Attacks on Golden Gate Bridge Similar to Attacks on High Speed Rail Today
The San Francisco Chronicle’s John King has a truly fascinating article in today’s paper examining the debate over whether to build the Golden Gate Bridge, a debate that reached a head in the fall of 1930 ahead of a public vote to approve bond funding.
Flickr photo by Salim Virji
Critics depicted the bridge as financially unsound, legally dubious, an aesthetic blight and an engineering hazard in the decade before the start of construction in 1933. The battle was most fierce in the fall of 1930, when voters in six counties were asked to allow $35 million in bond sales for construction.
We know the outcome: one of the few structures in California that genuinely deserves to be called an icon. But, on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the span’s completion, a look back at the fight shows how little has changed in terms of the attacks that are aimed at major alterations to the landscape – and the difficulty that one generation has in predicting how future generations might choose to live and the values they might hold.
The criticisms should sound familiar:
The committee findings soon became fodder for a newspaper advertisement that began “MR. TAXPAYER: This Ad is published to save you money – READ IT.” After all, they echoed what opponents had been saying all along: Things were moving too fast. There were too many unanswered questions. The numbers couldn’t be trusted.
The ad was one of many placed by the Taxpayers’ Committee Against Golden Gate Bridge Bonds. With a membership list that included future Mayor Roger Lapham and City Engineer M.M. O’Shaughnessy, this was no mere collection of gadflies. Such opponents insisted they weren’t against the idea of a bridge, simply the reality of this one.
“I am in favor of a bridge across the Golden Gate if it can be physically and feasibly built,” O’Shaughnessy declared in one ad. His statement then cautioned that toll bridges “too numerous to mention” didn’t generate the traffic necessary to pay the costs of needed maintenance.
This isn’t much different from the reports of the Legislative Analyst’s Office or the anti-HSR NIMBYs in Palo Alto and Atherton who claim that the high speed rail project is being rushed, with too many unanswered questions, and that the project won’t generate the trips necessary to break even on operating costs.
Although the automobile had become a mass form of transportation by 1930, many people still didn’t accept that it would become the dominant method of travel. Looking back on a past they knew well, an era where ferry boats and trains moved people around the region, the bridge’s opponents were convinced that the new era promised by project supporters was nothing more than a delusional and risky fantasy.
Now there wasn’t necessarily anything wrong with relying on ferries and trains to move people around the Bay Area, and today we know well the costs of freeways and automobile dependence. The point here is that we also know the Golden Gate Bridge turned out to be a major success, easily generating the trips required to break even on system operations.
One reason this happened was that the bridge enabled new economic activity, particularly in Marin and Sonoma Counties. By creating a link from those two counties to the San Francisco economy, the bridge brought suburban development to the North Bay and with it the trips needed to fund the bridge’s operation. Again, we can and should debate whether that was the right way to grow Marin and Sonoma Counties, or whether a rail system would have provided better patterns of growth. In fact, the HSR system will promote urban density rather than suburban sprawl, so this time we are getting it right. The fact is, however, that the bridge did work out as forecast.
As King himself explains, this is very similar to the current debate over high speed rail:
What is striking in retrospect isn’t how wrong the arguments turned out to be – the $35 million indeed covered the cost of construction, for instance – but how familiar they still sound: We need more details, the details we do have can’t be trusted, and there are better alternatives.
Look no further than the ongoing campaign against California’s high-speed rail system. Before voters approved bonds to help fund the effort in 2008, opponents depicted it in ballot arguments as a “boondoggle” that would benefit “out-of-state special interests.” Since then they’ve used the environmental review process and other venues to challenge the financing, ridership projections and route of the still-evolving plan.
King’s explanation as to why we’re seeing these criticisms again:
Such rhetoric would have no traction now; a legacy of the 1960s is that people who fight large-scale change aren’t caricatured as old fogies. The presumption is that they’re on the side of the angels, battling gentrification or ecological harm or other threats to the common good.
That’s very similar to the point I made in yesterday’s post, that the media have been trained to see critics of government projects as being heroic when most of the time they’re just being selfish and small-minded.
In a sense, what is needed today is a corrective to the 1960s. The ideologies of urbanism that came from that time were deeply flawed in that they were utterly dependent on fossil fuels and automobiles. What Peninsula NIMBYs are trying to protect is a model that is extremely ruinous for the environment, yet was once defined as somehow being environmentally friendly (at a time when the effect of carbon emissions on the environment was not well known) and efforts to modernize the definition of “environmentalism,” to bring it into alignment with our current realities, are regularly blocked.
Ultimately that’s one of the biggest points of similarity between the high speed rail project and the Golden Gate Bridge – they are both examples of anticipating and meeting future transportation needs that get opposed by people who are just not willing to accept reality. Change isn’t easy. But change is happening, right now. The status quo is bad for the environment and for the economy. HSR is here to help. 75 years from now, I hope Californians can look back at the development of their high speed rail system and look on it with the same sense of success and pride that we view the Golden Gate Bridge.
The GG Bridge was pushed by anti-rail and anti-transit interests, in particular the auto ass’n.
@ D.P.
I did not know the NS was back in the steam excursion business? -
http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/05/14/Steam-trains-likely-to-go-through-area-in-July.html
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:19 am
Oh, yes, thanks to the new CEO, who was a young buck (barely out of his teens) on the Southern about 1970, when the original steam program was just hitting its stride. Another example of the coming of age phenomenon, which also defines the generational break?
