Firm's track record may decide fate of its MTA contract

Link: Firm's track record may decide fate of its MTA contract - Los Angeles Times

Firm's track record may decide fate of its MTA contract

In other cities, AnsaldoBreda has been accused of missing deadlines and specifications on rail cars -- but so have its competitors. A $300-million contract in Los Angeles is at stake.

By Maeve Reston

July 23, 2009
Pressured by intensive lobbying from groups that include Los Angeles County's most powerful labor unions, transportation officials are slated today to decide whether to give Italian rail-car maker AnsaldoBreda a second chance at a $300-million contract.

For months, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials have been locked in debate with the company over the quality of the 50 rail cars it has built under an existing contract that is three years behind schedule. When MTA executives said they planned to seek competitive offers rather than extend the contract for another 100 cars, the company pledged to build a $70-million rail-car manufacturing facility in downtown Los Angeles if the contract is renewed.

At a time when city unemployment is at 12.5%, that caught the attention of city officials who argued the factory could be the centerpiece of a clean technology corridor proposed by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who sits on the MTA board.

But federal regulations bar Villaraigosa and other MTA board members from considering that offer, leaving them to focus on the company's performance. Some board members have been scrutinizing AnsaldoBreda's record in five other North American cities, as well as several recent contracts abroad.

Mixed reviews

Interviews and records reviewed by The Times show that AnsaldoBreda has faced similar public criticism in the past, but that several competitors also have checkered records.

"Anywhere in the world . . . you can find every rail manufacturer having problems," said MTA board member Richard Katz. "I don't know if it's because public agencies don't know how to order cars or they keep changing them, or if the private sector doesn't know how to deliver cars."

Top MTA staffers say AnsaldoBreda has not met its contract terms. Because the cars weigh on average 109,557 pounds -- about 6,000 pounds more than specified -- the MTA has had to reinforce five bridges along the Expo Line, according to the chief executive overseeing its construction. Staff also initially complained that the cars were incompatible with others in the fleet, a requirement waived by a former mid-level MTA official.

The firm's officials have disputed the weight calculations, blamed delays on MTA-ordered changes and highlighted inconsistencies in MTA statements -- including a glossy brochure on the Gold Line Eastside Extension in which former MTA Chief Executive Roger Snoble says the AnsaldoBreda vehicles perform "like a 21st century rail car."

This week, the firm's union allies accused a competitor, Siemens Transportation Systems Inc., of lobbying to scuttle the potential contract extension. Officials at Siemens -- one of six companies interested in competing for the work -- denied that charge.

Global portfolio

AnsaldoBreda officials say the contract options are critical to expanding their North American operation. The company's only other active manufacture or overhaul contract in the United States is refurbishing 27 cars for Buffalo, N.Y. But the firm is bidding on a driverless system in Honolulu and plans to compete for projects in Miami, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco.

In the 1980s, Breda Costruzioni Ferroviarie, which merged with Ansaldo Trasporti in 2001 to form AnsaldoBreda, built 48 light-rail cars for Cleveland. A spokesman for the transit agency there said the cars arrived six months late, but "customers were very happy with them."

Breda manufactured 364 cars in the 1980s for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Asked about the cars earlier this year, the authority's vice chairman, Peter Benjamin, said the agency has "had a perfectly reasonable experience" with them.

In the early 1990s, Breda manufactured cars for MTA's Red Line, which opened eight months ahead of schedule. The firm's officials have touted the comments of a former MTA executive who called Breda's system support "outstanding." But in a January memo to board members, MTA staff said the reliability and availability of the 30 original vehicles ordered from Breda "is by far the lowest" of its rail fleet.

Breda also built 151 light-rail cars in the 1990s for the San Francisco Municipal Railway; a spokesman would say only that they "carry more than 140,000 people a day successfully on our system."



Both AnsaldoBreda and Siemens have faced past criticism from officials at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. When the Massachusetts agency temporarily halted a Breda contract for trolley cars in December 2004 after a series of derailments, a top executive told the Boston Globe: "We bought a lemon."

Both sides filed claims against each other, but later worked to complete the contract. Agency spokeswoman Lydia Rivera said "the reliability and performance of the vehicle has improved dramatically."

In 2007, a state auditor faulted the Boston-area transit agency for failing to "provide detailed track standards and conditions data necessary . . . to properly design" the cars.

Subsequently the agency complained publicly about its order for 94 subway cars from Siemens, which ran three years behind schedule. Oliver Hauck, president of Siemens' transportation division, said the delays stemmed from ownership changes at its third-party car assembler and a bankrupt supplier.

AnsaldoBreda SpA, the Italy-based parent company of AnsaldoBreda Inc., has recently won deals in Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Taiwan.



Contract dispute

AnsaldoBreda's recent troubles with DSB, Denmark's state railway system, caught the attention of MTA board member Mike Antonovich, a county supervisor who favors seeking other bids rather than extending the firm's Los Angeles contract. Last year, DSB threatened to cancel AnsaldoBreda's contract for 83 diesel trains that were ordered in 2000 and scheduled for service six years later. The dispute was resolved in May when AnsaldoBreda agreed to pay a $411-million settlement.

Despite improvements over the last year, DSB said in a statement that the process had been "unacceptable."

AnsaldoBreda's lobbyist, Chris Lehane, said delays stemmed from complications after the company's 2001 merger. But he said AnsaldoBreda's owner, Finmeccanica, has done everything it can to address the problems.

Antonovich argued in a letter that DSB's criticism illustrates the company's "inability to fulfill its contractual obligations."

Although there have been past problems with Los Angeles County's contracts with Siemens and another rail contractor, Sumitomo, the MTA's new chief executive, Art Leahy, said they did not rise to the level of the recent disputes with AnsaldoBreda. He said his focus has been on the Italian firm's work in Los Angeles and "what way they might find to persuade us that they've resolved their quality control issues."

maeve.reston@latimes.com

MTA officials set to vote on toll lanes, transit plans and a $300-million rail contract (Source: LA Times)

Link: MTA officials set to vote on toll lanes, transit plans and a $300-million rail contract | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

MTA officials set to vote on toll lanes, transit plans and a $300-million rail contract
5:30 AM | July 23, 2009

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board will weigh a long-delayed vote on whether to extend the contract options of the Italian firm AnsaldoBreda, which wants to build 100 more light-rail cars worth about $300 million. The firm has said that if it gets the deal, it will build the cars at a manufacturing plant in downtown Los Angeles.

The board will also consider a $271-billion spending plan for the next 30 years that will lay out mass transit projects in Los Angeles County.

And finally, it is expected to set the tolls for solo motorists who use proposed high-speed occupancy lanes on the 110 and 10 freeways.

