As Contract Vote Nears, Rail Firm Pushes Its Leverage

blogdowntown: As Contract Vote Nears, Rail Firm Pushes Its Leverage

As Contract Vote Nears, Rail Firm Pushes Its Leverage
By Eric Richardson
Published: Wednesday, May 27, 2009, at 10:52AM

Gold Line Yard Eric Richardson


Light rail vehicles sit in the Gold Line's light maintenance yard in a 2007 file photo.

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — In the lead-up to a Metro board vote on whether or not to pick up a $300-million option for light rail cars, Italian firm AnsaldoBreda upped the stakes by saying that it intended to build a manufacturing plant in Los Angeles if given the deal. The board delayed action.

A day before the option contract again comes up for a vote, AnsaldoBreda will this afternoon participate in a job fair at L.A. Trade Tech.

Earlier this year, Metro expressed displeasure with AnsaldoBreda's performance delivering fifty light rail vehicles it had ordered for the Gold Line's Eastside Extension. It claimed that the cars were overweight, use too much electricity and that delivery has been far behind schedule.

The firm's offer to open a manufacturing plant in the city of Los Angeles was an attractive carrot, particularly to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who prominently featured clean technology and green jobs in his recent State of the City address. While the firm has several final assembly plants in the U.S., this would be their first manufacturing site outside Italy.

Last week, the board of the Community Redevelopment Agency gave its staff the go-ahead to negotiation a deal with AnsaldoBreda for 14.3 of the 20 acres at its proposed CleanTech Manufacturing Center just south of Downtown. Lease negotiations are conditioned on Metro exercising its option with the firm.

Today, the rail car manufacturer will join the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and the AFL-CIO for a job fair at L.A. Trade Tech. Labor has been a big supporter of AnsaldoBreda's plans, and the March Metro board meeting had a heavy turnout by hardhat-wearing union members.

While the promise of manufacturing jobs is a tough political sell to turn down, it remains unclear whether the Metro board will put aside its concerns in favor of economic development. The L.A. Times reports today that Metro CEO Art Leahy is recommending the option not be picked up, saying that he could "find little reason for recommending exercise of the options."

The board could further delay action on the option. The agenda item for Thursday's meeting asks that the board "CONSIDER extending the expiration of the option, exercising the option, or allowing expiration" of the AnsaldoBreda contract.

As a sidebar, AnsaldoBreda representative Fabio Ficano has been outgoing with blogs and media. You can find Q&A with Ficano in the comments section of this initial Streetsblog report from the March board meeting and this followup thread. He also wrote an opinion piece for the L.A. Times, responding to a critical column.

An interview with Michael Dukakis, 1988 presidential candidate, now occasional professor, speaks on transportation policy in the US.

Michael Dukakis: Obama Needs To Revive Train Manufacturing Industry » INFRASTRUCTURIST

Posted on Tuesday May 26th by Jebediah Reed


Michael Dukakis
Last week we ran part one of our recent interview with Michael Dukakis, in which he discussed how building transit will lead to healthier cities and how the burden is now on governors to take the lead on building out our passenger rail network.

In part two, the Duke has some advice for Obama on how to jump start what could become a major domestic industry in decades ahead and .

What the most important thing that nobody is discussing with respect to transportation policy?
The thing that nobody is talking about is: how do we revive the transit rail industry? You know, we can’t make a train in this country. If we’re going to commit ourselves to this kind of spending on rail, it seems to me that one the things that the administration should be doing is taking a serious look at how you revive train and transit manufacturing. Maybe you do it in joint ventures with foreign firms. But why shouldn’t we be getting a chunk of these jobs if we’re going to be spending this money?

If you were in Obama’s position, how would you do that?
The first thing you do is give the automobile makers a $5 billion contract to manufacture transit equipment. This would be far more stimulative, plus you’d get something for it. And then you distribute the equipment to transit systems all over the country. Let’s see if we can’t get them to make a streetcar. I mean, if you can make a bus, why not a streetcar? There are 100 cities in this country that want to do light rail–that’s a market for you. Did I ever tell you the story about Jack Welch and me?

No, please do.
This is after the Cold War. GE was closing some plants. I said, “Instead of closing these plants, why not get into the transit business? As governor, I’m spending hundreds of millions on transit equipment and I’m not buying a stick of it in this country.” I’ll never forget it. He said, “I’m a railroad guy”–his father was a conductor on the Boston & Maine railroad–”I love trains, but we go where the money is. As long as this country is spending billions on missiles, we’ll make missiles. When–and if–they decide to spend billions on rail, we’ll start making transit again.” So here we are. We have an administration that seems to want to do it. We have a Congress that’s strongly rail supportive. I think this might well be a time to act. And I’m serious about these bus contracts* for Detroit. Why not?

It does seem like there’s been a lack of imagination on the administration’s part with respect to transforming the car industry.
Yeah. Well, now that we got our $8 billion we can go to work on train manufacturing in the US.

Do you think an expansion of rail would actually allow us to bring down the car ownership rate?
We’ll see!

One of the most important questions around infrastructure investment in this country is whether we can get meaningful funding for an infrastructure bank. During the campaign, Obama promised $80 billion. But at least one very powerful senator–Max Baucus (D, MT.)–seems intent on derailing it.
Our president has great persuasive powers these days and I hope and expect he’ll use them. Max is a smart guy and not anti-train. He just doesn’t want that highway money mixed in. But, at the same time, it seems to me that in the future what highway money we spend in this country is going to be largely for maintenance and reconstruction. The new projects are mostly going to be–at least I hope–inter-city rail and transit.

But isn’t it going to be tough to convince to Congress to hand over a big pot of money with no strings attached?
That’s always a problem. You have folks in Congress who don’t want to be in a situation where they vote the money and then it’s the governors back home who take credit. But most people on the Hill really do favor giving states broad discretion. Now with that $8 billion, it’s not discretionary – it has to be used for rail.

How do we instill the required urgency in our politicians?
For me it was all about jobs. I used to ask, “Why aren’t there 200 people working on these road jobs? What is this six people stuff?” We had skilled construction trade people out of work. I just personally couldn’t tolerate a situation where we had work to be done, money appropriated, folks out there looking for work – and nothing happening. But now is very good time to be doing this stuff. We’ve got a lot of people in planning, engineering, and architecture that need work. There’s lots of excess capacity. Contractors are hungry, and they’re bidding low. Bids are coming in well below estimates on stimulus projects.

Some experts say we should be worried about these low bids–that construction firms are likely to start going broke before they finish the projects they’re working on.
Not if you have smart construction management. The Boston Harbor clean up came in on time and 25 percent below budget. That project and the Big Dig started out with the same estimated costs and had the same level of complexity. The difference was competent, tough construction management. We had the good sense to get contracts out on the harbor projects in the middle of the ‘89-’91 recession. My successor, William Weld, futzed around for two or three years on the Big Dig and that cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

So how on earth do we get good construction management?
A lot of it has to come from LaHood. He’s got to convey that. And I think he’s prepared to do so, based on the conversations I’ve had with him. But remember, it’s not the federal DOT that does the construction, with the exception of Amtrak. This is mostly a state thing.

Where it’s an uneven situation at best.
When we were out in Denver visiting our daughter last January, we drove along a local road that was under construction. We were out there again last weekend–and it’s still under construction. It’s almost June! We’ve got a problem in this country.

Is it that the state DOTs are simply dysfunctional organizations?
I don’t know that they’re dysfunctional. But for reasons I don’t quite understand. Kenmore Square in Boston still under construction five years after it began. It should be about a six month job. Actually, here it’s because the folks at the MBTA who are responsible for construction just don’t have what it takes. With Fred Salvucci, I had a transportation secretary who knew who the good people were.

Most governors don’t know amount about transportation policy–how do they get it right?
I nearly flunked physics at Swarthmore College. [Laughs] I’m serious though – that’s why I went into politics. But I’ve always had this interest in transportation. Salvucci and I started working together when we were trying to kill the Master Highway Plan here in Boston, which took ten years, and I got to know him. How do you find a guy who’s the son of an immigrant bricklayer and has two degrees from MIT and has political smarts coming out his ears? I was very fortunate. But it really depends on state and local elected executives picking top notch people to do this stuff. Even Fred though–I’d come back from the field and would call him up and say, “Nobody’s working on Route 2, Fred! Traffic’s backed up! What’s going on?” That’s one thing a governor can do – ask questions.

Looking around the country, are you seeing governors who seem to have that urgency you’re talking about?
When Kitty and I were driving back from LA recently, we stopped off at Zion National Park in Utah. On local TV there was Jon Huntsman, announcing stimulus construction projects, surrounded by twenty construction companies, and saying, “We’re moving on these and moving fast.” He probably doesn’t know any more about construction than I do, but he’s got that impatience and commitment to doing the stuff and putting good people to work doing it. It’s not complicated.

Photo

(*Dukakis credits his UCLA colleague Daniel J.B. Mitchell with this idea.)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009 at 8:15 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
5 Responses to “Michael Dukakis: Obama Needs To Revive Train Manufacturing Industry”

1. Snowflake Seven Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 2:55 pm

Oregon Iron Works are now building street cars for the Portland Streetcar Line and they are bidding on projects in other cities.
2. Bill Nelson Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 3:04 pm

I can answer Mr. Dukakis’ questions:

But why shouldn’t we be getting a chunk of these jobs if we’re going to be spending this money?

