California’s High Speed Rail Project Develops Super High Sky High Price

California’s high speed rail project has now generated sky high shock due to its new estimated price:

In what transportation experts say could be a cautionary tale for the rest of the country, the estimates for the cost and finish date of California’s signature high-speed rail project have been dramatically altered.

The new cost estimate, formally released Tuesday by the California High Speed Rail Authority, is $98.5 billion, more than twice the previous estimate of $43 billion. The finish date is 2034, 14 years later than first predicted.

California voters approved a $10 billion bond in 2008 in support of plans to build a high-speed rail corridor to link northern and southern California, with trains reaching 220 m.p.h. The system would link to other rail lines that fanned out across the state.

Supporters of the project say this new estimate gives the state planning certainty. But critics are aghast. State Sen. Doug LaMalfa (R) announced plans to introduce legislation asking state voters to reconsider the bond measure they already approved.

If it’s reconsidered, given the fact the price is twice what was originally estimated, it will have a good chance of being scuttled.

“The voters were deceived in the original go-around with highly optimistic ridership and cost numbers that have not been borne out,” Senator LaMalfa told The Sacramento Bee, saying the larger figures “should have been in front of voters to begin with, so they would have the truth.”

Officials are rolling out other details of the plan to soften the blow, touting the connections to existing Metrolink rails in large cities, for example. They are also trying to be frank – and more conservative – about ridership estimates that critics say are way too high.

“This plan represents a new day, a new train, a new beginning for the California High Speed Rail Authority and for our system,” said Tom Umberg, chairman of the authority board, in a statement.

Some analysts say the turn of events is a welcome bit of honesty, given that massive public-project costs generally balloon beyond expectations.

“The story is both shocking and unsurprising at the same time. It’s shocking because of the sheer size of the price tag,” says Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College. “It’s unsurprising because big projects often cost far more than the initial estimates.”

The episode could have an impact on plans for other rail projects nationwide. In February, Vice President Joe Biden announced a plan to put $53 billion in federal funds into a national, high-speed rail network, which could be built in regional sections.

But such projects are often more difficult than they seem at first, and California might have bitten off “way too much,” says Steve Schlickman, executive director of Univeristy of Illinois at Chicago’s Urban Transportation Center.

Anyone who has traveled outside of the United States can attest to the joys, usefulness and potential of efficient rail travel. And Americans who live on the northeastern United States have experience with rail service. But a project that comes in at TWICE its cost will face trouble if it’s on the ballot for reconsideration — particularly when it will become a political football coated in partisan rhetoric of those that support and oppose it.