Arnold Schwarzenegger Vetoes Several HSR Bills
Last week’s veto of AB 619 wasn’t the only HSR-related bill Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (who was elected 7 years ago today) vetoed.
• AB 289, by Assemblymember Cathleen Galgiani of Merced, would have enabled the California High Speed Rail Authority to hire up to 6 new staffers. But the governor’s veto messageindicated his preference that these things go through the normal budgeting process – which as we’ve seen isn’t much of a process at all. So no word on why the governor really didn’t support this laudable effort to help the CHSRA staff up and address community concerns.
• AB 1830 by Assemblymember Dave Jones of Sacramento, would have mandated that:
the authority to make every effort to
purchase high-speed train rolling stock and related equipment that
are manufactured in California, consistent with federal and state
laws.
Seems sensible to me. The governor didn’t see it that way:
While I support job creation in the state, this bill could result in unnecessary additional costs and delays in the constructing of high-speed rail in California and for this reason I am unable to sign it.
I am guessing he doesn’t want to close any doors to getting trainsets made in China or some other foreign country. Still, he ought to have supported this measure to help develop a California-based HSR construction industry.
• SB 455 by Senator Alan Lowenthal of Long Beach would have required that members of the CHSRA board appointed by the governor be confirmed by the State Senate. This was likely an opening shot in the upcoming battle over reforming the CHSRA. The governor’s veto message took a slightly mocking tone in shooting down this bill:
Current law provides that the five members of the High-Speed Rail Board appointed by the Governor are not subject to Senate confirmation. I see no reason to change this. I might be persuaded to change my mind if the Legislature were to allow the Executive Branch to confirm its four appointments to the Board.
Touché.
• SB 964 by Senator Elaine Alquist of Fremont would have required the CHSRA to work with the state Employment Development Department and the Mineta Transportation Institute to help develop studies and research of how the HSR project can help improve the labor market, and would have appropriated $500,000 from the Prop 1A bond for this laudable purpose.
The governor vetoed this too, claiming that the idea was a good one but more time and more funding was needed to enable such an assessment to be done:
While I strongly support efforts to provide a reliable high-speed rail system throughout California, I cannot support this bill. I agree that it is important for the State to create an inventory of skills required to successfully construct and operate a high-speed train system, but it is also important to provide a meaningful assessment to allow this to occur. The assessment requirement as contained in this bill will entail a significant unfunded workload for the Employment Development Department (EDD) that translates to expenditures well beyond the $500,000 currently identified in the bill itself.
The EDD would be required to use private consultants to perform a significant portion of the assessment, as the high-speed rail industry is “siloed” into the various aspects of high- speed rail development. Additional information must be gathered and a strategy for conducting this research work developed before EDD can provide an accurate cost estimate assessment for this project. Additionally, the January 1, 2012 timeline is a factor that limits a meaningful assessment of this nature. We must balance our need for important program studies with our fiscal reality.
• SB 965 by Senator Mark DeSaulnier of Contra Costa County is probably the most significant HSR bill to have been vetoed by the governor. It would have mandated that the CHSRA report certain findings to the state legislature 60 days after reaching a “cooperative agreement” with the federal government, including detailed plans as to how the funds will be spent.
The governor’s veto message gave similar reasons as for the veto of AB 289 – that it would have been outside “the regular budget review process.”
Overall, these vetoes don’t change the status quo regarding the project. It will be up to the next governor, elected in less than a month, to determine the future of the high speed rail project and of the Authority currently tasked with building it.
I’ll give kudos to the Governator here.
It seems like he’s done his best to enable the CHSRA the maximum flexibility in their decisions without having to deal with the political ramfications of where or how things are built. At the end of the day, this is an infrastructure project; the result should be measured in its utility as a piece of infrastructure, not as make-work or politics. His vetos also allow flexibility for the incoming administration to shape the future of HSR in california. Hopefully, both Meg and Jerry will see the value of HSR….
//dan.
“SB 964 by Senator Elaine Alquist of Fremont would have required the CHSRA to work with the state Employment Development Department and the Mineta Transportation Institute to help develop studies and research of how the HSR project can help improve the labor market, and would have appropriated $500,000 from the Prop 1A bond for this laudable purpose.” AND WHERE IS THE GOOD MR. DIRIDON FROM, WHY THE MINETA TRANSPO INSTITUTE. A LITTLE BACK SCRATCHING THERE, ELAINE? AT LEAST ARNIE GOT THAT ONE RIGHT.