Who is “we”? Why are “we” more entitled than “them”? Anyway, the reason “we” don’t get these jobs is because “we” are not as efficient at doing those jobs as “they” are.

I mean, if you can make a bus, why not a streetcar?

The US auto manufacturers are pretty incapable of building buses, just as they are unable to build a decent automobile. There is no reason to believe that their quality control would extend to streetcars.

I used to ask, “Why aren’t there 200 people working on these road jobs? What is this six people stuff?”

Why do a job with six people when 200 could do the same job? Why not 2000 people doing the job of six? When public works project consume resources (like labor), then there is less to go around for other things. Ideally, the road jobs would be done entirely by robots.

But for reasons I don’t quite understand. Kenmore Square in Boston still under construction five years after it began. It should be about a six month job.

Perhaps the contractors are guaranteed a “chunk of the money”, are using bloated workforces, and are working for unaccountable bureaucracies that even ex-governors do not understand?

It’s not complicated.

No, it’s enormously complicated to identify worthy construction projects and to do them correctly, on time, while not fleecing the taxpayers. It only seems easy when you make decisions with other people’s money — as politicians always, always, always do.
3. Don K Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 4:50 pm

The reason the Detroit Three won’t get into transit manufacturing are the same as the reason GM (the only one to have built transit buses) sold off its transit bus division years ago and the reason Ford Sold off its over-the-road truck operations. The corporate skills necessary for building a few thousand semi-customized units a year are totally different than the skills required for building 100,000-500,000 more-or-less standard (with limited option availability) units. One is mass production, the other is more akin to a craft shop. Kind of like the difference between manufacturing mainframe computers (which IBM owned) and manufacturing PCs (at which IBM struck out after originating).

If every transit agency could agree on a standard unit, then it would be more like auto production. As it is, I have no doubt Charlotte would want motor A with axle B and brake C, while Denver would want motor D with axle E and brake F, and Portland would want yet another combination.

The production model that would be most like what’s required for transit would be over-the-road trucks (think Kenworth/Peterbilt) or airliner manufacturing (Boeing), and I would expect any of these manufacturers to be competent.
4. David N Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 4:06 am

I had actually figured that giving time for an American train building industry to develop was one of the main reasons why Obama wanted to start relatively small when it came to intercity rail. Unlike the Chinese, for example, who pay enormous sums to foreign companies.
5. Streetsblog » State, National, and World Headlines from the Past Five Days Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 11:56 am

[...] Dukakis: Obama Should Give Detroit $5B to Make Transit Vehicles (Infrastructurist) [...]

Federal Officials to Hear California's Plan for High-Speed Train and Conventional Rail Integration

Federal Officials to Hear California's Plan for High-Speed Train and Conventional Rail Integration

May 27, 2009 08:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Federal Officials to Hear California's Plan for High-Speed Train and Conventional Rail Integration

--(BUSINESS WIRE)--California High-Speed Rail Authority:

What:
Federal Railroad Administration Workshop on High-Speed Rail in America


Who:
Federal Railroad Administration Representatives
Caltrans Director Will Kempton
California High-Speed Rail Authority Representatives


When:


Thursday, May 28, 2009

1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.


Where:


Sacramento Marriott Hotel Rancho Cordova

11211 Point East Drive

Rancho Cordova, CA


Details:
The Federal Railroad Administration will hold one of seven regional workshops in Sacramento as part of the agency's implementation of President Obama’s vision for an American network of high-speed trains. The federal agency is charged with establishing guidelines for use of $8 billion in federal stimulus funding for high-speed rail and intercity passenger rail development.

California is the only state in the country that already has in place $9 billion in voter-approved financing, environmental clearances and an adopted route for a true high-speed train. Caltrans Director Will Kempton and California High-Speed Rail Authority officials will outline the plan for California's 800-mile system, linking major cities with service up to 220-miles-an hour, as well as the conventional intercity and commuter rail systems that will link to it.

The FRA is expected to announce its interim guidance for grant proposals on or before June 17, 2009.

Can America be America without sprawl? | All About Cities.

Can America be America without sprawl? | All About Cities

May 27, 2009
Can America be America without sprawl?

Spreading out into the suburbs allowed Americans to continue a number of long-standing cultural threads taught to them about their nation’s past. Many Americans may therefore not easily change and relocate to communities of higher density living.

Europeans came to the United States in the 17th through 19th centuries for several reasons. These included wanting to escape government (state) persecution of their beliefs as well as having a chance to own land and be more independent.

The new US constitution written in 1789 assumed that Americans would be small independent farmers. The idea of the rugged, self-reliant individual as citizen emerged. The first amendment guaranteed citizens right to keep arms, to prevent the state (the government) from removing their liberties (keeping in mind citizens were only white men who owned property at this time).

Living in a prosperous city — then as now — requires a different mindset. The agents of the state — police, laws, bylaws, — uphold property rights and social safety, in return for being paid in the form of taxes. Being a city resident requires trusting others to look after aspects of your life. Taking the law into your own hands theoretically results in becoming an outlaw yourself, and criminal prosecution. Being in a more densely populated area also means getting along with people who are not necessarily like you — America’s mythical founders, the pilgrims, went to the new world to establish a community that included only themselves. Others since moved West with the same goal.

As the United States spread west, conquering nature it also forged the notion that everyone (well everyone who was white and male, anyway) should have the option to have a farm. And as new states were created, they were all roughly the same size. This idea of equality in land size emerged.

In modern times, automobiles allowed for people who no longer worked on farms — instead in city factories or office buildings or other edifices — to all have the dream of the same house with a yard. The suburbs sprawled out from cities just as America sprawled out from the East Coast decades and centuries before.

One reason for the push west — and the push to the suburbs — has been a desire to be different from Europeans. Immigrants often deliberately left behind the constraints of the old world. America was founded on not being Europe.

More recently, Europeans have been portrayed as those who live in cities, speak multiple languages, spend their time philosophizing, and don’t believe in guns or SUVs. Americans are frequently taught to think of themselves as the opposite.

With this historical foundation, it could take a while for many to believe that it is as American to live in a condo by the river in Portland as to have a suburban home in Plano Texas or to ride a bike to work in 20 minutes rather than drive the SUV for 45.

If a Great Reset is to happen, the hope is probably in younger and future generations rejecting some of the historical narrative of what it is to be American. The more Hispanic, black, Asian and other immigrant (or children of immigrant) voices that can be heard, the more the traditional myth can be challenged and be exposed for what it is — a narrow, exclusionary view of America that doesn’t account for the experience of the majority of it’s citizens in the 21st century.

Only then might being an educated, creative, tolerant urban dweller be an image more connected with the narrative of America’s history. Until it ceases to fit with how many Americans view themselves and their country, suburbia will remain a dominant force in the American economy — to its detriment, most likely.

Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson reflects on the need to link Northwest cities with fast, frequent rail service after experiencing backups at border.

High-speed rail along the West Coast is a 'no-brainer'

High-speed rail along the West Coast is a 'no-brainer'
Vancouver mayor complains about backups at the border

By JOEL CONNELLY
SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF

Enduring a 90-minute wait to cross the U.S.-Canada border on Tuesday, Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson had time to reflect on the need to link Northwest cities with fast, frequent rail service.

"Today, we drove. If there were a train, we'd have been on it: High-speed rail is a no-brainer for me," Robertson told a small Seattle dinner that night.

The mayor added, comparing his rail experiences in Europe to the time consumed getting in and out of Northwest airports, "It's faster and a helluva lot more fun than flying."

The mayors of Vancouver and Portland -- Greg Nickels is in Montreal -- and a bevy of officeholders and experts are devoting the last few days in May to a moveable "Cascade Rail Week."

They have two goals in mind, fast future trains such as those in the Washington, D.C.-New York corridor . . . and getting more cross-border rail service in time for nest February's Vancouver Winter Olympics.

Achieving these goals likely will depend on two guys with unusual names in far-off capitals -- Barack and Iggy.

The Northwest's rail boosters are hoping for a billion-dollar slice of the $8 billion high-speed rail pie that's part of the Obama stimulus package.

The money is to be spent in the next two years, with the administration promising to ask Congress for an additional $1 billion a year for the next five years.

The I-5 corridor, from Eugene, Ore., to Vancouver, is one of 10 corridors around the country in competition for the money. Other regions with projects in the oven include a Washington, D.C., to Florida link, service between Chicago and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and a long-on-the-book California link between San Francisco and Los Angeles.In the United States, except for one East Coast corridor, high-speed train service has sat in the station taking off in other industrialized countries.

"Why is the technologically most advanced nation on earth so far behind on rail?" state Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, chairwoman of the Senate Transportation Committee, asked at the dinner.

The president of the United States has posed a similar question, noting the bullet trains of Japan and the rail network that links cities in France.

"This is not some fanciful, pie-in-the-sky vision of the future. It's happening now: The problem is, it's happening elsewhere," Obama said recently.

The second goal of "Cascadia Rail Week" is to flag down bureaucrats in Ottawa before the world arrives in Vancouver next February.

"Our federal government is not there yet," Robertson acknowledged.At present, a single Amtrak train leaves Seattle early in the morning, and returns from Vancouver in the evening. Amtrak is eager to include a second daily run, an evening train to Vancouver that would return the following morning.

