The Draft Business Plan proposes new strategies that would expand electrification of the Caltrain corridor south of San Jose to Gilroy, ensuring that all communities currently served by Caltrain will benefit from the advantages offered by electric trains, including increased service frequency, reduced travel times, enhanced reliability, and improved air quality. The approach also focuses on the implementation of early interim high-speed rail service between San Francisco and Gilroy as early as The addition of high speed rail service to the Caltrain corridor has great potential for maximizing the benefits of corridor electrification, and providing communities along the corridor with new mobility options that will be a valuable part of our efforts as a region to address growing traffic congestion and maintain our economic competitiveness.
The Honorable Toni G. Your letter claims that legislative oversight of the Authority planned for will be sufficient, and it rejects a request for the legislature to issue a subpoena to the Authority.
Your response, along with a law enacted in June to reduce legislative oversight, seems to indicate that the legislative branch is essentially in cahoots with the administration of Governor Brown in limiting public scrutiny of this troubled mega-project. By declining legislative oversight of the California High-Speed Rail Authorityyou are evading an uncomfortable political reality and depending on the courts to reveal the truth about the status of this project.
It works to conceal documents that contradict its public statements, its business plans, and other reports provided to the legislature.
It cannot possibly comply with Proposition 1A. We urge you to reverse your position and take extraordinary means to obtain internal documents and public testimony from officials of the California High-Speed Rail Authority.
It was a response to the lack of public accountability we observed firsthand from the California High-Speed Rail Authority as they planned the rail alignment through our rural agricultural communities. Our introduction to the Authority gave us a foreshadowing of their typical conduct, which continues today.
Representatives of the Authority began trespassing on our properties without notice or permission of the owners. Initially bewildered, we soon discovered these outsiders were assessing our land in preparation for the Authority to take it, either through unfairly low financial offers or through eminent domain.
Meanwhile, the Authority established a rail alignment that literally put the track through the front door and out the back door of the only livestock rendering facility south of Fresno.
We perceived the disdain of agency officials for the agricultural life and rural traditions of our community.
You may not be aware that most of the parcel owners now targeted by the California High-Speed Rail Authority are resisting the government appropriation of our land. Every month, the State Public Works Board takes action to obtain that land.
To add to our frustration, someone arranged these meetings to be flooded with union construction workers from outside the area.
The Authority briefly opened an office in Hanford the county seat of Kings County for community outreach and then shut it down without public notice, perhaps calculating it could better handle the rural communities by crushing us with political power.
For almost five years, our members have met weekly for status updates at the Kings County Farm Bureau office, attended almost every monthly meeting of the Authority board, and studied the legislative-mandated reports and public relations material available to the public.
We identified numerous inconsistencies and questionable claims from the Authority to the Kings County Board of Supervisors, the California legislature, and the public. We hired some lawyers and policy consultants to perform detailed analysis of the performance of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, particularly in relationship to the mandates in Proposition 1A and in state laws implemented in conjunction with Proposition 1A.
They confirmed our impression that public accountability is sorely lacking for the California High-Speed Rail Authority. Some of the most devastating information obtained by Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability is only publicly available because of public records requests and off-the-cuff remarks made at board meetings.
This letter rests on outdated Authority claims such as the June announcement of bid results for Construction Package 1 civil engineering work from Madera to Fresno. Original bidding guidelines for Construction Package 1 emphasized the importance of experience with high-speed rail construction.Various probabilities are evaluated and a flexible business plan is developed to maximize returns.
Creative thinking and the ability to execute on the ground gives HSR a competitive advantage.
Mar 09, · The new draft business plan for California high-speed rail released today pegs the project at a higher cost of $77 billion — up from $64 billion estimated two years ago — and pushes the.
Feb 24, · The biggest change affecting the Bay Area in the draft business plan announced last week for California high-speed rail was the result of the enormous cost of tunneling beneath Pacheco Pass, which delays the start of train service to the San Joaquin Valley.
Caltrain’s Executive Director Jim Hartnett recently testified during three State Legislative hearings to review the Draft High-Speed Rail Business Plan. Reddit gives you the best of the internet in one place.
Get a constantly updating feed of breaking news, fun stories, pics, memes, and videos just for you. Passionate about something niche? Reddit has thousands of vibrant communities with people that share your interests. Alternatively, find out what’s trending across all of Reddit on r/popular.
Feb 11, · Most of the business plan assumes only three peninsula corridor stops for HSR: San Jose, Millbrae and San Francisco Transbay. The ridership and revenue memorandum, however, includes Redwood City in a fare table.