- Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

Transportation WG meeting
by John-Marc Chandonia 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

Hi, I've posted the agenda for the meeting this Thursday. Please let me know if you're able to come. We'll try to finish off plank revisions for presentation to the GM next week. Also, we're trying to schedule a showing of the peak oil film "End of Suburbia" which would make a great benefit/fundraiser for the SFGP as well. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://www.dolorespark.org/

1 0

Meanwhile, back in NYC, "It's a shameful abuse of power"
by Jym Dyer 10 Sep '04

10 Sep '04

http://tinyurl.com/3uko7 'It's a shameful abuse of power' Viewed as "arrest evidence," the city will not return 338 bikes seized until the court cases are resolved BY GRAHAM RAYMAN STAFF WRITER Staff writer Daryl Khan contributed to this story. Newsday | 09-Sep-2004 Katherine Roberts flies home to San Francisco today minus her beloved folding bicycle. Police arrested Roberts, 51, an alternative transportation advocate, and confiscated her $2,000 custom bike on Aug. 29, a day before the Republican National Convention opened. She is one of hundreds of detainees who still haven't gotten their bicycles back. "It's a shameful abuse of power," said Roberts, who endured nearly 30 hours in detention after her arrest by scooter police on 37th Street. "We are all supposedly protected by the Constitution. This shows they can rewrite the rules whenever they want." Police said yesterday they are holding 338 bicycles in a Greenpoint warehouse, which, according to Roberts, was "like they swept all the bikes off the streets." A police spokesman said the confiscated bikes are viewed as "arrest evidence" until the court cases are resolved, which in Roberts' case means late October and another $300 air fare. Matthew Roth of the bicycle advocacy group Times Up said the group plans to appeal to Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. If that doesn't work, he said, the group will file a motion before a judge. "The bikes would not further a case or be used in a trial," Roth said. "Holding the bikes is purely a punitive measure." Roth said he believes the bicycles are being used as "leverage" to induce people to take an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, which dismisses charges after six months. "If bikes were not there, a lot more people would fight the charges," he said. Separately, a hearing is scheduled for today in the ongoing legal case over detentions during the convention. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who told people to ride their bikes during the convention, yesterday said: "There were bicyclists who tried to stop traffic in this city and stop commerce and stop people's rights to assemble and people's rights to express themselves. "We believe we acted appropriately and that given the situation this city did what the law requires," he said. Many cyclists disputed that characterization. "We were obeying all traffic laws," said Anne Eller, 23, a doctoral student who lost her bike on Aug. 29. "They say it's arrest evidence, but evidence of what?" "You have a right to demonstrate," said Ryan Kuonen, 33, a comedy writer and nanny. "They were stopping people who weren't doing anything." As for Roberts, she spent two fruitless days in the rain, trying to get to the Brooklyn warehouse. "When we finally got there, having walked 10 long blocks through a depressed section, they said they couldn't release it," she said. ________________________________________________________________ Staff writer Daryl Khan contributed to this story.

1 0

letter on Transbay terminal
by John-Marc Chandonia 10 Sep '04

10 Sep '04

Here's the final language we decided to send to the supes: > > The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party encourages you to adopt a resolution of necessity for the City?s proposed acquisition by eminent domain of property at 80 Natoma Street in order for work on the extension of Caltrain to the Transbay Terminal to commence. The California state government gave land near the Transbay Terminal to the City and County of San Francisco on the condition that the Transbay Terminal and Caltrain extension be built. In addition to the rebuild of the terminal and the extension of Caltrain, 3,400 to 4,700 units of housing (35 percent affordable) are currently slated to be built on this land. If the City does not follow through with these plans, the state might take back the land and with it an opportunity to build desperately needed housing. Additional reasons make it essential that the Board of Supervisors take the necessary steps to see that work can begin on the Transbay project as originally planned. When it is completed, the Transbay Terminal will be a regional hub serving Caltrain and high-speed rail in addition to Muni, BART, Golden Gate and AC Transit. It will also serve as a terminus for eventual bus rapid transit systems established in San Francisco and the region. Moreover, the extended Caltrain will bring people to San Francisco from the peninsula as well as from Bayview, Visitation Valley, Potrero Hill and Dogpatch as there will be stations in those neighborhoods. This expansion of electrified train service will make it possible for more people to travel without cars, thereby improving air quality and lessening congestion. The 3,400 to 4,700 units of housing near the terminal will also reduce the need for personal vehicles. We also encourage the City to return authority over the project to the Transbay Joint Powers Authority. We believe it was a mistake for the City to shift authority from the TJPA to the San Francisco County Transportation Authority in mid-August for several reasons. First, as a part of this shift in authority, the City will have to borrow money so that the SFCTA can study an alternative that includes the construction of a high-rise at 80 Natoma Street. The TJPA has already found this alternative unacceptable. Second, in shifting authority from the TJPA to the TA, the City is violating the will of the voters as expressed through the passage of Proposition K in 2003 and the passage of regional Measure 2 in 2004. Third, the owner of the property at 80 Natoma Street, Jack Myers, is simply attempting to extort more money from the City. Allowing him to game the system and postpone construction on the project as originally planned risks exposing the City to environmental lawsuits and cost overruns. > > > > Sincerely, > > John-Marc Chandonia > > Susan Vaughan > > Transportation Working Group Co-Chairs on behalf of the SFGP Transportation Working Group JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://www.dolorespark.org/