“So no word on why the governor really didn’t support this laudable effort to help the CHSRA staff up and address community concerns.” ‘ADDRESS COMMUNITY CONCERNS’? HA HA. THE AUTHORITY HAS NO INTEREST IN ADDRESSING COMMUNITY CONCERNS. IT’S THEIR WAY AND THEIR WAY ALONE.
wu ming Reply:
October 7th, 2010 at 10:20 pm
dude, easy on the caps lock.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 7th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
Hey, Wu,
Do you get the impression that I have, that Tom is an old grump, from what I’ve called the “difficult, in-between age?”
Arthur Dent Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 12:20 am
Good God, DP, I’m convinced you’re going through some age crisis thing. Why the hang-up on everyone’s age? Do you have a hard time taking people at face value if you can’t first stuff them into a stereotype box? It’s getting tiresome.
Spokker Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 2:11 am
The world generally adheres to stereotypes. There are always exceptions but people generally conform to archetypes and not everyone is unique. Cruickshank himself is a stereotype. I know some people very similar to him in both looks and beliefs. Hell, one of them is a teacher too haha. I’m a stereotype. Typical nerdy asshole who likes trains. Shrug.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 5:05 am
No, I realize we deal with individuals. However, I have noticed a pattern of rail opposition and rail favoritism that is strongly age consistent.
(Here we go again)
Just about 20 years ago, I was promoting the idea of an interurban type trolley line as an alternative to a 4-lane highway in a section of West Virginia. Did a cost study on the thing, used data for moving dirt and so on from the highway department, etc., etc. Found a lot of cost and operational advantages that surprised even me. For my trouble got called a lot of names, including a Communist.
Talking with people about this, promoting it, I noticed an age pattern. The people who liked the idea were, then, either under 40 or over 70. The ones who didn’t like it were between 40 and 70. Not everybody fit the pattern, but the very large majority did.
I was also a member of a community organization then, and so was a man from Amtrak’s marketing department. I brought this up to him, and he said his marketing department had observed and measured the same thing.
The highway project took time (an important piece was only recently finished). Everyone got older. The age break points moved up over time. I currently estimate them to be at about 60 for the low break point and at 90 for the upper one. This seems to be confirmed with a bunch of younger people riding that commuter train, and much, much younger people on the subway in Washington.
I believe the opposition to trains is largely generational. The older crowd, over 70 before and over 90 now, remembers the prewar era, and wishes we had at least parts of it back. The younger crowd, under 40 before and under (Gasp!) 60 now, takes cars for granted, is environmentally aware, and finds driving is alternately terrifying or frustrating, and no longer special; this has been the subject of a number of marketing studies by Ford and the auto insurance industry, and the long time over which this has been occuring (long preceeding the current recession) suggests a trend that has them worried.
The group in the middle would have come of age–been between 20 and 25–between about 1950 and the first oil crunch of 1973. If you talk to a psychologist, he will tell you that’s the age in which your views of yourself the world you live in crystalize, in which you decide or figure out who and what you are, what your world is like, and as part of that, what the future can or should be. For this group in the middle, the future was supposed to look something like “The Jetsons.” That future didn’t include trains or trolley cars.
Unfortunately, it seems that future didn’t work out too well (i.e., enormous traffic jams), and truthfully, not everybody wants it (in execution, it turns out pretty sterile, as many modern buildings will attest). For a variety of reasons, including the peak oil problem, the vision of America as what writer James Howard Kunstler as a “Happy Motoring utopia” simply has to go. (Interestingly, the peak oil problem may well help to take care of the global warming problem, if you’re one to subscribe to that view; otherwise, it’s just a calamity.) Also unfortunately, the pro-auto crowd, what I’ve taken to calling the “difficult, in-between age,” mostly can’t or won’t see this.
Is it stereotyping? Well, it’s interesting that a number of people, ranging from my Amtrak marketing man to the fellows who have been running surveys for the Advertising Age article that was here a while back have been seeing and measuring the same thing. It’s interesting that the crowd on the train is getting younger all the time, as well as larger. A person I know in Chicago has also been seeing this; when he started riding trains in the 1960s, he was by far the youngest on the train, everyone else was over 50, and the trains were nearly empty, while today he has trouble seeing anybody over 50 on the trains he rides–and they are packed.
By the same token, the people who are fighting this, based on the television and photo images that have appeared here and elsewhere, show a lot of grey hair; everone fighting it, for the most part, does seem to be over 60.
Is it stereotyping? I don’t think so; I think it’s demographics, a change of generation. And I also have to remind you, we do deal with individuals! Not quite everyone fits the pattern.
