The Burlingame Voice

High-Cost Rail - Part 158 Rubber-stamping the EIR

The Chronicle and the Daily Journal dutifully put the CHSRA Board's rubber-stamp of the EIR for the Central Valley to EssEff section of the "bullet train" on their front pages.  The Chron sub-headed "Despite win, major hurdles remain for project" and the DJ sub-headed Millbrae's pending legal action about a parcel of land near the station expansion.

Having your own Board "approve" your EIR is sort of like me approving the dinner reservation I just made.  The state legislature still hasn't had the courage to kill the beast as hoped back in May.  The Chron made some attempt to frame the challenges

Major hurdles to the project remain. For starters, California hasn’t figured out where it will get up to $25 billion needed to build the San Francisco and Silicon Valley bullet train extensions.   Democrats in the state Assembly, led by the powerful Los Angeles delegation, had pushed for years to take a chunk of the $4.2 billion in bond funds for the Central Valley line and instead spend it on regional transportation projects in major metro areas that could eventually connect with high-speed rail.

But that standoff ended in June, when the Rail Authority emerged with its bond funding intact, though its operations will be overseen by a new inspector general. Lawmakers also dropped a push to cut costs by using diesel-powered trains, rather than electrified track, in the Central Valley.  But the project has faced ridicule over repeated construction delays and soaring costs, with its total budget growing from $33 billion to at least $105 billion in the Rail Authority’s latest business plan — and potentially many billions more when the authority factors recent inflation into its estimates.

Trains were initially supposed to start running in 2020. Now, the agency doesn’t anticipate the first trains will start running in the Central Valley until 2029, followed by Silicon Valley in 2031.

Leave it to Quentin Kopp to summarize

Still, the project faces critics who say it’s drifted too far from the statewide system voters approved in 2008. Quentin Kopp, a retired state senator and former chairman of the Rail Authority Board, laughed at the idea of bullet trains running into downtown San Francisco.  “That’s called much ado about nothing,” he said. “This is destined for the graveyard of boondoggles now.”

I liked the Dilbert cartoon that ran in today's DJ--it's a fit with this non-news

  

High-Cost Rail - Part 157 Courage to Kill the Beast?

We covered the reluctance of the California Assembly to hand over a few more billions of taxpayer monies to High-Cost Rail back in September here.  The failures of this project are becoming epic and the money pit is like something out of Indiana Jones.  The Daily Journal reprinted a Calmatters.org piece by the former LA Times journalist that details most of the failings.  This being Part 157 in our category, one could probably find a couple they missed, but here are some lowlights from the piece:

The feud has festered for 16 months, since Gov. Gavin Newsom asked the Legislature for a $4.2 billion appropriation in early 2021. The request has triggered a standoff with Assembly Democrats, who have steadfastly refused to hand over the last remaining funds from a 2008 bond measure for high-speed rail.

“The project is not proceeding according to a robust plan, which results in waste and other inefficiencies,” said Bent Flyvbjerg, a business expert in mega projects at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School and IT University of Copenhagen.  “Given the political divisions, the cost growth, the schedule delays and the lack of a sound future revenue source, this project is going to the graveyard of famous boondoggles.”

The latest estimate, made earlier this year, set the cost at $105 billion. The new price tag is based on some estimates made in 2019, not accounting for the spurt of inflation in construction materials and labor, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the non-partisan adviser to the Legislature. The risk is that the real cost is still not known.  (Ed:  I'll give you a conservative estimate for end-to-end completion--$300 billion)

Of the urban legislators, former rail authority chairman Dan Richard said, “They will never be satisfied. I made agreements to give $470 million for Los Angeles Union Station and $700 million for electrification of Caltrain. We didn’t even get invited to speak at the dedication.”  (Ed:  sad face)

The Assembly plan would also delay installation of a high voltage electrical system, until the Central Valley tracks connect somewhere. In the interim, it wants the rail authority to consider a new generation of battery-operated trains, which manufacturers say could reach 170 mph and higher in coming years. Kelly disputes that the battery trains could travel fast enough to comply with legal requirements. 

A more basic question is whether the state can ever afford to make the costly connections to the coasts, involving lengthy mountain tunnels near seismic faults. Bakersfield to Los Angeles is priced at $50 billion and San Francisco to the Central Valley tie-in at Chowchilla $22 billion, according to upper end estimates in the 2022 draft business plan.  “The idea that you would spend all your money on a train that doesn’t connect to anything and just hope that you’re going to get more money, I find a really frightening business proposition,” said Friedman.

