Is it a Lack of Comprehension, of Competence or of Veracity?
Could the Real Issue be that the initial construction segment will utilize the available funding in the Central Valley rather than the Bay Area or the Los Angeles Basin?
Sacramento – Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton) issued the following statement today regarding the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) report to the Assembly Transportation Committee on Tuesday, which questioned the legality of beginning the initial construction segment in the Central Valley and whether Federal ARRA and California Proposition 1A funding could be utilized for other purposes.
“The statements by the LAO indicate that they are unqualified to provide a comprehensive analysis of this complex project which the state has been working on for 15 years. They either haven’t read or do not comprehend the California High Speed Rail Bond Act, the federal ARRA funding criteria, or the Peer Review Committee report. Proposition 1A designated a highly qualified Peer Review Committee as the appropriate and qualified body to assess California’s High Speed Rail project as it progresses. The Peer Review committee, not the LAO, was authorized by the legislature and the voters for that purpose.
“Additionally, the LAO also does not seem to have read the Business Plan released by the High Speed Rail Authority a month ago which lays out the phased and blended approach that will provide passenger service between population centers sooner and the full high speed rail system later.
“It is obvious that the LAO has other motives in providing a very biased position on the High Speed Rail project to the Legislature. The LAO never showed any interest in the project until after the initial construction segment winner was chosen. Their report is fraught with inaccurate and misleading information, irrational opinions and faulty conclusions. It raises the question of whose agenda they are promoting.
“Last May I wrote a letter to the LAO in response to their initial report on the High Speed Rail project, making a public records request to find out who requested the report and who they had consulted in developing the report. I also pointed out the many flaws and inaccuracy included in that report.
“The response I received from the LAO basically indicated that they did not need to give me that information. I will continue to demand some transparency from the LAO regarding who requested their analysis of the project.
“I do know from questioning the LAO that they never consulted with the Federal Railroad Administration, any of the high speed rail systems in Europe or Asia or anyone who had ever actually been instrumental in the development and construction of a high speed rail system.
“I have to wonder if the Real Issue is that the initial construction segment will utilize the available funding in the Central Valley and not in the Bay Area or the Los Angeles Basin.
“As the author of Proposition 1A, the California High Speed Rail Bond, I find it absurd that the LAO would suggest that funding the initial construction segment is in any way illegal. Furthermore, the suggestion by the LAO that any of the High Speed Rail funding, Federal or State, would be available for any other purpose is patently false.
“The bottom line is that High Speed Rail is the best option for future passenger transportation in California and at the same time will create over 120,000 jobs for people from all over the state starting next year. While many in Washington and Sacramento are content to play political games, people continue to lose their jobs, their homes, their businesses and their hopes for the future. It’s time to stop whining that we can’t do anything to get out of this hole and start doing something to put our state’s economy back on track and make an investment in the future.”
CONTACT: Robin Adam, 209-726-5465
