NIMBYs Oppose California High Speed Rail
There is a Simpsons episode where every time a new law is proposed, a woman screams hysterically “what about the children!?” The joke is, of course, that she is yelling this about issues that don’t even affect the children. Watching some of the local opposition to the California High Speed Rail project brings this episode to mind.
The high speed rail project which was approved by the state’s voters in November, is being opposed by a number of municipalities in the peninsula region of the San Francisco Bay Area. The city of Palo Alto has now joined Menlo Park and Atherton in actively opposing the project as it currently exists. READ MORE
CA High Speed Rail Authority releases updated business plan
The CA High Speed Rail Authority, coming off a triumphant bond measure victory last week, has released an updated business plan. The plan provides an updated overview of the project’s benefits and how it should proceed.
The plan projects that the high speed rail system will generate “more than $1 billion in surplus revenues a year by 2030, reduce congestion and pollution, and return nearly three times as much in value as the system will cost over the next 40 years.” Ticket prices for the train are projected to be set at 50% of the equivalent fare for a plane flight. READ MORE
California Prop 1A, high speed rail bond measure, passes
Californians gave a thumbs up to a massive inter-city high speed rail system by voting in favor of Prop 1A. The bond measure, which will issue $10 billion in debt to get the $40 billion project started, generally faired best in counties where the project will actually lay tracks. Green areas in the LATimes map above represent counties voting in favor of the measure.
In an election where Californians didn’t backup their progressive reputation, this was a shining exception.
Now, more than ever, is the time to approve CA high speed rail: Yes on Prop 1A
When Proposition 1A was placed on the ballot earlier this year, gas prices were sky high and the economy was relatively healthy. Unfortunately, as the vote on the measure approaches next week, Californians immediate pain from high gas prices has been replaced by an immediate fear of the deteriorating economy. Some speculate that this political environment might make it more difficult to pass Prop 1A next week.
If that turns out to be the case, California would be blowing the best opportunity to point the state in a radically new direction. We’ve discussed the vast benefits of an inter-city high speed rail system before, which include taking cars off the roads, increasing mobility, improving the economy, but most importantly, it would shift our culture from cars, traffic, and pollution to trains, mobility, and a cleaner and healthier environment. READ MORE
Support for California’s high speed rail ballot measure, Prop 1A, grows on college campus.
· Support for California’s high speed rail ballot measure, Prop 1A, grows on college campus.
Today’s Environment
· McCain’s senior policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin reaffirmed the Bush Administration position that the Clean Air Act should not be used to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Grist notes that Obama’s position is actually to see if Congress can put together climate legislation in the first 18 months, and if not, to then use the Clean Air Act, as the Supreme Court has held is appropriate.
· e360 disagrees with even this position, urging that “Rather than wait for action by Congress, the next president should employ an existing tool for tackling climate change: using the Clean Air Act to control greenhouse gas emissions and to establish a national cap-and-trade program.”
· Audi announces a new plug-in hybrid, the A1 Sportback, which is said to run 60 miles on a single charge, after which it gets 72 mpg. As seems to be the case with most EVs, it is unclear when this concept car could be available.
· Support for California’s high speed rail ballot measure, Prop 1A, grows on college campus.
Chicago and rest of Midwest watching California high speed rail proposal closely
California is not the only region pushing for a new high speed rail system. In Chicago, the Midwest High Speed Rail Association is proposing to build an extensive high speed rail network linking nearby cities such as Cleveland, Cincinnati, St. Louis and Minneapolis, with Chicago acting as the hub. However, unlike in California, where Proposition 1A is on the ballot in two weeks, any high speed rail network in the Midwest is not yet slated for a vote. Clearly the proponents of a Midwest high speed rail system are going to be watching the California vote closely. If California succeeds in passing Prop. 1A, the ripple effects should extend across the country.
And an interesting side note from the article: Apparently, “Congress just released $9 billion to Amtrak to help make the way for trains traveling 110 miles per hour in the Midwest. With European trains capable of 220 miles per hour, there’s still a long way to go, but 110 would be better than Amtrak’s current 79 miles per hour.”
There is always a reason to say ‘no,’ CA needs to say ‘yes’ to rail bond
With the California economy struggling and the November election rapidly approaching, the debate over the proposed high speed rail system in California is heating up. California, the world’s 6th largest economic entity, has abysmal transportation options (with the Bay Area being the semi-exception.)
A high speed rail system that would connect SF, Sacramento, the Central Valley, LA, Orange County, and San Diego, would allow the state to join the rest of the developed world (outside of the US) with a fully functional high speed rail system. Not only that, but a proper city-to-city high speed rail system would also encourage development of rail lines on a local level in order to connect to the high speed network (as is the case in Europe).