I’m short on time, otherwise I would provide some links for you to look at, and let you decide for yourself. I will say it is a fascinating pattern to observe, whether you like its implications or not.
In the meantime, if you feel comfortable about answering the question, how old are you? (I’ll go first, I’m 55.)
Take care.
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 5:17 am
wow that’s deep. But you know what, selling tickets, I can tell you that I sell mostly to the older nostalgia crowd and the kids under 35. The younger generation doesn’t even bat an eye at taking the train they just act like its as normal as the assorted I-things stuck in their ears.
political_incorrectness Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 7:26 am
Generation Y is open to the idea of high-speed trains. People do not like sitting in traffic even with a schedule to go anytime, anywhere. My generation does not like air travel either. The only barrier is the politics. If we place an investment in rail, this country will adopt it. Until then, I wait with a sense of pesimism.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 7:54 am
And as I’ve said before, the reason why Millennials are turning away from driving is because being on our digital devices is more important. It’s a dramatic shift from 20th century priorities.
synonymouse Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 11:04 am
This generational nonsense is an absolute crock. Those older folks who are profoundly opposed to rail transit are a special case because they were indoctrinated when the highway lobby totally dominated transport thinking in the forties and fifties. Ronald Reagan represents an excellent example of this mindset – apparently he liked trains but was convinced they had been obsoleted by autos and trucks.
The Reagan generation is mostly gone and those who are left are generally sympathetic to rail transit. Then why do you see a Governor Christie cancelling a major rail tube project in New Jersey? The problem is pervasive corruption and underperformance, disappointment, mediocrity. The younger set was not around to see the hype of BART devolve into the dysfunctional empire on the permanent taxpayer umbilical cord we see today.
The experts cannot be trusted to implement any project right. The CHSRA’s exercise in
building a parallel UP cannot go unchallenged . The Palmdale caper is totally inexcusable. How can you justify one town, and real estate developers therein, receiving such favoritism at the expense of the rest of the State? You are mistakenly panning and/or ignoring Tolmach’s critique which is based on many more years of experience observing the transport scene in California. He is not opposed to hsr but it warning that the present plan is sure to crap out.
California has all the symptoms of the Greek syndrome.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704696304575538502008810226.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 2:29 pm
“is an absolute crock”
Pot, meet kettle.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Syn,
Of the three main points you seem to make, you have one right. That one is about Ronald Reagan. As to his “generation,” keep in mind the age spread for the solid pro-car crowd currently runs from 60 to 90; lots of people around who are in the younger years of this group, lots of whom are dead-set against railroads, thinking they are from the 19th century, so they can’t be any good.
The Republicans give me the impression they are agains rail because they think it’s socialist. In reality, they don’t want to spend the money on it–but I also charge them with hypocracy, as they ignore the corruption, the waste, the operational limits,and the disadvantages of roads, along with the required level of subsidy for the highway system.
This isn’t to say your criticisms of the HSR Authority are unjustified, but it does suggest the possibility of a double standard for rail projects. Otherwise, I would expect to also see and read about the highway department. I have never seen anything about it from you, so you see where I’m coming from. I can’t believe even you would think billion dolar highways and their supporting structured) are really worthwhile.
wu ming Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
“the experts cannot be trusted”
so we should listen to cranks and crackpots instead. gotcha.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Howdy, Jim;
Glad you seem to enjoy this “deep” thinking, even if a few others don’t quite agree (and even I wouldn’t really say it’s the whole story, just an apparently big part of it).
Some other people got into it even deeper. The links below lead to the discussion; I lead it off, of course, with an expanded version of the generation aspect, but I think you’ll be most interested in some of the responses, including one from a pretty heavy-sounding philosopher.
http://server.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29906&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=generations+nimbys+future
A couple of notes about some things you’ll see if you take a look into here.
One, this website is called Railway Preservation News, and is about my old stuff; in this case, the subject is the idea that at least some younger people were taking up an interest in historic preservation, with the thought that this same generational aspect could be at work here.
Two, there is a reference to a project at South Bend, Indiana, and Notre Dame University. This is a proposal to reactivate a spur leading from a main line to Notre Dame to handle the coal the school uses in its steam heating plant. The promoter who wants to do this would like to electrify the line as a trolley museum, and also to use small trolley locomotives to handle the coal traffic. This is, as far as I know, a project he is or was persuing with his own money, but he ran into a lot of grief from people living along the right-of-way of this dormant rail branch–and guess what, they are in retirement homes and assisted living centers! Talk about hostility to rail–they actually have been attempting to force this line to be torn up (it is still owned by a main line carrier),
Finally, there is a reference to a Ross Rowland as someone who does not fit the demographic. Rowland is about 70, is an excursion operator and steam locomotive owner, and is perhaps best known as the force behind the American Freedom Train project of the 1970s.
