California High-Speed Rail

[DJM19]

God Bless Fiona Ma!

[dragonsky]

Wednesday, April 4, 2007
California lawmaker aboard as French train sets speed record
Two O.C. Assembly members were meeting with transportation minister while colleague took ride.
The Associated Press

SACRAMENTO – A California lawmaker got a firsthand look Tuesday at the potential of high-speed rail as a double-decker train raced through the French countryside at a record 356 mph.

Assemblywoman Fiona Ma said she was the only American on board when a train operated by the French high-speed rail system surpassed the previous mark for conventional rail of 320.2 mph, which was set in 1990 by another French train. A magnetically levitated Japanese train holds the ultimate speed record of 361 mph.

Ma said the approximately 15 minute-ride was "pretty amazing."

"It felt like we were ready to take off on the runway in a plane," the San Francisco Democrat said in a telephone interview. "That steady acceleration ... feeling and force."

Ma is part of a delegation of a half dozen lawmakers who are in France this week, in part to examine the French high-speed rail system as California considers building a 700-mile system of its own to carry passengers at speeds of more than 200 mph.

Ma said she ended up on the record-setting run after the legislators met Monday with representatives of Alstom, a company that makes trains for the French high-speed rail system, TGV.

She said company officials were "all excited about setting the world speed record" and offered to take a member of the California delegation on the ride. "I kind of chimed up and said it would be great to be on there. ... I jumped at the chance," Ma said.

While she was on the record-setting ride, the other lawmakers -- Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and Assemblymen John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, Joe Coto, D-San Jose, Michael Duvall, R-Yorba Linda, and Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar -- had a meeting with the French transportation minister, Ma said.

Ma's experience was probably more memorable.

"It's something that is going to go down in my history book," she said. "How many times does one have an opportunity to do that, to be part of history?"

She said the ride made her even more convinced that California needs to develop high-speed rail, which has been in the planning stages for more than 10 years.

A nearly $10 billion bond measure that would help pay for a high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and the San Francisco area will be on California's 2008 November ballot. Plans also call for links to Sacramento and San Diego.

But a vote on the bond measure has been delayed twice already, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants lawmakers to bump it from the 2008 ballot.

Ma said she and other high-speed rail supporters hope to persuade Schwarzenegger to support the 2008 vote and to increase funding in his proposed budget to allow the state's high-speed rail board to do engineering work and begin buying right of way for the bullet trains in the next fiscal year.

"Our highways are congested," Ma said. "We're not going to be able to put more runways at our airports. The only way to move people around efficiently and effectively is a high-speed rail system like we have in Europe."

A spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, Sabrina Lockhart, said the Republican governor has other priorities for state bonds, including prisons and flood control, but is willing to consider other ways to pay for high-speed rail, such as private financing.

"The governor understands the state has limited ability to borrow money at this time," she said.

As far as boosting his budget proposals for the 2007-08 fiscal year for high-speed rail, Lockhart said the governor was "always willing to work with the Legislature to achieve budget solutions."

[innov8]

Friday, April 6, 2007
High-speed train inches ahead
Segment of a $40 billion, 700-mile route through the county will undergo study.
By ELLYN PAK of The Orange County Register

A state rail agency this week began moving forward on an extensive study for a high-speed train route that would whisk commuters between Anaheim and Los Angeles.



The California High-Speed Rail Authority is leading the charge for the $21 million analysis to examine the Orange County-to-Los Angeles segment of a $40 billion, 700-mile system that would eventually stretch from the Bay Area to San Diego.

"It really goes into the deeper level of environmental analysis," Darrell Johnson, Orange County Transportation Authority's director of transit project delivery, said of the next round of studies that will last about three years.

In addition, the rail authority is looking to study other segments of the system, including one that could connect Los Angeles to Palmdale and another linking the central part of the state to the Bay Area.

Officials envision a system that would move commuters from Anaheim to Los Angeles in 20 minutes. Meetings are being held to gather public input.

Last September, transportation officials in Orange County agreed to contribute $7 million to the study that would include considering right-of-way requirements and noise issues. The rail authority is funding the rest.

The city of Anaheim is already preparing to be a pit stop for the high-speed train and hopes to integrate the service into a full-scale transit hub that would be built by 2010.

The transit hub would bring bus and different rail services together at one location. Anaheim's current Metrolink and Amtrak station would move from Angel Stadium's parking lot the site.

