Posts
2010-2014: When Reality Hit
The years when costs exploded, lawsuits mounted, judges blocked funds, and the optimism of 2008 collided with brutal facts
1. November 2011: The Cost Bomb Drops
In November 2011, the California High-Speed Rail Authority released a revised business plan that shattered the 2008 optimism. The new cost estimate: $98.5 billion for the full SF-LA system—nearly triple the $33 billion voters approved just three years earlier.
Completion date? No longer 2020. Now 2033—thirteen years later than promised.
The reaction was explosive. State Senator Joe Simitian: "The numbers are so far off from what was promised to voters that I think it raises serious questions about the project's viability." Republicans called for cancellation. Even Democratic supporters expressed alarm.
How did costs triple in three years? Several brutal realities emerged:
- Land acquisition: Acquiring property through eminent domain was far more expensive than estimated
- Engineering requirements: Seismic safety, grade separations, and tunnel specifications all cost more than projected
- Route changes: Political pressure added the "Palmdale detour" and other modifications
- Honest accounting: The 2008 estimates were always fantasy—2011 faced reality
2. November 2011: Judge Kenny Blocks the Bonds
The same month costs tripled, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny delivered a devastating blow: he blocked California from selling $2.7 billion in voter-approved bonds until the Authority proved the project met Proposition 1A's requirements.
Prop 1A hadn't just authorized spending—it included specific promises:
- SF to LA in 2 hours 40 minutes
- No operating subsidies required
- Connections to existing rail systems
- Completion of a usable segment before bonds were used
Judge Kenny ruled the Authority hadn't demonstrated it could meet these requirements. Without bond funding, the project faced immediate crisis—federal grants required state matching funds, and bonds were the only source available.
The Authority appealed. Jerry Brown, who became governor in 2011, made saving high-speed rail a priority. For Brown, this was personal—he'd championed the project during his previous governorship (1975-1983) and saw it as his infrastructure legacy.
3. 2012: Jerry Brown Goes to War
In 2012, Brown fought for high-speed rail with the intensity of someone defending his legacy. He lobbied legislators personally, twisted arms, made deals, and ultimately secured a narrow victory: the legislature approved $4.7 billion in initial funding and authorized bond sales.
The July 2012 vote was razor-thin: 21-16 in the Senate, 51-26 in the Assembly—bare majorities, no Republican support, and several Democrats defecting. Senator Mark DeSaulnier, who voted yes, admitted: "This is the least bad choice I could make." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.
But Brown had his win. Construction could begin—if the lawsuits could be defeated.
4. The Lawsuit Avalanche
Multiple groups sued to block the project:
- Property owners: Fighting eminent domain takings
- Environmental groups: Challenging environmental impact reports
- Kings County: Suing over route changes through agricultural land
- Peninsula cities: Fighting the route through their communities
Each lawsuit delayed construction, increased costs (legal fees and inflation), and created uncertainty that scared off private investors. By 2013, the project faced over a dozen major lawsuits simultaneously.
The Authority won most of them—eventually. But "eventually" meant years of delays and hundreds of millions in additional costs.
5. 2014: The Revised Business Plan
By 2014, the Authority released yet another revised business plan. New cost estimate: $68 billion—down from 2011's $98.5B but still double the original promise.
How did costs drop? Not through efficiency—through scaling back:
- Delayed some segments to later phases
- Reduced early specifications (to be upgraded later)
- Assumed optimistic financing and ridership
- Shifted costs into future phases
Critics called it "creative accounting." Supporters called it "realistic planning." Either way, it showed the project couldn't meet 2008 promises at anything close to 2008 costs.
Conclusion: The Dream Dies, the Project Survives
The 2010-2014 period was when California High-Speed Rail transformed from ambitious dream to political zombie—officially alive but functionally dead. Costs tripled. Lawsuits multiplied. Promises evaporated. Yet construction would eventually begin because:
- Jerry Brown staked his legacy on it
- Federal money was committed and would be lost if returned
- Cancellation meant admitting total failure
- Sunk costs made stopping psychologically impossible
So California chose the worst option: continue building something that would never deliver on its promises, burning billions while pretending success was still possible. This is how infrastructure dreams become infrastructure disasters—not through honest cancellation but through zombie projects that can't succeed but won't die.
These four papers document California High-Speed Rail from 2010-2025—the complete story of how $15.7 billion bought zero passenger miles and why 2026's promises ring as hollow as every promise before them.
No comments:
Post a Comment