Comments on the Notre Dame project:
http://server.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29887&p=145436&hilit=notre+dame#p145436
Enjoy.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:20 am
I remember the freedom train coming through my town in the 70s. It came through at night. We all ran outside. ( we lived literally right next to the tracks… like 50 feet)
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:33 am
this is nice I remember the soundtrack too. wow. seems like a different world.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:56 am
I’ll round up a Freedom Train link or two later on. For now, a story about the restoration of an eastern steam streamliner, now sadly retired again due to the end of the steam program 15 years ago. . .oh, you’re right, such a different world, and not always for the better, I’m afraid. . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j8ERAPo8Z0&playnext=1&videos=m_qYCKokOY0&feature=mfu_in_order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CtktJ-GY8g&playnext=1&videos=g4oVQHPrMNo&feature=mfu_in_order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0ZdW_KTQe4&playnext=1&videos=Y-acl-9Ns9s&feature=mfu_in_order
Enjoy.
dave Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
They say that old ideas aren’t changed, they simply die with their holder from old age.
In short old brainwashing is flushed with new brainwashing from society, Yay!
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 4:58 am
WE here a lot of fuss from people in a certain age group, I think mainly because, there just happens to be more of them than anyone else. They are the same people who spent there entire lives making a fuss and having the spotlight shined upon them. THAT is what is getting tiresome. I think that a lifetime of fussing has resulted in them now fussing for the sake of it. I keep hearing “people are mad” and “people are fed up” but do they even know why? No. They are delusional. They are emotional. They are all whipped up into frenzy about things such as “spending” and they are all about these big back scratching conspiracies. (As if it’s something new that just started last week) They think their taxes have gone up when they have actually gone down. They want “government out of their social security and medicare.”
When is two politicians who reach a compromise and work out a deal, two adults making a compromise and working out a deal and when is it conspiracy and “backscratching?” It’s the latter when you don’t like the deal.
I am so sick to death of this entire generation hootin’ and hollerin’ and never shutting up about EVERYTHING. Enough. Geez, go to Boca already.
*hear*
a rep from San Mateo Chambers of Commerce stated yesterday that Menlo Park Council, et al
forfeited $35m in funding due to lack of certification of the e.i.r. by June deadline. Can anyone explain this?
Turner Picked as CM for $4.2B Transbay Transit Center in San Francisco”>
Opposition to rail has very little to do with age and a lot to do with political indoctrination. Most people I hear in favor of it here in California tend to be progressive folks, regardless of age. Those who oppose it tend to be Tea bagger types, or at least leaning republican.
Interestingly in Europe it’s the opposite. The NO TAV (No HSR) movement in Italy for example, is left leaning, while center right wing government leaders (from Berlusconi, to Sarkozy to Cameron), tend to support HSR. Go figure.
Apparently on both sides of the Atlantic, people tend to follow whatever their political or ideology leaders say, like a flock of sheep, whether their names are Glenn Beck or Beppe Grillo.
Regarding the chances of success of HSR in California, I tend to agree with those critics that see the detour through Palmdale as a handicap because of the add’l miles (i.e. time) added to the trip, although it might have been a cheaper and technically more feasible option. 440 miles is kind of a long way between SF and LA, and for that distance air travel is a formidable competitor. At the same time I don’t perceive the Central Valley and the Antelope Valley communities as potentially lucrative markets as some might think. Once you factor in the cheap gas, the no tolls and the fact that once in LA you’ll probably need to rent a car, most people will probably opt to drive all the way instead. People in Bakersfield or Palmdale will likely do so once they discover they’ve taken a very fast train to a very slow bus in LA.
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
If you skip the areas that are the most underserved and yet fastest growing, then there is no point in building hsr at all. If all you are going to do is duplicate nonstop air service between sf and la then don’t bother. The whole point is to get the states regions connected together and shrink the travel times. Reducing the travel time from fresno to sf from 3.5 hours to 80 minutes is a potential game changer. Its a big deal
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
they’ve taken a very fast train to a very slow bus in LA.
Thing is LA has lots of other options besides cars and slow buses. They have commuter rail, subway, light rail, fast buses. They can take the fast train to the fast subway. Even a fast train to a slow bus will be faster than an automobile to the traffic jams in LA.
