Union Station.

- That the system would not be able to operate without a public subsidy.

Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/04/16/3604768/high-speed-rail-loses-appeals.html#storylink=cpy


as mentioned a number of times, you can't propose a bond issue that says we will do A, B, and C if you approve the ballot measure. And then go out and do X, Y, and Z. You need to get a second vote about doing X, Y, and Z.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The court ruled that the issues brought before it
> are worthy of a trial:
>
> - That the blended system is substantially
> different from a line of dedicated tracks for
> high-speed trains that some hard-core advocates
> and project opponents both say was what voters
> were promised in Proposition 1A.
>
> - That sharing tracks with the Caltrain commuter
> line between San Francisco and San Jose will keep
> high-speed trains from achieving Proposition
> 1A’s mandate for a 2-hour 40-minute nonstop ride
> from downtown San Francisco to Los Angeles’
> Union Station.
>
> - That the system would not be able to operate
> without a public subsidy.
>
> Read more here:
> http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/04/16/3604768/hi
> gh-speed-rail-loses-appeals.html#storylink=cpy
>
>
> as mentioned a number of times, you can't propose
> a bond issue that says we will do A, B, and C if
> you approve the ballot measure. And then go out
> and do X, Y, and Z. You need to get a second vote
> about doing X, Y, and Z.


That's all well and good, but the bond act does not control other funds available for the project, and as mentioned, other funds are likely to be available by the end of the fiscal year. The bond act only controls the bond act funds, not the federal funds or the cap and trade revenues.

reindeerflame Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
> That's all well and good, but the bond act does
> not control other funds available for the project,
> and as mentioned, other funds are likely to be
> available by the end of the fiscal year. The bond
> act only controls the bond act funds, not the
> federal funds or the cap and trade revenues.

Problem is whatever federal funds are/become available (and if the GOP wins back the Senate later this year, I predict there will be zilch) plus cap and trade revenues are a drop in the bucket towards the overall cost of the project. And I believe there are matching funds requirements which the bond proceeds were supposed to cover. But it is extremely unlikely the bonds will ever be issued so in practical terms, there is little funding available to move forward.

There are also the politics of the HSR. The project is becoming Jerry Brown's in the view of many, including some Democratic state legislators. Since the guv has every intention of winning re-election to become the longest serving governor in California history (16 years over a pair of eight-year terms separated by many years), he'll walk away from HSR the minute he sniffs the winds changing. Don't think he cares one way or the other, this, like the San Joaquin water tunnels, is all about his legacy, especially as to how he ends up being compared to his dad, Gov Pat Brown (1960-68).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/14 04:51 by masterphots.

masterphots Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reindeerflame Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > That's all well and good, but the bond act does
> > not control other funds available for the
> project,
> > and as mentioned, other funds are likely to be
> > available by the end of the fiscal year. The
> bond
> > act only controls the bond act funds, not the
> > federal funds or the cap and trade revenues.
>
> Problem is whatever federal funds are/become
> available (and if the GOP wins back the Senate
> later this year, I predict there will be zilch)
> plus cap and trade revenues are a drop in the
> bucket towards the overall cost of the project.
> And I believe there are matching funds
> requirements which the bond proceeds were supposed
> to cover. But it is extremely unlikely the bonds
> will ever be issued so in practical terms, there
> is little funding available to move forward.
>
> There are also the politics of the HSR. The
> project is becoming Jerry Brown's in the view of
> many, including some Democratic state legislators.
> Since the guv has every intention of winning
> re-election to become the longest serving governor
> in California history (16 years over a pair of
> eight-year terms separated by many years), he'll
> walk away from HSR the minute he sniffs the winds
> changing. Don't think he cares one way or the
> other, this, like the San Joaquin water tunnels,
> is all about his legacy, especially as to how he
> ends up being compared to his dad, Gov Pat Brown
> (1960-68).


Some of the bonds, of course, have already been sold and spent, and cap and trade revenues would be much higher than the bond act over time. The courts will eventually find that some expenditure of the remaining bond funds is allowed.

As for Gov. Brown, there is no evidence that the project is hurting his popularity in any way. The public isn't deeply concerned one way or the other. Viz:

"Brown’s support among Republicans, who may see him as the most moderate of the Democratic voices in Sacramento, is even higher when it comes to his approval numbers. 31 percent of GOP voters think he’s doing a good job as governor."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/14 08:34 by reindeerflame.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CA HSR, and all the hoopla they've been
> proposing
> > for years, and now this, what a joke!
>
>
> Of course, a national road system like the
> interstate had been proposed for years before it
> finally took off in the 1950s.
>
> Meanwhile, some states self-financed their own
> projects, essentially the turnpikes we still have
> today.
>
> Even Rome wasn't built in a day.


Uh, Reindeer, the ballot passed back in 08, and nothin' has been broken even 6 years later! The Interstate Highway system wasn't mainly talked about much until Eisenhower saw how the Autobahn was built, and I bet they didn't have the roadblocks CA. HSR is having! Like I said a million times, PIPE DREAM!