SACRAMENTO – Senator Roy Ashburn made a motion in the Senate Transportation Committee Monday to remove the High Speed Rail measure, Proposition 1, from the November ballot. During a hearing over a last-minute rewrite of the ballot measure, Ashburn raised serious concerns over the complete lack of a business plan, as well as logistical and constitutional issues surrounding the proposal to be considered by California voters November 4th.
"This bond does not have the language necessary to protect the interests of the people of California and our future generations," said Senator Ashburn. "I do not believe this bond is ready to go to the people of California in November."
Senator Ashburn was the deciding vote when the original bond measure was passed by the Legislature in 2002; however the bond was held up due to environmental and other concerns. After six years of delay, the language of the bond is no longer accurate and does not allow for an ability to actually build the system to its current specifications, hence the need for the new legislation, AB 3034.
Senator Ashburn asked tough questions, noting several problems with the measure. The Authority has failed to develop a business plan and lacks real experience in constructing such a large-scale project. The project manager is the same contractor that was responsible for many of the problems associated with the "Big Dig" in Boston, recognized as one of the worst transportation planning boondoggles in recent memory. Public employee unions successfully inserted language preventing competition by the private sector.
Though some of Senator Ashburn´s concerns were addressed, the final ballot proposal still raises too many concerns. "After six years and $58 million spent, the full-time Rail Authority still has yet to come up with a viable business plan, but they want the voters to trust them with 10 billion more of their hard-earned dollars," noted Ashburn.
Despite Senator Ashburn´s objections AB 3034 passed the Senate Transportation Committee on a party-line vote, Democrats in support and Republicans opposing. The bill will next be heard by the Senate Appropriations Committee and after that the full Senate will vote on it before being returned to the Assembly for concurrence in the changes made in the Senate.
"This bond does not have the language necessary to protect the interests of the people of California and our future generations," said Senator Ashburn. "I do not believe this bond is ready to go to the people of California in November."
Senator Ashburn was the deciding vote when the original bond measure was passed by the Legislature in 2002; however the bond was held up due to environmental and other concerns. After six years of delay, the language of the bond is no longer accurate and does not allow for an ability to actually build the system to its current specifications, hence the need for the new legislation, AB 3034.
Senator Ashburn asked tough questions, noting several problems with the measure. The Authority has failed to develop a business plan and lacks real experience in constructing such a large-scale project. The project manager is the same contractor that was responsible for many of the problems associated with the "Big Dig" in Boston, recognized as one of the worst transportation planning boondoggles in recent memory. Public employee unions successfully inserted language preventing competition by the private sector.
Though some of Senator Ashburn´s concerns were addressed, the final ballot proposal still raises too many concerns. "After six years and $58 million spent, the full-time Rail Authority still has yet to come up with a viable business plan, but they want the voters to trust them with 10 billion more of their hard-earned dollars," noted Ashburn.
Despite Senator Ashburn´s objections AB 3034 passed the Senate Transportation Committee on a party-line vote, Democrats in support and Republicans opposing. The bill will next be heard by the Senate Appropriations Committee and after that the full Senate will vote on it before being returned to the Assembly for concurrence in the changes made in the Senate.