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
Its true. One thing I can’t wait to try is the trip from tbt to laus to hwood and highland via red line. Say there’s a concert at HOB or something, walk down the street, hop on the train – zippity do, Im in la, go downstairs hop on metro, pop up to hwd. see a show, and be downtown for the midnight train home to sf, which will drop me 7 blocks from my apt. no fuss, no muss, no planning, no baggage, no overnight stay, no tsa nonsense, and since its always summer in la, I dont even need a coat. throw on the jeans and t, pop down to the show and be home in bed early enough to work the next morning. HSR, as currently planned, will give me that kind of lickety split, dippity do, no drama, access to a huge part of the state like that, and that is going to rock. And millions of my fellow californians are going to figure out that they can do the same thing for any number of reasons and its gonna change they way we live, as californians…. well, we still live the same fabulous we already do, only we’ll do it faster, simpler and with cocktails at 220mph.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
…HOB? PATH goes to HOB, JSQ, NWK and WTC. …..
Johnathan Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 7:39 pm
Yeah, the high speed rail lifestyle develops new travel markets that cars and planes can’t offer. Which is why I like the Siemen’s slogan: Economies move at 220 mph.
You can save a night’s hotel room charge, carry items not suited for air travel (like deliver suitcases of gold jewelry and meeting your buyer), zip by highway traffic, receive family/group/multi-ride discounts not offered by airplanes, commuting to work daily, make more client visits, take a month long international trip as a Central California resident, etc.
Only a third of the ridership would be between the Bay Area and the LA Basin. The rest composes of Central California and local urban commutes. By 2020, LA will have the Wilshire BRT, Expo Line, Gold Line Foothill Extension, Crenshaw Line, I-405 light rail, Downtown Regional Connector, and Purple Line extension to Fairfax completed. This is without 30/10. LA Metro may double its ridership with completion of all Measure R projects.
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Not to mention pretty much the entire time on the train can be spent in a productive manner thanks to wifi and other amenities. Not to mention that it’s a lot more comfortable.
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
Its really true, there’s a couple bands that friends and I will follow around the state, we all live in various parts of the bay/la/sd/fno/riv/ the oc etc and bands will play all over, in these venues in these places – fox theater riverside, or a casino in fresno or hob in ana, etc, and the logistics are more costly and time consuming with flying whereas the train gets you a lot closer to a lot more places. Sure your friends have to pick you up etc, there are still logistics to work out but the core of it is made so much easier. Everytime all I can think is “wow this would have been so much easier if hsr were already in place”
There’s other things too. Things that just don’t occur to people. Once I missed a funeral in BFD because there was no way to get from sf to bfd and back in the allotted time frame without taking off work. It was not possible. But with hsr at 4 tph, I could have been there and back without missing a beat. There are thousands of possible situations where hsr is game changer.
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Heh, speaking of bands, I can see small bands performing on certain trains in the dining car.
Johnathan Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
I took a photo of Mt. Fuji on the Tokaido Shinkansen, eat a train lunch box, passed through a snow storm around Gifu (filmed the scenery), and did some reading. Jan. 2nd is peak travel time for the Japanese, so bus seats and airplane tickets would be extremely hard to get, neither would driving through a snow storm be fun. Arrived at noon and had the afternoon for sightseeing.
If we were driving:
1. The sun would set by the time we reached Kyoto, wasting an entire day.
2. Pay $60/day to rent a car, $120 for highway tolls, $60 gas, and parking. I would be insane to try it.
3. Miss the chance to explore Kyoto Station.
If it was between driving, taking an overnight bus, or nine hours of local train rides, the answer would be simple: I won’t make the Kyoto trip.
It’s the same for international tourists that arrive at San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Most don’t have a driver’s license. They would make the cross state trips if it were a viable option.
Alon Levy Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
The projects you’ve described for LA are precisely 30/10. Without 30/10, by 2020 LA has the Expo Line and the Foothills Extension.
Johnathan Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
See second image on Metro’s official blog below:
http://thesource.metro.net/2010/05/13/villaraigosa-explains-3010-initiative-to-house-committee/
Completion timelines are listed for both current plans and 30/10 accelerated plans.
Alon Levy Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
Sorry, you’re right. I misread “Wilshire BRT” in your post as “Wilshire subway.”
synonymouse Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
We don’t even know what the true costs of Tejon would be because the best alignment for the base tunnels was dismissed by PB and a cover story concocted to paper over the political fix in favor of Palmdale real estate developers. Same mo as with BART broad gauge decades earlier. PB is way too politicized to be trusted.