The current revival of steam on NS reminds me of what it must have been like when the original program was just starting in 1966; in fact, the first trips have been run with No. 630, a Southern 2-8-0, which was one of the first three engines in the program. The first engine, 2-8-2 4501, which is also ex-Southern, is under overhaul now, and hopefully will be running this year in time for her centennial.
http://www.21stcenturysteam.com/
http://steamcentral.com/
Part of what is bringing this about is that this year is the 30th anniversary of the formation of Norfolk Southern, so this is part of the celebration. Another part is the painting of something like 18 new diesel freighters in colors once used by predecessor roads, such as the Pennsylvania, the Virginian, the Nickel Plate, and the original Norfolk Southern (which was a small regional road in North Carolina and Virginia).
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=56989
Currently, NS is leasing operational steamers for the steam program, as opposed to overhauling the machines themselves. One the the engines that has been leased is the Fort Wayne Historical Society’s 765, one of the NKP’s famous 2-8-4s. Reportedly this engine is to get modern PTC gear for its service on NS, and that the installation is to be chronicled on the Society’s Facebook page. Bet that should be of some interest here–a modern PTC system on a steam engine! I’ll try to link that up as soon as I know something is available to post.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:51 am
While we wait for news on the 765. . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqNbd-MT4O0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c4YkoC0BY4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUxNpD3TQME
Smoke, whistles, steam–except for bigger engines, did it ever really get better than this?
Just ’cause it looks good, because it looks right!–a quick visit to New England:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr-o_dPSDA4
Have fun.
YesonHSR Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 7:58 am
The Nimbys/whiners in the 1930s were not treated like as Hero/victims as they are portrated in todays media, just the opposite..And the projects were something the media follwed with pride and interest instead of tearing it apart with every stupid little nonsense thing .
This California budget crisis thing seems pretty bad, guys.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:40 am
Not with an endless mob of zombie cadres out there creeping up to the State Capitol with “Tax Me More” tattooed on their foreheads Charlie Manson style.
Spokker Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:48 am
It looks like the red-county Orange County is in a pretty good position to weather the budget crisis.
http://www.scpr.org/news/2012/05/14/32419/oc-budget-more-stable-californias-still-some-bumps/
[quote]In the midst of dramatic cuts across much of California, Orange County’s budget director says that the county is actually in a strong fiscal place.
After four consecutive years of across-the-board cuts in all departments, Orange County Budget Office Director Frank Kim said the fiscal year 2012-13 recommended budget is balanced without major cuts.[/quote]
So naturally, the state is going to go after them, haha.
YesonHSR Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 7:52 am
Must be the the valley and /socal still down..SF is starting to boom..its hard to find an Apt right now and commerical rent is brisk..along with real new construction…one right down the block form me.
DavidM Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 8:02 am
The state is going after them for using school money to cover their general fund. They have been getting bailed out for years since they almost went bankrupt.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/04/06/state-officials-sue-orange-county-for-73-5m-in-property-taxes-earmarked-for-schools/
Tom McNamara Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 9:21 am
It’s an election year.
Brown tried to get the tax increases Schwarzenegger passed extended and it failed, so now he needs to create as dire a situation as possible on paper to get them to be approved. Realignment can solve the structural deficit, but you have seen already what sort of political firestorm that type of stuff creates….
Is this article correct?
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bullet-risks-20120514,0,4603595.story
With this recession predicted to go on forever, a 2017 deadline doesn’t seem necessary any more. I’d rather they get things started off right, then keep going with the same crews till the whole system is finished.
joe Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 8:21 am
The deadline is necessary out of fairness and economic need: We have the funding because CA promised to use it promptly. There are other States willing to spend the federal money if we delay.
Remember, this HSR funding was designed for stimulus, not a savings account. Delay doesn’t help fix the economic
flowmotion Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
In retrospect, the Dems probably regret the “shovel ready” stimulus idea. Most states burned through their dollars on pointless repaving projects. California is one of the few trying to make the most out of it. Now, after burning their goodwill on a whole lot of nothing, a real infrastructure stimulus seems remote.
Also what that article says about the HSRA is troubling. They really should turn the construction job over to CalTrans.
joe Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:18 pm
What the article says is supposed to sound troubling – no where did the article clarify that 1.5 M spent a day was Fed money?
It’s a pro-austerity article by the LATimes – now sign up for the paid subscription and click through on their ads.
flowmotion Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
“just 37 employees and has been operating for months without a chief executive, a deputy chief executive or a chief financial officer. It also has no single executive overseeing construction” … In PB We Trust.
Sic Caltrans on this, they’ll have the ROW cleared and bulldozers rolling within months.
joe Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 3:28 am
Legislate and Re-Org includes HSR and Caltrans – I think the Gov made this suggestion.
BruceMcF Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 9:18 am
Its not clear what “keep going with the same crews till the whole system is finished” means in your comment. The 2017 Deadline refers to the Initial Construction Segment that they have the $3.3b in Federal Funding for. If California does not want to use it by 2017, there are projects in the Pacific Northeast, Illinois, Virginia and North Carolina ongoing, and finding a state willing to spend it before 2017 won’t be a problem.
Elizabeth Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 9:54 am
Not all the money actually has this deadline by law. The FY 2011 money didn’t have any deadline so it would be more flexible.
It is a very interesting article and i do see the comparisons to the HSR project. If only we could look into the future and see if it turns out to be a great investment or not. Examples like the Golden Gate Bridge and the Hoover Dam are obvious winners. Everyone tends to forget the losers. Like the Alaskan bridge to nowhere or the recent trend for cities to build convention centers that never pay off.