Obstructionists, ideologues, and NIMBYs have and will continue to find reasons to say “no” to this measure, but we cannot allow these self-righteous minority voices to have a veto power over a project so important to the state. As a result, we are strongly in favor of Prop 1A.
CA high speed rail moves another step forward, other environmental bills stalled
Gov. Schwarzenegger pushed the California high speed rail proposal another step forward last week by signing legislation that would shore up the $10 billion bond measure slated to be on the state’s November ballot. Because of the importance Schwarzenegger places on this project, he made an exception to his promise to veto all legislation until the Legislature, which is marred in partisan fighting, passes a budget for the state. The gist of the bill is to “strengthen financial controls of the agency overseeing the high-speed rail project.”
However, while the high speed rail bill got an exception from the Governor’s veto promise, it is interesting to look at the other environmentally related bills indefinitely stalled, while the Legislature bickers over the budget. Greenspace, at LATimes, lays out a good summary, here is their description of two major ones:
The Clean Ports Investment Act: would alleviate air pollution that causes asthma and cancer in neighborhoods around the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland by imposing a fee on every cargo container. The $400 million-plus a year would be used to improve infrastructure and air quality. Freight movement through the three ports generates 30% of the statewide emissions of smog-forming nitrogen oxides and 75% of lung-scarring diesel particulates.
Global Warming Solutions Act: the first law in the nation to control planet-heating greenhouse gases by curbing sprawl. Transportation accounts for nearly a third of the state’s carbon dioxide emissions, and reducing the amount of driving is essential if the state is to meet its goal to slash its carbon footprint. Under the bill, sponsored by Sen. Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), regional planning and transportation agencies would develop plans to reduce global warming effects. Projects that meet greenhouse gas goals would get priority for some $18 billion to $20 billion in annual transportation funds.
California high speed rail plan to prioritize San Francisco to Los Angeles route
The California State Senate passed a bill late last week to amend the bond measure for the high speed rail system that is going before state voters in the November election. If passed by the Assembly and signed by the Governor, the new language of the measure will ensure that the Los Angeles to San Francisco route (the “backbone” of the system) will get priority in the construction process. Before this change, the high speed rail system could have been built piecemeal, with different local links being built in any particular order. While this is smart policy, there are still many obstacles to be overcome before construction on this transit system can begin. (The least of which, being voter approval of the ballot measure in November.)
NorCal NIMBYs begin fight against high speed rail line
The affluent Bay Area cities of Menlo Park and Atherton joined a group of plaintiffs that are filing suit today against the California High Speed Rail Authority. The plaintiffs are alleging the Authority violated environmental laws in their preparation of the environmental impact documents. However, of course, their real complaint has little to do with the “environment,” but is instead related to residents’ concerns that the elevated high speed rail line running through their town would be an eyesore and could also require the relocation of some people living along the tracks.
Duh. That’s what happens when major public works programs are pursued–the cityscape is altered and people living in the way are, unfortunately, forced to move. More unfortunately, however, is the complete predictability of this lawsuit. In this day and age, NIMBYs sue under environmental laws anytime they don’t like a construction project. Oftentimes, these litigious obstructionists need not even win their lawsuit, but merely hope to create enough delay and cost overruns that the plan dies on its own. Either way, the taxpayer bears the cost.
CA high speed rail takes a small step forward with agency approval of route
In spite of some recent setbacks, California’s proposed high speed rail system took a step forward last week when the California High Speed Rail Authority’s board approved the train’s route. The $10 billion bond measure to fund the beginning of the $40 billion project is slated to be on the November ballot in California, and was also recently endorsed by the governor. The route approved by the board will go as far north as San Francisco, and as far south as Anaheim. Major Central California stops would include San Jose, Merced, Fresno and Bakersfield. The main southern stop would be Los Angeles’ Union Station. It is contemplated that the line could be extended to Sacramento in the north and San Diego in the south at some point in the future.
The more we read about this proposed project, the more we are in favor of it. Our one criticism has been that it doesn’t address the problems of intra-city travel. However, it is our belief that should this major, inter-city rail system actually be built, that it will likely spur the development of other public railways at local levels. By building the high speed rail, the state will be taking a step towards shifting our culture away from cars and towards trains. These shifts in cultural norms can have contagious effects. Furthermore, and even more importantly, there will be practical reasons to further build-up local rail infrastructure, since they will provide the means to link up to the high speed rail system (like is the case in Europe).
There are always skeptics and opponents whenever a major project involving public funds is proposed, but for something as essential as the ability to travel throughout the state and to address greenhouse gas emissions from cars and planes, when there is an intelligently proposed plan that is able to radically address both issues, inaction is inexcusable.