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
“Interestingly in Europe it’s the opposite”
The Europeans who oppose HSR have nothing in common with US “deniers”. They are pro-rail, anti-oil and anti-nuclear. You’ll find them mostly in Italy and Germany. In Italy, they have no qualms about being supported by rich NIMBYs with whom they have nothing in common.
They say high-speed trains waste a lot of energy for a gain in speed that nobody demands, except rail companies who want to make their lines more profitable. They also claim the TGV is highly responsible for France’s refusal to phase out nuclear electricity.
We can note this group has very few followers in France whose electricity is 80% nuclear and has the highest number of high-speed trains. This French “thoughtlessness” is a big problem for the group. With no following in France they remain marginal and their lobbying power is zero.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
FRance would be foolish to give up nuclear power. Its the smartest thing they ever could have done. Its too bad the US didn’t do it. We wouldn’t be in the economic mess we are in. I have a lot of respect for the french for many reasons. They know how to live, they know what’s important, they know how to cook, they have strong national pride, they value their language and sovereignty, they aren’t afraid to take to the streets en mass when they are unhappy, and they are pragmatic when faced with those things they can’t change such as lack of natural resources. ( I also like how they believe in keeping a certain personal space distance when greeting, their reserved social interaction, and the fact that they don’t feel compelled to offer up fake smiles and gestures of interest to total strangers like we do in the US. – that’s right, I don’t really care how you are today, just ring up my purchase and and get me outta here okay?!)
I’m moving to France. That’s all there is too it.
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Jim, I’m afraid you idealize France a bit. My compatriots’ behavior often infuriates me, and especially our president’s. I remember a politician once saying “electoral promises are only binding for those who believe them”. How true.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
okay well don’t pop my bubble. I have to believe that if nowhere else, at least in France they still know how to act. What’s next, are you gonna tell me they’ve all gotten fat eating chicken mcnuggets and they’re running around smiling and waving to each other and saying “yo wassup” when they enter a shop. Have they traded the la charcuterie, boulangerie, boucherie, et patisserie for the 7-11? Please don’t tell me that. I’m counting on them to be the last bastion of etiquette and proper social behavior on earth.
Hopefully this Mars colony idea will work out someday and humans can start over fresh the right way again.
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 10th, 2010 at 4:17 am
France is McDonald’s 2nd market after the US. There is a MacDo (that’s what we call them in France) inside Marseille St Charles station. When leaving the TGV platform, look down if you don’t want the Golden Arches to be the first thing that meets your eyes when arriving in Marseille.
jimsf Reply:
October 10th, 2010 at 7:24 am
noooooooooooo!
Let’s assume I live in Fresno and need to go to Pasadena (where my company has a main office) to a meeting.
ESTIMATED TIME OF TRAIN TRAVEL:
Drive from home or office in Fresno (Herndon Ave. where lots of business parks and modern house developments are located, to HSR station downtown Fresno, park car, board train:
approx. 30 min. (let’s say)
Train Ride FNO to LAUS: 90 minutes
Alight train, walk to taxi stand, ride Taxi from LAUS to Pasadena: 30 min. (of course longer if you take public transit)
Total travel time: 2h 30 min.
Total estimated cost of train travel:
train $120 (based on current r/t 2nd class unrestricted ticket Florence-Rome, nearly same distance as Fresno-LA, consider though that Trenitalia is the cheapest of the EU HSR)
Taxi: $50 round trip
Parking at Fresno station for one day: $10
Total Cost r/t: $180.
ESTIMATED TIME OF CAR TRAVEL:
3h 30 min (door to door o/w)
ESTIMATED COST OF CAR TRAVEL (r/t)
Gas: $45
Car rental for one day (in lieu of wear and tear on own car): $35
Total cost: $80.
Convenience and freedom of having your own transportation in LA and not having to transfer from car to train to taxi: PRICELESS.
Of course there will be some who will opt for the train in spite of the higher cost because saving 1 hour will be important to them or because they don’t like driving. However I wouldn’t expect the same success HSR has in other countries. If you drive from Florence to Rome, it will cost you 44 euro on the train (o/w) but if you drive gas alone will be at least 30 euros, plus at least 20 euros of freeway toll. So gas+tolls alone (w/o wear and tear on car) is already more expensive than the train ticket. If you add the expensive parking in either Rome or Florence, and the fact that EU cities have everything within a short bus or walk from the station, it’s no surprise that people there opt to take the train instead of driving. Basically a train there is not only the fastest option, but also the cheapest (unless it’s multiple people traveling together).