When I was in college it was the new Denver International Airport that was the project in question. I actually supported it but it was critisized as too big and too far away and the strangest was too loud for the neighbors (all 3 of them because it is a long way out of the city). The baggage system was a disaster, tyring a new technology on that scale and it failed outright. I think opinion has pretty much turned around and in 30 years it will look like a good investment because it is big enough and modern enough to handle air traffic for the next 50-100 years.
Does HSR meet that standard…perhaps…no one has a crystal ball. I imagine if it is completly built out it will have some utility no matter what. Even the Big Dig (now that it is done) is appreciated for what it does. It just did it way overbudget and with shoddy workmanship. But it did help ease traffic (many many many years too late).
I think what seperates HSR from these projects right now are 2 things. First, they don[‘t know where the money is going to come to finish it. The identified sources (private and Federal Government) have not made commitments, much less ponied up the dough and if the GOP retains control of either the House or Senate it will be a cold day in Hell before CA gets another dime of Fed money for it. Private is only going to contribute if they can make money which means it needs to be built out and running before they will invest. Either way it is a perfect storm of problems for getting it built out and a partial system is for sure an epic fail.
The second problem is the act itself. I don’t think the HSR as now envisioned meets either the letter or spirit of the law. The lawsuits will slow it up, sapping momentum, and that uncertainty will only make the first problem above worse.
In this climate, with the 16 Billion deficit right now, I just don’t think it is going to happen. If it did, would we look back and think we were stupid to even think of not building? Perhaps, but it will be academic unless someone comes up with the money.
BruceMcF Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 9:20 am
“I think what seperates HSR from these projects right now are 2 things. First, they don[‘t know where the money is going to come to finish it.”
Yes, and another difference is that its not a bridge, so using it before the entire rail corridor is finished is a much more straightforward proposition than using a bridge before its reached from shore to shore.
John Nachtigall Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:04 am
Those are the breaks Bruce…every project has natural advantages and disadvantages. It was more straightforward…and HSR has to overcome that challenge
BruceMcF Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 10:35 am
If the Legislature approves the Prop1a funding for the ICS, then the ICS will be fully funded before commencing construction.
Which is what makes your comparison between funding of the completion of the entire Phase 1 and funding for the completion of the Golden Gate bridge an apples and oranges comparison ~ the ICS will be usable once completed, it does not have to wait until the entire Phase 1 is completed to be put to use.
John Nachtigall Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 3:44 pm
Usable…but Useless….The ICS is not worth the money unless they build it out the whole way. It will be 6 billion for a marginally more usefull regular train line…not what the money was supposed to be spent on.
joe Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Not useless – few partially built strictures are useful let alone cost effective.
We know where the money can come from – the requirement we have 100% funding lined up is not how government works – year to year with the power to pull back funds.
CA has an estimated 238 B in road/bridge maintenance needed over the next 10 years and it costs more as we delay. CA does not don’t know where all the money will come from – shall we halt road building until this gap is filled?
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
shall we halt road building until this gap is filled?
Yes. This is exactly the idea of fix-it-first.
joe Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 6:59 pm
Sign me up – Tom Friedman !
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
I thought Tom Friedman was the guy advocating for flashy bullet trains and never saying a single goddamned thing about anything else. How much has he written about Shanghai’s maglev, and how little about the amazing pace of its conventional subway construction?
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:55 pm
Tom Freidman should be remembered as number one cheerleader for the US invasion of Iraq.
Why anybody would ever listen to another word spoken or written by such a criminal and clown is beyond me.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 8:12 pm
The stuff he wrote about the Middle East (at least, about Israeli society) in the 1980s is one of the very few things I read on the subject by Americans that are mildly insightful. The other Iraqi War cheerleaders do not have any of that.
Andrew Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
@Richard: Yes, Tom Friedman is a crude purveyor of oversimplifying metaphors. On the other hand, he does deserve credit for helping people realize how far behind the US is.
BruceMcF Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
That utility is not instead of the utility as an HSR corridor, it is in addition to the utility as an HSR corridor, since the utility as an HSR corridor does not somehow melt away if it takes a little extra time to complete the corridor for operation of an Express HSR service.
And its not a marginally more useful rail corridor, its a substantially more useful rail corridor. If the San Joaquin can run an 80mph transit speed between Merced and Bakersfield, that turns a current run of about 3hrs on that stretch into a run of about 2hrs, which is competitive with driving for that stretch, and with no interference with freight traffic, so better on-time performance. The current evening services are able to arrive over two hours earlier ~ from both the reduction in transit speed as well as the opportunity to reduce the slack at the turnaround, given that half of the mileage is on dedicated passenger rail. That also means that the first two runs of the day in either direction able to make three trips rather than two, which is eight services a day each way rather than six from the same equipment.
Add the Bakersfield/Lancaster segment and the usability of the rail corridor is greater, though you’ll of course require different rolling stock to take advantage of it.
slackfarmer Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 9:46 am
CAHSR and DIA both lacked funding for full buildot. The initial airport build included the core facilities and some of the planned runways. As discussed in yesterdays thread, it’s still under construction. Runways to add, terminals to be upgraded, and rail connection to downtown Denver.
Such is the nature of large infrastructure systems. Expecting funding to be in place for the full buildout before commencement is unreasonable and contrary to historical practice. The sooner we start construction on the initial HSR segment, the sooner we can apply for more federal funds for expansion and upgrades.