-- Dan Weikel and Maeve Reston

Downtown L.A. Streetcar Public Open House (Source: www.lastreetcar.org)

No Link-PDF file
Downtown L.A. Streetcar Public Open House

DISCUSS CONCEPTUAL STREETCAR
ROUTES & PROJECT UPDATES
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
4:00 – 7:30pm

THE BRADBURY BUILDING
304 S. Broadway
5th Floor LAPD Meeting Room #1
Los Angeles, CA 90013‐1224

4:00 – 6:00pm OPEN HOUSE
Individual Concept Review & Input

6:00 – 6:45pm PRESENTATION
What Streetcars Mean for Downtown, Overview of Conceptual Alignment Options, Economic & Transit Benefits of Streetcars, LASI Progress Update, Status & Timeline

6:45 – 7:30pm OPEN HOUSE
Individual Concept Review & Input

Intended to be a catalyst for economic development, the streetcar will enhance connections to and the accessibility of Downtown attractions by creating a circulation system that links pedestrians to local and regional transit networks. Come TELL US which conceptual alignments you prefer, suggest modifications, and discover alternative options. Your input will actively shape the future of Downtown Los Angeles!

Make sure to visit LASI’s new website – www.lastreetcar.org – where you can review materials,including the alignments, before the workshop.

Public Transportation: METRO routes 2, 4, 30, 31, 40, 42, 45, 302, 730, 740, 745, Red/Purple @ Pershing Square;
DASH routes B & D within one block of Bradbury Building

Los Angeles Streetcar Inc | 550 South Hope Street, Suite 2300
(213) 618‐9781 | www.lastreetcar.org | info@lastreetcar.org

Metro Board Preview: LRTP, AnsaldoBreda, Silver Line and Tolls (Source: Streetsblog LA)

Streetsblog Los Angeles » Metro Board Preview: LRTP, AnsaldoBreda, Silver Line and Tolls

Metro Board Preview: LRTP, AnsaldoBreda, Silver Line and Tolls

by Damien Newton on July 21, 2009

This week's Metro Board Meeting, the meeting where much of the transportation related news for the entire month comes to a conclusion, has a lot of interesting items. Highlighted by the potential passage of the "2009" Long Range Transportation Plan and the potential extension of the AnsaldoBreda light rail car contract. However, some smaller items, such as a discussion of Asm. Lieu's proposal to extend HOV access to cars with the magic "fuel efficient" sticker, a setting of the fares for the Silver Line and setting the prices for Metro's Express Lanes will also be discussed.

I never imagined it would take this long to pass the plan.
Highlighting the agenda is an expected vote on the 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan. Technically, the LRTP is a document required by the federal government before agencies can request federal funds, but traditionally it is also a visionary document where an agency spells out its priorities and its vision for the growth or transit and transportation in its area.

You may remember that Metro delayed a vote on the 2008 LRTP until this year so that it could take into account whether or not Measure R had passed when creating its project timeline. Over eight months after the transit tax's passage, the Board is finally ready to vote on the LRTP.

Or are they? At a "workshop" on the LRTP last month, then Board Chair Antonio Villaraigosa moved to hold off passing the 2009 LRTP until July so that Metro could do more outreach. Tt had been eighteen months since Imagine campaign had kicked off and the Mayor claimed he wanted to make Metro's vision clear to county residents before its passage. If there's been any new outreach in the last six weeks, I'm not aware of it. Based on email conversations; neither is the Bus Rider's Union or the Southern California Transit Advocates. So.CA.TA's Dana Gabbard took a humorous look at the lack of any new outreach efforts on behalf of the LRTP.

...previous Plan preparation included convening stakeholder groups to provide input while the draft plan was being formulated and a round of public meetings in the region (held in the evenings) on the draft plan were conducted seeking input.

This current plan has had minimal to no substantive means by which to comment. A poorly publicized hearing held during a weekday in downtown L.A. falls far short of what used to be common practice.

That said, I should note the old way of doing things still mostly resulted in what you would expect they planned to do anyway, so I am not claiming it was paradise or some such. But at least the niceties were observed.

As best I can tell, with the exception of the addition of some clarifying language on bicycle and pedestrian funding; the current draft plan is no different than what was presented at last month's workshop. So if they weren't going to change anything, or do more outreach, than what was the point of the delay? I'm pretty sure they didn't just hold-up the process so that they could release the new bicycle and pedestrian funding numbers.



For the fifth meeting in a row, the fate of Contract No. P2550, the one granting an exclusive right to manufacture light rail cars to the Italian company AnsaldoBreda, will certainly bring fireworks to the meeting. Because Breda is years behind schedule on its current contract and the cars are too heavy for the tracks, most rail advocates want the contract for new cars to go out to bid. However, AnsaldoBreda counters that it's Metro's fault the cars aren't built to their specifications and has amassed an army of union workers to press their case. You see, AnsaldoBreda is promising to build a new rail car factory in L.A. County. Even though the Board of Directors can't legally take that into account when awarding a contract, the presence of scores of union workers demanding that the Board "vote for jobs" is too big for any politician to feasibly ignore.

However, hope that the Board might cancel the exclusive arrangement and put future cars construction out to bid received new hope. An article in today's Times reports that, Metro CEO Art Leahy sent a letter to the Metro Board asking them to not re-new the contract with AnsaldoBreda. The LA County Federation of Labor sent a memorandum countering Leahy's, but it again stresses jobs creation, something that the Metro Board is not legally allowed to consider.

Other items of note include a discussion of whether or not Metro should support efforts to allow more hybrids and other "clean" vehicles to use HOV and HOT Lanes throughout California and whether or not to extend the January 2011 sunset for the hybrid access law. There is now precedent for allowing "hybrid benefit" laws such as these to retire, as the City of Los Angeles voted last year to end its "free parking for hybrids" program. You would think with the state's ongoing fiscal crisis that legislators would be looking for ways to raise money, not ways to hand out more discounts.

Speaking of HOT Lanes, there is also an agenda item on the consent calendar to set the "toll costs" for single passenger vehicles to access the coming "Express Lanes" on the I-10 and I-110. The fees would be set at a minimum of twenty-five cents a mile and a maximum of $1.40. Streetsblog will follow-up on this story a little later this week or sometime next week.

And speaking of user fees, the Board will also approve a hearing plan needed to set the fares for the Silver Line Bus Service during the September 24 Board of Directors meeting. Does anyone want to bet on whether the hearing is held before or after a debate on AnsaldoBreda?

City Council Studies Extending Green Line to Airport (Source: NBC Los Angeles)

Link: City Council Studies Extending Green Line to Airport | NBC Los Angeles

City Council Studies Extending Green Line to Airport

Updated 5:00 PM PDT, Tue, Jul 21, 2009

The City Council Tuesday approved a study of extending the Metro Green Line to Los Angeles International Airport.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn said that Los Angeles World Airport's pending purchase of the Park One lot for $126 million "may provide the first real opportunity to build an on-airport rail link at LAX."

The Park One lot is just off Sepulveda Boulevard next to the airport's Central Terminal Area.