The expanded service would encourage overnight stays in Vancouver. The Washington Dept of Transportation has forecast $16 million to $33 million in benefits to British Columbia's Lower Mainland.

But Canada's Border Services Agency has put a block in the path of the second train.

Ottawa bureaucrats demand that Amtrak pay to staff the border checkpoint for the second train, which would hit the 49th Parallel after normal working hours. The cost would come to more than $500,000 a year.

The red light in Ottawa has even provoked outrage even from the Vancouver Sun, usually a slavish supporter of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party government.

"These trains could have been rolling nine months ago," opined British Columbia's largest newspaper.

"Iggy" is opposition Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff, "hopefully our next prime minister" in Robertson's words. Another Canadian national election is predicted for fall. A former Harvard professor, Iggy needs to pick up at least six to ten parliamentary seats in British Columbia -- specifically the Lower Mainland -- if he is to unseat Harper.

In a classic truism for a West Coast politician, the newly elected (2008) Robertson spoke of disconnect and "frustration with the federal governments in both of our countries."

South of the border, such "Cascadians" as former Secretary of State Ralph Munro and Bruce Agnew of the Discovery Institute have worked for two decades to bring fast, reliable rail service to the I-5 corridor.Does Obama's stimulus package represent a light at the end of the tunnel?

"We're all getting old so lets get this damned railroad built," Munro said at the dinner.
Joel Connelly can be reached at 206-448-8160 or joelconnelly@seattlepi.com.

AnsaldoBreda is hoping to land a $300-million contract, but the MTA chief recommends seeking bids from other firms, based on its performance on an earlier contract.

Rail car bid in doubt, firm makes new offer - Los Angeles Times

Rail car bid in doubt, firm makes new offer
AnsaldoBreda is hoping to land a $300-million contract, but the MTA chief recommends seeking bids from other firms, based on its performance on an earlier contract.
By Maeve Reston
May 28, 2009
On the eve of a key vote on whether to grant a $300-million rail car contract to an Italian company offering to build its manufacturing plant in Los Angeles, the new chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority appeared Wednesday to dim the company's chances.

In a memo that might weigh heavily on some MTA board members as they make their decision today, he recommended seeking bids from other firms because of concerns about the company's past performance.

But the company, AnsaldoBreda, moved quickly to salvage the potential deal to build 100 cars for the agency's light rail lines. Late Wednesday, AnsaldoBreda Inc. President Giancarlo Fantappie said in a letter to MTA chief Art Leahy that the company would provide a $300-million "financial guarantee," ensuring the fulfillment of the new contract.

The potential rail plant -- offered by AnsaldoBreda as leverage to get the contract -- has been a central component of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's plan to jump-start a clean technology corridor downtown and bring "green jobs" to Los Angeles at a time when unemployment is topping 12%.

In March, AnsaldoBreda's contract options were on the verge of expiring because of staff complaints that the 50 cars already being built under the firm's base contract are 5,000 to 6,000 pounds overweight, incompatible with MTA's other passenger cars and three years late.

Villaraigosa, who as chairman of the MTA board helped broker a two-month reprieve for the company, believes the $300-million performance guarantee could change the dynamics of the vote. The mayor would support the contract if it had "an iron-clad guarantee that the cars will be delivered on time and on budget," his spokesman said.

AnsaldoBreda's offer Wednesday capped a vigorous marketing and lobbying blitz to clinch the 100-car contract. The company, which currently builds cars in Italy and assembles them in Northern California, has begun negotiating with city officials to lease a prized vacant 14-acre parcel east of downtown -- offering to pay $15 million in rent up front.

Over the weekend, it aired radio ads inviting workers to apply for "one of 2,000 new manufacturing and construction jobs that pay as much as $55,000 with benefits." And the firm held a "job fair" co-sponsored by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor.

The federation has been pressing board members to support AnsaldoBreda. Maria-Elena Durazo, the influential executive-secretary of the labor federation, said if AnsaldoBreda loses the deal Thursday she would be "extremely disappointed."

Before AnsaldoBreda offered the guarantee, Leahy said he based his recommendation on the company's performance in Los Angeles.

Federal rules, he noted, bar the agency from favoring a local company if federal money is used to help pay for the product.

And after vetting the company's record on the 50-car contract, Leahy told board members in a memo Tuesday night that he could "find little reason for recommending exercise of the [100-car] options."

Leahy said the problems "lead me to be concerned about our ability to rely upon them." Under the new contract "they promised to bring the cars in on time, but the history of their performance -- makes one wonder about that," he said.

maeve.reston@latimes.com

The Central Valley portion of the High Speed Rail system may be constructed after both the San Francisco-to-San Jose and Los Angeles-to-Anaheim segments are constructed, but that timetable is not set in stone.

Valley Voice Newspaper

Stimulus Money May Change
High Speed Rail Schedule

San Joaquin Valley - The Central Valley portion of the High Speed Rail system may be constructed after both the San Francisco-to-San Jose and Los Angeles-to-Anaheim segments are constructed, but that timetable is not set in stone.

High Speed Rail Authority spokesperson Kris Deutschman said it is true that both the northern and southern segments of the rail system are further along in the planning stage than the Central Valley, but what actually gets built first is yet to be determined. At one time, it was believed the Valley segment would be one of the first constructed.

However, earlier this month, the Authority approved a list of shovel-ready construction projects likely to qualify for $8 billion in federal stimulus funding for high speed trains.

According to the Authority, one of the project elements selected was the entire Los Angeles-to-Anaheim and San Francisco-to-San Jose corridors, where the Authority is expected to have completed the project level environmental documents this year and qualified and selected design build teams to begin construction of the sections by the 2012 deadline.

The Authority also selected a second stimulus project that would be the identification, selection and negotiation of right-of-way acquisition in the Merced-to-Bakersfield section, including the system's planned maintenance facility, but not the rail system.

Mike Olmos, Visalia assistant city manager, said he attended that meeting and he is not surprised that the Central Valley segment may come later rather than earlier.
“There are some areas further along because right of way can be acquired now,” said Olmos. “However, we're the middle link. The high speed rail cannot work unless the middle link is done. They have to get to us if they want to make a connection between L.A. and S.F. and that's what the system is all about.”

Georgiana Vivian, with the Authority, told members of the Tulare Sunrise Rotary Club that because of the federal stimulus funding, the projects first considered “shovel ready” must be built first. Right now, the San Francisco-to-San Jose segment is by far the farthest along, with the Los Angeles-to-Anaheim segment second.

Vivian said construction on the Central Valley segment may not begin for another seven years, but Deutschman said that does not mean that portions of the Valley line could not be built sooner and there is a key reason at least a portion of the Valley line is important.

“We need to test trains on long stretches of flat land and the Valley would be best for that,” she said. Vivian said the timetable is to begin testing trains by 2015 and that the Authority must test the trains and tracks for three years before passengers can be carried. That means the earliest riders will be able to get aboard the high speed rail is 2018.

“We have the longest segment and that is where they can achieve the speeds to test the trains,” agreed Olmos.

He said the seven-year timetable sounds about right, but work on the environmental review of the Valley line – which includes determining where the line will go – is moving forward.

“There's a team of consultants working on the Bakersfield-to-Merced segment. They've been in contact with us,” said Olmos.

Visalia hopes to land a stop, and the Authority has identified five possible locations for a stop in this area – four along Highway 99 near Visalia and one at Highway 43 and Highway 198 near Hanford.

“We have a general route and recommended stations in the Valley, all along the 99 corridor, not I-5,” said Deutschman. However, the Authority has not decided if a stop will placed in the Visalia/Hanford area.

She also said the Authority is trying to determine where to place its maintenance facilities – two smaller facilities probably at each end, then one large facility somewhere near the middle of the system. Olmos said the Authority is looking at the old Castle Air Force Base north of Merced for that large facility.

The 800-mile high speed rail is being funded by a $90 billion bond measure, another $12-15 billion in federal money, $2-3 billion in local money and $6-7 billion in private funds.

Deutschman said the Authority should hear by the end of June if it is going to get any stimulus money, but it is confident some will come. When asked how many dollars the high speed rail might get, she replied, “All I'm hearing are billions.”

Federal rail officials have established initial criteria for grants to complete individual projects that are “ready to go” with preliminary engineering and environmental work completed and that demonstrate “independent utility.”

"We are confident that California's system is well ahead of every other high speed train project in the country and should be a leading candidate to receive stimulus funding," said Board Chairman Quentin Kopp. "Ours is the only one with billions of dollars in voter-approved state funding committed to the project, with environmental clearances already in place and with construction elements already identified and ready to go."

Deutschman said the L.A. route is most “shovel ready,” but there are portions within each segment that might be shovel ready, but not the entire system.

When fully completed, passengers will be able to ride from San Francisco to San Diego. The S.F.-to-L.A. non-stop run is projected to take less than three hours.

Covering Tomorrow’s Big Metro Board Meeting

Covering Tomorrow’s Big Metro Board Meeting « I Will Ride Blog

Covering Tomorrow’s Big Metro Board Meeting
Posted by Albert

If you followed our live-tweet @iwillride of last week’s Metro Budget and Finance Committee meeting, you would have known that the committee voted in favor of recommending to the Metro Board of Directors that the Gold Line Foothill Extension receive a $10 million increase in Measure R funding for 2010 – a substantial upgrade from the original $127,000 it was slated to receive. Hence the use of the word “Big” in the title.