John Nachtigall Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:06 am
DIA had funding to become a functioning airport before buildout. HSR does not. After this first 3.3 Billion from the feds there is currently no more coming. It may or may not be unreasonable, but it is a problem for HSR. If no more money comes, then it will be a waste of the money spent to that point
BruceMcF Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 10:39 am
No, it does not become a functioning airport, it becomes a functional rail corridor. Between the the use value, the progress toward a Bay to Basin corridor, and the stimulus impact, its worth the state funding required.
It would, of course, have been a better deal for California if California had not overbid the state match in its application for the Federal funding.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
the problem with that is that IT WAS SOLD to the voters as a completed package, and nowhere did it say that the projects completeion would be dependent on federal funds that may never materialize
thatbruce Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 10:15 am
@lex luther:
It sounds like you didn’t read the voter guide to Prop 1A. It has quotes like:
However, bond funds may be used to provide only up to one-half of the total cost of construction of each corridor or segment of a corridor. The measure requires the authority to seek private and other public funds to cover the remaining costs.
and
While the authority plans to fund the construction of the proposed system with a combination of federal, private, local, and state monies, no funding has yet been provided.
Maybe you missed the difference between the estimated (in 2006 dollars) cost of $45 billion, vs the bond issue for just under $10 billion (year of issue). The analysis reminded voters of this with:
Of the total amount, $9 billion would be used, together with any available federal monies, private monies, and funds from other sources
The literature available to voters at the time says otherwise. It stated that the exact sources of funding for it, beyond the $9 billion of California bond money, was unknown. It stated that federal funding would be sought, along with private investment. It was not sold as a completely-funded project.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
I’m not going to disagree with the general statements you make, and I have no sympathy for Robert’s argumentatum ad portam auream. Looking forward rather than backward, we need to compare costs and ridership, and not try to build infrastructure because we can.
That said, I think HSR can pass muster, assuming costs can be brought under control. The current estimate, about $53 billion in today’s money, is higher than I’d like, but less than my cancel-now number. Further cost reductions are possible, but unlikely without hard decisions about whether Palmdale really needs to be served or (secondarily) whether Fresno and Bakersfield really need downtown stations. Of course further escalations are also possible, but if the first contracts to be tendered come on budget, most likely the rest will.
The ICS by itself has practically no benefits, but it’s pretty cheap, especially if you treat the federal money for it as free. It’s like an exploratory dig for a major tunnel project: it will let us know how realistic the costs are and what local construction challenges there are. Large cost overruns will indicate the rest of the project is shaky and should be canceled; on-budget construction will indicate the opposite.
By the way, the Big Dig’s effect on traffic is overrated. Although Boston traffic went down after peaking around 2005, the same reduction in traffic happened nationwide, as high gas prices caused VMT to stall. Meanwhile, the costs are being offloaded everywhere. The MBTA is being saddled with debt for court-mandated mitigations and has to slash service as a result: two-thirds of the MBTA’s present deficit is interest on Big Dig debt.
joe Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 5:31 pm
“Looking forward rather than backward, we need to compare costs and ridership, and not try to build infrastructure because we can.”
‘we’ in CA are not we out-side of CA. The stimulus will help our economy – RI’s not so much. Not factoring in to the value of job creation and the economic pain of the current CA economy (and added cuts to unemployment benefits in CA) is exactly why your analysis is incomplete.
53B is not a golden number and Palmdale is worth it to CA resident – and to RI resident – not so much.
Your Big-dig analysis – you coincidentally claim the Boston traffic improvement was part of a nation wide phenomena – the counter argument is the big-dig analysis was to improve traffic and has actual engineering arguments. What are yours?
How do court mandated mitigation costs and debt payment for the big-dig invalidate the project’s value? That’s a different issue.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
My analysis? There’s very little correlation between freeway miles per capita and congestion per capita, and none if you control for metro area size. Plus there’s a battery of studies that show that building more roads does not reduce congestion locally because traffic fills that capacity, and conversely when roads are removed much of their traffic disappears (for the West Side Highway in New York, it was one half).
The issue with court mitigations is that these are hidden costs that are offloaded onto transit users. To reduce the extra pollution, the courts mandated certain transit projects; instead of being paid by the Big Dig itself, they’re being paid by MBTA riders who do not use the road. This is worsening transit service and shifting modes in the wrong direction, increasing pollution further. And those are the mitigations that were built. Many were not, in contravention of court orders, and in one or two major cases, the costs magically tripled (to $8-9 billion for 2 km of North Station-South Station tunneling) when the people in charge didn’t want to build the projects.
This nastiness about my living in RI is really stupid when you’re defending a project that makes my transportation options worse and that all the local urbanists will tell you exactly what is wrong with.
joe Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 10:46 pm
The big dig has reduced congestion. Critics say it’s moved elsewhere – into the suburbs.
Mitigation: Public transit riders and drivers are all transportation users. People who do not ride the public ystem pay for it. Top two sources of funding – sale tax and then fares.
State Sales Tax $756M
Fares $430M
CA:HSR is a CA decision and it is very dishonest to measure the value of the HSR system without considering the economic benefits of putting people to work in CA and helping to improve the quality of life in the CV as well as join the CV to the coastal areas. Measuring the merits as a ridership/cost and setting arbitrary cost goals is insensitive and incomplete.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 11:24 pm
When MA dedicated sales tax revenue to the MBTA, it also saddled the MBTA with billions of dollars of debt for projects that were decided not by the agency. The MBTA is the most indebted public transit agency in the US as a result. See some explanation and numbers here. One third of this debt is Big Dig mitigations, the rest projects built by the state legislature before 2000.
