[Sosfbay-discuss] No on Proosition 1

[Jim Doyle]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Greg Jan* <gregjan4 at yahoo.com <mailto:gregjan4 at yahoo.com>>
Date: Aug 19, 2008 9:15 AM
Subject: Please forward!:  "No on Prop. 1, High Speed Rail boondoggle"!
To: jmc at sfgreens.org <mailto:jmc at sfgreens.org>, marnie at greenchange.com 
<mailto:marnie at greenchange.com>, blkcloud at sonic.net 
<mailto:blkcloud at sonic.net>, sanda at greens.org <mailto:sanda at greens.org>, 
revdecker at msn.com <mailto:revdecker at msn.com>, jims at greens.org 
<mailto:jims at greens.org>, Larry.Cafiero at santacruzgreenparty.org 
<mailto:Larry.Cafiero at santacruzgreenparty.org>, larry.cafiero at gmail.com 
<mailto:larry.cafiero at gmail.com>, sanbenito at cagreens.org 
<mailto:sanbenito at cagreens.org>, monterey at cagreens.org 
<mailto:monterey at cagreens.org>

Dear Greens,
 
After we sent you write-ups (reports) on all of the state propositions, 
our County Council here in Alameda County met to formalize our 
endorsements for the Voter Guide which we will be publishing next 
month.  In reviewing the arguments for and against Prop. 1, the "High 
Speed Rail Bond", we decided to change our position from "Yes, with 
reservations" to "No, with regrets".  Most of the arguments for why we 
are now opposing Prop. 1 are summarized below.
 
We are sorry we were not able to provide you with this info. earlier, 
but as you can imagine, we have been quite busy with not only all of the 
state propositions, but also with gathering info. and sending out 
questionnaires to candidates for some 32 local races which we will be 
covering in our Voter Guide, plus about a dozen local ballot measures. 
 
In any case though, please forward this write-up to Greens in your 
county, so that they might know of our new position and thinking about 
this proposition.  (And especially if they will be attending this 
weekend's state plenary General Assembly meeting in Orange County, 
PLEASE FORWARD THEM THIS INFO RIGHT AWAY, so they can read it before 
that meeting, where it will be discussed!).
 
Thanks very much,
 
Greg Jan
Oakland, CA
  
No on Prop. 1, High Speed Rail boondoggle

We all believe in attractive alternatives to driving, especially sleek 
electric trains designed in Europe, but the promises in Proposition 1 
are simply too good to be true.

The cogent reason for Greens to oppose the high-speed rail project is 
that it is a public works fraud scheme specifically designed to appeal 
to gullible environmentalists. If we vote for Proposition 1, as it is 
currently on the ballot, the only guarantee is that billions of dollars 
will be spent on engineering, land acquisition, demolition, and 
construction of part of a guideway. No actual track will be laid as the 
huge $10B bond is only a small portion of the total amount required!

There is no guarantee that there ever will be a workable rail system, 
and under current law, no consequences for project managers if they 
waste every dime. The idea is apparently to start a very big hole in the 
ground, then come back and ask for more bucks. Federal funding is as 
imaginary as private investment.

The firm which has been prime contractor for all work authorized to date 
by the High Speed Rail Authority is Parsons-Brinckerhoff, notorious for 
choosing the wrong concrete  epoxy for the tunnel in Boston's 
way-out-of-control Big Dig that ballooned from in cost from $2 billion 
to $22 billion.

The HS Rail Authority predicts an annual ridership of 117 million 
passengers on a 24-station line. As a reality check, France's most 
popular high-speed train, the TGV-Southeast carried only 18 million 
passengers in its 10th year in a country with a population twice that of 
California and already long habituated to traveling by train. It is 
simply unbelievable that California trains will outperform European routes!

The Authority claims that the project will have no operating deficit, 
but the Legislative Analyst says that  the operating cost would be about 
$1 billion annually, and suggests that some proportion of this would 
have to be covered by state subsidies (likely in the hundreds of 
millions annually). Where would the money for this subsidy come from? 
Probably from other public transit service statewide.

The Rail Authority has been actively hyping the Merced County real 
estate market with statements about the "new California gold rush" and 
its selection of the Pacheco Route, a repeat of the UC Merced land scam 
with the same participants. The staff says they won't build a Los Banos 
station, but Schwarzenegger backer Angelo Tsakopoulos and his investor 
corporations have purchased 3500 acres of land within three miles of the 
proposed stop. What does he know that we don't know?

Recent proposed changes to the initiative will spread the $10B more 
broadly among counties to make it more palatable to voters. That sounds 
exactly like a boondoggle to us. If this measure passes, we may NEVER 
get high speed rail due to the vast cost overruns and bad reputation 
that this project will inevitably create. Join many rail enthusiasts and 
vote NO on Prop. 1.