1 0

letter about transbay terminal
by John-Marc Chandonia 09 Sep '04

09 Sep '04

On our agenda for tonight, we'd like to finalize this letter to supervisors (below), as well as the letter regarding the bike plan. Also, if we have time, we can work more on the Transportation Plank. It won't be up for another vote at the GM until next month, though, due to the need to spend time on endorsement-related decisions. JMC ----- Forwarded message from susan vaughan <susan_e_vaughan(a)yahoo.com> ----- > > > > > >Transportation Working Group > > San Francisco Green Party > > August 31, 2004 > > > > To the San Francisco Board of Supervisors: > > > > The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party encourages you to adopt a resolution of necessity for the City?s proposed acquisition by eminent domain of property at 80 Natoma Street in order for work on the extension of Caltrain to the Transbay Terminal to commence. The California state government gave land near the Transbay Terminal to the City and County of San Francisco on the condition that the Transbay Terminal and Caltrain extension be built. In addition to the rebuild of the terminal and the extension of Caltrain, 3,400 to 4,700 units of housing (35 percent affordable) are currently slated to be built on this land. If the City does not follow through with these plans, the state might take back the land and with it an opportunity to build desperately needed housing. Additional reasons make it essential that the Board of Supervisors take the necessary steps to see that work can begin on the Transbay project as originally planned. When it is completed, the Transbay Terminal will be a regional hub serving Caltrain and high-speed rail in addition to Muni, BART, Golden Gate and AC Transit. It will also serve as a terminus for eventual bus rapid transit systems established in San Francisco and the region. Moreover, the extended Caltrain will bring people to San Francisco from the peninsula as well as from Bayview, Visitation Valley, Potrero Hill and Dogpatch as there will be stations in those neighborhoods. This expansion of electrified train service will make it possible for more people to travel without cars, thereby improving air quality and lessening congestion. The 3,400 to 4,700 units of housing near the terminal will also reduce the need for personal vehicles. Members of the Transportation Working Group also encourage the City to return authority over the project to the Transbay Joint Powers Authority. We believe it was a mistake for the City to shift authority from the TJPA to the San Francisco County Transportation Authority in mid-August for several reasons. First, as a part of this shift in authority, the City will have to borrow money so that the SFCTA can study an alternative that includes the construction of a high-rise at 80 Natoma Street. The TJPA has already found this alternative unacceptable. Second, in shifting authority from the TJPA to the TA, the City is violating the will of the voters as expressed through the passage of Proposition K in 2003 and the passage of regional Measure 2 in 2004. Third, allowing political intrigue to postpone construction on the project as originally planned risks environmental lawsuits and cost overruns. > > > > Sincerely, > > John-Marc Chandonia > > Susan Vaughan > > Transportation Working Group Co-Chairs > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other > providers! > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ----- End forwarded message ----- -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://www.dolorespark.org/

1 0

[susan_e_vaughan@juno.com: Re: [Transpo] [susan_e_vaughan@yahoo.com: letter re. bike plan update, can you post this for more feedback?]]
by John-Marc Chandonia 25 Aug '04

