HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 3 BULLET TRAIN 02-06-84 REPORTS
/" o Te a y 1 Iltel" - C om
Bill Huston, City Manager
Director of Community and Administrative Services
BULLET TRAIN LEGISLATION
The five cities who have joined in the lawsuit and various citizens groups
involved in opposition to the bullet train met January 20 in Oceanside. Bob
Bonde of the United Citizens Coastal Protective League introduced several pieces
of legislation which the group has asked us to support. The legislation is only
proposed at present, so support will be in concept at this point. Details are
attached.
The first concept is a request to Senator Deddeh that the Bullet Train project
be placed under the California Public Contract Code. The Public Contract Code
was designed to insure fair treatment for the contractor and maximum protection
for the State. It has several checks and balances which are directly applicable
to the Bullet Train project.
The second concept deals with Regional Transportation Commissions. The legis-
lation would establish the fact that the Regional Transportation Commissions are
responsible for the approval of all transit rail projects within their desig-
nated regions. This Commission approval would be required for each of the
affected areas before the Public Utilities Commission is authorized to issue a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any regional transit
project. A two-thirds vote of both the Senate and Assembly would be required to
override the Commission's decision.
The third proposal deals with giving commuter transit rail priority over other
types of rail developments in designated rail corridors already serviced by
inter-city passenger rail systems. It proposes that the Public Utility
Commission not issue a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any
other type of rail development until the availability and practicability of
commuter transit rail corridor space has been proven to exist along the entire
length of the project.
A fourth concept proposes that the promoters of any public or private regional
transit rail project will provide the funds necessary for the Public Utilities
Commission to conduct a comprehensive needs, assessment for the entire length of
the project. The needs assessment would be completed prior to the acceptance of
the promoter's application for a Certificate of Public o--CS~'~enience and
Necessity.
Bullet Train Legislation
January 31, 1984
Page 2
With Senator Foran and Assemblyman Young controlling their respective
Transportation Committees, the legislation probably will not pass. The
introduction of this legislation, howev6r, will keep the issue in the minds of
our legislators in Sacramento. Staff will continue to monitor the progress of
these concepts as they are introduced, and will support them in cooperation with
the other cities, unless Council has any objections.
Staff will keep Council informed regarding the progress of these proposed bills.
Royleen A. White, Director
Community and Administrative Services
kaw
Attachments-
UNITED ITIZENS COASTAL PFt TECTIVE LEAGUE
P.O. BOX 46, CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA, CAMFORNIA 92007, phone (619} 753-7477
January
Honorable Wadie Decldeh
o/o State Capitol'
Sacramento, California
Dear senator Ded~ch:
With the publicatic~ of the Office of Technology Assessment damming
report on high speed rail, and previous reports from San Diego
Associations of Governments, and the City of Tustin, it is apparent'
that the proposed bullet t~ain project is not financially viable.
To protect the taxpayers and investors, it is requested that you
consider author~- legislation that wo~ld place the project under
the states Public Contract
The Public Contract Code, as yon know, ~as designed to ensure fair
treatment for the developer (contractor) and maximum protection for
the state. It a~pears directly applicable to this project and provides
the following:
1. Requires a ~ set of plans, specificatioas and estimates before
the projectca~ be advertised for bid.
One of the big concerns is t~at the developer is planning
to fast track the project (Draw plans and construct it at
the same t~me). Under this set of conditions no one ~uld
know how much the project is costing until nearing the end
of construction.
b. Legislature. would be able to follow the progress of the
project if the state procedure was used.
2. Work would' be conducted under contract a~mrded to lowest
responsible bidder, a
ae
Best value can be achieved by bidding pr.oject. ..
Possibility of payoffs and kickbacks reduced ~ith the
states bidding process.
(American High Speed P~il Corporation intends to negotiate the
construction contract with a partnership of three firms that
contributed one million dollars to the project)
page 2
Letter to Honorabl
January 15, 1984
'3d.t.e Deddeh
3. Funds must be avai/able at time of bid to cover filed estimate.
a. Process necessary to avoid starting a project and then
failing for the lack of capital.
4. Require Performance and Payment bonds.
a. To ensure that e~ployees would be paid and that plans and
specifications are followed.
5. Completion date required.
a. To avoid, disruption to co,,,,,unity services over a prolonged
period of time, a coe~letion date end penalty assessment are
req,,~ ~ed.
6. Liability insurance
a. To protect state and developer, sufficient l~b~ty
insurance is required.
?. State control of
a. State to act as fund control for bond monies to ensure
that work is completed before money is paid.
The following is the legislation suggested:
~ll .transit r~l projects, public or private, that utilize state issued
industrial revenue bonds as a fun~ng source (before, during or after
construction) shall c~lywiththe conditions set forth in the Public
Contract Code.