I love trains but I’m sorry to say but the same is not true in California. One has to be realistic about it. Car travel is cheap and convenient here. The success of HSR will therefore hinge on stealing customers from the air market, that’s why a fast SF-LA connection is more important than serving the Central Valley communities. Of course it would be different if Fresno had 3 million people.
Drive straight from home
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
The common assumption among the bay and la sophisticates is that the middle of the state doesn’t matter. It does. A lot more than you think. And people going to their company’s business meeting is not the likely scenario. I’m exhausted defending the central valley and the ridership I know is there, against the hoity-toits. There is no reason whatsoever to spend 40 billion plus dollars if all you are going to do is give businessmen an extra option for getting from la to sf. It would be a huge waste of money, even it if it made a profit. The point of investing in californias rail infrastructure is to tie together all the regions, who are paying for it, paying for it because they want to be connected too, together. YOu honestly don’t think the population of the heart of the state is worth paying attention to because you think they are less than. That is the underlying motivation. Its rampant in the bay and socal. I’m pretty sick of it cuz I know better.
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 5:59 pm
a) Why are you taking the train to LAUS, when you could instead take it to Burbank? And yes, I know that it might stop in Glendale, not Burbank.
b) Why are you quoting the price for an unrestricted ticket?
c) 3h 30min is only possible if there’s no traffic, which will become increasingly unlikely in the future.
d) You’re assuming that car travel will REMAIN cheap and convenient in California indefinitely. The trends are indicating the opposite.
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
It’s even easier than I thought in your example of Fresno-Pasadena. There will likely be BRT in Fresno by the time HSR is online, and you can easily take the Gold Line from LAUS to Pasadena. So you may never need to get in a car or taxi, except for a few miles at either end.
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
by the way – ridership and otp continue to improve in cali
jimsf Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
re: the counties to be served by hsr in the valley… Extensive growth is predicted for the region. DOF projects a population of 15.6 million by 2040, a tripling of the current population
datacruncher Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:25 pm
And yet Fresno with the current 5+ hour train/bus ride on the San Joaquins to LA or SF still sees many rail passengers, people already choosing not to drive. The Fresno Amtrak station handles a relatively large passenger volume compared to other California cities in the Bay Area or Southern California, and with fewer frequencies than many of the other cities receive on the Surfliners, Capitols, etc.
FY2009 California Amtrak Passengers by station:
http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/CALIFORNIA09.pdf
wu ming Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
man, sac has huge ridership relative to the population. davis is certainly punching above its weight as well.
Peter Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
And that’s with conventional speed trains only.
wu ming Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
the whole valley has disproportionate ridership. HSR will be huge.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:10 am
Yes I know because those are the people whom I talk to everyday. I know more about them than the chsra does. They are the most underserved, the most willing to use [rail], they most loyal, have the most pent up demand, and have the most to gain.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:17 am
These comments about ridership in what are some comparitively small places points out a potential falacy that too many believe in, and that is tying population density to travel volume, particularly in regard to rail. The two are not necessarily the same!
If they were, would we have built railroads in the 19th century and interstates in the 20th across the deserts of Utah, Nevada, and New Mexico, or across the plains of Nebraska and the Dakotas? Not too many people there then or now! For that matter, why would we have sent locomotives and later highway vehicles marching across the mountains of Pennsylvania and West Virginia, or the ranges of the Rockies and the Cascades?
Nostalgia trip, even if it is with freight (and coal at that)–steam locomotives marching across a mountain in Virginia in the 1950s; the place mostly looks the same today, and yes, trains still march there. . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV8rA3UE-lc
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 8:54 pm
I don’t make the trip regularly, only when needed, but I can tell you that the two-hour train ride to Washington, DC from where I live when I have to work there is much, much more preferable than driving in that traffic an dealing with the parking. Oh, and that two-hour train ride is an all-stops local that only goes about 75 miles, so you are talking about an average speed of well under 40 mph.
Of course, I have to also recall that I swore off driving down there when my last trip down required 4 hours to cover those same 75 miles. Actual mileage, because of the route I took, was closer to 100 miles, but that still works out to an average driving speed of 25 mph, much of it on so-called super highways. If we ever lose that train, I’m never going to Washinton again, even if the job requires it; I’ll just turn down the assignment. The hassle won’t be worth it.
If a two-hour train ride has functional advantages at under 40 mph, what will true high speed rail do for its passengers and for the country?
wu ming Reply:
October 8th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
if you count the metro populations of cities with HSR stops in the central valley, it comes out to 4.28 million. these cities have the highest growth rates in the state, and the region may match the bay area in population by the time the HSR is completed. it might seem insignificant to you, but that’s a lot of people living pretty close to the HSR line.