25 Aug '04

For anyone who needs their password, the list page can send you your password by email... just follow the directions at the bottom of the page. Thanks for posting the info on the bike plan; I'll look at this again when I have a chance. JMC ----- Forwarded message from "susan_e_vaughan(a)juno.com" <susan_e_vaughan(a)juno.com> ----- From: "susan_e_vaughan(a)juno.com" <susan_e_vaughan(a)juno.com> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:12:09 GMT To: jmc(a)sfgreens.org Subject: Re: [Transpo] [susan_e_vaughan(a)yahoo.com: letter re. bike plan update, can you post this for more feedback?] Go to the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, hit current actions, then hit Bike Plan Update in the column on the left and scroll down to Upper Market. The removal of a right turn lane is discussed under "Design" in the body of the explanation for Upper Market. As it is now, vehicles travel down Duboce or ???_____??? to get to the Central Freeway. I can't remember the second street. The original plan for the Central Freeway rebuild did not include a right turn from Market onto the Central Freeway if I got all the testimony I have heard right (August 9, Land Use Committee). You could check with Matt's office. Also, vehicles will be traveling straight from Octavia across Market onto the Central Freeway. JMC, I know I'm subscribed to the transportation list serve, but I can't access it because I don't seem to have a password. When I typed in a password, the response was that I was already subscribed. Can you help? Thanks Sue On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:14:11PM +0000, susan_e_vaughan(a)juno.com wrote: > In particular, we support the desire of the bicylce coalition to see the prohibition of right turns onto the Central Freeway from Market Street as there is currently a heavily-used bicycle lane that carries bicycle traffic from the Castro, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods into downtown San Francisco along this route. Can you point to where in the plan this is addressed? I thought I looked through the Market Street part of the plan fairly well, but missed this. I wouldn't support this unless there's no alternative, since I think Upper Market is the major route for cars from west of Twin Peaks: if they couldn't turn right, most would continue to drive downtown until they hit 10th St or 8th St (and then turn right at those corners). A better strategy would be to get them all to turn down Duboce (closing Market Street to cars past this turnoff), or create special signals at the turn (e.g., separate red and green lights for bikes and cars, and no turn on red). JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://www.dolorespark.org/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://www.dolorespark.org/

1 0

Re: [Transpo] [susan_e_vaughan@yahoo.com: letter re. bike plan update, can you post this for more feedback?]
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 24 Aug '04

24 Aug '04

Actually I'm wrong -- the no right turn IS a part of the bike plan update. Here is a more detailed letter (but not much more detailed): Transportation Working Group San Francisco Green Party 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, California 941__ August 24, 2004 The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition 1095 Market Street, #215 San Francisco, California 94103 Sustainability is one of the ten key values of the Green Party. The current reliance of many San Franciscans on personal vehicles for transportation is not sustainable in the long run. For this reason, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party believes bicycles are a key element in transitioning San Francisco residents from to more environmentally friendly means of transportation. The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party thus endorses all elements of the Bike Plan Update. In particular, we support the desire of the bicylce coalition to see the prohibition of right turns onto the Central Freeway from Market Street as there is currently a heavily-used bicycle lane that carries bicycle traffic from the Castro, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods into downtown San Francisco along this route. We also encourage the bicycle coalition to work on better routes for bicyclists traveling across the Mission from east to west. While the proposed east-west route along Cesar Chavez and/or 26th Street will serve bicyclists near the edge of the Mission and Bernal Heights, it will not adequately serve bicyclists who use 14th Street to travel east -- but have no pathway nearby for going west. Sue Vaughan John-Marc Chandonia Co-Chairs, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party _______________________________________________ Transpo mailing list Transpo(a)sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo

