On Jan. 24, Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris asked the California Supreme Court to conduct an expedited appeals process that considered the state’s newly filed challenges to a tentative ruling in August and a finalized opinion in November from Sacramento Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny.

The respected veteran judge concluded that the state High-Speed Rail Authority did not have a legal business plan because it had not identified reliable funding for the 300-mile “initial operating segment,” a cost the authority earlier pegged as $31 billion. Kenny also said the state had not completed adequate environmental reviews for the initial segment.

In a strategy that on its surface seems beyond peculiar, the office of Attorney General Kamala Harris did not challenge the core premise of Kenny’s tentative ruling — that the project didn’t have a legal business plan. Instead, the AG merely said the project could continue for now with the state using federal grants that were already in hand.

But after Kenny reacted by putting out a final judgment that found, yunno, the project still didn’t have a legal business plan, the sniping started from the governor’s office and state Democrats. After a month, it led Harris and Brown to seek an expedited review. In February, the state Supreme Court agreed to review their request — but assigned the chore to the 3rd District Court of Appeal. On Feb. 15, the appellate court said sufficient issues had been raised about Kenny’s ruling and the importance of timeliness to the project and that it would conduct an expedited review.

I thought and still think the most likely explanation for this shoddy legal work is that the governor — playing 3-D chess to the rest of the world’s checkers — wanted the dubious, controversial project killed off ASAP. Lawyers I talked to with no stake in the case expressed disbelief that Kenny would hold what’s known as a “remedies” hearing only to have the state provide no remedies to the legal deficiencies he cited in his tentative ruling.

An unexpectedly slow ‘expedited review’

Remember, in its first appeal — when it was supposed to make its full case — the state didn’t dispute that it was breaking the law. This alone prompted some observers to predict the appellate court would rule within weeks in favor of bullet-train opponents.

Nine weeks later, however, the appellate court still is taking testimony and reviewing evidence. A quick decision affirming Kenny didn’t happen. It sounds to me like this case will drag along — with nothing “expedited” about it.

In the big picture, nothing has changed. The bullet train has no funding options after it blows through its initial $13 billion or so in secured state and federal funding. No investors will come forward without the possibility of taxpayer subsidies to protect them if the project goes south, and such subsidies are against state law. In the sequester era of sharp limits of domestic discretionary spending, Congress certainly isn’t going to fund a hugely costly public works project just for one state.

But in the medium picture, if the appeals judges overturn Kenny or in other ways muck with his opinion, we could soon see the state spends billions of dollars on an initial segment of track for a project that will never be completed.

Stranger things have happened. Every day the “expedited review” drags on makes me worry more that the hoped-for summer 2014 denouement to the bullet-train insanity might not happen. Instead, we’ll have it to kick around for at least another year.

On the bright side, if the Brown administration really does start the initial segment in the middle of nowhere without future funding anywhere in sight, maybe then we’ll finally see the establishment ninnies stop proclaiming Jerry to be a good governor just because budgets pass on time.

A $13 billion abject debacle is pretty tough to ignore.

By Chris Reed

We’ve seen some very good reporting about the bullet-train fiasco from around the state. The two best recent examples are stories outlining the chicanery in the bidding process for the contractor for the first segment and describing how the California High-Speed Rail Authority has lost support from key early advocates of the project.

But what’s needed is for someone to focus like a laser on the funding prospects for the second segment of the bullet train before we spend billions on the first. A U.S. Government Accountability Office report in December said that $39 billion more in federal funding would be needed for the project to complete its San Francisco to Los Angeles route, with $20 billion specifically to complete the first segment.

However, as I noted in today’s U-T San Diego editorial, hopes for such federal largesse are now pretty much dead:

“The congressional directive to the FAA to end air traffic controller furloughs strongly suggests the demise of the president’s contention that the March 1 budget sequestration requires proportional cuts across a vast range of departments instead of smart, focused cuts that establish and reflect national priorities. …

“This in turn suggests that we have just begun an era of relative frugality in Washington, D.C., after years of the federal government spending 40 percent more than it took in.

“And what does that mean specifically for California? That the state bullet-train project looks more futile than ever. Discretionary domestic spending is going to pretty much disappear in the post-sequester era. What does a December Government Accountability Office report on the bullet train say will be needed to build the second segment of California’s project after the $13.4 billion in committed state and federal funding is used up? Billions of dollars in federal funding –- i.e., discretionary domestic spending.”