The 17-mile Green Line was intended to serve the airport, but budget problems and planning conflicts derailed those plans. Green Line passengers headed to LAX can get off at the Aviation Station and catch a free shuttle to the airport.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has explored extending the Green Line to Aviation Boulevard and Century Boulevard, and the airport agency has proposed building an "automated people mover" to get people in and out of the terminals from Manchester Square. An airport tax to fund that possibility has been in effect since 1993.

Hahn stressed that "an on-airport rail link inside the Central Terminal Area would provide the greatest convenience to passengers and encourage the use of the city's mass transit system."

Other big-city airports have on-site rail links connecting to mass transit systems, Hahn said, citing San Francisco's airport link to the Bay Area Transit Service, Reagan National Airport's link to the District of Columbia rail system and John F. Kennedy Airport's AirTrain that connects to the greater New York City and regional rail systems.

LA council orders study of Green Line LAX extension (Source: The Daily Breeze)

Link: LA council orders study of Green Line LAX extension - The Daily Breeze

LA council orders study of Green Line LAX extension
From staff reports
Posted: 07/21/2009 06:40:02 PM PDT

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday ordered a study to determine whether to extend the Metro Green Line to Los Angeles International Airport.

LAX officials will spend the next six months examining whether it's possible to bring the light rail line directly to the airport by building a stop on the site of the Park 'N Ride at Park One lot, located just east of Terminal One. The City Council agreed earlier this month to buy the parking lot for $126.5 million.

The Green Line's estimated $200 million, two-mile extension to LAX would likely be funded by Measure R, the countywide half-cent sales tax measure that went into effect July 1 to fund $40 million worth of local transportation projects over the next 30 years.

For now, the Green Line's stop at Aviation Boulevard drops travelers two miles away from LAX, forcing them to board a shuttle to complete a trip to the airport.

In a related move, the Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners on Tuesday approved a $1.4 million contract with STV Inc. to develop ground transportation plans at LAX, including the Green Line extension proposal, a new car rental facility and address several parking issues.

LACMTA schedules public meetings to review subway extension (Source: www.progressiverailroading.com)

Link: LACMTA schedules public meetings to review subway extension

LACMTA schedules public meetings to review subway extension

Next month, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) will hold five public meetings to provide an update on the Westside Subway extension project.

In April, the agency held six meetings to obtain public feedback for the project’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which currently is being drafted. Now, LACMTA officials plan to present a summary of comments received during the scoping period, the progress made on refining two “build” alternatives and the potential construction process.

The alternatives call for extending the Wilshire Subway on the Metro Purple Line via Wilshire Boulevard or extending the Wilshire/West Hollywood Subway, incorporating all of the Wilshire Subway and including a spur from the Metro Red Line via Hollywood’s Santa Monica Boulevard. In January, LACMTA’s board approved a plan to analyze the two alternatives via an environmental review and preliminary engineering.

After the evaluation process is completed, the board will select a Locally Preferred Alternative, then pursue a final environmental review, final engineering and construction. The Westside Subway extension is slated to receive partial funding from Measure R, a half-cent sales tax increase voters approved in November 2008.

Officials Break Ground on Orange Line Extension (Source: NBC Los Angeles)

Link: Officials Break Ground on Orange Line Extension | NBC Los Angeles

Officials Break Ground on Orange Line Extension

Updated 4:19 PM PDT, Wed, Jun 24, 2009

Elected officials and transportation leaders broke ground Wednesday on an extension of the Metro Orange Line that will stretch the popular busway to Chatsworth, making it the first project funded by Measure R tax funds to begin construction.

The $215.6 million project will extend the Orange Line -- which operates on a dedicated busway across the San Fernando Valley -- four miles from its western end point in Canoga Park to the Metrolink/Amtrak station in Chatsworth.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and City Council members Greig Smith and Dennis Zine were among those taking part in the groundbreaking ceremony.

"We knew that this was a great opportunity to connect the dots here in the San Fernando Valley, and bring a system to the valley that will connect the employment centers," Smith said.

The project is expected to create about 3,000 jobs, and have an economic impact of $461 million. The expansion is scheduled to be completed by summer 2012.

"It's just ridiculous paying three dollars a gallon, you know, when I can pay a $1.25 to get all the way there," Orange Line rider Carlos DeSantiago told CBS2.

Los Angeles County voters narrowly approved Measure R in November. With the measure requiring the approval of two-thirds of voters, it received support from 67.41 percent.

The half-cent sales tax was opposed by some residents and officials who said the county's tax rate was high enough. Some also complained that the planned allocation of the tax funds was not equally distributed among various parts of the county.

The lion's share of the funding, 35 percent, will be spent on rail and bus rapid transit projects, including $4.2 billion for a subway connecting downtown with Westwood.

The remaining funding will be split among bus operations, highway projects, system improvements and rail operations, with 15 percent of the total given directly back to local governments for street repairs and other transportation-related projects.

Copyright City News Service

Valley Still Overlooked With Transit Planning

San Fernando Valley Business Journal - Printer Friendly Version

San Fernando Valley Business Journal

Valley Still Overlooked With Transit Planning

By - 7/20/2009

San Fernando Valley Business Journal Staff

This is the Valley Industry & Commerce Association’s monthly column for the Business Journal.

There is something important missing from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (Metro) Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) that is set to be reviewed July 23…the Valley.

Three crucial Valley-based projects are not receiving proper consideration or funding in the currently-proposed LRTP. These projects were promised higher priority and adequate funds in the past. They have been deemed as beneficial to the entire region and address problems for some of the most congested stretches of roadway in the nation. The plan includes more than $200 billion in funds and the Valley is getting short-changed once again.

First, the Sepulveda Pass fixed-transit project would help ease gridlock through one of the slowest-moving sections of U.S. freeway, the I-405 between the 101 and 10 freeways. The 405/101 and 405/10 interchanges rank first and fifth, respectively, on the list of America’s worst highway bottlenecks.

An above or underground rail system would connect the Westside and the Valley and help ease this congestion, but the project’s funding is being diverted to the “subway to the sea” project instead. Based on $1 billion guaranteed under Measure R, the rail project was expected to be completed sometime between 2031 and 2033. Now, Metro officials are pushing back the completion date of the Sepulveda Pass rail project to 2039.

Second, the Redline extension to Bob Hope Airport has been a key project for VICA and consistently on our list of priority transit projects for the region. We were not alone in this opinion. When considering all projects for the LRTP, Metro’s rating scale ranked the Redline extension to the airport as the fourth most-needed project and second in anticipated performance.

The logical deduction would be that a project this important would be pushed to the top of the funding list, but there are no funds designated for the Redline extension. Even as recent data shows that the Redline enjoys a larger ridership than the Blue, Gold and Green lines combined, it sits in the second tier of unfunded projects.