And you can check sanitized data about freeway network size, city size, and congestion on my blog. (The numbers are cribbed from the Texas Transportation Institute.)
Do you know what’s really insensitive? To praise a $15 billion project for rich suburbanites and then when people complain that the costs of air pollution are being offloaded on Bostonians who don’t own cars, to complain that transit is subsidized.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Measuring the merits as a ridership/cost and setting arbitrary cost goals is insensitive and incomplete.
Incomplete? Insensitive? Right. I get it! Exactly like the so-called “theory” of “evolution”, forced on us by liberal elites.
Furthermore, double blind testing is an insensitive reductionist western plot to outlaw traditional and homeopathic wellness practices.
There’s all sorts of great things that become possible if you exterminate all numerate thought and follow the sensitive, true promptings of your heart.
Carbon emissions limits are just a way for socialists to drag down our standard of living.
The sky fairies demand infant genital mutilation.
There are no natural resources limits because human ingenuity knows no bounds.
A rising tide floats all boats.
An armed society is a polite society.
2 + 2 = whatever.
Math class is hard! Let’s go shopping!
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 6:46 pm
I think it might be argumentatum ad portūs aureī but then my Latin ain’t what it used to be.
Or at the very least portum aureum it’s a gate that’s golden not a gate made of gold.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
Portam auream maybe. Gate is feminine porta, so it’d be portam rather than portum.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
Um, I meant portam auri. Aurei is still an adjective, just in the genitive case.
Andrew Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 8:10 pm
Are you for real?
Alon Levy Reply:
May 17th, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Are you talking about how aurei is masculine, or what?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Porta or portus?
The Golden Gate doesn’t open and close but it is the embarkation/debarkation point for the riches of California
anyway the whole thing hinges on pōns
Alon Levy Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
Portus is port; gate is porta.
$6B+ for HSR in May revise budget.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/Revised/StateAgencyBudgets/2000/2665/department.html
Spokker Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:35 am
Genius. The strategy is to fund HSR while crippling the ability of detractors to sue the Authority through state courts. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/05/california-budget-cuts-courts.html
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
wrong. it doesnt stop lawsuits, it just overloads couts with more cases with less judges to see them which means backlog and that will drag out lawsuits. if any court issues an temp injunction against HSR while the lawsuits continue, the cuts to the courts would make it harder on the CHSRA due to time constraints
joe Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
Double wrong – read it.
“Our courts exist to protect the fundamental rights of all Californians,” McGuiness said. “We cannot turn litigants away simply because money is scarce.”
“Sadly, they and their constitutional rights are being washed away,” McCarthy said.”
Now ask yourself – if the courts are backed up for years then when will the court injunction be granted?
Spokker Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:26 pm
I wonder if high-profile cases will be given priority, though. I’m sure a ruling on HSR in California is much more important than one guy’s claim against his employer.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:38 pm
it flew right over your head didnt it
slackfarmer Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:45 am
$2.8B is from state bond funds and none from the state general fund, so the $6B+ must include federal funds.
BruceMcF Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:18 am
$3.3b from Federal funds.
Robert’s article here is really a ridiculous comparison, but he has made it before.
They were not short 90% of the funding to build the bridge when it was started in 1933 — indeed they had almost all the funds.
Then there is the magnitude.
$34 million to build in 1933 dollars is about $584 million in today’s dollars. Hell they have already spent more that that and they haven’t even put down a single foot of track.
Eric M Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 11:12 am
So?
You do realize the engineering and design of the bridge was 10% of the total cost? So your argument of $500 million spent and no track laid is irrelevant.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
And no unions in the mid-30′s. No comparison.
Spokker Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:01 pm
No boomers, either.
http://www.babyboomersruinedamerica.com/
Peter Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Umm, bullshit?
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
low wages – low costs in that era. Little relevance to today’s circumstances.
Remembers it was the carmen’s union insistence on 2-man operation that helped to kill most of the streetcar lines in the City. Dummies lost out anyway and had to drive buses.
Peter Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:22 pm
Still doesn’t change the fact that you made up your earlier claim.
morris brown Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
I got my cost information from Wikipedia. The total cost was around $35 million in 1930′s dollars.
My comparison to that cost, inflated to today’s dollars of close to $600 million as compared to a 68 – 74 – 98 billion project is valid indeed. There is really no comparison and Robert’s contention that the HSR project should go ahead because of the success of that project is really pretty irrelevant.
Eric M Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 5:08 pm
So we should just stop projects because they cost a lot more than they did 50, 60, 70, 80 years ago? Horrible logic that retards advancement and progress.
Take a look at the price of things fro the 30′s. By your logic, it would be insane to buy a house today for $600,000 because back then it was under $10,000. Actually, by the postings you have done on this blog, you clearly are only concerned with your own well being and not the future of the state.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Morris, the construction costs of all public works have gone up in real terms. The Interstate program cost about 9 million dollars per route-mile, in today’s dollars. Now go find a recent highway widening that is this cheap. I-69 in Indiana is if memory serves 30 million per lane-mile, and the terrain isn’t exactly the Rockies.
The interesting thing, by the way, is that although real costs go up over time, if you look at costs today, there’s very little difference between first- and third-world countries. Continental European subway construction costs in PPP terms are a hair higher than Chinese costs and lower than Indian costs. The cheapest third-world tunneling I’m aware of is in Turkey and Iran, both solidly middle-income, and those are only about on a par with Spain.
Peter Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
I wasn’t talking about construction costs. I was countering synonymouse’s ridiculous claim that unions weren’t involved in the construction of the GOlden Gate Bridge.