Another complication is that construction in the Central Valley is bogging down, once again failing to meet a revised schedule. There are 119 miles currently under contract for roadbed and structures, which originally was supposed to be completed by 2017. 

“There is visually nothing happening in the Central Valley,” said Jeff Denham, the former chairman of the House rail subcommittee, a Republican almond farmer who voted for the project when he was in the Legislature but later became a strident critic. “Equipment has been moved out.”

A central problem involves utility relocations, which are far behind schedule and delaying the start of bridges and viaducts. The rail authority’s most recent progress reports validate the executives’ concerns.  In its April progress report, the rail authority said that 57% of 1,850 utility relocation projects remain uncompleted by three teams of contractors some 10 years after construction began.  (Ed:  If they had just run it through the I-5 median this never would have happened).

Slow land purchases have loomed over the project for a decade. The state lacks 222 parcels out of 2,291 that it needs, the report said.  The three current contracts cover only 119 miles of the 171 miles of the route that Newsom wants to build. (Ed:  ibid I-5)  New contracts and land acquisition would be needed for 52 additional miles. Tracks, a complex signaling system and a high voltage electrical system would come after bridges, track bed and viaducts are largely completed.  (Ed:  OK, $400 billion)

There was a poll out recently that said 56% of Californians still support the project.  I interpret that as 56% of Californians are just plain clueless.  This is headed for the "graveyard of famous boondoggles" and Newsom's name will be on the headstone.

 

High-Cost Rail - Part 156 Employer of the Year?

I probably should have saved this for an April Fool's Day post, but I fear nobody would have been fooled.  Just this week we learn:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) has received the prestigious Employer of the Year Award from the Women in Transportation Seminar (WTS) Sacramento chapter. This annual award recognizes a transportation organization for outstanding leadership in mentoring women in the transportation field, providing opportunities for upward mobility for women and having women at the highest levels of leadership.

“A talented, highly-capable and diverse staff is a pre-requisite for success on a project of this magnitude,” said Authority CEO Brian Kelly.

Let's look at the state of the project.  A supermajority Democratic legislature is balking at the ever-escalating costs and suggesting the Authority pull the plug on the Central Valley train to nowhere in favor of spending the funds at the metropolitan bookends; while our US Senators are out begging in Washington for additional bookend funding.  Other legislators are asking if the trains shouldn't be diesel--the horrors!  Much of the overrun is driven by the inability to get rights of way deal closed and putting in change orders that send the contractors' bills up.  The system has dropped to a single-track configuration in the Central Valley which is gonna make north and southbound trains tough to schedule.  And the court battle over complying with the original Proposition's T's & C's is on-going.

CC-HSR is now heading to the California Supreme Court. We will be filing a “Petition For Review” in the Supreme Court on or before January 7^th, and while the Supreme Court doesn’t have to hear our case, we have some good reasons to think that the Court will take up the question we raise.   The Supreme Court has made very clear, in its own past decisions, that the Legislature cannot pull a “bait and switch” on the voters.

If the CHSRA were a private company, it would be bankrupt, out of operation and looking to sell assets in a court-monitored sale---but there aren't any assets beyond some concrete in the Central Valley.  If I were working for the Authority, that job would not be highlighted very much on my resume--regardless of my sex.

Friends With Benefits - Friends in High Places

We have not had a Friends With Benefits post in a long time, but this one just came barreling out of the blue like a runaway freight train.  If you are going to have friends in high places, I cannot think of a higher perch than the White House.  The SF Chronicle has the story:

California is being denied $12 billion in federal transit funds. Here's how it'll hurt the Bay Area

A decision by the Biden administration to withhold $12 billion in federal transit funds from California could immediately affect services provided by the Bay Area’s 27 transit operators as they attempt to recover deep financial losses sustained during the pandemic, local officials say.

The denial of the transit funding is the latest twist in a long dispute over whether California’s 2013 Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act, which capped pension benefits for new employees, infringes on the collective bargaining rights of public transit workers in the eyes of the federal government.   In an Oct. 28 decision, the Labor Department reversed a determination it made in 2019 and essentially deemed California’s law improper because the pension rules changes were implemented via legislation and not bargained with public unions.