Lastly, the North/South busway corridor project has the backing of VICA, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, L.A. City Councilmember Richard Alarcón and former Metro CEO Roger Snoble. This kind of backing will usually get a project the funding needed to, in this case, improve the traffic flow on some of the Valley’s busiest streets.

No such luck for this project that would have prioritized major Valley surface streets, including Van Nuys, Lankershim, Reseda and Sepulveda boulevards. The LRTP funds that should have helped keep these frequently-traveled streets humming will instead be spent on beautification.

Each year Valley businesses lose thousands of hours of productivity because employees and executives are stuck in some of the country’s worst traffic. This lost productivity translates directly to the company’s bottom-line and business cannot afford to lose this precious time and money.

Do you think the Valley is getting short-changed on transportation projects? How would improved transportation help your business? Email your responses or thoughts about the column to angela@vica.com.

More 'Subway to the Sea' Community Meetings Scheduled (Source: LAist)

Link: More 'Subway to the Sea' Community Meetings Scheduled - LAist

More 'Subway to the Sea' Community Meetings Scheduled


In Purple, the two Westside Subway Extension Alignment Alternatives | Download a PDF of this map here

As exploratory drilling for the possibility of a subway to the Westside continues to take place on city streets, Metro is gearing up for another set of community meetings for updates on the project (meeting info is below). Last Spring, public meetings gathered input on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/R) process that is currently underway. Next month, they will present a summary of what was heard at those meetings, provide updates to possible route alternatives and discuss the subway construction process if the project goes forward.

Where does the project stand today?

Back in January, the Metro Board approved two possible projects, technically "build alternatives," for further environmental review and preliminary engineering, which is currently underway. Those two build alternatives are extending the Purple Line down Wilshire Blvd. westward and an alternative that includes the aforementioned Purple Line extension plus a Santa Monica Blvd. spur from the Hollywood/Highland Metro Red Line station that would meet up with the Purple Line on the Westside.

By law, Metro also has to study a "no build" alternative and a “Transportation Systems Management” alternative--basically, beefing up the current fleet, schedules and routes.

Once this process is over, the Metro Board will vote on their preferred alternative (many in the public hope for the Wilshire/Santa Monica one). Then Metro will move on to a final environmental review, final engineering and construction.

Public Meetings

All meetings are from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and are easily accessible by public transit. Parking is also available at all the locations.

Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Wilshire United Methodist Church
4350 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles
Spanish & Korean translations will be provided at this meeting

Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Plummer Park
7377 Santa Monica Boulevard
West Hollywood
Russian translation will be provided at this meeting.

Thursday, August 6, 2009
Santa Monica Public Library
Multi-Purpose Room
601 Santa Monica Blvd.
Santa Monica
Spanish translation will be provided at this meeting.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Beverly Hills Public Library
Auditorium
444 N. Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills
Spanish translation will be provided at this meeting

Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Westwood Presbyterian Church
10822 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles
Spanish translation will be provided at this meeting
user-pic
By Zach Behrens in News on July 20, 2009 3:30 PM

Off the Agenda: Metro Board Not Talking Bikes or Rail Acceleration This Week (Source: Streetsblog Los Angeles)

Link: Streetsblog Los Angeles » Off the Agenda: Metro Board Not Talking Bikes or Rail Acceleration This Week

Off the Agenda: Metro Board Not Talking Bikes or Rail Acceleration This Week

by Damien Newton on July 20, 2009


Streetsblog, Sallam Allah/Flickr

Last week, two proposals by Metro staff dominated a lot of the Livable Streets discussion in Los Angeles.

The first was what seemed to be a proposal to accelerate three rail projects funded by Measure R, the Downtown Connector, Gold Line Eastside Extension 2, and Green Line to LAX. The proposal garnered a lot of interest on the blogs after I Will Ride first noticed the proposal on a committee agenda and began asking how they could get their favored project, the Gold Line Foothill Extension, moved up as well.

It turns out the report in question had nothing to do with picking projects to accelerate, but instead was about illustrating what any sort of acceleration schedule would mean to Metro's finances. As we noted here last week, the "proposed" acceleration didn't really make fiscal sense for an agency that is already projecting lower-than-expected revenue from Measure R. While the Metro Board is scheduled to "receive" this report at Thursday's Board Meeting, there is no serious talk about accelerating any of the time lines for any rail project at this point in time.

Also up for debate were the proposed revisions to Metro's "bikes on trains" policy. Two weeks ago, cyclists were happy to hear that Metro was planning to revise its policy towards bikes to remove any rush-hour restrictions on bicycles. However, when cyclists were invited to a meeting with Metro staff to discuss the proposal, they ended up hearing about a plan to restrict bicycles to a "two-per-car" limit even in cars where there's a lot more space available.

After an outpouring of negative feedback, and a strong turnout by cyclists at the Metro Operations Committee, the proposal has been shelved for, at least, this month's Board Meeting. Instead of Metro staff's original plan, Stephen Box reports that a new motion to "direct staff to investigate further and to involve the cycling community" took its place.

Quentin Kopp: HSR is "Organic Green" (Source: California High Speed Rail Blog)

Link: California High Speed Rail Blog: Quentin Kopp: HSR is "Organic Green"

Monday, July 20, 2009

Quentin Kopp: HSR is "Organic Green"

Responding to a silly Examiner editorial espousing neo-Hooverite claims about the high speed rail project, former CHSRA chairman Quentin Kopp has an op-ed today defending the HSR project against claims it is "pork":

The latest editorial suggests that federal stimulus dollars to the high-speed rail project are attributable to backroom, smoke-filled dealings with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Such leaps of logic would be silly and worth a chuckle or two if not so dangerous in misinforming California residents. On the contrary, federal stimulus dollars will provide needed impetus to our dreary economy. Moreover, California is in the pole position for those critical dollars thanks to decades of vital work by the California High-Speed Rail Authority....

Don’t politicize high-speed rail and lambaste it in some overarching dissatisfaction with the U.S. stimulus bill. “Track to Nowhere” may be an easy, sophomoric chant, to which millions more will chant back, “Build, baby, build.” Construction of a high-speed train system constitutes the premiere opportunity for California to lift itself into the 21st century. I’ll put my faith in independent residents of California who understand the benefits of high-speed rail, not as a partisan policy position but as a nonpartisan solution for our state’s stressed transportation system.


Kopp is right to put his faith there, in the same voters who were bombarded with right-wing distortions and lies about HSR in 2008 and still voted to approve HSR and $10 billion in bonds. Voters understand very well the need for economic recovery, for sustainable transportation, for high speed trains. Republican, right-wing claims that this is "pork" have gained hardly any traction at all with the public. But kudos to Kopp for pushing back against the nonsense anyway.

Posted by Robert Cruickshank at 10:26 PM

MTA chief recommends against Italian firm's rail cars (Source: Los Angeles Times)

Link: MTA chief recommends against Italian firm's rail cars - Los Angeles Times

MTA chief recommends against Italian firm's rail cars

Agency staffers report that the cars being built by AnsaldoBreda under an existing contract are too heavy and years behind schedule.