Media ignore link between sequester fight, bullet train

Yet nobody in the California media besides the U-T has made the link between last month’s federal budget showdown and the state bullet train project. If they did, then this would be the conclusion that everyone but rail cultists would come to:

“The California High-Speed Rail Authority has attracted no private investors because such investors want revenue guarantees the state cannot legally offer. The federal government -– or some unlikely foreign benefactor –- is the authority’s only hope for funding to build its grand project. If the federal option is gone, should we really spend billions on an instant white elephant in the Central Valley?

“The answer is, no, of course not. But as long as Gov. Jerry Brown is in denial on bullet-train realities –- starting with but not limited to the death of the federal funding option -– here comes a boondoggle for the ages.”

John and Ken’s preferred shorthand for the project — the Browndoggle — should be what we call the white elephant that’s soon to rise in the Central Valley. Our alleged savant governor is the opposite of a genius on this topic. We’ll soon see a multibillion-dollar monument to his obliviousness.

By Chris Reed

Is there ever any hard, legit good news about the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s plan to build a state bullet-train network?

The stories last week about the U.S. Government Accountability Office depicting CHSRA’s ridership estimates as reasonable were only positive if you ignored all the GAO commentary about the unlikelihood of the full bullet-train network being built.

Now comes the San Jose Mercury-News with yet another batch of bullet-train bad news:

“While much of the squabbling over California’s high-speed rail project has focused on its huge construction price tag, the cost to taxpayers just to plan the bullet train is also soaring.

“California rail leaders said Tuesday it will cost an extra $97 million in office and field work to design the rail line, which has famously seen its construction cost double to $69 billion since voters approved it five years ago. The extra state and federal funds set aside for planning will wind up in the pockets of private consulting firms, including some that earn billions of dollars in annual revenue.

“Rail officials say much of the latest increase is because of delays to the project’s aggressive timeline and the need to study alternative plans aimed at appeasing concerns of communities along the San Francisco-to-Los Angeles rail corridor.

“For instance, the California High-Speed Rail Authority board Thursday is set to approve an extra $38 million for mega-firm URS to work on clearing state and federal bureaucratic hurdles required before construction can begin in the Central Valley this summer. That $158 million effort dates back six years and was supposed to be done by now, but has been delayed because residents between Fresno and Bakersfield have asked the state to study different locations to lay tracks, a time-consuming and costly endeavor.

“Rail officials say the new pre-construction planning budget of $878 million, while an increase of 12 percent, is still within the limit approved by voters in 2008.”

So here’s the challenge to the Robert Cruickshanks of California: Where are the stories that will make the voters who backed Prop 1A in 2008 think they did the right thing? Where are the stories that will make those voters think that California providing $9.95 billion in bond seed money made any sense?

Bob? Bob? Bob?

By Chris Reed

There’s been quite a bit of good reporting done on the bullet-train fiasco. Mike Rosenberg of the San Jose Mercury-News and Lance Williams of California Watch jump to mind. But Ralph Vartabedian of the Los Angeles Times probably deserves top honors.

Vartabedian’s smart, nuanced beat reporting points discerning readers toward the truth — namely, that California’s project makes Boston’s Big Dig look like a work of efficient genius. The latest example was his piece this week on why and how some of the bullet train’s most ardent and longtime defenders have turned on the project. It’s full of interesting specifics that set up his future reporting on court fights over the project’s legality.

But it’s more than just this sort of sharp professionalism. Bullet train followers know all about Quentin Kopp’s misgivings and the lies and deceptions that have marked the project since well before it won $9.95 billion in bond seed money from state voters in 2008. Here’s what Vartabedian has done that is exceptional: His reporting has shown the bullet train fiasco is even worse than we imagined!

This is from his Jan. 27, 2013, piece, headlined “State has yet to buy any land for train”:

“Construction of California’s high-speed rail network is supposed to start in just six months, but the state hasn’t acquired a single acre along the route and faces what officials are calling a challenging schedule to assemble hundreds of parcels needed in the Central Valley.

“The complexity of getting federal, state and local regulatory approvals for the massive $68-billion project has already pushed back the start of construction to July from late last year. Even with that additional time, however, the state is facing a risk of not having the property to start major construction work near Fresno as now planned. …

“It hopes to begin making purchase offers for land in the next several weeks. But that’s only the first step in a convoluted legal process that will give farmers, businesses and homeowners leverage to delay the project by weeks, if not months, and drive up sales prices, legal experts say.