Joe Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Not one complaint on the internet from Morris about the expensive 101 widening. It is perfectly fine for expensive construction when it suits his interest.
Any idea how much per mile the lane costs Morris?
Jonathan Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
But, but, but… in Morris’ world, roads are a Public Good and therefore sacrosanct!
No-on expects _roads_ to recover the cost of their construction (even excluding interest).
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Let us not forget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934_West_Coast_waterfront_strike
either.
VBobier Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:15 pm
And as Peter said, Your statement is a LIE.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Oh, my, my, I lie. The mid thirties saw the Wagner Act and union organization, but the wages were still very low and the unions not that powerful yet. And where there were unusually powerful, as on the NYC waterfront, organized crime was often involved. During the War FDR cut a deal with them for help with the Italian invasion. He could have had them shot for sabotage.
There are lies of commission and lies of omission. Neatly forgotten is that the GG Bridge enjoys a monopoly on surface transport in its corridor. Also curiously forgotten is that the fiscal phenomenon known as “TOLLS!” License to print money. Tehachapi Stilt-A-Rail is going to have to award below market fares to attract riders – a far cry from charging lucrative and exorbitant tolls. as per GG District.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
I’ve been stuck in traffic waiting to cross the Golden Gate Bridge more than once. Evidence that they are charging below market rates for the toll. If they were charging market rates there wouldn’t be any congestion.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:23 pm
The highway lobby sees that congestion as simply the rationale for a second deck for autos.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
the bay bridge will carry more individual people in a week than HSR will in a month, and the golden gate is a worldwide tourist attraction, unlike high speed rail which is in many countries throughout the world.
and again, californians love their cars. addicted to oil? no, just addicted to freedom and convenience
Neville Snark Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Perfect. And my idea of freedom and convenience involves jumping on a train, and not having the ball-n-chain of a car to worry about, and getting to my destination while reading, looking out the window, working or browsing the internet, etc. For me, and for the envisaged riders, it’s much better; build it and we of course will still have our freeways etc.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:12 pm
why dont you just buy a limo then? you just described what limo riders do
VBobier Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
As long as You pay for it… ;p
Jonathan Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
l
Lex, are you really so clueless as to consider that a serious response?
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:39 pm
for you to believe that my response equals clueless only shows your elitism. typical progressive liberal nut
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 12:09 am
And you, sir, are too stuck in the present to see the problems we have if we don’t get out of cars, and don’t get off the oil standard, in spite of you’re working out on the trail (which is something I should do, but never seem to get the time for).
You also represent what is wrong with conservatism today, most of which has become mean spirited, authoritarian, corporatist, and just plain blind. Don’t you dare call me a liberal, I’m probably the most old-fashioned person here, as others here will attest–Catholic, in the pro-life camp, and patriotic, too. I may be among the few here–may even be the only one here–who wishes we had the old Hayes code back in the movie business. You, and others like you, make me ashamed of the conservative label. You, and others like you, are why what is a nominally “conservative” party is about to go on the rocks because of the extremism of its members. You, and others like you, are also giving religion, specifically Christianity, a bad rep.
And you’ve labeled yourself with insults to others like this:
“why dont you just buy a limo then? you just described what limo riders do”
“typical progressive liberal nut”
“. . .but apparently, you think any reference to freedom means repub. shows your true colors with you [your] indentured servitude to BIG BROTHER and BIG GOVERNMENT.”
“enter alex jones and the globalists, new world order and bohemian grove [groove?]”
And that’s just the personal insults, and about all from this page alone.
I’ve met your kind before, in person, in the flesh, not on a website, so I know what I’m speaking of. Believe it or not, to a certain extent I have a bit of sympathy for the conservative crowd. As I’ve said before, and quoting a coworker, too many of them, myself included, “have seen too many of the wrong changes.”
Take my word for it, if you get yourself called a cracked Tea-pot, a Repugnant One, or some of the other things that unfortunately come around by others who are less restrained than I am, you may rest assured you have earned such labels. Indeed, you have worked hard to earn them. That is an achievement of most doubtful stature.
Spokker Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 12:37 am
D.P. would ride a steam train to work if he could!
I agree with most of what you say Mr. Lubic, but there’s nothing wrong with cars that an increased gas tax, ending parking minimums (and/or charging the market rate for parking) and tolls cannot fix.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 4:10 am
No argument from me, Spokker, on the auto pricing, as I’ve written about before, with numbers; probably ought to run up the Highway Statistics links again for reference. . .
And a steam train on the former Pennsylvania Railroad line that’s only a block from my house? For commuter service as well as heritage service, like San Francisco’s cable cars and F-line, and the steam Harz Mountain railway in Germany? I like that! I like that!
Spokker Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 5:10 am
D.P., if you provide me with an email address, I can send you some of my own research into highway statistics (with some history to boot).
Peter Reply:
May 17th, 2012 at 5:06 am
No, what he described was train passengers do every day around the world. I’m pretty sure that rides in limos cost more, too.
Peter Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Or have no choice because we ripped up all the previous working public transit systems and subsidized everything related to automobiles.
VBobier Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:17 pm
Ah Yes, Yer true colors show, a Repugnican… Freedom? More like indentured servitude to Big Oil, If You want Freedom, Get out and start WALKING, otherwise shut up…
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
I walk and run every day, alongside the liberal progressive critical mass-hole bike riders who tell me to get out of their way because “this is a bike lane”
and nope, Im a Democrat and have been one since the Clinton came to power. I am a Bill Clinton dem, youre a jerry brown dem. BIG DIFFERENCE
but apparently, you think any reference to freedom means repub. shows your true colors with you indentured servitude to BIG BROTHER and BIG GOVERNMENT.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
Walking or running in the bike lane is just as bad as walking or running in the car lane.