The Orange County-to-Los Angeles leg would cost $1.5 billion and go alongside the Metrolink tracks, said Dan Leavitt, deputy director of the rail authority.

Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, a rail authority board member, said Anaheim is a convenient and central point for commuters who wish to shuttle between different counties.

Officials said the high-speed train service would be financed through state funds – though a plan to place a bond measure onto the 2008 ballot was recently delayed, pushing the tentative schedule back.

"I'd really like to see if there are private-sector options," Pringle said of possible funding sources.

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister...le_1643925.php

[DJM19]

Does this line fit at all in the state plan? Whats the point in having two lines going between the same place?

[LAsam]

I believe this line is an OC spur, and there is also a line which goes from Union Station to SD.

[bmfarley]

For everyones information...

State


SoCal


NorCal


San Diego Specific


Time comparison by mode


1999 Survey


More information is available at the California High Speed Rail Authority website.

[bmfarley]

I think people should send letters of support to California Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) and California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez.

Although they have expressed support for the project, they need to be let known that people support them. If they sense there is little support... they'll back off.

[J_Taylor]

So, I was thinking the other day.
1)Where is the Oakland Depot location, if they have even thought that far a head.
2)Is a Oakland spur needed, if its only going to stop there.
I would love to see an Oakland row, and even more so if it ran up the caps route to Sac. but I don't see that as something that will happen anytime soon(TM)

I am just waiting for Southwest, ect to start to put out anti-HSR puff peaces..

[Richard Mlynarik]

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

So, I was thinking the other day.
1)Where is the Oakland Depot location, if they have even thought that far a head.

I don't know what "Oakland Depot" means, but my guess is the CHSRA Bay Area to Central Valley Program EIR/EIS
Definition of Alternatives: Conceptual Engineering Plan and Profiles, Typical Sections, & Station Fact Sheets will interest you.
Overview at http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/pu..._AlgnStOpt.pdf and http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/pu...egment_Map.pdf

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

Is a Oakland spur needed, if its only going to stop there.

I have no idea what this question means.

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

I would love to see an Oakland row, and even more so if it ran up the caps route to Sac. but I don't see that as something that will happen anytime soon(TM)

Oakland to Sacramento via the Hwy 80 corridor isn't on the list, for a couple reasons:
* The Capitol Corridor people have their own low-speed, make-UPRR-rich plans.
* SJ/SF/Oakland/San Ramon to Sacramento via Altamont (but NOT Pacheco) is more than time-competitive with the direct route, while serving the Bay Area to LA area market better than Pacheco in every other way as well. Synergy!

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

I am just waiting for Southwest, ect to start to put out anti-HSR puff peaces..

$20 million is ready to ensure that Modern America stays just the way we like it.

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

So, I was thinking the other day.
1)Where is the Oakland Depot location, if they have even thought that far a head.

I would be curious to know too.

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

2)Is a Oakland spur needed, if its only going to stop there.
I would love to see an Oakland row, and even more so if it ran up the caps route to Sac. but I don't see that as something that will happen anytime soon(TM)

As much as I appreciate what caps has done, it's still behind in the times. The route from OAK to SAC takes forever and it's expensive. $36 to be exact. I keep waiting to hear of news about a dedicated and straigtened ROW but nothing yet... And with 80 jammed as it is, there NEEDS to be a reliable and fast link. Hopefully HSR will continue through Oakland to Sac.

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

I am just waiting for Southwest, ect to start to put out anti-HSR puff peaces..

They've done it in Texas. What's going to stop them from doing it here?

[pdxstreetcar]

I had heard there was talk of having the Oakland station underground and terminating at City Center at the 12th street BART station.

The only reasons ever to fly Southworst were for the low fares which seem to have disappeared over the last few years. Anyhow if they ever do go ahead and fight HSR I will vow to never fly them ever again.

[J_Taylor]

Originally Posted by Richard Mlynarik

$20 million is ready the ensure that Modern America stays just the way we like it.

If you think that the US spending money on the military is why we have no rail, you are correct, but not in the way you think.
At the end of WW2 the VA home loan program is in my view one of the biggest factors. That the VA home loans are designed for buying a single family homecontributed greatly to the suburban USA after the War. That and the US was sold, lock stock and barrel on the fact that the American dream is owning your home with a white picket fence in the burbs.