2 1

Re: Fwd: Say Goodby to High Speed Rail 1-2
by Norman Rolfe 23 Aug '04

23 Aug '04

Contact any and all Supervisors and tell them to support Daly's Resolution of Necessity, in other words, start eminent domain proceedings on 80 Natoma Street. Also show up at the Building Inspection Commission meeting on Monday, August 30, 9:00 AM in City Hall, Room 400. Urge them to revoke 80 Natoma's permits. Another big problem is the SFCTA staff. They have come out with a report that supposedly shows how to tunnel under 80 Natoma Street, but most people not connected with the SFCTA or its consultants agree it's not feasible. Norm Rolfe On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:43:34 -0700 (PDT) susan vaughan <susan_e_vaughan(a)yahoo.com> writes: > Hi Norm, > > All of a sudden, high-speed rail and the Transbay > Terminal are sounding do dleazy. Can you tell me what > I should be supporting? What the Transportation > Working Group of the SF Green Party should be > supporting? > > Thanks, > > Sue Vaughan > > --- RicSilver(a)aol.com wrote: > > > From: RicSilver(a)aol.com > > Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:08:38 EDT > > Subject: Say Goodby to High Speed Rail 1-2 > > > > To: RicSilver(a)aol.com > > > > > > > > Say Goodby to High Speed Rail > > > > > > > > > > Any Comments? Ideas? > > > > > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > > Tribune > > > > High-speed collision with conflicting interests > > > > Plans to link trains to Transbay Terminal run into > > intransigent > > developer and rail officials who appear to back him > > > > By Sean Holstege > > Staff Writer > > > > Plans for a California bullet train network and > > conveniently linked Bay Area > > transit are joined at the hip in downtown San > > Francisco. > > > > Yet top California High Speed Rail Authority > > officials appear more > > supportive of a downtown developer than either > > public transportation project. > > > > A 51-story condominium development at 80 Natoma > > Street stands in the path of > > proposed bullet train lines into the new Transbay > > Terminal's basement. > > Attempts at diffusing a political collision course > > there have raised questions > > about conflicts of interest and new doubts > > bullet trains will ever reach downtown San > > Francisco. > > > > In May, Mayor Gavin Newsom invited Rail Authority > > Chairman Joseph Petrillo > > to intervene, Petrillo said. But city records show > > that Petrillo's employer, > > international law firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & > Walker, had helped 80 Natoma > > developer Jack Myers execute > > financial deals two months earlier. > > > > Myers' firm took title on March 25 for $10, plus > > other undisclosed > > "considerations," and then took out a $124 million > > construction loan, city records > > show. > > > > An attorney in Petrillo's division of the law firm > > told Petrillo that he had > > represented Myers, the rail chairman said in an > > interview. > > > > Myers built the office complex where Petrillo's > > firm is headquartered a > > block away from 80 Natoma. Petrillo convened bullet > > train contractors at that > > office for a fund-raiser, also in May. > > > > San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly said 80 Natoma > > and the terminal can't > > co-exist, describing the collision course as "a > > pretty significant conflict." > > Last week he voted against a new plan that some in > > San Francisco believe would > > allow both projects to proceed. > > > > At stake is a downtown San Francisco terminal that > > would allow people to > > transfer between major Bay Area transit systems > > under one roof while using one > > fare. From the basement, bullet trains would carry > > people to downtown Los > > Angeles in 2-1/2 hours. > > > > The glittering $1 billion terminal could > > revolutionize the region's > > disjointed transit network. Sponsors envision one > > of the world's great rail stations, > > to rival New York's Grand Central, London's > > Victoria and Paris' Gare du > > Nord. > > > > Several state laws and voter-backed measures pay for > > the terminal and > > require rail platforms in the basement for Caltrain > > and bullet train alike. > > > > The Rail Authority's environmental report projects > > the future Transbay > > Terminal as the busiest station in the entire > > 700-mile network. > > > > Without trains, the Transbay Terminal would -- as > > critics have called it -- > > become the world's most expensive bus stop. > > Independent engineers found no > > option for tracks other than under Myers' property. > > But while Rail Authority > > Executive Director Mehdi Morshed was telling people > > he didn't care if his > > trains ever reach the terminal, Petrillo's actions > > seemed to bolster Myers' > > negotiating position. > > > > The public agency developing the terminal needs > > Myers to suspend work until > > it can tunnel under it. Myers refuses, and the > > agency has begun an eminent > > domain proceeding to buy the property. "Every dollar > > going into that high-rise > > is one-for-one coming out of the public's pocket," > > said San Francisco transit > > advocate Michael Kiesling. "I believe Myers is > > trying to scam public money > > out of this." > > > > Daly put it more politely, calling Myers effective > > at "trying to better his > > negotiating