By Maeve Reston

July 21, 2009
Negotiations heated up Monday between Los Angeles County transportation officials and an Italian firm seeking to extend its contract so it can build 100 light-rail cars, a deal worth $300 million.

With a decision by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board expected Thursday, agency CEO Art Leahy released a memo recommending against exercising AnsaldoBreda's contract options for the 100 cars.

Hours later, the head of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor countered by urging board members to back the Italian firm because of the potential for hundreds of new jobs in the Los Angeles-area in the midst of a recession.

Leahy said he was continuing to negotiate with the firm, but he favored seeking proposals from other light-rail companies for 113 new rail cars. At least one, a subsidiary of the German conglomerate Siemens with a headquarters and manufacturing facility in Sacramento, is actively lobbying the agency and has expressed interest in competing for the work.

AnsaldoBreda, which is midway through a base contract to build 50 light-rail cars for the agency, has pledged to provide hundreds of direct and indirect local jobs by building a manufacturing plant in Los Angeles if the firm lands the extended deal.

But since early this year agency staff advised seeking other bids because they say the firm's first round of cars were 6,000 pounds too heavy and incompatible with others in the fleet -- a requirement that has since been waived by an MTA official -- and that delivery of the last of AnsaldoBreda's 50 base cars will be three years behind schedule.

Executives attribute the delays to changes requested by the agency and to the time it has taken to test the cars, and they note that agency officials have publicly praised the cars in their promotional materials.

Outlining the status of negotiations in a letter to board members Monday, AnsaldoBreda's lawyer and lead negotiator Jeffrey M. Capaccio said the firm has offered an "unprecedented financial guaranty" of a $50-million irrevocable letter of credit with an automatic replenishment of $25 million should it fail to perform. That is in addition to a $300-million performance bond -- insurance that the company will deliver what is promised -- and $30 million in potential damages should it fail to meet certain criteria, which are still being defined.

However, Leahy told board members in his memo that performance bonds and damages were already required under the contract.

The additional guaranty of up to $75 million, Leahy said, is "subject to a number of risks." Those risks include "a work plan that has yet to be agreed to, AnsaldoBreda's ability to replenish the letter of credit, uncertain and undefined draw-down triggers, and given the conditions imposed, the funds are not readily available," he said.

The chief executive said AnsaldoBreda also had not "provided sufficient assurances that they will be able to remedy the base cars."

Earlier this year, the L.A. County Federation of Labor, which is backing the Italian firm, commissioned a study on the number of jobs that could be created if AnsaldoBreda were to build a plant in L.A.

Assuming a brisk pace of building 75 cars annually and refurbishing 36 over the same period, the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation found the firm would employ 535 full-time manufacturing employees and 126 at its corporate headquarters, with hundreds of additional indirect jobs throughout the county.

The development corporation estimated construction of the proposed $70-million, energy-efficient plant in an industrial stretch of downtown Los Angeles could employ 970 people full time for a year. AnsaldoBreda has pledged to hire union workers to build the plant and the cars.

The head of the union coalition, Maria Elena Durazo, urged board members Monday afternoon to exercise AnsaldoBreda's contract options. And she accused Siemens of trying to scramble the potential deal.

Durazo urged scrutiny of Siemens' performance in other cities, adding that AnsaldoBreda has "gone above and beyond in demonstrating in every way possible its commitment to Los Angeles County."

Oliver Hauck, the president of Siemens Transportation Systems Inc., said the company has "no intent to scuttle anybody's deal, we're just trying to make ourselves known to the customer so the customer knows there are alternative bidders interested."

maeve.reston@latimes.com

Metro Goldline Foothill Extension (Source: northeastpasadena.blogspot.com)

Link: Welcome to North East Pasadena: Metro Goldline Foothill Extension

Friday, July 17, 2009

Metro Goldline Foothill Extension

A significant milestone in the journey towards opening the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension is rapidly approaching. On July 23rd, the Metro board is expected to finally consider its Long Range Transportation Plan that will finalize the funding schedule for the Foothill Extension. Will you be there to show your support?

The draft LRTP proposes an opening date for the Foothill Extension in 2017, even though the Foothill Extension Construction Authority has presented a business plan to open it in 2013. This is your opportunity to tell the Metro Board that you will ride the Gold Line. Please urge the board to accelerate funding to operate the line 2013.

You have the ability to influence the decision. Tell Metro:

Don’t Delay Funding – Metro should dedicate funding to the Foothill Extension now so that construction begins as soon as possible! The Foothill Extension is ready to go.
Make Gold Line a Priority – The project will create thousands of jobs during construction, help get our economy on track and reduce congestion on local streets and freeways.
Get Us To Azusa in 2013 – The Construction Authority has a plan to get the line to Azusa in 2013. Urge Metro to support projects that can open sooner, so people can start riding at the earliest possible date. Why wait four extra years for the train?
It has been a long journey, but with your help we made significant progress in making the Gold Line a priority. Metro has proposed allocating $743 million for the Foothill Extension in the draft LRTP. Our next step is to persuade Metro to run the line when it's completed. We need your support.


Join the delegation of elected officials, community leaders, residents, business owners, students and others marching on Metro Headquarters! We need a strong showing of support at this critical meeting:

Metro Board Meeting
Thursday, July 23, 2009
9:30 a.m.
Metro Headquarters, Board Room
One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 Map
RSVP TODAY


Need transportation? We can help! To RSVP, call (888) 977-2269, or e-mail us at info@iwillride.org.

A couple hours of your morning will make an impact in the lives of millions of San Gabriel Valley residents for generations to come. Many of you have shown your support but don't stop now. Speak up for mobility, reduced pollution and jobs now--the Metro Board of Directors needs to hear from you on July 23rd.

Sincerely,



I Will Ride Outreach Team
www.iwillride.org


**If you haven't already, please e-mail the Metro Board to voice your support for the Foothill Extension. Help send a strong message that the San Gabriel Valley can't afford to wait for jobs, improved air quality and reduced traffic congestion. Tell a friend!**

Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad (Source: California High Speed Rail Blog)

Link: California High Speed Rail Blog: Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad

What do the Golden Gate Bridge, Shasta Dam, and the Central Valley Water Project have in common? They are all products of the Great Depression. At a time when both California and the federal government were strapped for cash and suffering the effects of a major economic downturn, government decided to use infrastructure projects to provide economic recovery in both the short and the long term. Each project continues to provide economic activity 70 years later. Each has paid for itself many times over.