Transit rail projects shall not be classified as a public utility
under ~Bis provision.
Because of the fact that Amerie~ High SpeedReil Corporation planstohave
its funding in place by July, it appears that this b~]~ would have to .be
considered under the urgency clause.
This bill does not see,.to be unfair to the developer and would grant the
taxpayers and investors a much greater degree of security.
Your serious consideration of this request would be greatly appreciated.
for any reason you can not carry this bill, would you please so notify
Senator Craven as he has agreed to consider it.
cc: Senator William Craven
UNITED CI I'IZENS COASTAL PRO, ,:CTIVE LEAGUE
P.O. BOX 46, 'CARDIFF-BY-THE.SEA, CAUFORNIA 92007, phone (619) 753-7477
January 16, 198~
Honorable Ollie Speraw
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 9581~
Dear Senator Speraw:
In an effort to define and control the proposed bullet train
project, we are suggesting several ideas for 198~ legislation.
Attached are copies of letters to-legislators asking for their
help. It is hoped that you would .review these ideas and help
..implement as many as possible before the deadline Friday, Jan. 20.
One suggestion that seems to follow your SB 70~ revolves around
the fact 'that the legislature established regional transportation
commis.sio~s to study, evaluate and implement transportation pro-
J'ects within their zone of lnfluemce but, in the case of AB
they overrode that authority without consideration or approval of
the ' de s.ignate~ commls sions.
Suggested Le¢lslatlou
Regional Transportation Commissions established by
the legislature are responsible for the approval of
all transit rail projects within their designated
regions. Regional Transportation Cc~nlsSlon approval
is require~ for each area affected before the Public
Utilities Commission is authorized to issue a Certifi-
cate of. Public Convenience and Nepesslty for any region-
al transit rail project.
A two-thirds (2/3rds) vote of both the Senate and
Assembly is required to override a Commission's ~eclsion.
If we could get such a bill passed if would return a degree of power
to the communities and place one more big hurdle in the way of
American High Speed Rail Corporation.
Your help is greatly appreciated.
UNITED CITIZENS COASTAL PRuTECTIVE LEAGUE'.
P.O. BOX46, CARDIFF-By'THE-SEA, CAUFORNIA 92007,'phone (619} 753-7477
~anuary 16, 1981~.
Honor-able Robe~ Frazee
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 9581~.
Dear Bob:'
It would be appreciated if yom would conSider authorimg a bill
~o protect 'the rail corridor for the future use of those 9eople
who live along.the corridor a~ who will have to live with the
environmental circumstances if it is lost to a second high speed
rail system.
We recently fou~i that January 20 is the. deadline for 198~ bills.
If you are not interested in carryiz~ this proposed legislation,
please let me know as soon as possible.
Su~=e sted ?~lslatiou
In those designated rail corridors already serviced'by
intercity passenger rail systems, economically feasible'
space will be' preserved for commuter oriented transit
tall developments,
The Public Utilities Commission will not issue a Certifl-
cate off Public Convenience and Necessity for ~y other
type of rail development until the availability and practi-
cability of commuter transit rail corridor space has been
proven to exist along the entire length of the project.
Your c0mm~t~eration of this suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
,,,./~re rs, ~
RGB/e f
UNITED CITIZENS COASTAL PF dTECTIVE LEAGUE
P.O. BOX 48, CA,DIFF.-aY-THE-SEA, CALIFORNIA 92007, phone (619! 753-7477
January 16, 198~
Honorable wlll~_~m Craven
State Capitol, Room ~081
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Bill:
Z talked with former Senator Mills about several ideas for
legislation to define ami control, the proposed, bullet train
project. He thought the following suggestion was defensible
because a precedent ~h~S already been established. Ee said
the Public Utilities Commission rejected the use of San Diego
t~pe trolleys in an application for a transit rail project
after evaluating, other equipment ~echnologles.
Suggested r~¢lslation
The promoters cf any, public or private, regional
transit rail project will provide the funds neces-
sary for bhe Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to
conduct a comprehensive ueecls .assessment for the
entire l~agth of the project. The PUC wiil complete
the needs asseesme~ prior to the acceptance of the
promoters application for-a Certificate of Public
Convenience -~d Necessity.
The needs assessme~ will include individual, com-
munity and regional transportation needs. It will
evaluate and compare proposed equipment systems with
other available state of the ar~ systems. It will
consider routes, fares, euvirommeutal impacts, eco-
nomic implications, and determine if the proposed
system meets the highest and best use of the corridor
criteria.
Because American High gpe~d Rail Corporation plans to submit its
application for the PUC certificate lu March, it appears that the
legislation would require an urgency clause if it is ~o be effective.
I know how busy you are but, if such legislation could be enacted
in time, it would be of great benefit to people along the corridor
for generations to come.
· Sin rs,