« Recycling Update: Running Out of County Landfill | Main | Newsom: Ballot Shenanigans? »

August 05, 2019



Perhaps the unblending of the "blended" solution is closer than we think.


“Assembly Democrats see greater public value in improving passenger rail from Burbank to Anaheim, relieving congestion on the busy Interstate 5 corridor before the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles and putting additional money into San Francisco commuter rail.”

Improving transit in the state’s most congested urban areas, advocates of the new scheme contend, is more important than the patched-together system that Newsom has proposed.

“I like the concept,” Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon told The Times. “Any project that doesn’t have a significant amount of service to the largest areas in the state doesn’t make much sense.”

The plan now gaining traction in the Legislature would acknowledge reality and could hasten an end for the ill-conceived, mismanaged bullet train, even Newsom’s much-abbreviated version.



Construction of a new South San Francisco Caltrain station is a year and a half behind schedule and $16.6 million over budget.

The project, which will build a new 700-foot center platform and pedestrian underpass, is delayed because it took longer than expected to secure required Caltrans permits and because of challenges relocating utilities. Originally set for completion in June of this year, the project is now expected to wrap up in November 2020.



Headline in yesterday's Daily Post: Caltrain costs will rise with electrification.

Once Caltrain electrifies its tracks, transit officials estimate it could cost at least $208 million a year to operate the commuter railroad--a 33% increase over last year's operating budget of $155.7 million.
The piece mixes up the proposed increase in the number of trains based on the now vastly outdated ridership projections from pre-Covid with some operating costs. Here's the confusing bit:

"Petty said the increased operating costs with electrification is driven by running more trains. Electrified trains are more efficient (no metric given on this) than the current diesel trains, BUT THEY REQUIRE A BIGGER SYSTEM FINANCIALLY, he said".
Meaning you need a lot more miles delivered to cover much higher fixed costs? Not sure.


The words "more efficient" have no meaningful context in today's government speak.

How sad these constant lies from our inefficient government (apologies for the redundancy) have become.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

About the Voice

  • The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. On it you can read and comment on important city issues.

    Note: Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice Blog are those of the poster and not necessarily the opinion of the editorial board of the Burlingame Voice. See Terms of Use

Contributing to the Voice

  • If you would like more information on the Burlingame Voice, send an email to [email protected] with your request or question. We appreciate your interest.

    Authors may login here.

    For help posting to the Voice, see our tutorial.