State considers shifting funds from bullettrain
Key California lawmakers have devised a plan to shift billions of dollars from the Central Valley bullet train to rail projects in Southern California and the Bay Area, a strategy that could crush the dreams of high-speed rail purists.
The move is a response to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan earlier this year to direct all of the remaining bullet train funds into the San Joaquin Valley and build a partial high-speed system from Bakersfield to Merced at a cost of $20.5 billion.
Assembly Democrats see greater public value in improving passenger rail from Burbank to Anaheim, relieving congestion on the busy Interstate 5 corridor before the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles
and putting additional money into San Francisco commuter rail. The proposal has been taken more seriously
in recent weeks, and supporters think it will meet the tricky legal requirements of the highspeed rail project.
“I like the concept,” said Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (Dlakewood). “Any project that doesn’t have a significant amount of service to the largest areas in the state doesn’t make much sense.”
Over the last six years, state officials have promoted and then discarded different master plans to solve the bullet train’s financial
, legal and political problems, though they have remained committed to keeping the Central Valley construction as the top priority. Even under the new plan, the construction of viaducts, bridges and rail bed would continue.
In interviews with more than a dozen elected officials, legislative staffers, rail industry executives, bullet train insiders and others, The Times heard strong support for returning to a strategy that the state abandoned a decade ago: building the bullet train toward the Central Valley from Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The big urban areas have the largest
population and worst highway congestion — meaning ridership, revenue, greenhouse gas reduction and political payoff are strongest at the ends, not the center. A change of course could help build long-term support for the train, some argue.
“It is not the end of high-speed rail, but a way to save it,” Rendon said, citing a growing lack of confidence with the current approach.
The reformulation grew out of discussions among key Southern California Assembly members and their staffs, who have grown weary of the project’s cost increases, schedule delays, technical problems, litigation and political missteps the last six years, all in the Central Valley, where the state rail authority has spent $5 billion so far.
“I can’t stand by and watch billions of dollars being spent in the hopes of future ridership in the Central Valley, while there is thirst for faster and better train service in Orange and Los Angeles counties,” said Assemblyman Tom Daly (D-anaheim). “It is time.”
Assemblywoman Laura Friedman (D-glendale) is also on board with the plan: “We need to make sure we put investment into areas of the state where we get the biggest bang for the buck. I would like to see Los Angeles get its fair share and more than we have gotten so far.”
Newsom declined a request for an interview and his staff had no comment on the discussions.
Brian Kelly, chief executive of the California High-speed Rail Authority, said other state agencies with some limited rail authority contributions are already investing $4.4 billion in rail over the coming years in Southern California.
“It is a mistake to simply take money from one region and spend it in another,” Kelly said.
But in a nod toward politics, Kelly added: “I look forward to working with the Legislature.”