“One major stumbling block could be valuing agricultural land in a region where prices have been soaring, raising property owners’ expectations far above what the state expects to pay. …

“Delays in starting construction could set in motion a chain reaction of problems that would jeopardize the politically and financially sensitive timetable for building the $6-billion first leg of the system. …

“If the construction schedule slips, costs could grow and leave the state without enough money to complete the entire first segment. ..

“In addition to property, the rail authority still needs permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and approval by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, two more potential choke points that Morales says can be navigated.

Here’s an excerpt from “Rail line’s big dig,” the Nov. 13, 2012, piece by Vartabedian that outlines the project’s insane complexity:

“The sheer scale and scope of the bullet train’s push into Southern California, including traversing complex seismic hazards, would rival construction of the state’s massive freeway system, water transport networks and its port complexes. It is likely to be viewed in future decades as an engineering marvel — or a costly folly. ..

“The plan calls for bullet trains to shoot east from Bakersfield at 220 mph, climbing one of the steepest sustained high-speed rail inclines in the world. It would soar over canyons on viaducts as high as a 33-story skyscraper. The line would duck in and out of tunnels up to 500 feet below the rugged surface. It would cross more than half a dozen earthquake faults heading toward L.A.

“Tunneling machines as long as a football field will have to be jockeyed into mountain canyons to do the heavy, back-breaking work once left to Chinese laborers. New access roads and a corridor for high-voltage power lines will have to be carved through the Tehachapis to feed power-hungry trains. When completed and fully operational, the bullet train will need an estimated 2.7 million kilowatt hours of electricity each day — about a quarter of Hoover Dam’s average daily output. …

“One measure of the topographic challenge: Over that 141 miles from Bakersfield to Los Angeles, up to 59% of the track would run in tunnels or on viaducts, according to preliminary planning documents. …

“At this point, the rail authority estimates it will cost about $7.7 billion to build the 83 miles of rail from Bakersfield to Palmdale and about $12.5 billion to build the 58 miles of rail from Palmdale to Union Station. …

“Depending on the slope of the track, the tallest viaduct could be 200 to 330 feet off the ground.

“The same holds true for the segment through the San Gabriel Mountains, roughly following California 14.  …

“California’s bullet train will have to operate over some of the nation’s most seismically active terrain … . There are half a dozen faults between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, including the White Wolf and San Andreas, both capable of producing a 7.5 magnitude quake. Where high viaducts are near faults, engineers are considering reinforced concrete structures that would resist ground motion and have containment features to prevent a derailed bullet train from plunging to the ground … . At full speed, however, a bullet train would need four to five miles to make an emergency stop on level ground, and longer going downhill.”

I don’t know how anyone could read this without thinking about every other sentence, “The state of California is competent to pull this off?” Nor do I think anyone could read this and think the bullet train will only cost $68 billion. Triple that — at least.

Which brings us to the Los Angeles Times editorial page. According to Nexis, the last time it weighed in on the bullet train, in November 2011, here was the literally juvenile result:

 “It’s a gamble, and not one to be taken lightly. But gasoline isn’t going to get any cheaper in the future and the freeways aren’t going to get less clogged. We think California can find a way to get the train built. We think it can. We think it can….”

Yes, the L.A. Times editorial page editor actually invoked “The Little Engine That Could” in sickeningly cutesy fashion to stick up for this folly.

I bet, to invoke a Trent Dilferism, Ralph Vartabedian threw up in his mouth a little when he read that painfully childish and uninformed editorial.

In an interview with CalWatchdog contributor Chris Reed, KFI 640 AM’s John and Ken discussed the fiasco that is the California bullet-train project, which they call the “Browndoggle.”

The interview begins at the 5:35 p.m. point of their Friday show — about halfway through this podcast.

It focused on topics familiar to Cal Watchdog readers.

— The implications of federal belt-tightening for future funding from Congress.

— The indifference of state and federal regulators and legislators to the ways the California High-Speed Rail Authority is breaking not just promises but laws.

— The unrealistic hopes that the Obama administration has raised for state bullet-train fans about the prospects for massive new federal funding.

— The ideological cheerleading for the bullet train that one often sees on the pages of the state’s biggest newspapers.