Of the federal transit funds California stands to lose, about $9.5 billion would come from the money earmarked for the state in the infrastructure bill approved by Congress last week. Also at stake in the decision is $2.5 billion in federal COVID relief funds allocated to sustain transit services during the pandemic, which had not yet gained Labor Department certification at the time of the ruling.  It’s the loss of the latter bucket of money that could be felt most immediately by Bay Area transit agencies and their riders.

The article goes on to describe the potential impact on BART, the transBay corridor project, Muni, and the Golden Gate Bridge district.  It doesn't mention Caltrain or the High-speed rail project by name, but you have to believe they are in the mix--or out of the mix in this case as the Feds throw their weight around.

I happened to get an cursory update on the Caltrain electrification project a week ago:  92 foundations for poles are complete, 67 poles have been installed and all 10 power transformers are in place.  86 new cars have been shipped from Switzerland, 73 are in Salt Lake City for final assembly and 1 is in test in Colorado.  There was no word on whether further Fed funds will be held up over the pension reform fight since this just popped into the public view.

High-Cost Rail- Part 155 CA Legislature Balks at Cost

The LA Times remains on the case regarding the high-cost boondoggle that continues to trudge along in the Central Valley.  In a piece titled Newsom and California lawmakers hit an impasse on financing bullet train the Times notes

A battle to secure an additional $4.2 billion for the California bullet train has hit an impasse, with Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders failing to reach a compromise Friday.

Unless the two sides resume talks soon, any additional money for the bullet train will have to be negotiated in 2022, forcing the rail project to dip further into the roughly $2-billion pot it has in hand....a large coalition in the Assembly wants some of the money diverted to high-speed rail segments in Southern California and the Bay Area.

The negotiations were led by Assembly Transportation Chair Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), who has been pressing the bullet train project to improve its performance after a history of cost increases and schedule delays. Friedman has contended for months that there was no reason to give the rail authority the full $4.2-billion appropriation when it wasn’t needed in immediate years.

The legislative dispute could affect the willingness of Congress to provide federal funding for the bullet train out of a $3.5-trillion budget resolution.

One can only hope.  We are at Recall minus nine days.  I believe virtually anyone who would win on Question 2 would immediately put a bullet in the bullet train, including MeetKevin.  I know I would as I noted here.  It would be Day 1.

My Gubernatorial Pipe Dream

Today was the last day to file papers to replace Gavin Newsom as governor of California.  I did not get my paperwork in as planned.  Ever since Arnold bested a field of 135 candidates to replace Gray Davis in 2003, I have regretted not throwing my hat in the ring.  But I was busy back then.  What could be more fun than a "gadfly" run at the governor's mansion?  More importantly, for $4,200 anyone could have their candidate's statement printed in the voter guide and mailed to all 20.9 million registered voters in the state.  That is a bargain!

I didn't get around to filing today, but I did write my candidate's statement.  Here you go:

Day 1:  I will kill the High-speed rail project saving California taxpayers $100+ billion.  Newsom knows it is the right thing to do, but cannot buck Big Labor.

Day 2:  I will redirect all available infrastructure funding to our water systems and new storage.  We cannot address housing until we have sufficient water security for the population and businesses that are already here.  Our best defense against climate change is a lot more trees that need water.

Day 3:  I will quadruple our wildfire firefighting capabilities by redirecting much of our $105 billion budget surplus to personnel and equipment.  There is no excuse for being surprised 5 years in a row and we need those trees, not the pollution from the wildfires.  It's a no-brainer.

Day 4:  I will sign an executive order guaranteeing Californians easy, cost-effective access to all sources of energy including natural gas, gas for cars, propane and nuclear power without limitation.  Existing local restrictions will be invalidated, and the existing solar credits and net metering will continue.

Day 5:  I will clear the way for single-family residential zoning to stay single-family residential zoning.  These neighborhoods are the backbone of our communities and need to be safeguarded.  There is plenty of R2 and R3 zoning to meet our near term housing needs.

Day 6:  I will issue a series of RFPs to upgrade the primitive computer systems at the EDD, the DMV, the court system and the voter registration system while recouping the $30+ billion of EDD fraud that Newsom seems to have forgotten about.

Day 7:  I will issue an executive order that reinforces cities’ and town’s rights to have at-large city council and school board elections when they have less than 100,000 residents.  Postage stamp-sized governance is not good governance.