Right now most Americans think that having a car means freedom of movement.They also think mass transit is for the poor and unwashed masses.
When I was in Tokyo I had better freedom of movement with out a car due to the fact that the rail lines went ever where I needed.
The problem is in the US getting people out of there car and getting transit to go where people want to go, not where political types think it should go.

enigma99a got my questions, even if my typing on them was bad.Same with pdxstreetcar.

One more request as well, Richard Mlynarik, Please don't pointlessly bash the military. Bash it only if it needs it and you have the tech to back it up.
________________________________________________________________

As much as I appreciate what caps has done, it's still behind in the times. The route from OAK to SAC takes forever and it's expensive. $36 to be exact. I keep waiting to hear of news about a dedicated and straigtened ROW but nothing yet... And with 80 jammed as it is, there NEEDS to be a reliable and fast link. Hopefully HSR will continue through Oakland to Sac.

It would be nice, and I would love to see the HSR take that route to SAC. I think I should have typed it as ," If the CAHSR isn't going on to Sac, then what is the point of it going to Oakland? It it worth it to spend the extra money on the Oakland Spur when the Transbay is a BART ride a way?

I had heard there was talk of having the Oakland station underground and terminating at City Center at the 12th street BART station.

I have heard that as well. While a decent location that would involve a lot of tunnels and a lot of money.

[bmfarley]

I emailed State Senator Christine Kehoe of San Diego. I was pleased with her response as it did not seem a stamped boilerplate. I get the feeling she looked it over before okaying the response as it appears as much energy went into her effort as I had put into mine. Although I cannot discern her position on California High Speed Rail I did learn that the matter of the CHSRA FY08 budget would be discussed further in a budget committee.

Below is my March 21st email followed be her response received today. Please see her email for other new information... some of which I do not believe has been in the media.

Christine Kehoe,
As a State Senator and member of committees for the 'Budget & Fiscal Review' and 'Transportation & Housing' I urge you to take action to honor the California High Speed Rail Authority's request for $102 million for the FY08 budget. The funding is necessary to initiate design efforts and purchase critical right-of-way.

High speed rail is important to San Diego! It relates to the airport and capacity constraint issues at Lindbergh Field. As you know, Lindbergh is projected to begin having capacity problems from 2015 to 2022. High speed rail can mitigate this dilemma by providing fast frequent and cheaper transportation to other California destinations. High speed rail is very competitive with air travel with destinations greater than 300 miles and less than 500; or so. The benefit of high speed rail is with time. It simply takes less of it to get from point A to point B when considering the hoops one must get through when travelling by air.

I am supportive of high speed rail for this reason, and, that it provides an alternative to driving. As a society we must take action to change our ways and transition to alternative transportation and fuels. Reliance on mid-east oil, pollution emitting vehicles, and constantly building roadways to satisfy never ending latent demand... should and must change.

Some day I want to have a son or daughter. I want to raise them in California and a society not dependant mid-east oil, an unstable part of the world that hates western culture and way of life. If we separate from them we can only become more safe here at home.

Will you be a leader? Will you champion high speed rail in the legislator?

Sincerely,
my name and address

^^^^ Ther above letter is similar to what I provided in a previous post in this thread. Did anyone else write their state representatives?

Dear Mr. (my name):

Thank you for your recent email expressing your support for allocating $102 million for the High Speed Rail Authority’s operations during the 2007-08 budget year. As you may be aware, the Governor has proposed a funding level of just $1.2 million for the Authority for the coming fiscal year.

While the Governor’s proposed funding level would enable the Authority to continue operating, it does not include funding to allow the authority to continue contract work that began in the current fiscal year.

Part of the problem for the Administration, is that the Governor is proposing a new bond issue of over $29 billion for various infrastructure projects, principally in the field of education. It is the Governor’s plan to place these on the ballot in 2008 and 2010. As you will remember, the new bond proposal would be in addition to the bond package of $37 million that was approved by the voters just this past November. The Administration is suggesting that setting aside bonding authority for high-speed rail would take up the state’s capacity to issue bonds for the other purposes that the Governor is backing. Therefore, they are proposing to indefinitely postpone the $9 billion high-speed rail bond measure that is supposed to go before the voters in November 2008.

At this point, the intent is to move the whole issue into the Budget Conference Committee, and allow this to be part of the “Big 5” negotiations between the Governor, and the majority and minority party leaders of both houses. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as this matter is deliberated further in the Senate.