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21211.htm
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
but its not a bike lane, its a recreation trail, thats why i laugh at them when they yell at me
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:33 pm
oh an the vehicle code you used has to do with those that “sit, stand, loiter or stop”, it mentions nothing about running, jogging or walking, so it doesnt apply and because its not precise, it would be thrown out easily in court. better luck next time
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:07 pm
loiter can cover a wide variety of things.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:16 pm
LOITERING in CALIFORNIA
California Penal Code Section 653.20(c) and Health & Safety Code Section 11530(a) define loitering as a “means to delay or linger without a lawful purpose for being on the property and for the purpose of committing a crime as opportunity may be discovered.”
delay or linger without lawful purpose is loitering, and running, jogging, walking is lawful and not loitering. have a nice day
thatbruce Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 10:34 am
@adirondacker12800:
This is probably a better match:
Pedestrian in Bicycle Lane
21966. No pedestrian shall proceed along a bicycle path or lane where there is an adjacent adequate pedestrian facility.
However there is insufficient information in lex’s comment to determine whether he illegally walks/runs in a defined bicycle lane, or whether he is legally on a shared path that the bicyclists arrogantly think they own.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
It difficult to determine how things work in Lex’s universe.
VBobier Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
So why didn’t Ya become a Repug like the Dixiecrats did?
Oh and Bill Clinton is for HSR as it says Here…
flowmotion Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Good to see Bill Clinton finally had to guts to stand up for things he never cared about while he was President for 8 years.
Eric M Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Just another reason it will be successful. People from around the world, as you stated, have high speed rail and are familiar with the convenience of it. And being California has more tourism than any other state in the union, it will just add to the success of the rail system by being a relaxing and convenient option to traverse California, north or south.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:12 pm
L.A., OC, San Fran, San Diego, Monterey, Santa Barbara ,Yosemite and Tahoe have more tourism. the rest isnt visited as much. and NOBODY is coming from out of state to sight see in Fresno or Bakersfield, Merced or Madera.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
To be fair, HSR with connecting bus can be used for Yosemite and Tahoe.
Alon Levy Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Nobody is coming from out of country to sightsee in Shizuoka and Hamamatsu. But the Shinkansen offers a convenient connection from Tokyo to Osaka (among many others), and so tourists spend time in more major cities than they would otherwise.
The same is true of California. HSR is built to serve a lot of markets, and tourists who’d visit both LA and SF when they wouldn’t otherwise is one of them.
Eric M Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
I didn’t say the system will be successful ONLY because of tourism. That is just one aspect. The other is to connect the major population centers throughout the state.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
they already are connected. this isnt the covered wagon days. you act as though we are cut off from the world without HSR
Eric M Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:21 pm
No I don’t. But you fail to realize, or maybe you just don’t want to see, the advantages of having alternative forms of transportation throughout the state. Cars have their place, as do airplanes. But fast, reliable rail transportation for distances like those in California is a perfect fit.
J. Wong Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:10 pm
“and the golden gate is a worldwide tourist attraction” @lex luther
And foreign tourists who come to California won’t flock to ride HSR between LA and SF since they’re so familiar with it from their own countries?
“Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose”
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose? LMAO!!!!!!!!
enter alex jones and the globalists, new world order and bohemian grove
and your also quoting hippie song lyrics. try again only next time come up with something original
J. Wong Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
You wouldn’t know irony if it hit you in the head.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:56 pm
and you wouldnt know plagiarism if it ran you over
BruceMcF Reply:
May 16th, 2012 at 7:18 am
If the state funding for the ICS is approved, then they will have all of the funding for the ICS before proceeding.
OCTA Board Not Friendly to High-Speed Rail
http://voiceofoc.org/countywide/this_just_in/article_588fbb42-9ea2-11e1-9a1c-0019bb2963f4.html
This board has it right, but even then they will be more than happy to take any funding they can claw from Prop 1A funds.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
Golden Gate Bridge = Tejon
Tehachapi = Richmond-San Rafael Bridge
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:16 pm
Interesting that some on OCTA Board want to “fill the gap” instead of “nowhere to nowhere”.
But the Tehachapi Roundabout is just as much a waste as chopping up farmland paralleling 99 when I-5 is already ready and waiting. Only consolation I can conceive is restoring the San Francisco Chief.
The immediate political future is getting even murkier. Romney’s political corpse is showing some signs of rising from the crypt.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
unless romney has a dukakis tank moment, he will probably continue to rise as people begin to realize that romney is no john mccain
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
even the democratic mayor is saying we need to slow down on this…
but the pro-rail folks will pretend they didnt hear it, or dismiss the mayor as declinist or nimby or an anti-obama democrat or whatever and just keep acting like nobody elses opinions matter. When we lose the federal funding, Governor JB will just try to go it alone and start building without the feds and will try to shove it down our throats but that will only be a waste as lawsuits after lawsuits will pile up and it will cost JB re-election and the project will be halted to just the central valley without palmdale, leaving the residents of the arrid, ag land armpit of california as the only ones to have HSR all the way from merced to bakers. what a sightseeing trip that will be.
VBobier Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 1:18 pm
Thankfully Yer not in charge…
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
neither are you.