If you’re wondering why the Metro Budget and Finance Committee recommended such a big increase for the Foothill Extension, one only has to look at where the $10 million is coming from. Metro staff has estimated the (somewhat-disputably low) first-year projection of Measure R revenue for 2010 to be $361 million. Of that total revenue, approximately $125 million will be dedicated to rail projects. Of that $125 million, Metro budgeted $97 million for specific rail projects, leaving an unallocated fund balance of $28 million. And that $28 million is where Supervisor Mike Antonovich proposed the additional $10 million for the Foothill Extension come from.

So it should be a simple task for Metro to approve about a third of its unallocated funds to the shovel-ready Foothill Extension right? Here’s hoping. A majority of the 13-member board must approve the proposal.

Look for a wave of yellow-gold shirts tomorrow at the MTA building, and join us while you’re at it! We encourage all supporters to come and speak their minds to the Metro Board of Directors.

The meeting takes place tomorrow at 9:30 AM in the Metro Board Room at the MTA building.

For those not attending, we’ll be covering the meeting (this never gets old) live on our Twitter feed @iwillride. You can also listen live by calling in at (213) 922-6045.

Here’s hoping.

Metro Debates FY10 Budget, Including Measure R

Streetsblog » Metro Debates FY10 Budget, Including Measure R

Metro Debates FY10 Budget, Including Measure R

by Damien Newton on May 27, 2009

Photo of Ansaldo-Breda built High Speed Rail Car via Jimcb/Flickr

Tomorrow is the fourth Thursday of the month, and that means it's time for another packed agenda for another Metro Board agenda. The agenda is dominated by the adoption of Metro's FY10 Budget and various side items such as the next chapter in the controversy surrounding Ansaldo-Breda rail car suppliers.

The"big-ticket" item tomorrow should be the debate over next year's budget. Last week we discussed how the budget proposes a 120,000 cut in service hours in bus operations, just a year after the Metro Board bent over backwards to avoid any sort of cuts.

Unlike last week, we can now see how Metro is planning to spend the first of its 30 years of Measure R funds on page 13 of the budget. In its first year, Measure R is projected to put aside over $100 million dollars for projects in future years. For example, it is "saving" over three times as much money in its highway expansion coffers than it is spending. On the highway side, Metro is socking away $54 million in funds and spending only $16 million, over three-quarters of which will be spent on sound walls.

On the rail expansion side, by far the most money will be spent on Phase II of the Expo Line. The current budget draft has Metro spending $71 million on rail expansion, with $61 million going towards Expo Phase II. However, a motion by Director Antonovich would take the $27 million that staff was planning to save and directing it towards the Gold Line Foothill Extension. While our friends at I Will Ride are pretty excited about this proposal, its bound to be one of the most controversial agenda items.

Ansaldo-Breda appearing on the agenda guarantees a strong turnout from organized labor as they did last month. Generally, I consider the controversy about whether or not to "extend the expiration of the option, exercising the option, or allowing expiration of Contract No. P2550 with AnsaldoBreda S.p.A. for 100
additional light rail vehicles" as the Board puts it is outside of my area, but since the union presence could dominate the meeting, I thought it only fair to give warning.

Of course, there are always surprises from activists and the board at meetings with agendas this long and complex. We'll have a full report tomorrow after the meeting.

About Birthdays.....

Birthday Card Messages presented by 1-800-FLOWERS.COM

Those who love deeply never grow old; they may die of old age, but they die young.

- A. W. Pinero

And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years

- Abraham Lincoln

If you carry your childhood with you, you never become older.

- Abraham Sutzkever

In the midst of winter, I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.

- Albert Camus

Pleas'd to look forward, pleas'd to look behind, and count each birthday with a grateful mind.

- Alexander Pope

Please don't retouch my wrinkles. It took me so long to earn them.

- Anna Magnani

Growing old is like being increasingly penalized for a crime you have not committed.

- Anthony Powell

Life is too short to be small.

- Benjamin Disraeli

At twenty years of age, the will reigns; at thirty, the wit; and at forty, the judgment.

- Benjamin Franklin

To me, old age is always fifteen years older than I am.

- Bernard M. Baruch

After 30, a body has a mind of its own.

- Bette Midler

Your life is a gift from the Creator. Your gift back to the Creator is what you do with your life.

- Billy Mills

He not busy being born is busy dying.

- Bob Dylan

Middle age is when your age starts to show around your middle.

- Bob Hope

You know you are getting old when the candles cost more than the cake.

- Bob Hope

Middle age is when you still believe you'll feel better in the morning.

- Bob Hope

First you forget names; then you forget faces; then you forget to zip up your fly; and then you forget to unzip your fly.

- Branch Rickey

Every age can be enchanting, provided you live within it.

- Brigitte Bardot

It's sad to grow old, but nice to ripen.

- Brigitte Bardot

One-half of life is luck, the other hand is discipline--and that's the important half, for without discipline, you wouldn't know what to do with luck.

- Carl Zuckmeyer

Thirty-five is when you finally get your head together and your body starts falling apart.

- Caryn Leschen

A birthday is a time to reflect on the year gone by, but to also set your goals for the upcoming year.

- Catherine Pulsifer

Men are like wine. Some turn to vinegar, but the best improve with age.

- C.E.M. Joad

Just remember, once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed.

- Charles Schulz

new MTA chief is recommending the agency dispense with the company’s contract options for 100 additional cars and seek competitive bids for the $300-million job.

Chief urges MTA to decline Italian firm's $300 million contract options | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

Chief urges MTA to decline Italian firm's $300 million contract options
9:55 AM | May 27, 2009

In a blow to an Italian rail-car manufacturer that had tantalized Los Angeles city officials with a proposal to build a plant in downtown Los Angeles, the new MTA chief is recommending the agency dispense with the company’s contract options for 100 additional cars and seek competitive bids for the $300-million job.

The 13-member board may still approve AnsaldoBreda contract options at its meeting Thursday, but the recommendation sets up a potential confrontation between incoming Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chief Executive Officer Arthur T. Leahy and the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor.

The federation became one of the strongest backers of AnsaldoBreda after the rail company pledged to build a manufacturing plant and hire union laborers — a proposal intended to give the company leverage in persuading the MTA board to approve the potential 100-car contract.

Dozens of union workers attended the March MTA board meeting urging members to approve AnsaldoBreda’s contract options, despite concerns of MTA staff -- and the former CEO — about problems with the 50 cars the Italian company is building under its current contract.

Those cars, which cost the agency $2.9 million each, failed to meet a number of requirements specified in the MTA contract: They are incompatible with other passenger cars in the MTA fleet, 5,000 to 6,000 pounds heavier than ordered and the 50th car would arrive three years late, according to MTA officials.

AnsaldoBreda officials have blamed the delays on changes ordered by MTA and dispute the agency’s weight calculations. At the last meeting, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is chairman of the MTA board, and one of his MTA appointees, Richard Katz, brokered a two-month delay on the decision, giving the new CEO and board members more time to vet complaints about AnsaldoBreda's performance.

Over the course of the two-month extension, MTA staff was to ensure that AnsaldoBreda met its contractual obligations on weight, compatibility and delivery schedule under the current contract. In a brief memo to board members, Leahy said that although AnsaldoBreda had made a “concerted effort” to respond to concerns, their actions “fall short of meeting the requirements.”

After reviewing the company’s plans and an MTA staff study of them, Leahy added he could “find little reason for recommending exercise of the options.”

The board will debate at its Thursday meeting whether to exercise AnsaldoBreda’s options.

-- Maeve Reston

Free YouTube to MP3 Converter 3.1.5.55

Free YouTube to MP3 Converter - Free software downloads and reviews - CNET Download.com

Free YouTube to MP3 Converter 3.1.5.55
Download Now (5.73MB)
Tested spyware free
Features
* License:

Free
* Editor's Rating: 4.0 stars
* Average User Rating: 3.5 stars (out of 52 votes) Rate it!
* Downloads: 1,161,533
* Operating Systems: Windows Vista, Windows XP
* Additional Requirements:
No additional requirements
* Limitations:

No limitations
* Date Added:

April 06, 2009

Publisher's description of Free YouTube to MP3 Converter
From DVDVideoSoft:

Free YouTube to MP3 Converter. Extract and download music from YouTube movies and save it as MP3 files on your PC with one mouse click! Convert *.flv video files to *.mp3.

Editor's review of Free YouTube to MP3 Converter

4.0 stars
* "Conversion made easy"

* Reviewed by: CNET staff
* Reviewed on: May 14, 2009
* Version reviewed: Free YouTube to MP3 Converter 3.1.5.55

The minor quibbles we have with Free YouTube to MP3 Converter have nothing to do with its functionality. This effective freeware is ready to go right out of the box, but can be easily customized by the user.

No effort has been made to dress up the program's utilitarian interface, which consists of seven large buttons, a few fields, and a drop-down menu. A plain text box advises users to paste URLs in the field, and this is all the onscreen guidance you'll need. Once you see the video title in the field, you click Download and the program goes to work. The process wasn't lightening quick, but considering the size of some of our test files, it wasn't bad. Converted files played without a hitch.

