The bulk of Alameda's argument against Prop 1 is that all the money so
far has gone to a corrupt contractor.  However, the legislation does
not require that contractor to actually build it; we could still
approve the bond and then try to get our state reps to raise concerns
about the contractor.  Besides, if we blocked every government project
built by corrupt contractors, we'd be living on sand dunes.

I also agree that the promotional case for rail is overblown in terms
of ridership, but we should look towards how many people will want to
ride the rail after the effects of peak oil become more apparent, and
the cost of driving or flying to LA becomes prohibitive.  The power
for an electric train can come from a variety of sources, and don't
necessarily have to come from coal.  It's much more likely to get
something built if we start now, and not after gas becomes even more
expensive (as that will raise costs for construction and materials,
and voters who can't afford to drive to work will be even less likely
to pass a bond).

JMC