Last fall we spent a lot of time on this blog debunking the New Hoovers who claimed that now was the wrong time to build high speed rail - that despite the clearly successful model of the big 1930s infrastructure projects, California should embrace austerity and follow a different path, even in spite of the need and economic benefit of high speed trains. Here in the summer of 2009 we find that this attitude persists. However, as the enormous scale of the recession has become undeniable, the New Hoovers have had to find another reason to argue against infrastructure projects. As Dan Walters shows in the Sacramento Bee today, the state budget mess is providing the new excuse for New Hooverism:

Is this the time to launch construction of a high-speed railroad line between Northern and Southern California that will cost at least $40 billion, much of it from bonds to be repaid from a state budget that's already gushing red ink?

Yes, say its fervent advocates, contending that a bullet train, similar to those in Europe and Japan, will reduce air and auto congestion, reduce greenhouse gases and generate many billions of dollars in economic benefits.

Walters doesn't give his opponents or HSR much credit. He ignores the effect of those "many billions of dollars in economic benefits" - does he think that the state of California or its budget can afford to turn down the jobs and tax dollars that come from the HSR project? Construction workers' pay is taxed, as is their spending. HSR saves travelers time and money, creating a Green Dividend that fuels economic growth through the savings that sustainable mass transportation creates.

Instead he seems to be arguing from an embrace of misery. His preferred solution to the economic crisis appears to be lowered horizons and mass suffering. To Walters, the budget crisis means that all plans and projects that would spend money must be shelved. Presumably they'll await economic recovery, but that recovery will not occur without those infrastructure projects. Since the phrase "economic recovery" appears to be banned in Sacramento, among both politicians and the media that cover them, it isn't surprising that Walters embraces misery for misery's sake. Suffering and pain will somehow produce recovery - that's the neo-Hooverite model that Walters espouses in his column.

Most of Walters' column is devoted to rather weak attacks on the HSR project that suggest he is simply not very familiar with the key details of the project:

Bullet train advocates have been touting California as qualifying for a significant portion of the $8 billion set aside in federal stimulus money for transit because of the bond issue.

Recently, however, the feds decided to place the Los Angeles-Las Vegas high-speed route promoted by Nevada interests, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in the California system. It raises the specter that huge sums would be spent to make it easier for Californians to spend money in Las Vegas casinos.



In fact, the LA-Vegas HSR project does not appear eligible for HSR stimulus money. Nevada's application for stimulus funds was limited to $1 billion to study maglev from Primm to the Las Vegas Strip, a project that Senator Reid no longer supports. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood has repeatedly stated the SF-LA HSR route is the most likely to receive HSR stimulus funds.

The criticism continues, however, questioning both whether a high-speed rail system makes transportation and economic sense and the route adopted by the California High-Speed Rail Authority, especially running trains over the unpopulated Pacheco Pass between San Jose and the Central Valley....Meanwhile, opposition to the Pacheco Pass route appears to be growing because it would mean routing trains down the bucolic San Francisco Peninsula between San Francisco and San Jose. The alternative would be to run trains over the Altamont Pass along Interstate 580 into the Stockton-Tracy area, a more heavily traveled commuter corridor.



But since the alternative route, over Altamont Pass, would have bypassed San Jose entirely, the Pacheco route actually has far more people living along it than Altamont. The fact that nobody lives in the Pacheco Pass itself is actually an argument FOR that alignment, as it means fewer stops for a train whose purpose is to whisk travelers from the Bay Area to Southern California in the shortest amount of time possible. If the goal was to design a commuter railroad, then Altamont would indeed be a preferable choice - which is exactly why the California High Speed Rail Authority plans to develop Altamont as a high speed corridor.

Environmental activists in Palo Alto are complaining about the impact on their city and, somewhat mysteriously, language appeared in still-pending revisions to the 2009-10 state budget that makes allocation of $139 million in high-speed rail planning funds contingent on "alternative alignments" being considered. Advocates of the Pacheco Pass route consider that to be a poison pill and will try to get it removed before a final budget is enacted, if that ever occurs.

Peninsula NIMBYs are a nuisance to the project, and are putting their own personal aesthetic values in alliance with neo-Hooverism in order to block economic recovery. Their opposition is unsurprising and annoying, but it's not a reason to doubt the economic value of the project.

While $9 billion of the voter-approved bond issue is to be used for the system, if and when it is ever built, the remaining $995 million can be spent on local mass transit systems on the assumption that they will improve access to high-speed rail.

There is a suspicion among those who chart the erratic course taken by the bullet train project that when push comes to shove, its only tangible fruit will be those local projects.

Only someone who has paid just passing attention to the HSR project would consider its course "erratic" - the CHSRA is well along the path of finalizing environmental documents, determining the project-level design, and has already built working relationships with the leading HSR experts around the world. Winning voter support for the project AND the $10 billion in bonds it needs to get started was no small accomplishment. And with President Barack Obama and most of the Congress on board, HSR is far from a pipe dream. It is a real plan with a bright and viable future.

But it's understandable why those who have chosen to deny the future would choose to deny the value and viability of the HSR project. For people like Dan Walters, the state's economic and budget crisis means we must lower our horizons and suffer until somehow, apparently through magic, we have economic recovery. For the rest of us, who believe economic recovery is desirable and that it can be produced through infrastructure as it was 70 years ago, the high speed rail project is a necessary part of the project to rebuild California. It's a shame Dan Walters, who has spoken so insightfully in other venues about the need to rebuild California's broken political system, chooses to eschew vision and planning in favor of a morose neo-Hooverism.

Our predecessors did not listen to that kind of talk when planning the Golden Gate Bridge or the Central Valley Project. Nor should we.
Posted by Robert Cruickshank at 7:20 PM

City Council Greenlights Alternate Plan for Rail Yard (Source: www.surfsantamonica.com)

Link: City Council Greenlights Alternate Plan for Rail Yard

City Council Greenlights Alternate Plan for Rail Yard

By Jorge Casuso

July 17, 2009 – The City Council Tuesday voted to move ahead with a plan that would relocate parts of a proposed light rail maintenance yard despite opposition for neighboring residents and some businesses.

The plan includes using a city-owned parcel at 1800 Stewart Street and a Santa Monica College-owned parcel, as well as the originally proposed site currently owned by Verizon near Olympic and Stewart streets.

The council voted 4 to 2 -- with the four Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights (SMRR) council members present backing the plan and Bob Hollbrook and Bobby Shriver opposing it -- to pursue the alternative and to continue to explore other possible sites and ensure community involvement.

The move to relocate the noisier functions of the Exposition Light Rail Maintenance facility further away from homes in the Pico Neighborhood came after SMRR opposed the proposed Verizon site on Exposition Boulevard earlier this year.

In a letter to the council, the powerful tenants groups called placing the facility across from an apartment building a case of “environmental injustice,” and warned that the facility would have “many intolerable impacts” on the city’s poorest and most ethnically diverse neighborhood.

The council vote came after a consultant hired by the City to explore alternative sites “confirmed that there were no other sites. . . that met the criteria, particularly with respect to size and ownership,” according to staff.

But the alternative plan failed to please the two dozen residents who testified that it did not adequately address health and safety issues – one neighborhood leader said it created a “toxic triangle" – and that it would snarl traffic on Stewart Street.