position." > > > > Myers said that's nonsense. "I don't want > > condemnation, and I'm going to > > fight it all the way," he said. He sued to overturn > > the Transbay Terminal's > > environmental study. > > > > In a May 4 meeting Petrillo tried to resolve the > > dispute. "Petrillo was > > acting like Myers' man, barking out stuff. He hasn't > > been a friend of the > > Transbay Terminal," said Jerry Cauthen, an engineer > > on the terminal project. > > > > The Transbay Terminal authority paid two consultants > > to assess whether > > tracks could reach the terminal without tunneling > > under Myers' project. They said > > no. > > > > "Petrillo was involved on the phone. He was trying > > to muzzle the > > consultants," said Tony Bruzzone, AC Transit's > > point-man on the terminal. > > > > The same two consultants are retained by the Rail > > Authority and helped > > prepare its environmental study. Petrillo > > acknowledged they were placed in the > > awkward position of serving two masters. > > > > Petrillo said he was merely trying to cut to the > > chase to see if 80 Natoma > > and the terminal could co-exist. "They were > > debating numbers that didn't > > communicate to me the basics I needed to know: > > whether there were any fatal > > flaws," Petrillo explained. > > > > AC Transit fired off a letter to San Francisco > > officials two weeks later, > > arguing: "Failure to acquire this parcel will cause > > the entire Transbay program > > to collapse." > > > > > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > > Tribune > > > > Truth may have come off the tracks > > > > Rail Authority efforts leave some legislators > > questioning if > > proposed high-speed rail project is 'a fraud' > > > > By Sean Holstege > > Staff Writer > > > > Lawmakers say California High Speed Rail Authority > > work is not just sloppy, > > but misleading. > > > > Sloppiness was evident: a business plan that never > > mentioned an Oakland > > track, a $20 million environmental plan describing > > a future BART station six > > months after it opened. > > > > The route into the Bay Area is one of the biggest > > controversies in the plan > > for the 700-mile system. The Rail Authority dropped > > an Altamont Pass route in > > favor of two South Bay alternatives. > > > > On Feb. 17, Rail Authority Executive Director Mehdi > > Morshed told the state > > Senate Transportation Committee that years ago > > French, German and Japanese > > rail experts had blessed the plan to run tracks > > through San Jose rather than > > over the Altamont Pass. > > > > Morshed couldn't document the claim. > > > > The Train Riders Association of California filed a > > public records request > > for all communications with the French, German and > > Japanese consultants. > > Morshed provided what he described as a full, > > unedited set of documents. > > > > "None of the documents we were provided contained > > any information to support > > Mr. Morshed's statement," TRAC's Oakland lawyer > > Stuart Flashman wrote > > lawmakers. > > > > In a rebuttal letter, Morshed reasserted the > > documents that led to the > > Altamont decision "were peer reviewed by German, > > French and Japanese experts," > > adding the reviews marked "general agreement." > > > > But a month after Morshed's testimony, Rail > > Authority Deputy Director Dan > > Leavitt wrote a Japanese rail expert, asking for "a > > brief analysis" of the > > environmental study's conclusion that an Altamont > > Pass route would be > > "impractical." > > > > On March 16, Leavitt wrote "the task should take no > > more than $10,000." > > > > On April 23, the Japanese expert duly complied with > > a three-page report, > > finding "it is reasonable to eliminate the > > (Altamont) option." On May 10, came > > the bill. "Cost for the review task: $10,000," the > > Japanese expert wrote. > > > > Morshed said the letters stemmed from a U.S. > > Environmental Protection Agency > > request. A Feb. 27 EPA letter copied to Morshed > > noted concern that the > > Altamont route "appears to have been prematurely > > eliminated." Morshed said his > > Senate appearance was all > > a misunderstanding. > > > > "The question was 'Why didn't you study it?' and I > > said we did," Morshed > > said. He said he only intended to imply that foreign > > consultants reviewed the > > whole plan and "did not find fault with our > > assumptions," including the > > Altamont. > > > > "How they construe that to be misleading, I don't > > know," he said. > > > > But lawmakers on the committee had no doubts. "It > > sounds like Mehdi said he > > had a study that predated their decision and it > > informed their decision. Now > > it looks like they are making it up as they go > > along," said Sen. Tom > > McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, who sat on the > > committee hearing. > > > > "I am not surprised that phantom studies are being > > waved before the > > Legislature," McClintock added. "I think this entire > > project has been a fraud since > > the day it was proposed." > > > > "I don't know how you could interpret it any other > > way," said Brian Perkins, > > transportation adviser to Sen. Jackie Speier, > > D-Hillsborough, who also sat > > on the committee. > > > > More troubling to Perkins, who called Morshed's > > actions "not intellectually > > honest," was a document missing in his public > > records