The beauty of this converter lies in its simple set up. By default, converted files are saved into the program's folder in My Documents, and they retain the name of the source video. The files are saved as MP3s, normal quality. These settings are easily changed, though, with quick-access buttons and a drop-down menu. The most work a user might have to do is fill out the fields in the optional Tags fields for artist, title, track, and other information.

Sadly, the program doesn't integrate with your browser, but you can opt to have it automatically pick up URLs from the clipboard, which eliminates one step from the cutting and pasting process. It also installs the Ask.com Toolbar and resets your home page to the Ask.com Web site by default, so if you don't want these extras, you'll have to uncheck some boxes during the installation process. These inconveniences are offset by the fact that this program is not only effective, it also costs nothing to use. We highly recommend Free YouTube to MP3 Converter for any user.

DesertXpress high speed train ready for construction next year

DesertXpress high speed train ready for construction next year. « Trains For America

DesertXpress high speed train ready for construction next year. May 25, 2009
Posted by patlynch in Domestic HSR, Regional USA Transportation.
trackback

You already know this headline has a big “if.” The story runs in the Contra Costa Times reports developers will spend $4 billion in private investment for a Victorville to Las Vegas high speed rail link. This is not the Maglev proposal.

The preliminary environmental study is complete and the FRA needs to sign off. The business plan suggests a ticket price in the $50 range.

As planned, the DesertXpress line would allow Southern California passengers to board trains at a north Victorville train station and speed to Sin City as quickly as 150 mph. The line, which would generally follow the route of the 15 Freeway, would feature 183 to 200 miles of track, depending upon its ultimate alignment.

DesertXpress is still awaiting approval from the federal government. The firm has completed a draft environmental impact statement and Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Rob Kulat said the agency could make a decision in nine months.

Experts Find That $40 Billion Transit Tax May Not Pay for All They Hoped

Los Angeles Downtown News and Information - LA Downtown News Online > News > Rating R

Rating R

(l to r) California Transportation Commissioner Dario Frommer, MTA board member Richard Katz and new MTA Executive Director Art Leahy participated in a May 13 panel discussion on Measure R. Katz warned that the anticipated $40 billion could turn out to be as little as $25 billion. Photo by Gary Leonard.
*
Experts Find That $40 Billion Transit Tax May Not Pay for All They Hoped
by Ryan Vaillancourt
Published: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:27 PM PDT
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES - When Los Angeles County voters passed Measure R last November, approving a half-cent sales tax to raise $40 billion for transportation projects, many saw it as a sign that the public was desperate to ease congestion.

The tax hike required approval from 66.67% of voters. It got 67.22%.

“It’s very difficult to get two-thirds approval of anything and particularly in a bad economy, which I think speaks to how dire the perception of this problem was,” said Phil Recht, chair of the Central City Association, which hosted a panel on Measure R on Tuesday, May 13, before a crowd of business and transportation leaders.

Recht, who moderated the panel at the Sheraton Los Angeles Downtown, pointed to projections that the county’s population will swell from 9.8 million to 12 million by 2030, slowing the average freeway speed to about 20 miles per hour.

If voters expected Measure R to reduce traffic immediately, that won’t happen. The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces some major economic potholes on its road to easing congestion and improving the reach of mass transit, concluded the panel of experts, including new MTA Executive Director Art Leahy.

Measure R, which follows a $38.9 billion state transportation bond approved in 2006 known as Proposition 1B, puts a half-cent sales tax in place for 30 years. With the first funds becoming available July 1, the measure is expected to fund 33 transit projects — including the proposed Downtown Regional Connector and an extension of the Metro Gold Line — as well as a portion of regional street repairs and other projects.

As unemployment continues to rise and the economy continues to struggle, however, the revenue stream of sales tax dollars that was supposed to feed Measure R is suddenly thinner than anticipated, said panelist Richard Katz, a member of the MTA board.

“The $40 billion that you voted for, based on this economy, is now about $32 billion, and if it doesn’t turn around quick, it’ll be $25 billion before too long,” Katz said.

Reason to Move, Now


If Katz lamented the recession’s toll on Measure R’s ability to raise money, he said a silver lining is that lower construction costs and competition among contractors make now a good time to jumpstart infrastructure projects. As an example, he noted that a recently started expansion of the San Diego (405) Freeway high-occupancy vehicle lane came in 10% below the MTA’s anticipated cost, saving the agency $100 million.

“With three or four more projects like that, you can build another project just based on the savings,” he said.

Still, new projects will likely be difficult without further financial contributions from the state and federal governments, said panelist Dario Frommer, a former state Assembly majority leader and one of two current California Transportation Commissioners from Los Angeles County.

For Measure R to be successful, elected officials will have to leverage the county funds to obtain more dollars from the state and federal governments, Frommer said.

Recht agreed.

“Forty billion dollars sounds like an awful lot of money, but it’s still not nearly enough to fund even the 33 projects that are designated in this measure,” Recht said.

A New Leader


As the MTA attempts to implement its transportation projects amid the global economic woes, it’ll do so under the reins of Leahy, who most recently served as executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority.

Leahy, a Los Angeles native who started his career in transportation as an MTA bus driver, still resides in and commutes from Orange County. He and the other panelists agreed that in addition to financial challenges, future transportation projects face a significant obstacle in community opposition. Leahy said he hopes to counterbalance that during his tenure with earlier and more proactive community engagement during the planning process.

For Downtown residents and workers, the benefits of Measure R may be felt most in the Downtown Regional Connector, a proposed two-mile transit route that would link four light-rail lines. The project, expected to cost at least $800 million, is in the environmental review stage and completion is likely seven to 10 years away.

If the Regional Connector is the only Measure R funded project in Downtown proper, area commuters and residents alike may have more at stake in the 32 other projects if they can divert traffic from the Pasadena (110), Hollywood (101) and Santa Monica (10) freeways, said Carol Schatz, executive director of the Central City Association.

“Downtown residents have to go other places,” Schatz said. “Any time they go some place else they’re faced with this reality. Not to mention those who don’t live Downtown who want to get here for a sporting event or a concert.”

Contact Ryan Vaillancourt at ryan@downtownnews.com.

Obama’s Transportation Secretary Says He Wants to ‘Coerce People Out of Their Cars’

CNSNews.com - Obama’s Transportation Secretary Says He Wants to ‘Coerce People Out of Their Cars’

Obama’s Transportation Secretary Says He Wants to ‘Coerce People Out of Their Cars’
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief


(CNSNews.com) - Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told a group of reporters at the National Press Club on Thursday that he wants to “coerce people out of their cars.”

In Newsweek magazine last week, nationally syndicated columnist George Will published a piece critical of Lahood, entitled, “Ray LaHood, Transformed--Secretary of Behavior Modification.”

“He says he has joined a ‘transformational’ administration: ‘I think we can change people's behavior,’” Will reports that LaHood said over lunch.

LaHood, a former Republican congressman from Peoria, Ill., has become a champion of using the Department of Transportation and federal transportation spending to get people to take trains, busses, and ride bikes instead of driving cars.

At the National Press Club on Thursday he attempted to respond to George Will’s column and to explain his vision for using the power of government to change people’s transportation behavior and to change the nature of American residential communities.

“We want to really--and notwithstanding the fact that George Will doesn't like this idea--the idea of creating opportunities for people to get out of their cars--and we're working with the secretary of HUD, Shaun Donovan, on opportunities for housing, walking paths, biking paths,” said LaHood. “If somebody wants to ride their bike, if--to work or to the place of employment or to other places--mass transit, light rail--creating opportunities for what we call livable communities.”

The moderator of the press club event asked LaHood: “Some in the highway-supporters motorist groups have been concerned by your livability initiative. Is this an effort to make driving more torturous and to coerce people out of their cars?”

LaHood answered: “It is a way to coerce people out of their cars.

“Yeah,” he continued, “I mean, look, people don't like spending an hour and a half getting to work. And people don't like spending an hour going to the grocery store. And all of you who live around here know exactly what I'm talking about. You know, the dreaded thing is to have to run an errand on a weekend around here or to try and get home at 3:00 in the afternoon or even 5:00 in the afternoon.

“Now, look, every community is not going to be a livable community. But we have to create opportunities for people that do want to use a bicycle or want to walk or want to get on a streetcar or want to ride a light rail,” said LaHood.

Lahood suggested to the reporters that George Will is the only person opposed to using the government to promote mass transit and bicycling over driving a car.

“And the only person that I've heard of that objects to this is George Will. Check out Newsweek magazine,” said LaHood.

Lahood then made a joke about the fact that some conservatives believe that the way he wants to use the Department of Transportation represents an increased government intrusion in people’s lives.

“Some conservative groups are wary of the livable communities program, saying it's an example of government intrusion into people's lives,” said the moderator. “How do you respond?”

“About everything we do around here is government intrusion in people's lives,” said LaHood. “So have at it.”

Burbank Plans Intermodal Transit Center

AviationNews.net

Burbank Plans Intermodal Transit Center
May 26, 2009 08:26 AM


The Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena (Calif.) Airport Authority, owner and operator of Bob Hope Airport, said has retained Ricondo and Associates for a fee of $94,450 to undertake the initial environmental review of a proposed regional intermodal transit center at the airport that would provide access at a single point for air transport, Amtrak, Metrolink rail, buses, and rental cars to converge.

An elevated and covered moving sidewalk would convey arriving and departing passengers between the airport terminal and the transit center, facilitating immediate access to the terminal without using shuttle buses.

