--
See other -- Articles
Title: Feds to audit CA high-speed rail project as funding flounders
Source:
HotAir
URL Source: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/04 ... ail-project-funding-flounders/
Published: Apr 14, 2018
Author: Ed Morrissey
Post Date: 2018-04-15 01:08:26 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 4264
Comments: 11
The inspector general’s audit, announced Thursday, will examine the Federal Railroad Administration’s oversight of nearly $3.5 billion in federal grant money awarded to the project. That’s bad news for a project that has already had plenty of bad news over the last several years. The IG will apparently focus mainly on how the FRA has performed in reporting on California’s progress rather than the performance of the California High-Speed Rail Authority. At issue will be whether the FRA has enforced project performance requirements, but that will still point out the lack of progress California has made despite all of the cash it received: The audit will specifically evaluate how the Federal Railroad Administration determines whether California has complied with federal guidelines. “Currently under construction” is a generous way for the Associated Press to describe the status of the project. In its original project plan — the plan that qualified California to get the $3.5 billion in federal funding — CHSRA projected that the first phase would be operational within eight to eleven years. It’s been ten years since then, and now the state projects that the rail line between somewhere-around-Fresno to somewhere-around-Bakersfield won’t be ready for several more years. During that same time, the estimated project cost rose from $33.4 billion to $77 billion, an increase of 129%, and there’s still no clear way to connect the first phase to San Francisco or Los Angeles. In fact, as Dan Walters pointed out at the Mercury News earlier this week, no one’s sure how California can raise the money to connect the Central Valley run to the two population centers it’s supposed to connect: Louis Thompson, one of the nation’s top rail system experts who chairs the project’s official “peer review” committee, sees “little prospect” that fares from the first extension could finance the second. He told legislators that the project, a favorite of Gov. Jerry Brown, is “at a critical point when difficult decisions need to be made,” and cited the need for a “credible long-term plan to finance the system.” … Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor’s staff said there are multiple “issues” such as potentially higher costs than the current $77.3 billion estimate (twice what voters were told in 2008 when they passed a $9.95 billion bond issue), “significant uncertainties” about the bond issue proposal and finally, the lack of a “complete funding plan.” The review concluded, “It is crucial for the high-speed rail project to have a complete and viable funding plan (and) at this time, no such funding plan exists.[“] In other words, no one knows where the money will come from. The news that the IG has become curious over the FRA’s lack of enforcement indicates it won’t be coming from Washington, especially in a Congress controlled by Republicans. And even if the money was there, no one has a plan to cut through the mountains on either end to get to San Francisco or Los Angeles, a decade after launching this project. Walters favors the completion of the Fresno-Bakersfield track, which the existing funding might cover, but it’s tough to see why. The demand for the 119-mile corridor won’t ever be high enough to nearly cover the cost of the construction and operation, even if it adds Amtrak service as Walters suggests. The two areas have serviceable highways to cover the 97-minute drive on 99, and Greyhound service that takes 130 minutes. California will have spent well over $10 billion to connect two counties (Fresno, Kern) by fixed rail with a combined 2016 population of 1,864,703 people, or 4.7% of the state’s estimated 39.5 million people. It would have been a heck of a lot cheaper to simply build a replacement highway along 99 instead, and would have been much more proportional to the demand for transport between Fresno and Kern. It’s time to stop throwing good money after bad. One has to suspect that the IG report will come to the same conclusion, at least as far as the FRA and federal cash is concerned. Congress should have cut off this project years ago anyway. If California’s legislature wants to go broke betting on 19th-century fixed-track solutions to the 21st century’s transportation issues, they can do that all on their own. Poster Comment: Shocked! Shocked, I say. Aw, hell, who am I fooling? I predicted a sour end to this boondoggle from Day One, as did so many others. Gee, I wonder what federal auditors will find — besides a phantom train set and a lot of wasted money? With a new study out showing that California doesn’t have the funding to complete even the first phase of their high-speed rail project, the Inspector General for the Department of Transportation will open the books to see how federal monies have been spent: California’s high-speed rail project is facing an audit from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s as costs continue to climb. The federal money awarded to California comes with specific conditions that Kelly has promised to meet. They include completing a 119-mile (192-kilometer) segment of track now under construction in the Central Valley and finishing environmental reviews for the full line by 2022. After a decade-plus of cogitation, they said, the state still doesn’t have a complete scenario for raising the tens of billions of dollars it would take to extend the San Joaquin section into the San Francisco Bay Area via San Jose and southward to Los Angeles. …
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: (#0)
Will anyone be arrested for fraud and theft of services? Or do they get to keep the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars they stole?
California will be able to show the costs have not necessarily included project realization as the planning for the project consumed the costs. The bureaucrats planned an albatross.
Hahahahahahah, stop it, yer killin' me. : )
I think they'll continue to throw money in that hole because Brown simply refuses to give up on it. He had in mind a legacy project, like the great California irrigation/dams/canals projects of 50-100 years ago. And it has all fallen apart. But good luck trying to get them to admit it.
I predict a similar boondoggle result for the $20 billion New Jersey Gateway Tunnel project -- which we know will be $40 billion by the time it's completed.
And that Boston project that went so far over cost. Too bad the NJ/NY project seemed to get funded under the horrible spending bill. Trump justified it by citing dire need for military spending but I think he knows it is wrong to let the Dems blackmail him into such a bad budget by holding the military hostage. Which was their plan all along. They knew sequestration would inevitably lead to this pork-filled scenario some years down the road.
A lot of bad things happened (and didn't happen) under that spending bill. As proof, all you had to do was look at the smiles of Pelosi and Schumer.
The Big Dig. Expected to take 7 years and cost $2.8 billion. Ended up taking 15 years and costing $22 billion (with interest).
Yep, your memory is better than mine. As I recall, that was one thing Romney did was to force through the final part and make it all end. Some of these projects seem to want to drive costs through the roof and drag it out as long as possible for the benefit of contractors and labor. Finishing such projects kills the golden goose as far as they are concerned.
Nah. My Google is better than yours.
#2. To: Tooconservative (#0)
(Edited)
but that will still point out the lack of progress California has made despite all of the cash it received:
#3. To: Tooconservative (#0)
... a phantom train set and a lot of wasted money?
#4. To: misterwhite (#2)
Will anyone be arrested for fraud and theft of services?
#5. To: buckeroo (#3)
California will be able to show the costs have not necessarily included project realization as the planning for the project consumed the costs. The bureaucrats planned an albatross.
#6. To: Tooconservative (#5)
I think they'll continue to throw money in that hole because Brown simply refuses to give up on it.
#7. To: misterwhite (#6)
#8. To: Tooconservative (#7)
under the horrible spending bill
#9. To: Tooconservative (#7)
And that Boston project that went so far over cost.
#10. To: misterwhite (#9)
#11. To: Tooconservative (#10)
Yep, your memory is better than mine.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]