Just a few weeks after Peninsula Congresswoman Jackie Speier called for “revisiting” high speed rail, the Peninsula’s other congressional representative, Anna Eshoo, has published an op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle titled “Ensure high speed rail is on the right track”. Eshoo is supportive of the HSR project in this op-ed, but argues for giving the HSR stimulus money that the San Francisco to San Jose section is eligible to receive to Caltrain for its electrification project.

I’ve been following this story very closely, but have held off on writing about it in any depth while we at Californians For High Speed Rail undertook a series of meetings with key stakeholders to better understand the situation on the Peninsula with regard to the Caltrain electrification project. In the coming days and weeks you’ll see and hear more about our response. For now, I’ll limit myself to the contents of Eshoo’s op-ed.

For many months, the people of the 14th Congressional District have been worried – and justifiably so – about what high-speed rail could mean to their communities. Now comes word of financial difficulties that threaten the future of Caltrain, the spine of the Peninsula transportation system and the little train that could, and does so much, to serve us.

As you can expect, I reject this framing. The worries about what HSR would do are often overblown, and the voices of HSR supporters have not been properly marshaled or heard by the Peninsula’s elected representatives. 60% of the region’s voters backed Prop 1A, and HSR retains significant local support, although such supporters have been shouted down by the NIMBYs.

We can see this as one problem piled on another. Or we can see this as an opportunity to protect and improve Caltrain and to deliver a message to the California High Speed Rail Authority that its trains will come to the Peninsula when – and if – it can prove that it will mean a better community and better transit.

Here too, I reject Eshoo’s framing of the situation as being one of “Peninsula vs high speed rail.” The Authority is not some external force seeking to impose its alien plan on an unwilling population, but an agency of the people of California seeking to implement the project the Peninsula voted for, and which many of its elected officials – including the entirety of the Palo Alto City Council – endorsed in 2008. It is unfortunate that Eshoo accepts the “us versus them” frame, because it makes it more difficult to show how HSR will benefit these communities.

Those benefits include:

• Grade separations that save lives, reduce traffic, and cut down significantly on noise

• Help in freeing the Peninsula from costly dependence on automobiles for regional and intrastate travel

• Creating thousands of desperately needed jobs

• Raising property values

• Improving local air quality

I’m sure other Peninsula residents can think of other benefits of the HSR project. In fact, you’re going to have to, because Eshoo needs to hear that case, and needs to hear it from her constituents.

That the High Speed Rail Authority needs to prove itself is beyond any doubt. Authority representatives – many of them well meaning – have proven repeatedly to be ineffective and even counterproductive in the way they have approached the project and the public. Frankly, they could not have been better at damaging their own credibility and the credibility of the project if they had planned it.

Eshoo has a point here. But there are important details missing. The Authority’s outreach was underfunded, the fault of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state legislature. That made it difficult to do the proper kind of outreach. The Authority’s performance at the Menlo Park Town Hall in August, which Eshoo had convened, clearly did not indicate to Eshoo that the Authority had done its job in public outreach. That has improved since August, but Eshoo does not seem to believe enough has been done.

Further, Eshoo could help build the case for HSR. She presents herself as a neutral actor here, when in reality she is in a very good position to help fix whatever the Authority has done wrong. As we’ll see later on, she does the same when it comes to funding.

The California State Auditor’s office recently issued a scathing report, detailing poor planning, inadequate risk assessment and a flawed business plan. The saddest fact? No one was surprised by it.

Yet again we see the damage that damn State Auditor’s report has done. Despite its significant errors, the report is being used as confirmation of supposed flaws with the HSR plan. The HSR project doesn’t have poor planning, an inadequate risk assessment, or a flawed business plan (though the plan could use improvement). But because the State Auditor claimed those things existed, we’re supposed to believe they did? I don’t agree.

The High Speed Rail Authority has to hit the reset button, improve its reputation and assuage Peninsula residents, who have every reason to fear that this project will be a nightmare. Meanwhile, we have to state with one, clear voice that a lot will have to happen before – or if – high-speed rail is going to operate on the Peninsula.

Here again we see the “hit the reset button” framing. There’s no need for it, and no need to believe that Peninsula residents “have every reason to fear that this project will be a nightmare.” Aren’t the deaths caused by an at-grade railroad a community nightmare? What of the costs to residents of being dependent on oil for transportation? What of the desperate need for economic recovery, the nightmarish situation faced by Eshoo’s constituents who daily worry about how they’ll make ends meet – particularly construction workers?

We will need to see a credible plan for financing the project. We will need to see a credible business plan for operating the system. We will need proof that those in charge of designing the project have heard our concerns.

This part is very significant, given the fact that Eshoo is a sitting member of Congress. Here again we see Eshoo presenting herself as a neutral arbiter, when she is anything but. She could play a key role in resolving the questions about HSR’s finances by working to pass a new Transportation Bill with full funding for the California HSR project. She might even be able to secure earmarks to help trench or tunnel the project.

As we’ve explained before, the HSR project’s funding plan is no different than any other transportation funding project. You plan it, you identify a local source of funds, and you apply for federal funding to reach your total construction budget. Eshoo should know this.

We need to see what high-speed rail will do for us, not only to us. In other words, we need high-speed rail on the Peninsula to be a betterment, not a detriment. One of the betterments we expect is an improved Caltrain, and that is something that can be done right now.

The best, most charitable way to read this is as an invitation to Peninsula HSR supporters – and there are more of them than there are HSR deniers – to let Eshoo know that they already see HSR as a betterment, and why that is the case. The status quo on the Peninsula is not tenable.

In February, the Federal Railroad Administration awarded $2.25 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to California’s high-speed-rail project. Part of the California High Speed Rail Authority request for funds was to advance the Caltrain electrification and modernization plans.

We can start that project today, and that’s why we need our fair share of recovery-act funds to go to Caltrain. The Caltrain projects include installing a modernized signal system, the first steps in electrifying the Caltrain corridor, construction of grade separations in San Bruno, and improvements to Caltrain stations in San Francisco and San Jose. These projects are environmentally cleared, and ready to go, and could put thousands of people to work on the Peninsula.

The Caltrain electrification project is a good use of HSR stimulus money – if that project is built in a way that ensures it is compatible with the HSR project. We’ll have more very soon on what exactly needs to be done to make that happen.

An effort is underway in the Legislature to ensure these funds are available to Caltrain without predetermining the outcome of any alignment or design issues still facing high-speed rail.

Again, that effort should be contingent upon there being safeguards to ensure that any work on Caltrain’s project is compatible with HSR, and will not have to be ripped out months after completion for the HSR project.

My Bay Area congressional colleagues have joined me in signing a letter to Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood asking that he direct the Federal Railroad Administration take into account the ability of the Caltrain projects to put Americans to work and advance the interests of high-speed rail.

Well, that is interesting. But I think it would be a huge political risk for President Obama to accept this line of thinking, short of there being strong guarantees that Caltrain work can be used by HSR. If Caltrain’s project undermines HSR or has to be ripped out later, it’s going to backfire badly on the White House, as it will be seen as a wasteful expenditure that didn’t actually deliver the promised bullet train service.

One thing is clear: We cannot lose Caltrain. This is a golden opportunity to do something positive for Caltrain and the Peninsula for now and for generations to come.

Our task as HSR supporters is to show that what Eshoo said of Caltrain is equally true of HSR itself. I wish she didn’t portray herself as a passive actor, and I wish she would make a robust case for HSR service and show how it would indeed benefit the Peninsula. Looks like we’ll have to do so ourselves.

Are HSR supporters up to the challenge? I certainly am.