John Burrows Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 1:08 am
For the round trip you will be saving 2 hours. How much is 2 hours of your time worth?
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 4:38 am
In my case it was exchanging at least 2 hours of frustration and stress (that’s when traffic wasn’t bad, and I could never remember a time it wasn’t), plus more stress and frustration at finding a parking place, plus fatigue, plus stiff legs, plus a sore butt, plus a $35.00 parking ticket on one occasion, for two hours of enjoying the Potomac Valley, the steam engine on exhibit at Gaithersburg, assorted Victorian era stations along the line designed by Francis Baldwin, a chance to read a newspaper, strecting my legs to avoid stiffness, the chance to work if I chose to do so (plenty of others on the train do). . .who wants to drive anymore?
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:13 am
driving is so over.
clb Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 5:41 am
Huh? Taxi? slow pub transit LAUS to Pasadena?
Living in Pasadena when I had Jury duty in downtown LA -
Gold Line to LAUS = $1.25 – Bus to Downtown – $0.25
total round trip $3
Gold line Schedule:
http://www.metro.net/riding_metro/bus_overview/images/804.pdf
Riding time is 17 min to/from the Fillmore station, and 23 min to/from the Lake station
So your $50 taxi becomes $2.50 Gold Line….
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 6:11 am
So you’re going to waste 7 hours of your day sitting in a car, unable to get any work done, when you could be on a high speed train sending emails, working on a presentation, or reconciling the latest budget numbers?
This is a perfect example of people not being willing to admit the 20th century is over. “Freedom of having your own transportation” in LA is now trumped by “ability to stay connected to your digital world,” which CANNOT be done in the car. If workplace contact were still just about phones – i.e. if this were 1985 – then you might have a point. But it’s 2010 and I don’t know of anyone who can afford to be offline for 7 hours of a day when there is an alternative that keeps them connected.
By 2020, when Phase 1 of the HSR system is to be completed, very few people will be able to afford the luxury of taking off a day from work to travel from one part of the state to another via automobile. Digital connectivity will be of paramount importance. It already is to Millennials, which is why we are so strongly supportive of passenger rail and why we’re driving less. It soon will be to most other generations as well, as they find their desire to maintain 20th century practices becoming impossible to reconcile with 21st century realities.
Drunk Engineer Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 9:16 am
I think you need to get out more. Or at least see a professional about an obvious Internet addiction problem.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 9:23 am
Some people just operate in certain circles where its all about tech and connectivity and they just don’t realize that there is a whole big country of people out there who don’t do those kinds of jobs. That said, one can’t argue against the superior comfort, connectivity, dining and entertain offered by rail travel that far exceeds air and auto offerings hands down.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 9:32 am
I’m talking about the *workplace* in California, where a large number of jobs (by no means all) require people to be in front of a computer for most of the working day. Taking 7 hours out of the workday to drive increasingly means one is essentially taking a day off from work, whereas using a WiFi-equipped train with ample room to set up a laptop means one can continue to work even while in transit.
Aside from things like construction, retail, and other jobs that require one to either work with their hands or have face-to-face contact with a customer, California jobs are already built around digital connectivity, whether we like it or not (and I do not disagree that sitting at a computer terminal for long periods of time is not healthy). But to dismiss “work” as “an obvious Internet addiction problem” shows you’re deeply out of touch with reality.
jimsf Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 10:28 am
Robert, just keep in mind that those “other” jobs are the majority not the minority of employment in california. I may not seem like it from where you sit, but they are.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
The point isn’t whether they’re the majority or not.
The point is that if I own a business in Fresno, and an employee has to go to Pasadena for a business meeting, I am going to require that they take the high speed train so they can still be productive and get some work done. I’ll reimburse the cost of the HSR ticket, the Metro Rail ticket, and the Zipcar rental at the Pasadena Gold Line station. But if the employee insists on driving, I’d insist they use a vacation or a personal day for it.
That’s not because I’m a train fanatic, it’s because of common sense.
link
Guess Anaheim just approved their station – and it excludes HSR…
http://voiceofoc.org/article_19bd7cac-cda1-11df-892e-001cc4c03286.html
Peter Reply:
October 9th, 2010 at 8:43 am
Looks like Pringle’s conflict of interest is causing Anaheim to get more than its share … or NOT.
Gloria Romero Says Southern California Transportation Officials Richard Katz And Curt Pringle Are Breaking The Law:
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/transportation/gloria-romero-speed-rail/