Then I will have dinner at the French Laundry. I will pay for my own dinner and no lobbyists will be invited.  Breakfast at Alana's the next morning and then back to work.  There is plenty more to be done.  When you read that voter's guide before September 14, you know what to look for!  I appreciate the people who previewed my agenda and offered to host a coffee for me.  That and $30 million would have done the trick :-)

High-Cost Rail- Part 154 Kopp Speaks Out...Again

It's no April Fool's Day joke that high-speed rail is continuing to burn through cash in the Central Valley with ever more delays and reduced expectations of service--if it ever starts service.  We noted that the originator of this boondoggle, Quentin Kopp, saw the light and become a vocal opponent eight years ago here in Part 87.  That was a long time ago on any construction project, but the problems with this one grow by the year.  Kopp published an opinion piece in the Daily Journal that highlights a number of problems:

While I was chairman of the authority, a state general obligation bond for $9,950,000,000 was approved on Nov. 4, 2008, by taxpaying California voters, with specific provisions safeguarding taxpayer money and construction and operation of high-speed rail, including a ban on taxpayer subsidy for operating expenses.....Bond proceeds were intended to stimulate private investment, federal appropriations and local investment. Sadly, my promises to voting taxpayers haven’t been kept since I left the authority governing board in 2009.  Not one penny has been raised from private investors or local governments. There’s $5.5 billion of voter-approved general obligation bonds unsold.

While Kopp focuses on the financing legalities, the cost side of the equation is slipping out of control.  Another contractor has raised the big, red flag on the Authorities' failures and the impact on construction time--where time really is money.  The LA Times reports

A major construction team on the California bullet train project notified the state rail authority this month that it will not complete a 65-mile section of the future route in Kings County until at least April 14, 2025 — nearly two years after the date that the state included in a business plan adopted Thursday.  A construction team led by the Spanish firm Dragados described a chaotic system for projecting future construction progress because of state delays in securing land for construction.  Dragados said it has had to hire workers as land becomes available and then lay them off as it awaits new parcels. It said that “trepidation” among subcontractors and suppliers is resulting in higher risk that must be priced into bids for work. 

Combing through the LA Times article, we can assemble a partial look at the massive overruns from delays and change orders:

Contractor         Distance    Known Overruns        Pending Overruns      Parcels To

                                                                                                                 Acquire

Dragados             65 miles     $134 M approved           $642.5M                      264

Tutor Perini         31 miles           n/a                          $250M                        500+ 

Ferrovial             22 miles      $193 M approved            n/a                            n/a

Back to Quentin Kopp for the finale:

Caltrain electrification was blessed by the Legislature in 2018 with $775 million from the high-speed general obligation bond, which is illegal under Proposition 1A notwithstanding its worthiness, and is presently subject to a lawsuit by Kings County and other Californians, including me, pending in the California Court of Appeal.

Good for him.  Eight years past his epiphany he's still at it.

High-Cost Rail- Part 153 Bait and Railroad Switch

The never ending saga of high-cost rail cash bleeding away in stunning amounts continues unabated.  But there is new news on a bait and switch on the actual construction as reported by the Fresno Bee yesterday.  Here are the lowlights

The authority, (Rail Authority CFO Brian) Annis said, has already exhausted most of its other sources of money for the Madera-to-Shafter work, for which the cost is now estimated at about $13.8 billion. That new estimate is about $1.3 billion more than what was forecast a year ago by the agency.

The quarterly cap-and-trade auctions have generally amounted to an average of about $180 million for the high-speed rail authority, Annis said. But the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic knocked the May 2020 auction down to only about $6 million. That auction, and two subsequent auctions in August and November, cost the agency about $288 million in projected cap-and-trade income, officials estimate.

You have to love the use of the verb "cost" here.  The quote of the year so far is

“Hoping that the federal government will come in and save your asses is not a business plan,” said David Schonbrunn, president of the nonprofit Transportation Solutions Defence and Education Fund, or TRANSDEF.

But here is the bait and switch on construction

Additionally, the business plan now calls for building a single set of tracks, instead of two, along most of the 119-mile stretch. (CEO Brian) Kelly said one set of tracks would allow for the testing of train sets and other systems before early passenger operations commence between Bakersfield and Merced in about 2029.

Kelly said building only one set of tracks as an initial phase reflects the agency’s ability to construct what it has money to achieve, and could persist even into passenger operations along the route. “We believe we can meet all the operating requirements” with one set of tracks along with sections of passing tracks, Kelly told board members Tuesday.

