Hot Topics

The Community Coalition on High Speed Rail's (CC-HSR) Eminent Domain and High Speed Rail program was a great success (July 14, Burlingame Library). Eminent domain attorney, Andrew J. Turner, described how the eminent domain process works and what the homeowner or business owner can expect. Gary Patton, pictured here,

gary patton
[IMAGE]Gary Patton, Burlingame Public Library
discussed the work CC-HSR is doing among elected officials locally and in Sacramento. It was clear from the evening's activities that the only hope many property owners have is if CC-HSR and others like us are successful in getting the legislature to reshape the high speed rail project.

We plan to present the eminent domain program again this fall. We will post the date and the location when we have finalized them.

[IMAGE]


Report on CC-HSR's Activities

CC-HSR is working hard to protect our communities from a badly planned high speed rail project. We have employed a top flight attorney and are undertaking both lobbying and litigation efforts, in addition to our effective public outreach and advocacy. As this report shows, we're making progress!

LEGISLATIVE AND GOVERNMENT ADVOCACY

CC-HSR members have testified at several legislative hearings in Sacramento. Tina Andolina, Legislative Director for the Planning and Conservation League (PCL), which has been working with us, continues to guide our legislative efforts. Here's what our lobbying efforts have accomplished so far:
  • Addressed Poor Business Plan: We arranged for our local elected officials and members of the community to testify before the Senate and Assembly regarding the California High Speed Rail Authority's (CHSRA) poor business plan. They have made a big impression! We also had a private meeting with Assemblyman Mike Eng, the head of the Assembly Transportation Committee, and are in continuing touch with the key staff members of both the Assembly and Senate Transportation Committees.
  • Pushed for legislative oversight: CC-HSR advocated for a change in the governance structure of the High-Speed Rail Authority, and have succeeded in getting increased oversight and accountability. We met with four chairpersons and over 40 legislative members of Budget and Policy Committees to advocate for these policies. We asked legislators to hold back funding until there is increased oversight of the CHSRA and an investment grade ridership study. We also wrote letters and provided informational packets to all Committee members. In short, the Legislature has now focused its attention on the governance of the high speed rail project, as we have been effectively demanding.
  • Bolstered Peer Review: Tina Andolina successfully got language added to the Budget Bill to increase the role of the Independent Peer Review Committee. This should have a major payoff in the future.
  • Stopped CEQA waivers: We testified about the need to uphold CEQA and urged opposition to bills seeking to waive CEQA for projects that could include high speed rail. Out of four bills proposing such waivers, none passed.
  • Supported State Auditor's findings: We attended a Senate Hearing on a very critical audit of the CHSRA. The State Auditor identified many problems: overspending by subcontractors; lax management; and grave doubts about whether private investors would really invest billions of dollars in this project. Our presence in the State Capitol made sure that these problems weren't ignored.
  • Revised bill language: Tina Andolina worked with the Senate Committee Staff to amend problematic bills such as SB 965, AB 289, AB 1375, and AB 1670, eliminating bill language that would have permitted the High-Speed Rail Authority to continue its mismanagement of our money.
  • Educated key legislators on high speed rail issues: We secured meetings with key Assembly members including:
  • Assembly Member Ma (San Francisco)
  • Assembly Member Beall (San Jose)
  • Assembly Member Ruskin (Peninsula)
  • Assembly Member Torlakson (Contra Costa)
  • Assembly Member Harkey (San Juan Capistrano)
  • Assembly Member Huber (Lodi)
  • Assembly Member Buchanan (San Ramon)
  • Assembly Member Monning (Santa Cruz)

Burlingame Mayor Cathy Baylock, Burlingame Council Member Michael Brownrigg, Menlo Park Council Member Heyward Robinson, and former Atherton Mayor Jim Janz attended these meetings with us.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

We have connected and coordinated with groups throughout the state to create awareness and help others take action. Here's how we did it:

Helped members of the community respond to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR): The program-level EIR for the SF Bay Area was decertified in December as a result of the successful lawsuit. CHSRA had to re-do this EIR and accept new evidence and public comments. CC-HSR coordinated with peninsula cities, rail advocates, and the general public to make sure we built the strongest possible case under CEQA for a routing decision that didn't destroy our communities or undermine our economy.
  • We sent post cards to 7,000 homes along the Caltrain corridor urging participation in the EIR process.
  • Campaign leader and environmental attorney, Gary Patton led an "EIR 101" presentation to a packed room in Holbrook Palmer Park in Atherton.
  • We posted sample EIR letters on several community websites and blogs which enabled hundreds of residents to craft their own comments.
  • CC-HSR board members met with groups in North Fair Oaks, an unincorporated part of San Mateo County adjacent to Atherton, Menlo Park and Redwood City and provided presentations in both English and Spanish.
  • Our attorney, Gary Patton, spoke at the Peninsula Cities Consortium (PCC) meeting about the EIR Process and the need for our local elected officials to be coordinated.
  • Ensured that inflated ridership numbers were not considered in the EIR: Ridership is the basis for the routing choice and many other assumptions under the EIR. New evidence shows that the CHSRA's ridership estimates were unreliable. For this reason, the cities of Menlo Park and Atherton and TRANSDEF, the Planning and Conservation League, and the California Rail Foundation filed a legal action trying to re-open the lawsuit that challenged the SF Bay Area EIR. Gary Patton has provided critical strategic advice.
  • Advocated a current EIR for Caltrain electrification: Gary Patton has been negotiating with the Joint Powers Board (JPB), which governs Caltrain, over concerns that the EIR by which the JPB seeks to electrify Caltrain is outdated since it was developed in 2004. A lot has changed since then. In 2004 the public had no idea that high speed rail would be an issue, much less that Caltrain would partner with the CHSRA over the use of the Caltrain corridor. The public has the right to a current EIR and to know how this partnership and electrification will affect our communities.
  • Kept the community informed of key events: We notified the community about recent news, legislative hearings, and local CHSRA meetings. We follow key legislation and let the community know when and how they might take action.

LITIGATION

Attorneys Mike Brady and Zachary Tyson work pro bono to ensure that high speed rail planning complies with the law.
  • Peterson/Roger Reynolds' Lawsuit: On June 22, the Superior Court in Sacramento ruled that the CHSRA and Caltrain must agree that no construction of high speed rail on the peninsula corridor can begin until the written consent of Union Pacific Railway Corporation has been obtained. This was the essence of the suit--to obtain a court order that will bind CHSRA and Caltrain.
  • Brown Lawsuit: This lawsuit was filed April l5. It raises fundamental funding and financing problems faced by the project. Although the CHSRA only have about 5% of the funds to do the work on the first stage of the project, the law requires them to have enough money in the bank to finish a given corridor before starting construction on that corridor. The suit also claims that the CHSRA plans to start work on four separate corridors simultaneously and that this runs the serious risk that they will run out of money on each corridor, leaving the work abandoned and uncompleted--a disaster for the communities. The suit notes that the law (Prop 1A and AB 3034) prohibits subsidies from the state for the train's operations, and yet CHSRA is desperate to receive such subsidies to attract private investment.