Los Angeles Times

Battle over bullet train

Democrats in D.C. and California disagree on how high-speed rail should be powered.

- BY RALPH VARTABEDIA­N

A key block of California lawmakers is feuding with the Biden administra­tion over the state’s high-speed rail endeavor, arguing that conditions of a restored federal grant lock the project into what the group sees as an outdated technology for powering the bullet train.

In a recent letter to U.S. Transporta­tion Secretary Pete Buttigieg, California Speaker Anthony Rendon and 17 other Assembly Democrats say the federal grant unnecessar­ily directs California to use overhead electrical lines to propel the trains down their tracks.

Instead, Rendon wants California to keep open the option of powering locomotive­s with batteries or fuel cells, arguing that the switch could help the state avoid the high cost of installing overhead lines, a system used worldwide since the 1960s.

The Rendon letter — sent to Buttigieg late last month — comes amid an increasing­ly intense standoff between Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administra­tion and the Assembly leader on design and funding of the nation’s largest single transporta­tion project. Newsom wants California to stick to his plan of building the first segment of the high-speed rail line in the Central Valley, but Rendon and his Assembly allies want to divert the funds to bullet train segments in Southern California and the Bay Area and fear installati­on of electric lines will close off that prospect.

In June, the Biden administra­tion reinstated a $929-million Obama-era grant to help construct the San Joaquin Valley highspeed rail line, which President Trump terminated in 2019. California filed a lawsuit against the federal action, which the Biden administra­tion settled last month, resulting in the $929 million being reissued.

But in restoring the grant, the terms were modified to require the state to adopt a wired system. The new federal grant language contains 27 references to electrific­ation of the system in the Central Valley, whereas the original funding agreement only mentioned once that the rail project had to plan for electrific­ation.

The bullet train project is attempting to build a 171mile operating segment between Bakersfiel­d and Merced for $22.8 billion, which would consume nearly all of the existing funds for the project through 2030. The project is short $80 billion to execute the original vision of a 220-mph train from Los Angeles to San Francisco, which voters approved by passing Propositio­n 1A in 2008.

The changes in the grant would go against the wishes of the electorate, according to the Rendon letter.

A U.S. Department of Transporta­tion spokespers­on said in an email that the agency “values” Rendon’s input and will be responding “shortly.”

The email makes clear that electrific­ation in the Central Valley is “included in the [grant agreement] recently executed among the parties.” It adds that the requiremen­t was included in the bond act.

The controvers­y comes at a key moment in the troubled history of the project. Newsom requested the Legislatur­e appropriat­e $4.2 billion, the last remaining funds from the $9-billion bond fund voters approved in 2008. Lawmakers passed a budget and adjourned without approving the request.

“Negotiatio­ns are ongoing between the Legislatur­e and the Governor’s office on these issues,” said rail authority spokeswoma­n Annie Parker.

U.S. Sens. Diane Feinstein and Alex Padilla applied further pressure on Rendon and his Assembly allies this week, urging them in a letter to adopt the $4.2-billion budget request and implicitly agree to the electrific­ation plan. “Now is not the time for California to step back from its commitment to high-speed rail, a mode of transporta­tion that is critical to reducing congestion and meeting our critically important climate goals,” the letter said.

Rendon responded with a tweet that indicated he is holding his position: “The Assembly is dedicated to making the initial Central Valley line an actual useable segment that will alleviate the most congestion and greenhouse gases as possible. The existing project has been scaled back from two tracks to one track and will not adequately serve the Central Valley, let alone the rest of the state. I believe we can do better than that.”

A year ago, a majority of Democrats in the Assembly cosponsore­d a resolution to defer building the partial operating system in the Central Valley — and delay electrific­ation until links are ready to Southern California and the Bay Area. The idea is to allocate some of the money to a Burbank-to-Anaheim high-speed segment and a tunnel under downtown San Francisco. Both of those have long been part of the plan for the high-speed rail system.

The diverted money would come in part from delaying the installati­on of the electrical system.

The rail authority had planned to issue a contract next month to cover installati­on of tracks, signals and the electrical system. The authority said the COVID-19 pandemic has caused delays and it now plans to request proposals in the fall.

Paul Dyson, a longtime passenger rail advocate from Burbank, said installing wires for a partial system in the Central Valley would create an ongoing expense for the state. “It is going to be fiendishly expensive,” he said.

But the Rail Passenger Assn. of California and Nevada, an advocate for highspeed rail, wrote its own letter to Buttigieg to support the plan for wires. “Overhead electrific­ation has proven reliable and is safe and cost effective for highspeed rail systems around the world,” it said.

Brian Kelly, chief executive of the California HighSpeed Rail Authority, has opposed any delay in installing a power system in the Central Valley, arguing that completion of an operating high-speed segment between Bakersfiel­d and Merced is essential to demonstrat­ing the benefits of the concept and will spur support to complete a statewide system.

The rail authority also asserts that the bond act requires electrific­ation, since it is the only way the system can achieve the high speeds mandated by the law.

But the lawmakers are not retreating.

The June 29 letter to Buttigieg, which also was signed by Transporta­tion Committee Chairwoman Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), asserts that the state could tap into rapidly evolving technology of fuel cell and battery-operated trains, which are already operating to a limited extent in Europe. Rendon and Friedman, along with other lawmakers, say diverting some of the money from the Central Valley and investing it in bullet train segments in Los Angeles and Orange County would create greater ridership much sooner.

The impasse reflects growing frustratio­n in the Legislatur­e with the project’s cost growth and setbacks since the first constructi­on contract was issued in 2013.

 ?? California High-Speed Rail Authority ?? CREWS work on constructi­ng a segment of California’s high-speed rail in Madera County in 2018.
California High-Speed Rail Authority CREWS work on constructi­ng a segment of California’s high-speed rail in Madera County in 2018.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States