Mayor Ken Genser noted that the yard, which would service trains that run on the second phase of the line from Culver City to Downtown Santa Monica, would have little or no impact on health, since the cars are electric and do not pollute.

The plan also was opposed by officials at the Lionstone Group, a real estate investment firm that has a ground lease with the City until 2030 for the land at 1800 Stewart.

"Our ground lease is not for sale and we will actively oppose any effort to take our lawful right to use that for the next 21 years," said Daniel Dubrowski, a founding partner of Lionstone.

College officials, on the other hand, said they are willing to give up the adjacent college-owned student parking lot if the City helped them find an alternative site. The council directed staff to help the college relocate the parking lot.

Shriver, who cast one of the two opposing votes, said the City should continue to look for an alternate site, which should not be difficult to find in today’s economic climate.

High-speed rail isn’t pork — it’s an organic green (Source: San Francisco Examiner)

Link: High-speed rail isn’t pork — it’s an organic green Opinion Articles - Editorials on Top News Stories | San Francisco Examiner

Opinion

High-speed rail isn’t pork — it’s an organic green

By: Quentin L. Kopp
Special to The Examiner
July 20, 2009

In 1986, I was elected to the California Senate from my home district as an independent — an event not achieved in the state Senate since 1878. In part, my election (and re-election two times) was attributable to my record of protecting public tax dollars and a philosophy and practice of fiscal restraint, responsibility and accountability.

As such, I took great umbrage at the July 9 Examiner editorial entitled, “High-speed rail projects are about pork, not transit.” Such peckish pap. What’s more befuddling for regular readers, the same editorial page has opined in the past in support of high-speed trains, urging the 800-mile system not be derailed.

The latest editorial suggests that federal stimulus dollars to the high-speed rail project are attributable to backroom, smoke-filled dealings with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Such leaps of logic would be silly and worth a chuckle or two if not so dangerous in misinforming California residents. On the contrary, federal stimulus dollars will provide needed impetus to our dreary economy. Moreover, California is in the pole position for those critical dollars thanks to decades of vital work by the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Just since 2000, the system has received a certified statewide program environmental impact report and statement under state and federal law, following thousands and thousands of government agency and citizens’ comments and hundreds of public meetings reviewing the project. Cooperation with regional transportation agencies such as BART and Caltrain to integrate the high-speed rail and local and regional commuter systems for the benefit of the public is unceasing. The general alignment and station locations have been chosen for a majority of the system, designed to carry millions of passengers at speeds up to 220 mph by 2030.

Yet another critical environmental document has been certified, establishing Pacheco Pass as the preferred high-speed train route connecting San Francisco and the Peninsula with the Central Valley, while pursuing a partnership with local regional transit agencies to develop a joint-use high-speed rail infrastructure project in the Altamont Pass corridor. The Authority has also created an institutional structure to manage construction of high-speed train infrastructure and technology adaptable to California’s unique needs, and launched a program for comprehensive long-term management of operations and assets of a fully functioning system. Project level environmental work and analysis has commenced throughout the first phase of the project to Anaheim, and here in the Bay Area a draft scoping report capturing 995 public comments has been released.

Securing federal grants represents one part of a financing plan that shares responsibility between local, state and federal governments together with significant private equity investment. That’s not pork. It’s USDA prime.

Yet another indicator of the lean and mean condition of the project is the passage of Assembly Bill 3034 (Cathleen Galgiani, D-Livingston) signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, which includes significant project and financial oversight and other taxpayer protections.

California residents overwhelmingly supported Proposition 1A, a down payment on an economically viable and environmentally essential transportation improvement for a burgeoning population with bursting travel demands and needs.

Don’t politicize high-speed rail and lambaste it in some overarching dissatisfaction with the U.S. stimulus bill. “Track to Nowhere” may be an easy, sophomoric chant, to which millions more will chant back, “Build, baby, build.” Construction of a high-speed train system constitutes the premiere opportunity for California to lift itself into the 21st century. I’ll put my faith in independent residents of California who understand the benefits of high-speed rail, not as a partisan policy position but as a nonpartisan solution for our state’s stressed transportation system.

Retired Judge Quentin L. Kopp is a member of the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad (Source: California High Speed Rail Blog)

Link: California High Speed Rail Blog: Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Now Is The Perfect Time To Build A Railroad

What do the Golden Gate Bridge, Shasta Dam, and the Central Valley Water Project have in common? They are all products of the Great Depression. At a time when both California and the federal government were strapped for cash and suffering the effects of a major economic downturn, government decided to use infrastructure projects to provide economic recovery in both the short and the long term. Each project continues to provide economic activity 70 years later. Each has paid for itself many times over.

Last fall we spent a lot of time on this blog debunking the New Hoovers who claimed that now was the wrong time to build high speed rail - that despite the clearly successful model of the big 1930s infrastructure projects, California should embrace austerity and follow a different path, even in spite of the need and economic benefit of high speed trains. Here in the summer of 2009 we find that this attitude persists. However, as the enormous scale of the recession has become undeniable, the New Hoovers have had to find another reason to argue against infrastructure projects. As Dan Walters shows in the Sacramento Bee today, the state budget mess is providing the new excuse for New Hooverism:

Is this the time to launch construction of a high-speed railroad line between Northern and Southern California that will cost at least $40 billion, much of it from bonds to be repaid from a state budget that's already gushing red ink?

Yes, say its fervent advocates, contending that a bullet train, similar to those in Europe and Japan, will reduce air and auto congestion, reduce greenhouse gases and generate many billions of dollars in economic benefits.

Walters doesn't give his opponents or HSR much credit. He ignores the effect of those "many billions of dollars in economic benefits" - does he think that the state of California or its budget can afford to turn down the jobs and tax dollars that come from the HSR project? Construction workers' pay is taxed, as is their spending. HSR saves travelers time and money, creating a Green Dividend that fuels economic growth through the savings that sustainable mass transportation creates.

Instead he seems to be arguing from an embrace of misery. His preferred solution to the economic crisis appears to be lowered horizons and mass suffering. To Walters, the budget crisis means that all plans and projects that would spend money must be shelved. Presumably they'll await economic recovery, but that recovery will not occur without those infrastructure projects. Since the phrase "economic recovery" appears to be banned in Sacramento, among both politicians and the media that cover them, it isn't surprising that Walters embraces misery for misery's sake. Suffering and pain will somehow produce recovery - that's the neo-Hooverite model that Walters espouses in his column.

Most of Walters' column is devoted to rather weak attacks on the HSR project that suggest he is simply not very familiar with the key details of the project:

Bullet train advocates have been touting California as qualifying for a significant portion of the $8 billion set aside in federal stimulus money for transit because of the bond issue.

Recently, however, the feds decided to place the Los Angeles-Las Vegas high-speed route promoted by Nevada interests, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in the California system. It raises the specter that huge sums would be spent to make it easier for Californians to spend money in Las Vegas casinos.

