Attorney for plaintiffs in bullet-train lawsuit suggests way out

01 Mar, 2014 by Chris Reed

Print this article Font size -16+

Michael J. Brady, the Redwood City attorney for Kings County and other parties suing the California High-Speed Rail Authority, offers his theory on the easiest, cleanest way for Gov. Jerry Brown to abandon the bullet-train fiasco. This is from an email he sent out yesterday:

“There is a lot of disenchantment  among proponents of HSR; the voters have turned against the project; the politicians are looking for a graceful way to exit from what is now regarded as a ‘loser.’  Here is the solution, step by step — a simple and popular solution:

“1. The Legislature passes an initiative which is designed to go before the voters for approval; [the Legislature can do this; no signature gathering is necessary]; the measure could go on the November, 2014, ballot; there is time;

“2. The measure would be blissfully simple and would provide as follows:  all rounds remaining in the Proposition 1A bond fund are to be redesignated and transferred to a new bond fund and placed in that fund; the proceeds are to be used for the following four purposes:  water projects; law enforcement infrastructure improvements; freeway repairs; school building construction; each to receive 25% (avoids squabbling);

“3. This is a win-win for the Legislature:  popular programs that Demos and GOP both support; bipartisan approval;

“4. The voters will love it-high priority programs, much more popular than the ill-fated hsr;

“5. And look at the nature of the  projects:  all infrastructure, using union labor, thousands of jobs! 

“6. It passes; everyone’s a hero! LET’S DO IT!”

Upon examination, not much of a union concession

I don’t like the union payoff much, but it’s a logical way to grease this compromise to approval. And any big state infrastructure projects will have PLAs, so it’s not much of a concession, at least if you support capital-improvement spending on “water projects; law enforcement infrastructure improvements; freeway repairs; school building construction.”

How unusual: a trial lawyer proposing a way to quickly wrap up a case for which he’s probably billing $400 an hour.

Good for you, Mike!