In addition, the project includes the construction of a publicly accessible compressed natural gas facility to supply CNG to airport shuttle buses and CNG-powered private automobiles.

Lawmakers: 710 Freeway extension must be underground

Lawmakers: 710 Freeway extension must be underground | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

Lawmakers: 710 Freeway extension must be underground
3:26 PM | May 26, 2009


710 State lawmakers weighed in on some vexing issues for Southern California by agreeing Tuesday to increase fines on bandit taxicabs and require any extension of the 710 Freeway from Los Angeles to Pasadena to be done by tunnel.

The state senate approved a measure, sponsored by the city of Los Angeles, setting a $1,250 penalty for taxi cabs operating without city licenses. The problem has grown, with the Los Angeles Police Department making 1,427 arrests last year, quadruple the yearly average for the previous decade.

"This (illegal activity) endangers the public, competes unfairly with franchised taxicab operators ... and deprives localities of hundreds of thousands of dollars in licensing fees," said Sen. Jenny Oropeza (D-Long Beach), author of SB 201, which now goes to the Assembly for consideration.

The Senate also sent the Assembly a measure by Sen. Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles) mandating that any extension of Interstate 710 from its current ending at the Los Angeles city line to connect with Interstate 210 in Pasadena be built by tunnel.

"Removing the surface route option will protect homes and keep neighborhoods in tact," said Cedillo, author of SB 545.

-- Patrick McGreevy

Orange line was a missed opportunity for light rail

Orange line was a missed opportunity for light rail - LA Daily News

Orange line was a missed opportunity for light rail
By John Reynolds John Reynolds is a Canoga Park resident who studied urban and regional planning at University of California, Davis.
Updated: 05/26/2009 06:32:09 PM PDT

The Orange Line busway has been a success and there are many good reasons to expand the service. Unfortunately, the Orange Line is also a story of opportunities lost, and the planned expansion of the line north to Chatsworth illustrates both the success of the line and its challenges.

One concern about the northward expansion of the Orange Line deals with the businesses that will be forced to relocate from along the old Southern Pacific right-of-way. Many of these businesses leased their land from the Southern Pacific and coexisted with the railroad literally in their backyard. It is unfortunate that the busway requires much more land than the railroad did. This is just one of the many impacts that has resulted from the decision to build the Orange Line as a busway instead of a light-rail system.

In 1989 I began studying transportation issues as related to urban planning. For one of my classes I researched and presented a report comparing traditional bus systems and light-rail systems that included a cost-benefit comparison.

It is true that light-rail does have a comparatively high initial cost compared with traditional buses. But that truth has many qualifiers. Putting buses on a specially built, private right-of-way changes the equation significantly. Beyond the roadway there are vehicle maintenance and replacement costs. A more difficult computation concerns the cost of the commute time for the distance traveled.

The cost to install pavement is considerable and almost equal to the cost for rail, not including overhead power. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has already had to repave portions of the Orange Line, suggesting any cost savings have been decreased.

Buses have very significant maintenance costs and a remarkably short operating life. Most buses last only 10 to 12 years. This should be compared with rail vehicles that have an operating history of 50 years or more - just look at the New Orleans trolleys, for example.

One of the modern concerns has been carbon dioxide and its contribution to global warming. Most buses burn fossil fuels, creating a significant number of pollutants, of which carbon dioxide is just one. Most light-rail vehicles use electric power, in which it is easier to control the environmental impact.

Noise is another environmental pollutant of concern. The Orange Line has required the construction of sound walls to control the noise from the tires and the engines. The electric propulsion of light-rail equipment is almost silent, as is the rail and wheel contact.

The Orange Line busway has had many problems with accidents between buses and automobiles. Part of the problem concerns a confusing set of signals at many intersections and impatient drivers running the red signals. The MTA has tried to reduce this by slowing the buses down or having them stop at some intersections, which has significantly increased the travel time on the line.

If the line had been built as light-rail, those intersections would have been protected with signals and crossing gates. At certain intersections it would have been reasonable to build bridges so that the automobile traffic would not have been inconvenienced at all by the transit vehicles. Complete grade separation would allow the light-rail vehicles to travel faster and significantly reduce the time needed to get from Woodland Hills to North Hollywood.

High-speed rail proposal is viewed with concern

High-speed rail proposal is viewed with concern

High-speed rail proposal is viewed with concern

Issue Date: May 27, 2009

By Christine Souza
Assistant Editor


Visualization showing an option for grade separation at Shaw Avenue in Fresno. NC3D of Portland, Ore., is working with the California High Speed Rail Authority to provide visuals of the proposed high speed rail project.

As the state's High-Speed Rail Authority plans an 800-mile high-speed rail system that will help alleviate congestion on roadways and transport passengers from San Francisco to Los Angeles in a little over two and a half hours, California's agricultural landscape is likely to change dramatically.

An estimated 300 miles of the project is expected to go through the Central Valley—one of the most productive farming regions in the world.

"There has been a real concern by agriculture about the route that the California high-speed rail project ends up taking and how it is going to impact those properties, as well as properties adjacent to the proposed project corridor," said Andrea Fox, California Farm Bureau Federation governmental affairs legislative coordinator. "While the routes of the project are being planned, we cannot lose sight of the many benefits of California agriculture, not only to support the state and nation economically, but to feed people locally and around the world."

The train, which would travel at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, was a major topic of discussion this month at the Great Valley Center's annual conference, entitled "20/20 Foresight, A View of the Great Valley in a Decade."

Quentin Kopp, chair of the California High-Speed Rail Authority and former state senator, addressed attendees about the project.

"California has been identified as having 38.2 million people, according to the State Department of Finance. The experts advise us that California high-speed rail is tantamount in terms of supplying a means of transportation to 50 million Californians by the year 2030," Kopp said.

After failing to pass a high-speed rail system on the statewide ballot in 2006, California voters approved a high-speed rail project last November with the passage of Proposition 1A that authorized $9.95 billion in general obligation bonds to fund the first phase of a planned multiphase high-speed rail network.

Kopp mentioned that $9 billion worth of bond funds will be directed to construction of the project and the remaining $950 million is for entities such as Bay Area Rapid Transit in the Bay Area to connect to the high-speed rail. Federal funds, including federal stimulus dollars, as well as other federal grants, have also been made available for high-speed rail projects nationwide. A few billion dollars more is expected to come from local, regional and even private sources, Kopp said. Total cost of the first phase of the project, which will include high-speed train lines from San Francisco to Anaheim, via the Central Valley and through Pacheco Pass, is estimated to be $45 billion.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority is tasked with completing final planning, design and environmental efforts. Construction efforts are projected to begin as soon as 2011.

The route that connects Los Angeles to San Francisco, via California's Central Valley, will be the first phase of the network.

"Three hundred miles of the project lie in the Central Valley and indeed is a critical part of the whole system," said Robert Schaevitz, vice president of Decision and Implementation Services with URS Corporation, the project manager for the Fresno-to-Palmdale section of the project. "The highest speeds on the system will be in the Central Valley where there is the least conflict with the difficult terrain except for a couple of important exceptions—Fresno and Bakersfield. We're working in the Central Valley to make sure that every mile that we can will have that 220 mph top speed."

An area between Merced and Madera counties is being looked at as the potential site of one of California high-speed rail's heavy maintenance facilities. Merced County Farm Bureau Executive Director Diana Westmoreland Pedrozo foresees this project as creating real problems for the future of agriculture in the Central Valley.

"Unless the state has some real land-use rules to be attached to this project, it will be a nightmare for agriculture," Pedrozo said. "So far, my local, regional and state governments have not given me any confidence in their ability to actually protect and preserve our ability to feed our future generations and ourselves. You are talking about the only place on earth that can do what we do."

Heading farther south, Schaevitz said, one of his biggest challenges is getting the project through Bakersfield.

"The existing railroad system there was laid out many years ago, so it is very, very tight. If we are going to keep our high speed going, we cannot stay with the freight rail lines," he said.

Matthew Park, executive director of the Kern County Farm Bureau, said the county Farm Bureau has been meeting with leaders of the project.

"Kern County Farm Bureau is at the table in the discussion with the project managers. Even just a rough diagram through the City of Bakersfield runs into all kinds of problems," Park said.

Park confirms that the high-speed rail project will likely change the look of agriculture in the county, but it is too early to know what acres will be impacted.

The leaders of the project held a series of public scoping meetings throughout the Central Valley communities including Merced, Madera, Fresno, Visalia and Bakersfield, in which 442 people registered. That process yielded over 150 written comments from the public.

Schaevitz has a long list of considerations when conducting environmental studies and one of them, he said, is the impact on agricultural land and the local economy. When weighing alignment options for this high-speed rail project, one consideration is to take as little prime agricultural land as possible, he said, but "in some limited cases the structure, for various reasons might actually be up in the air, and in other cases we might have to purchase a 50-foot right-of-way and take off corners of property."

"CFBF supports the concept of mass transit, but we must insist on protecting agricultural land and preventing urban sprawl. Because our success depends on a healthy environment, we are committed to solutions that work," Fox said. "Considering California's projected $21.3 billion budget deficit and the existing $100 billion bond indebtedness, coupled with the need for new water projects and improvements to existing transportation and other infrastructure, we are concerned about cost-effectiveness of this project."