disclosure. > > Correspondence between Leavitt and the Japanese > > expert refers to an e-mail dated Feb. 17 > > -- the same day Morshed testified. > > > > "It's like the missing 17-1/2 minutes," Perkins > > said, referring to the > > erased gap in the Oval Office tapes that helped > > force Richard Nixon from the > > presidency. "They apparently learned from Mr. Nixon > > that you burn the evidence." > > > > French consultants, working under a High Speed Rail > > Authority contract, also > > had offered an opinion to the authority. They noted > > an Altamont route "would > > not be practical," and they peer-reviewed the > > agency's work in 2000 and > > found it "sound and reliable." > > > > The Feb. 11 letter was written by engineers at SNCF, > > parent company to > > Systra Consulting. Systra is one of three firms > > picked for the "Project > > Implementation Team," which stands to make $10 > > million a year if California's rail bond > > passes. > > > > Flashman said Morshed's team "got back what they > > wanted" from a firm with an > > incentive to deliver. > > > > Veteran San Diego lawmaker James Mills, who quit > > the California High Speed > > Rail Authority board, is not surprised. > > > > "One of the reasons I left is I couldn't get the > > truth out of Mehdi Morshed. > > Mehdi is one of those people who has a hidden agenda > > on everything," Mills > > said, "He would only tell the truth when it was > > convenient." > > > > Mills described the entire project as "based on a > > fallacy" of wildly > > exaggerated ridership projections. It stems, he > > said, "from hiring a consulting firm > > (and) letting them know what you want them to say." > > > > Morshed said Mills is "full of (it)," describing him > > as someone who used his > > position on the board to help California's intercity > > Amtrak service and > > undermine the bullet train. > > > > But some Central Valley politicians involved in the > > rail issue side with > > Mills. > > > > "Their story changes depending on their audience," > > Kings County Supervisor > > Alene Taylor said. "They have not been honest with > > the public. It's how they > > do business." > > > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > > Tribune > > > > Bullet Train to Nowhere > > > > Critics say politics and back-room deals cast > > serious doubt on whether a > > proposed $37 billion high-speed rail system will > > ever be built > > > > By Sean Holstege > > Staff Writer > > > > The marbled conference hall buzzed with that potent > > mix of money, power and > > anticipation. > > > > It was May 11, 10:40 a.m. Willie Brown was late to > > his own meeting, well > > under way in the 24th floor boardroom of an > > international law firm's downtown > > San Francisco office. > > > > Around the U-shaped, polished wood table assembled > > heavyweights in the rail > > engineering and construction world, including the > > CEO of Parsons Brinkerhoff, > > one of the country's biggest transportation firms. > > They came to the private > > meeting to throw money and political > > clout behind a proposed $37 billion bullet train > > network. Big deals were > > afoot. > > > > As the dozen or so guests waited, they schmoozed > > for 40 minutes with three > > top officials from the California High Speed Rail > > Authority, the public agency > > planning the 700-mile rail network, ultimately > > stretching from San Diego to > > San Francisco, Oakland and Sacramento. > > > > Without asking for it directly, Rail Authority > > chiefs told industry leaders > > -- including those with authority contracts -- that > > the rail agency needed > > money and political backing to carry on. > > > > Brown took his place at the head of the table. His > > resume as powerful San > > Francisco mayor and Assembly speaker well known to > > everyone in the room, Brown > > now markets his influence in the private sector. He > > looked over the group and > > explained that he and former state lawmakers > > Richard Katz and Terry Goggin > > wanted a fee of $1 million. > > > > In return, they would steer a favorable budget into > > law by lobbying all the > > key state politicians. Then they'd launch a campaign > > to convince California > > voters to pass a $10 billion rail bond. > > > > The author of California's political reforms and > > good-government watchdogs > > said -- absent any overt coercion -- such > > fund-raisers are legal, but raise > > doubts about appearance and propriety. > > > > "How can the public be confident that decisions > > would be based on merit and > > not undue influence?" asked Andy Draheim of Common > > Cause, a government > > watchdog group. > > > > That's exactly how several industry sources took > > it. In describing the > > meeting and events surrounding it, they portrayed a > > below-the-radar state agency > > run amok with a history of back-room dealing, > > conflicts of interest and > > secretive money-gathering. One called the > > meeting a "classic shakedown" -- and not the first. > > > > Industry sources spoke on condition of anonymity > > because their employers > > prohibit media interviews. In the close-knit world > > of transportation > > engineering, sources fear their firms would be > > blackballed or they would earn > > career-ending reputations by talking openly. > > > > They say the Rail Authority's cavalier tactics raise > > serious doubts