Imagine if Caltrain only had one track end-to-end with some passing track sections along the way and was supposed to run four or five times as many trains as it does now.  And was supposed to run them at 120 mph.

Recycle Your Chronicle...Or Not

We can assign this to the I Told You So file, or the What Did You Expect? file or the Have You Learned Anything From This? file.  Today's SF Comicle editorial titled "What's wrong with recycling" in the print edition lists a comedy of errors that can be expanded upon in a number of directions.  But first, let's read some excerpts:

Back in 2012, the California Legislature declared it the policy of the state that by 2020, at least 75% of the state’s waste would be reduced, recycled or composted. It was a bold legislative goal that turns out to have been a waste of the paper it was printed on.  Since the target was set eight years ago, the state’s annual landfill disposal has grown steadily from about 40 million tons a year to nearly 50 million. The recycling, composting and reduction rate, meanwhile, fell from around 50% to 37%, or about half the rate lawmakers set out to achieve.

One of the heaviest blows to the effort in recent years came from China and other Asian nations that stopped accepting discarded plastic and other materials from wealthy countries such as the United States, much of which was unusable garbage falsely counted for domestic purposes as recycled.  (Imagine THAT!)  That forces officials to contend with more waste that is unrecyclable in general or at least within California’s borders, where state and local regulations can make it difficult to build and even maintain recycling facilities. (Imagine THAT!)

This is the Chonicle!  There's more about plastic bags with recycling triangles on them that aren't recyclable, lithium ion batteries (like Teslas) and propane tanks, but you will have to click through to read the tale of woe.  My point is to draw a direct line between the clowns who pass these laws and do nothing to facilitate meeting the goals.  Let's ban natural gas in new construction, ban gas powered cars by 2035, build 30 miles of high-cost rail instead of recycling plants in-state to recycle our own stuff, overload the electrical grid so we are at the mercy of adjacent states in a crunch, fine PG&E for not trimming enough trees after the fact and shovel taxpayer money at any number of misguided goals.  In the meantime, groups like the Sierra Club line up like lemmings on the approved agenda with no clue that any of it will actually help the environment.

Me?  I'd just like to know that my empty detergent bottle was going to be recycled nearby, I will have reliable power, someone is balancing development with the worst case scenario for water availability in our arid state and my taxes aren't being siphoned off by anyone other than prisoners scamming the EDD.  What is Newsom's approval rating again?

Exodus - Part 2 Elon Musk Departs

Back in July we asked "how big? and how long?" would be the exodus from the Bay Area?  We got one more view of just how big today when the Wall Street Journal reported that Elon Musk said at a WSJ CEO Summit council this week he has moved to Texas.

Taking up residence in Texas comes with personal benefits for Mr. Musk: The state doesn’t collect state income or capital-gains tax for individuals. The auto executive qualified this year for billions of dollars in stock-option compensation as part of a pay-package agreement, making him the second-richest person in the world.

During the spring, when Mr. Musk was sparring over coronavirus shelter-in-place orders that shut his factory near San Francisco, California Gov. Gavin Newsom told CNBC he was “not worried about Elon leaving any time soon” and the state was committed to the car maker’s success. “We may not be the cheapest place to do business but we are the best place to do business,” Mr. Newsom, a Democrat, said.

California’s taxes underlie many of the complaints. Its personal income tax tops out at 13.3% for amounts over $1 million a year, the highest in the nation. Capital gains are taxed at a similar rate.

In a separate piece this week, the WSJ also highlighted how mid-tier cities are gaining population at the expense of SF and NYC

For every person who moved to the Bay Area from Austin between April and October, 2.9 people moved in the other direction, according to an analysis from LinkedIn. That is a 39% increase from a year earlier.

Perhaps the Gavinor could make a phone call, apologize and get back Musk's tens of millions of dollars in annual California taxes.  He would also have to call the CEOs of HP Enterprise, Palantir and dozens of start-ups and sports stars.  But as the Journal noted "Many who call the Bay Area home have expressed relief at the departure of tech professionals who have been blamed for driving up the cost of living and congesting the freeways."  When I was an analyst, we called that a "going out of business strategy".  Nobody is less pleased with the over-development of the Peninsula than me, but if we are to fund the good stuff (schools, social services, infrastructure, pensions) and the bad stuff Newsom wants (high-cost rail, costly green policies, giveaways) then he might want to pick up the phone and start calling.