3 ms·

actually exceeded the most recent $77B estimate @ $90B That's disingenuous. The original figures are for the entire finished project as originally scoped; the

actually exceeded the most recent $77B estimate @ $90B That's disingenuous. The original figures are for the entire finished project as originally scoped; the modern $77B is for the current, useless scaled-down fragment.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> The original figures are for the entire finished project as originally scoped; the modern $77B is for the current, useless scaled-down fragment. No, the $77B is for the entire project, and is the reason cited for limiting substantive state-funded work (outside of completing environmental reviews and efforts to secure outside funding) to the 119 mile segment previously identified as the initial construction segment.
- masonic 8y ago
  The "entire project" was the full 800+ mile network as promised in Proposition 1A. Quoting from the ballot pamphlet[0]: "Proposition 1A is a $9.95 billion bond measure for an 800-mile High-Speed Train network that will relieve 70 million passenger trips a year that now clog California's highways and airports—WITHOUT RAISING TAXES (emphasis theirs)." As aside from your misdefinition of the "entire project", we're not even getting the Phase 1 we were promised at that $77B price point: "The current price tag is $77 billion, up from $33 billion when the project was approved. Funding has become a problem for the rail authority, which can’t afford to complete even a partial operational segment — slow or fast. In its 2018 business plan, the authority deleted construction of a 13-mile tunnel under the Pacheco Pass from its first phase because it did not have enough money. The decision will leave about 80 miles of track in the Bay Area disconnected from 119 miles of track in the Central Valley." This is not the 520-mile, contiguous, 220MPH LA-Sacto-San Jose project that was promised for Phase 1. Not remotely close. And I'm not even counting the promised Phase 2. [0] http://vigarchive.sos.ca.gov/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-rebutt1a.htm http://vigarchive.sos.ca.gov/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-re... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20180816125913/http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20180729/california-bullet-train-might-not-attain-states-mandated-speed# https://web.archive.org/web/20180816125913/http://www.marini...

dragonwriter 8y ago

> The original figures are for the entire finished project as originally scoped; the modern $77B is for the current, useless scaled-down fragment. No, the $77B is for the entire project, and is the reason cited for limiting substantive state-funded work (outside of completing environmental reviews and efforts to secure outside funding) to the 119 mile segment previously identified as the initial construction segment.

masonic 8y ago
The "entire project" was the full 800+ mile network as promised in Proposition 1A. Quoting from the ballot pamphlet[0]: "Proposition 1A is a $9.95 billion bond measure for an 800-mile High-Speed Train network that will relieve 70 million passenger trips a year that now clog California's highways and airports—WITHOUT RAISING TAXES (emphasis theirs)." As aside from your misdefinition of the "entire project", we're not even getting the Phase 1 we were promised at that $77B price point: "The current price tag is $77 billion, up from $33 billion when the project was approved. Funding has become a problem for the rail authority, which can’t afford to complete even a partial operational segment — slow or fast. In its 2018 business plan, the authority deleted construction of a 13-mile tunnel under the Pacheco Pass from its first phase because it did not have enough money. The decision will leave about 80 miles of track in the Bay Area disconnected from 119 miles of track in the Central Valley." This is not the 520-mile, contiguous, 220MPH LA-Sacto-San Jose project that was promised for Phase 1. Not remotely close. And I'm not even counting the promised Phase 2. [0] http://vigarchive.sos.ca.gov/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-rebutt1a.htm http://vigarchive.sos.ca.gov/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-re... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20180816125913/http://www.marinij.com/general-news/20180729/california-bullet-train-might-not-attain-states-mandated-speed# https://web.archive.org/web/20180816125913/http://www.marini...