about > > whether the Golden State can ever build a "bullet > > train" network, which could > > relieve Californians of congested in-state air > > travel. > > > > Three days after the San Francisco gathering, > > Brown, Goggin and Katz wrote a > > follow-up memo to invited donors, detailing the > > first and only meeting of > > Friends of California High Speed Rail. > > > > 'Substantial retainer' > > > > The memo, obtained by ANG Newspapers, confirms a > > picture that emerges from > > interviews with more than half of the participants > > and dozens of > > transportation sources familiar with high-speed > > rail. > > > > "Over the next 60 days we propose to concentrate > > our considerable political > > resources and campaign experience," the memo states. > > "This will require a > > substantial initial consultant retainer for our fees > > and expenses of $400,000." > > > > Another $600,000 was needed to start the bond > > campaign, the memo said. > > Overall, Brown would get half of the $1 million, > > while Katz and Goggin would split > > the rest. > > > > Public agencies, including BART and AC Transit, > > often ask consultants and > > vendors for big political checks, officials at each > > agency, and others, say. > > > > "If you say, 'Give me a campaign contribution and > > I'll give you contracts,' > > that's a bribe. If you say, 'You won't get a > > contract unless the bond > > passes,' that's OK. That's just normal politics -- > > getting contributions from those > > that benefit," said Robert Stern, a UCLA professor > > who helped write > > California's Political Reform Act. > > > > He found no transgressions in the Brown letter. > > > > Top Rail Authority officials say concerns about > > influence-peddling are > > misplaced, because the appointed governing board > > will be almost entirely replaced > > before it votes on contracts. > > > > "Any competitive bid at the High Speed Rail > > Authority will be based on > > merit, as it always has been," authority board > > member Rod Diridon said. > > > > "The people who benefit from high-speed rail should > > organize themselves, > > because otherwise it may very well remain > > unaccomplished," Rail Authority > > Chairman Joseph Petrillo said. > > > > Petrillo, Diridon and Rail Authority Executive > > Director Mehdi Morshed "were > > very careful not to cross a line that might exist," > > said one industry player > > who attended the May 11 meeting. > > > > Questions of influence > > > > But Common Cause's Draheim said the public should > > naturally ask "if future > > decisions on public policy will be unduly > > influenced by the position these > > officials put themselves in." > > > > Morshed and Diridon said they felt no such qualms, > > because, they said, it > > was Willie Brown's meeting. > > > > Petrillo, whose law firm hosted it, apparently was > > less comfortable. Not > > long before Brown arrived Petrillo told the group > > "I shouldn't be here," and he > > recused himself. Diridon and Morshed remained. > > > > No contributions were reportedly made, and a > > follow-up telephone conference > > call was canceled. No public records for the > > political group are on file with > > the Secretary of State's office, and Brown, Goggin > > and Katz are not > > registered lobbyists. > > > > Brown and Goggin did not return calls to their law > > firms made over several > > weeks. > > > > Sources familiar with their request for money > > called it premature amid > > persistent doubts that California's dream of a > > European-style rail system will > > bear fruit. > > > > Funding for the Rail Authority was -- and remains > > -- uncertain. A lengthy > > environmental study is under review and significant > > challenges are expected. > > > > The Legislature passed a bill, which Gov. Arnold > > Schwarzenegger signed, > > delaying a November bond vote by two years. Later > > he trimmed the rail agency's > > budget and his reform advisers recommended > > scrapping the Rail Authority > > entirely. > > > > Its plans assume America's first bullet train will > > carry 68 million > > passengers a year, enough to cover costs and debt, > > with spare money to finance an > > expansion beyond the first San Francisco-to-Los > > Angeles track. > > > > No bullet train system in the world, nor any large > > U.S. transit system, is > > self-sufficient, let alone profitable. > > > > But believers say tactics, not merits, threaten to > > kill bullet train > > prospects in California. > > > > "They are going to screw high-speed rail all up if > > they keep playing around > > like this. It's already radioactive," one industry > > leader said. Union Pacific > > lobbyist Wayne Horiuchi skipped the Willie Brown > > fund-raiser and others by > > rail commissioner Rod Diridon. > > > > One, at Diridon's South Bay home, raised re-election > > campaign money for Gov. > > Gray Davis one day after Davis signed the $10 > > billion rail bond bill. > > > > Davis challenger Bill Simon showed up with the > > media, raising allegations of > > payback. > > > > Diridon said the fund-raiser had been planned weeks > > beforehand and the > > timing was "an unfortunate coincidence." > > > > 'Pay-to-play' > > > > "Rod Diridon called me personally and wanted me to > > contribute to Gray > > Davis," said Horiuchi, who declined the offer > > because "we didn't want to get into > > the political