Senator Christine Kehoe
39th District
2445 5th Avenue, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92101
619-645-3133
619-645-3144 Fax

[CHapp]

From Senator Kehoe's response to bmfarley:

Part of the problem for the Administration, is that the Governor is proposing a new bond issue of over $29 billion for various infrastructure projects, principally in the field of education.

Now that I find truly remarkable. Come on, Governor Arnold and fine gentlefolk of the CA legislature: what's those $29 billion REALLY being earmarked for?

[bmfarley]

I was thinking about that same statement after I put the post up; however, for different reasons that yourself.

Why must you ask? Well, the opening phrase... who 'is' the 'Administration?' And, does it indicate her position?

[CHapp]

I felt compelled to ask because I don't see the connection between infrastructure projects and the field of education.

[bmfarley]

Originally Posted by CHapp

I felt compelled to ask because I don't see the connection between infrastructure projects and the field of education.

Transportation and education have typcially been competing against each other for funding for awhile. Prop 42 passed in November 2004, which redirected sales tax on gasoline to transportation rather than the general fund, is a semi recent example. The California Teachers Association (specific name escapes me) competed against the proposition because it removed that revenue stream from the state general fund... which is where education is funded from.

I would suspect the yet to be announced 2008 bond measure for education would go toward buildings, computers and whatnot, versus teacher/administration salaries. Buildings and whatnot is infrastructure and would boost the economy... but so would construction of a HSR system.

My position on an education bond measure.... well, I don't have any kids and I've already graduated from school. So, I don't have a vested interest in education investments right now. When I have kids I will... but their being in school is a minimum of 6 years out from now. On the otherhand, myself and every other of the 37 million Californians use transportation every day.

[pdxstreetcar]

On a related note...
Recent photo from inside the old Oakland train Station (16th & Wood):

Lee Otis

Infact the station even has its own flickr group (with 70 photos).
http://www.flickr.com/groups/319944@N24/

[BTinSF]

FYI bmfarley:

Hate to burst your bubble, but check the language of the letter you got from Sen. Kehoe:

the Governor has proposed a funding level of just $1.2 million for the Authority for the coming fiscal year.

While the Governor’s proposed funding level would enable the Authority to continue operating, it does not include funding to allow the authority to continue contract work that began in the current fiscal year.

Part of the problem for the Administration, is that the Governor is proposing a new bond issue of over $29 billion for various infrastructure projects, principally in the field of education. It is the Governor’s plan to place these on the ballot in 2008 and 2010. As you will remember, the new bond proposal would be in addition to the bond package of $37 million that was approved by the voters just this past November. The Administration is suggesting that setting aside bonding authority for high-speed rail would take up the state’s capacity to issue bonds for the other purposes that the Governor is backing. Therefore, they are proposing to indefinitely postpone the $9 billion high-speed rail bond measure that is supposed to go before the voters in November 2008.

and then check this paragraph from the Legislative Analyst's 2007 Budget analysis ( http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2007/...665_anl07.aspx ):

As part of the 2007-08 budget, the administration is proposing $29.4 billion in general obligation bonds for various infrastructure projects, principally in education, to be placed on the ballot in 2008 and 2010. The administration believes that setting aside bonding authority for high-speed rail would take up the state’s capacity to issue bonds for most other purposes. Therefore, the administration proposes to indefinitely postpone submitting the high-speed rail bond measure to the voters. This would essentially end the project unless another source of funding is provided. The budget, however, requests $1.2 million to support the continued operation of HSRA during 2007-08. This amount does not include funding for the authority to continue to contract for work related to the development of a high-speed rail system.

It's not exactly plagiarism but it's pretty close to a paraphrase and, as somebody who has worked in a legislative office, I'd bet it came from some staffer, not the Senator.

Otherwise, however, we agree on just about everything you said.

[bmfarley]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

FYI bmfarley:

Hate to burst your bubble, but...

Wow! Fortunately I was not too much on an emotional high. I would have assumed a staffer wrote that response, but I was also suprised by the level of detail and the seeming level of effort.

But, I see now that there was some copy and paste work involved. What may be interesting is the differences, not the similarities, between the LAO and teh Kehoe letter. Does it lend itself to indicating her position? I can't tell right now. If anything it spells out that it is the Administration pushing an agenda.. not her. I guess.