For more information about the California High Speed Rail project, go to www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov.

(Christine Souza is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. She may be contacted at csouza@cfbf.com.)

Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item.

CBS' Jeff Greenfield touts faster commutes and less road and air congestion, but ignores Amtrak's operating losses.

'Evening News' Segment Lobbies for European-Style High-Speed Rail

Evening News' Segment Lobbies for European-Style High-Speed Rail

CBS' Jeff Greenfield touts faster commutes and less road and air congestion, but ignores Amtrak's operating losses.

By Jeff Poor

Business & Media Institute
Jeff Poor is a staff writer at the Business & Media Institute. His work has been mentioned by Rush Limbaugh and linked by Drudge Report. Prior to joining BMI in May 2007, Poor was a student at the University of South Alabama in Mobile, Ala., where he graduated with a B.A. in Communications: Print Journalism. While at USA, Poor was Editor in Chief of The Vanguard, the University’s student newspaper, and a columnist for Lagniappe, Mobile’s Alternative Bi-Weekly publication, covering local politics. Poor also holds a B.S. in Building Construction from Auburn University. He is originally from Pelham, Ala., and resides in Falls Church, Va. 
jpoor@mediaresearch.org

5/26/2009 9:50:12 AM

On Memorial Day, when many Americans are returning from vacation destinations on the highways, CBS found a possible way for government to solve the gridlock on roads and in airports.

A May 25 “CBS Evening News” segment determined that high-speed bullet trains like those overseas could solve all our transportation problems.

“It’s long been believed the highways and airways would be less crowded if there was a faster, more efficient passenger train system in this country, like those high-speed bullet trains in Europe and Asia,” said “CBS Evening News” anchor Jeff Glor.

According to CBS correspondent Jeff Greenfield, our U.S. transportation system is lagging far behind those overseas because of our lack of a high-speed rail system like in Japan, China and Europe.

“In Japan, the bullet train has been racing across the country for 45 years at 185 miles per hour,” Greenfield said. “In China, trains run between Beijing and Tianjin at more than 200 miles per hour. In Europe, trains criss-cross Britain, France and Spain faster than 150 miles per hour. But here in the United States, only the Acela briefly reaches speeds of more than a hundred miles an hour on its Boston-to-Washington run. For most of that trip, it averages more like 85.”

To Greenfield, this lack of high-speed rail infrastructure in the United States is cause for concern.

“Why? Why does the United States lag years, decades behind Europe and Asia?” Greenfield said. “Can a new administration really put this country on track for high-speed rail and should it?”

Greenfield noted that the federal government’s stimulus plan signed into law earlier this year contains money for high-speed rail.

“Obama’s stimulus plan includes an initial $13 billion for high-speed rail projects along the northeast corridor, in the Midwest, California and Florida,” Greenfield said. “A train going at the speed of the European model would make it from New York to Washington in about an hour and a half. It’s about the same from Atlanta to Charlotte, N.C. San Francisco to Los Angeles – about two-and-a-half hours.”

That may be true, but air travel currently is much cheaper than Amtrak in most instances, and it’s still much faster than the estimates Greenfield cited. Currently a direct commercial flight from Washington, D.C.’s Reagan-National Airport to New York’s LaGuardia airport is an hour and 17 minutes. A flight from Atlanta to Charlotte is an hour and seven minutes. And a flight from Los Angeles to San Francisco is an hour and 20 minutes.

But Obama administration Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said high-speed rail expenditures are a way of relieving congested roads and airports, despite the price tag that would run “into the hundreds of billions of dollars” according to Greenfield.

“You’re trying to sell a system that is ultra expensive as though it were something that were designed for the masses to be affordable and it’s not,” former GOP Oklahoma congressman and Distinguished Fellow at The Heritage Foundation Ernest Istook said to CBS.

And as reported by Reuters, Senate Republicans claim Amtrak has received over $21 billion in federal tax dollars to cover operating and capital costs since 1971. However, Amtrak loses more than $700 million annually. With exponentially more taxpayer dollars at stake, there’s no indication that Amtrak could do a better job overseeing a high-speed rail system.

A similar segment was aired on “NBC Nightly News” on April 11. According to the report, the money put into the stimulus for high-speed rail wasn’t nearly enough.

More U.S. airports add rail service to downtown. In LA, we have the rail to do it, but not the will.

More U.S. airports add rail service to downtown - USATODAY.com

More U.S. airports add rail service to downtown

Portland, Ore., is among major metropolitan cities in the USA to have a public rail system that runs from the city's center to the airport. The number of travelers using Portland Metro's service to the airport grew 7.7% in 2008.
Enlarge image Enlarge By Port of Portland
Portland, Ore., is among major metropolitan cities in the USA to have a public rail system that runs from the city's center to the airport. The number of travelers using Portland Metro's service to the airport grew 7.7% in 2008.


By Roger Yu, USA TODAY
Riding the rails between downtown and the airport is becoming a reality for more U.S. travelers.

With their roadways jammed with cars and shuttles, a growing number of domestic airports are building or have plans for a rail link that will connect passengers from the terminals to regional metro-rail systems, allowing road warriors and vacationers to ditch their cars.

"There is a consensus building that this is a desirable piece of overall strategy to deal with ground transportation challenges," says Matthew Coogan, director of New England Transportation Institute who has written extensively about the subject.

Direct rail connections to Seattle-Tacoma and Dallas Love Field are expected to open later this year. Other large airports with an approved rail project that will be completed in the next few years: Salt Lake City, Phoenix Sky Harbor, Miami, Dallas/Fort Worth and Oakland.

Several other airports, including Denver, Washington Dulles and Los Angeles, have similar plans, but their projects are years from completion.

Airport rail links have long been popular in Europe and Asia. But only eight of the 20 largest U.S. airports, based on 2008 boardings, have rail service that drops passengers off within walking distance of the terminals: Atlanta, Chicago O'Hare, New YorkJohn F. Kennedy, San Francisco, Newark, Minneapolis, Boston and Philadelphia.

But a confluence of operational and economic factors have pushed the airport rail agenda forward in recent years despite opposition from taxi and bus proponents and fiscally conservative lawmakers.

With air traffic rising rapidly in recent years, airports are learning that simply building more parking lots and enlarging roadways aren't sustainable practices, Coogan says. Many U.S. airports have also embraced the green movement, budgeting more for programs that reduce their carbon footprint.

Greater availability of federal funding sources for airport rail is helping the cause. After a rigorous application process, Phoenix Sky Harbor persuaded the Federal Aviation Administration to let it use the passenger facility charge — a fee added to air tickets — to partially fund its rail project. Oakland received $70 million for its rail project from the federal economic stimulus package this year.

Popular rail services

Experts cite Washington, D.C.'s metro service to Washington Reagan National, Bay Area Rapid Transit's (BART) connection to San Francisco International and New York JFK's 8-mile AirTrain that links to the local subway as the most heavily used and popular systems in the USA. They also feed into established and far-reaching regional metro systems that are easy to use for travelers who forgo rental cars. Since it opened in 2003, AirTrain ridership has grown steadily, and about 4.75 million paid to ride the JFK train in 2008, according to the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey.

"When I fly to SFO, I always take the BART from the airport to my office in downtown San Francisco, and I love it," says business traveler Marc Belsher, a health care technology consultant. "It is inexpensive, reliable, relatively fast and ultraconvenient. It is the natural choice for me, especially in this economy."

Cleveland, St. Louis and Portland, Ore., run smaller rail systems that also provide direct-to-airport service. The number of travelers using Portland Metro's service to the airport grew 7.7% in 2008, says Steve Schreiber, aviation director for Portland International.

Still, airport-rail ridership in the USA is woefully low compared with other countries, says Andrew Sharp, director general of the U.K.-based International Air Rail Organisation. In many European and Asian airports, 20% to 30% of travelers get to and from the airport using rail. In the USA, ridership typically ranges from 2% to 5%, he says.

Airports actively pursuing a rail connection have several options:

•Add to existing systems.Seattle's Sound Transit, a voter-approved initiative passed in the late 1990s to create a regional light-rail system, is close to finishing its latest line. The Central Link, a 16-mile line running between downtown Seattle and Sea-Tac airport, will launch later this year. Its airport station is scheduled to open in December.

About a decade ago, Salt Lake City had no public rail. The Utah Transit Authority has since built a system that covers about 150 miles. A 5-mile downtown-to-airport connection is under construction and scheduled to open in 2012, says Michael Allegra of UTA. He expects about 6,000 riders daily when it opens.

One of the largest construction projects in the nation's capital is a 23-mile extension of the region's Metro to Washington Dulles. The new line will also serve the Tysons Corner area, Virginia's largest employment center. The completion date hasn't been determined.

•People-mover rail. Some airports have a metro station nearby but not within walking distance. To close the gap, they are looking to automated people-mover trains as a solution. Because people-movers typically run within airport grounds, airport authorities can tap funding sources that are available only for airport projects.

Phoenix Sky Harbor will use passenger facility charges to partially fund its Sky Train, a people-mover that will open in 2012 and connect to a nearby light-rail station. One airport station will contain an enclosed and air-conditioned moving walkway that will take travelers directly to the terminals.

BART this month approved funding for a 3.2-mile elevated people-mover that will connect BART's Coliseum station to Oakland International, replacing the current bus connection. It's scheduled to enter service in 2013. About 4,300 Bay Area passengers a day are expected.

