High Cost Rail - Part 62 $piraling Upward$

From today's SF Examiner, we read

A new report says California’s proposed high-speed railroad could cost state taxpayers more than three times the official $43 billion cost projection.

This $138 billion estimate comes from a trio of Bay Area analysts who have followed the project, which was conceived to carry residents from San Francisco to Los Angeles in about 2½ hours.

but my favorite part is high-cost rail fanatic Ron Diridon's fanatical reaction

Former authority board member Rod Diridon conceded that the true cost will be well more than the original $43 billion projection, but wouldn’t venture an exact forecast. However, he thought federal funding would open up for the project within four to five years, once the “fanaticism of the tea party” has worn off in Washington.

But Diridon said Warren and his colleagues aren’t qualified to make projections for the project.

But as we leave the Diridon-alternate reality and come back to earth, here is another link that is making the rounds among those of us who live in the real world.  I wasn't familiar with The Planning Report, but Katz' comments are interesting, particularly after he non-answers the first part

The second part of your question: “should it be dead?” You know, it’s going to die on its own, the rate that it’s going. The problem is Brown realized this late because he took the view at the beginning that this was Arnold’s train: he fought for it; he wanted it. Someday someone will be able to explain to me why the President of the United States thinks this is his “Go to the Moon” project à la Kennedy because it’s nothing like that. But he’s holding onto it like it is, the way it is. 

and then

If they’re not in the ground turning dirt by September, Jerry has to write a three-and-a-half billion-dollar check and give it back to the feds.

Jerry, get our checkbook out...time to start writing that 10 digit check.

Comments

[pat giorni]

The latest:
Silverfarb usually gets it right, because he gets it................

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=221671&title=Mixed views on rail update