In fact, the LA-Vegas HSR project does not appear eligible for HSR stimulus money. Nevada's application for stimulus funds was limited to $1 billion to study maglev from Primm to the Las Vegas Strip, a project that Senator Reid no longer supports. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood has repeatedly stated the SF-LA HSR route is the most likely to receive HSR stimulus funds.

The criticism continues, however, questioning both whether a high-speed rail system makes transportation and economic sense and the route adopted by the California High-Speed Rail Authority, especially running trains over the unpopulated Pacheco Pass between San Jose and the Central Valley....Meanwhile, opposition to the Pacheco Pass route appears to be growing because it would mean routing trains down the bucolic San Francisco Peninsula between San Francisco and San Jose. The alternative would be to run trains over the Altamont Pass along Interstate 580 into the Stockton-Tracy area, a more heavily traveled commuter corridor.

But since the alternative route, over Altamont Pass, would have bypassed San Jose entirely, the Pacheco route actually has far more people living along it than Altamont. The fact that nobody lives in the Pacheco Pass itself is actually an argument FOR that alignment, as it means fewer stops for a train whose purpose is to whisk travelers from the Bay Area to Southern California in the shortest amount of time possible. If the goal was to design a commuter railroad, then Altamont would indeed be a preferable choice - which is exactly why the California High Speed Rail Authority plans to develop Altamont as a high speed corridor.

Environmental activists in Palo Alto are complaining about the impact on their city and, somewhat mysteriously, language appeared in still-pending revisions to the 2009-10 state budget that makes allocation of $139 million in high-speed rail planning funds contingent on "alternative alignments" being considered. Advocates of the Pacheco Pass route consider that to be a poison pill and will try to get it removed before a final budget is enacted, if that ever occurs.

Peninsula NIMBYs are a nuisance to the project, and are putting their own personal aesthetic values in alliance with neo-Hooverism in order to block economic recovery. Their opposition is unsurprising and annoying, but it's not a reason to doubt the economic value of the project.

While $9 billion of the voter-approved bond issue is to be used for the system, if and when it is ever built, the remaining $995 million can be spent on local mass transit systems on the assumption that they will improve access to high-speed rail.

There is a suspicion among those who chart the erratic course taken by the bullet train project that when push comes to shove, its only tangible fruit will be those local projects.

Only someone who has paid just passing attention to the HSR project would consider its course "erratic" - the CHSRA is well along the path of finalizing environmental documents, determining the project-level design, and has already built working relationships with the leading HSR experts around the world. Winning voter support for the project AND the $10 billion in bonds it needs to get started was no small accomplishment. And with President Barack Obama and most of the Congress on board, HSR is far from a pipe dream. It is a real plan with a bright and viable future.

But it's understandable why those who have chosen to deny the future would choose to deny the value and viability of the HSR project. For people like Dan Walters, the state's economic and budget crisis means we must lower our horizons and suffer until somehow, apparently through magic, we have economic recovery. For the rest of us, who believe economic recovery is desirable and that it can be produced through infrastructure as it was 70 years ago, the high speed rail project is a necessary part of the project to rebuild California. It's a shame Dan Walters, who has spoken so insightfully in other venues about the need to rebuild California's broken political system, chooses to eschew vision and planning in favor of a morose neo-Hooverism.

Our predecessors did not listen to that kind of talk when planning the Golden Gate Bridge or the Central Valley Project. Nor should we.
Posted by Robert Cruickshank at 7:20 PM

MTA takes issue with potential contractor's ties with Iran (Source: Los Angeles Times)

Link: MTA takes issue with potential contractor's ties with Iran - Los Angeles Times

MTA takes issue with potential contractor's ties with Iran
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a vice chairman of the board, and another member are concerned that Siemens Corp. helped provide technology to monitor calls in Iran.

By Dan Weikel

July 18, 2009

Officials for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority said Friday that they were concerned about the Iranian business connections of Siemens Corp., a potential contender for lucrative contracts to build light rail and subway cars for the agency.

Siemens, which owns Siemens Transportation Systems Inc., partnered with Nokia last year to provide TCI, Iran's telecommunications company, the technology to monitor voice calls on the country's fixed and mobile telephone networks. Though such systems are legal and in place around the world, a controversy has erupted over whether the technology has provided the Iranian government with the capability to eavesdrop on dissidents.
FOR THE RECORD:
Rail contractor: In Saturday's Section A, an article reporting that Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials had concerns about a potential contractor's business connections with Iran inaccurately said that a firm related to another MTA rail contractor, AnsaldoBreda, has business deals with that nation. AnsaldoEnergia SPA —owned by AnsaldoBreda's parent, Finmeccanica -- provided gas turbines to Iran under a contract awarded in 1997, but the work was completed in 2002, a spokesman said.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is a vice chairman of the MTA board, and board member Richard Katz said they were concerned about Siemens' ties to Iran considering the widespread civil unrest that has followed the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"The mayor has been working to ensure that the city divests from any company that does business with Iran," said Matt Szabo, a spokesman for Villaraigosa. "So obviously any connection Siemens or any other potential contractor has to Iran would be of great concern to the mayor when considering a contract."

Katz said he had the same concerns. He noted that members of Congress are considering legislation to prevent federal contracts from going to companies doing business with Iran.

But the Iranian connection may get more complicated for MTA beyond the ties with Siemens Corp.

A potential competitor of Siemens Transportation Systems Inc. for MTA contracts is AnsaldoBreda, an Italian firm that is trying to win a $300-million MTA contract to build 100 light rail cars.

The MTA board is set to decide next week whether to award the job to Breda or rebid the contract because the company has been late delivering cars and has failed to meet MTA specifications.

However, Breda is owned by Finmeccanica, a conglomerate of defense, aerospace, energy and transportation companies, which has deals to provide Iran with 44 gas turbines through its subsidiary Ansaldo Energia.

Whether MTA should also avoid doing business with AnsaldoBreda "is a good question," Katz said.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

Staff writer Maeve Reston contributed to this report.

Duarte Mayor Fasana to be local voice on Gold Line Authority (Source: Pasadena Star-News)

Link: Duarte Mayor Fasana to be local voice on Gold Line Authority - Pasadena Star-News

Duarte Mayor Fasana to be local voice on Gold Line Authority
Staff Reports
Posted: 07/19/2009 04:05:22 PM PDT

Duarte Mayor John Fasana has been appointed to the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority board to serve as the representative of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, CEO Habib Balian said Friday.

Fasana, who has represented the 30 San Gabriel Valley cities on the Metro board since its inception, was appointed to the Foothill Extension board by Metro Chairman and Glendale City Councilman Ara Najarian.

Fasana will be sworn in at the July 22 Construction Authority board meeting.

To submit information for briefs, e-mail hector.gonzalez@sgvn.com