Meanwhile, Miami-Dade Transit broke ground last week on a people-mover extension from the Earlington Heights station — the nearest stop to Miami International— to a ground transportation hub that's being built next to the airport. The rail link and the ground transportation hub are both expected to be completed in 2012.

Ongoing debates

Like most large construction projects, airport rail proposals face stiff headwinds. Opponents challenge funding sources and new taxes and cite preferences for cars and buses. But the central argument in most debates has centered around ridership, specifically whether airports have enough demand to justify millions in cost.

BART's connection to SFO, completed in 2003, has yet to reach BART's initial ridership forecast and is still not profitable. Prior to construction, BART projected there would be 17,800 average daily boardings to and from the airport by the year 2010. As of this month, SFO ridership was at about 11,000.

Frank Sterling and Juliet Ellis, activists in the Bay Area, also questioned BART's plans to spend $500 million for Oakland International's people-mover and its decision to charge $6 for the service vs. $3 for the current shuttle bus.

"The proposal to charge double that for the new connector might drive away customers, unless it delivers twice the value," they wrote in a recent newspaper commentary, "Can East Bay residents afford this?"

These are appropriate debates, Coogan says. Some cities are better off sticking to buses, he says. For example, LAX's FlyAway Bus, which provides non-stop rides to various neighborhoods in Southern California, is more convenient for many travelers than the metro.

For some cities, it'd be wiser to spend scarce funds for extending metro to public transportation-friendly suburbs before considering airports, Coogan adds.

"How often does a person go to work? And how often does a person go to Paris in a year?" he says.

In Seattle, where light-rail coverage is still growing, expectations are modest, with 3,000 riders a day expected at the airport station initially. "We're at the beginning. It's a step-by-step process," says Ron Lewis of Sound Transit. "But there are other neighborhoods that will be served by the line along 15 miles."

Former governors press for maglev Clean, high-tech trains called sound investments

Former governors press for maglev - Las Vegas Sun

BRIAN GREENSPUN: WHERE I STAND:
Former governors press for maglev
Clean, high-tech trains called sound investments

By Brian Greenspun (contact)

Sun, May 24, 2009 (2 a.m.)

Republican Kenny Guinn             Democrat Bob Miller
When two of the most popular former Nevada — Republican Kenny Guinn and Democrat Bob Miller — get together to support an idea they think is important, it is my responsibility to step aside and give this space to them so readers may benefit from their wisdom.

When lawmakers debated President Barack Obama’s stimulus package this year, many were quick to criticize proposed funding for high-speed rail transportation. Specific projects, including those supported by innovative and proven technologies, became the focus of sound bites and innuendo.

However, it’s with good reason that the Obama administration is pursuing a comprehensive high-speed rail strategy. According to the Texas Transportation Institute, highway congestion caused urban Americans to travel an additional 4.2 billion hours and purchase an extra 2.9 billion gallons of fuel in 2007, resulting in a congestion cost of $78 billion. U.S. traffic has doubled over the past 25 years, yet highway capacity has increased only marginally during the same period with no new high-speed rail systems in place.

In response, the president and secretary of transportation have signaled their intention to build a world-class network of high-speed passenger rail corridors by investing $8 billion provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. A few years ago the concept of rail travel seemed destined for the history books. Today, public and private sector organizations are working together to bring our nation’s railroads into the 21st century.

But if the administration wants to make a lasting contribution to our transportation system, it needs to invest in next-generation technologies such as the magnetic levitation (maglev) system built in Shanghai and operating with a 99.98 percent on-time performance, having traveled 3.5 million miles and carried 18 million passengers; systems that are both sustainable and renew the American people’s enthusiasm for rail travel. Surprisingly, despite the nation’s increased focus on environmentally responsible and highly efficient automobiles, there is no agreed-upon technology for modernizing U.S. railways. It is time we agreed that maglev technology, frequently overlooked, ought to be part of that standard.

Maglev is emissions-free, does not rely upon foreign or domestic oil and uses less energy and emits far fewer pollutants than traditional forms of ground or air transportation. This dramatically reduces CO2 emissions on the highways.

Instead of using wheels, maglev trains hover above the tracks — or guideways — levitated by magnetic force and propelled by electricity. There is no physical contact between the train and the guideway, which eliminates friction and enables high speeds with little to no noise. The base of the train wraps around the guideway and the train therefore cannot derail. Additionally, while the tracks of traditional trains require frequent maintenance and repair, the maglev train guideway, or track, is expected to be in service for 60 years or more with minimal maintenance.

Just as important, maglev train technology, which originated in the United States, was developed in Germany and has been fully certified and operational in Germany on a 20-mile track for more than a decade with the ninth generation of trains now in service. Shanghai has embraced this technology and provides the first commercial maglev passenger service to and from its new Pudong International Airport, reaching unprecedented ground speeds of more than 275 mph in daily operation (twice as fast as Amtrak’s fastest commuter train). By comparison, a Boeing 777 commercial airplane used for long-range flights can reach a cruising speed of 550 mph.

Yet for some reason maglev in the U.S. has yet to be widely embraced. It can be understood why this is the case in Europe, given its intricate, interconnected network of traditional and high-speed passenger trains with maximum speeds of 180 mph. In this country, however, we have the advantage of starting fresh.

We can paint the high-speed rail picture any way we want to. And, given the lack of a preexisting passenger rail infrastructure and great distances between U.S. cities (especially in the West and Midwest), the advantages of safe, environmentally responsible and state-of-the-art 300-mph maglev technology should be obvious.

The California-Nevada Interstate Maglev Project, which our administrations helped spearhead through local public-private partnerships, is one such effort that deserves the nation’s support.

The full corridor of this rail project will create nearly 100,000 jobs, generate $12 billion in economic output and add $3.4 billion in household income. Benefits also include economic development effects, such as construction, operation and maintenance jobs as well as commercial and residential development around stations or in the adjacent corridor. According to the range published by the Federal Railroad Administration, maglev within this corridor can be constructed within the same cost-per-mile ($30 million to $50 million) as advanced European-style high-speed rail.

The project will also help ease land consumption issues, effects on wetlands, endangered species and community disruption. The complete 269-mile corridor will use less than 1 percent of the available electricity on existing grids.

While addressing the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Miami last summer, President Obama commented, “I don’t want to see the fastest train in the world built halfway around the world in Shanghai. I want to see it built right here in the United States of America.”

We couldn’t agree more. Regardless of what critics say, everyone has a role to play in creating and supporting a modern U.S. transportation system for the 21st century. Consumers, our economy and our shared environment deserve no less.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

DesertXpress execs say they can start building high-speed train to Vegas in 2010

DesertXpress execs say they can start building high-speed train to Vegas in 2010 - San Bernardino County Sun

DesertXpress execs say they can start building high-speed train to Vegas in 2010
Andrew Edwards, Staff Writer
Posted: 05/24/2009 07:05:26 AM PDT

VICTORVILLE - Construction crews could begin work on a proposed high-speed rail line to Las Vegas as early as next year, executives with the company behind the project said.

"The strong need for the project is clear and obvious," said Andrew Mack, vice president of Las Vegas-based DesertXpress Enterprises.

The DesertXpress idea is based on the assumption that Vegas-bound Southern Californians would be willing to pay to park their cars Victorville and forego the time and potential frustrations of freeway travel. The company says it can build the route with private funding.

The proposed high speed rail route a separate from the proposal to establish a Maglev route from Las Vegas to Anaheim.

As planned, the DesertXpress line would allow Southern California passengers to board trains at a north Victorville train station and speed to Sin City as quickly as 150 mph. The line, which would generally follow the route of the 15 Freeway, would feature 183 to 200 miles of track, depending upon its ultimate alignment.

DesertXpress is still awaiting approval from the federal government. The firm has completed a draft environmental impact statement and Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Rob Kulat said the agency could make a decision in nine months.

Mack said DesertXpress' business model is similar to that of a toll road, and
that construction and other start-up costs will total $3.5 to $4 billion. and that the line could be built in four years. The midpoint fare price is projected to be about $50.

Victorville mayor pro tem Tom Rothschild, a Desert XPress supporter, said a high-speed rail line can be built in the near future. He thinks Maglev, which uses magnetic force to levitate and propel trains, is not yet practical.

"Maglev is great, don't mistake me. I think it's the greatest technology for the next half of this century," Rothschild said.

DesertXpress' draft environmental statement projects that the establishment of a high-speed rail station in Victorville could create 361 to 463 jobs for Victorville. Rothschild views the proposal as a boon for his city.

"For us, it would be incredible. We've got a lot of developable land in the freeway corridor," he said, referring to the northern part of the city where Desert XPress' station could be built.

If DesertXpress happens, Mack said the most logical city to expand to would be Palmdale, where he said the train could link to the proposed California High Speed Rail system.

But in Barstow, 25 miles north of the proposed Victorville station, there's a question of whether DesertXpress should stop there as well.

DesertXpress' environmental document reports that although ridership studies did not support a station there, the company is studying the feasibility of a station at Barstow Outlet Mall based on the concerns of Barstow officials.

"We had the freeway come and take out Route 66, and we know what that means here," Barstow planning consultant Paul Secord on a video recording of special meeting of the Barstow City Council that was held April 28.