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
With Moonbeam on the throne, nobody is in power. He’s oblivious – Van Ark could not even get to square one with the guru in his own mind.
lex luther Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
moonbeam is the ralph nader of the dem party. elitist, self aggrandizing, megalomaniac suffering from delusions of grandeur.
van ark did nothing but milk the tax payers, like thge rest of the worthless CHSRA
synonymouse Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
In Van Ark’s case I suggest he was actually worth his $300k/yr. The Borden to Corcoran scheme was clearly an attempt to draw attention to the financial plight of the CHSRA and the half-baked and scabbed together nature of the general plan. This is where you can expect to get the most for what little you have to spend. And he opened the curtain on how jury-rig connecting a rural segment to the existing Amtrak net would be and that the initial revenues would be very, very modest indeed.
But the most significant contribution from Mr. Van Ark was his recognition of just how pivotal Tejon would be to the success of hsr in California. He had to get past all the smoke and mirrors PB, Palmdale, and the Chandlers had deployed but give him credit for realizing Tejon was the place to make a stand and stick out his neck career-wise. His willingness to stand up to “downtown” will be vindicated over time. Van Ark earned his bonus IMHO.
Moonbeam is way too out of it to even begin to grasp the importance of taking on Mayor Villa’s cabal.
Tom McNamara Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
It’s simpler than that: If the Legislature doesn’t fund HSR and the feds take their money back, the state will just hit Orange County that much harder. Brown is done playing around with them and with Umberg and Pringle not on the CAHSRA Board anymore he doesn’t even have to pay them lip service.
(It’s kind of funny too, because Orange County isn’t the bastion of conservatism it used to be…)
joe Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
Tom;
You recall the Gov already hit OC on taxes owed that OC was not paying to CA due to the State helping OC after their bankruptcy ..
OC’s pissed so they are withholding 73 M property taxes which is hurting schools – the State is suing OC.
Orange County lawmakers attempted with little success last summer to have the state restore the car tax money before the end of session. In its place, Orange County has withheld property taxes this year that normally pay for K-12 schools and community colleges – money that the county believes is rightfully its own.
Spokker Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 11:13 pm
It should be noted that OC’s bankruptcy had a lot to do with a Democrat’s risky bets. It was a Republican that tried to call it out, but he was unsuccessful in doing so. I don’t even like praising the Republican guy, John Moorlach, because I don’t really like him otherwise, but it is what it is.
Anyway, the treasurer, Robert Citron, was charged with several felonies for his actions. While he did not serve prison time, he got 5 years probation and 1000 hours community service.
Just thought I would mention that so we’re all on the same page.
Off topic, but maybe of interest, and certainly entertaining–James Howard Kunstler in Florida, in a recorded interview on transit, rail, art, and so on, as only Kunstler would put it. Of course, he’s a bit skeptical on HSR, but I still like him anyway.
http://www.transitmiami.com/cnu/a-transit-miami-conversation-with-james-howard-kunstler
Alon Levy Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Kunstler is skeptical about any technology newer than about 1900. He thinks cities will shrink and people will go back to labor-intensive farming because of peak oil, too. He hates skyscrapers on principle.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
“Kunstler is skeptical about any technology newer than about 1900.”
That’s pretty funny, considering how Kunstler rants and raves via that newfangled thing called the internet. I bet he types his books on a computer, too, not an old typewriter like the one I still have in my office for a few jobs–and it’s modern compared to a couple I have at home!
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 6:08 pm
I have two Underwood No. 5s that make great bookends. I’d love to do this to one of them but it would cost too much to get them back in working order.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=tu3g4ZBt3o0
adirondacker12800 Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
and you’d need one of these to go with your cell phone
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/cellphone/8928/
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 6:25 pm
I am a throwback, so of course, I like that typewriter!
I admit, part of it is feel, and part of it is sound.
Computers are wonderful, but they just don’t feel the same as those typewriters.
Of course, you know about my preference for older movies, more family-oriented, that sort of thing. I have a friend who says I’m so old fashioned, he wonders how I can like movies made after 1927, following the introduction of sound!
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Kunstler from a few years back on his favorite thing to poke at, modern architecture:
http://www.transitmiami.com/metro-monday/metro-monday-james-howard-kunstler-discusses-main-street-america
And from Railway Preservation News, discussion and links to what some consider the 20 most beautiful railroad stations in the world. Californians, rejoice, LA Union is among them!
http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33305
For California steam fans and dome car fans–AT&SF 3751 on Cajon recently:
http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33306
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 15th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?road_number=ATSF%203751
Listening to the Senate HSR hearing today, there was a point when it seemed that Sen. Simitian was making an offer to Dan Richard. Simitian was complaining about how Gov. Schwarzenegger line item vetoed something that he felt the legislature was promised from some HSR legislation. He asked Richard if he could get a promise that if the legislature sent Gov. Brown HSR legislation with conditions added, that the Gov. would not line item veto the conditions. Richard seemed taken aback at first by this, then realized that Simitian was setting the stage for some negotiations. So it sounds like there will be some wheeling and dealing ahead.
It tells me he sees little leverage with the Gov so he’s making a public offer to ask the Gov to limit his veto power.
HEMU-430X prototype is publicly unveiled and is making demo runs. Designed for 370 km/hr(230 mph) revenue service speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4xY_MuApCc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPMkVRk1YN8
The Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District awarded GE Transportation , a unit of the General Electric Co., a $15.5 million contract for an advanced communications and information system (ACIS). The system will be used to integrate transportation and security data used by the bridge and collaborating law-enforcement agencies, said Mary Currie, the Golden Gate Bridge’s spokesperson.