sensitivity of pay-to-play." > > > > Said another rail industry source: "Rod Diridon is a > > one-trick-pony. All he > > knows is shaking people down." > > > > "I can't control that (perception),"said Diridon, > > adding the Rail Authority > > is "gun-shy of pay-to-play accusations." > > > > But several rail sources said they felt compelled > > to donate to scholarship > > dinners at the Mineta Transportation Institute, > > which pays Diridon $138,834 > > annually to be executive director. Engineers, > > consultants and rail firms fear > > losing favor at the High Speed Rail > > Authority if they don't support the foundation at > > the government- funded San > > Jose State University think tank, some said. > > > > "No one has ever discussed it with me, and if they > > were honorable and > > seriously concerned, they should. I'm not going to > > turn down scholarships because I > > recently became a member of the High Speed Rail > > Authority, " Diridon said. > > "Unnamed sources don't have much > > credibility with me." > > > > Diridon said he's been at the Mineta Institute > > since 1992 and has invited > > the same donors to the scholarship dinner for > > years. Davis appointed him to the > > High Speed Rail Authority in 2001. > > > > Diridon said two firms with Rail Authority contracts > > -- French rail company > > Systra and political consultants Townsend Raimundo > > Besler & Usher -- never > > gave money to the Mineta Institute. Other firms have > > donated and never received > > Rail Authority contracts, he said. > > > > But the institute's brochures list Bechtel Corp. > > and Parsons Brinkerhoff > > Quade & Douglas as big donors in 2002 and 2003. > > > > Both firms are part of the Rail Authority's Project > > Implementation Team, > > which is paid $10 million a year to steer the > > project from plans to > > construction. Tax law exempts the foundation from > > disclosing contributors, but an > > institute brochure listing sponsors reads like a > > who's who of high-speed rail > > wannabes. It includes at least seven attendees of > > Willie Brown's May 11 meeting and > > at least two no-shows. > > > > One no-show was LTK Engineering Services, which is > > represented in Northern > > California by former Sacramento transit director > > Tom Matoff. He said Willie > > Brown's $1 million request -- $100,000 per donor -- > > was out of his league, but > > he buys $2,000 tickets every > > year to the Mineta Institute fund-raiser. > > > > Although he said he's never felt pressured, he > > added, "We want to be viewed, > > like everybody else, as a friend of the project." > > > > He said there's no clear connection between > > contributions and work, but his > > firm doesn't leave it to chance. > > > > "It's the way it's done, and everybody does it," > > Matoff said. > > > > Critics of the High Speed Rail Authority's work have > > long suspected Diridon > > had an overlapping role between the Mineta Institute > > and the rail board. Last > > year the institute sponsored a discussion of the > > bullet train proposal at > > the Commonwealth Club of California. > > Diridon was the featured speaker. > > > > Diridon also introduced himself at the Willie Brown > > fund-raisers > > representing the Mineta Institute. > > > > "Over the past two years the lines of distinction > > between the authority and > > institute have been blurred," wrote Ken Gosting, > > executive director of > > Transportation Involves Everyone, in a letter > > to Diridon. > > > > Similar questions of overlapping interest and > > hidden political influence > > also hover over a community campaign that's sprouted > > in Merced. > > > > Lee Boese Jr., an orthodontist, chairs the Merced > > group, whose literature > > advocates high-speed rail somewhere in Merced > > County. The area is a key > > battleground because that's where the route would > > split into the Bay Area -- one of > > the plan's hottest controversies. > > > > Boese says bullet trains will boost the Central > > Valley's tepid economy and > > help clean its smog-heavy air. > > > > The Merced County High-Speed Rail Committee, has 24 > > active members from all > > walks of life, Boese said. A spring fundraiser > > raised $25,000, and all > > donations were tax-deductible, Boese and group > > literature said. > > > > Questionable filing > > > > But the group's filing with the Secretary of > > State's office describe it as a > > 501(c)4 nonprofit, a charitable civic organization. > > > > Tax laws allow such groups to conduct "unlimited" > > political lobbying without > > disclosing contributors, according to IRS > > advisories. > > > > The IRS also says that contributions to civic > > charities are not > > tax-deductible. > > > > The money, Boese said, pays for the help of > > Sacramento political consultant > > Elaine Trevino, who lobbies local governments and > > organizations. > > > > Trevino is not a registered lobbyist. Neither she > > nor Boese explained the > > discrepancy in the organization's filing and its > > pitch for tax-free > > contributions. Nor did they explain why the group > > didn't organize as a simple political organization. > > > > Boese and Trevino attended the Willie Brown > > meeting, representing themselves > > as Merced real estate interests. Several members of > > the group have business > > interests in the Los Banos area, one of the > > preferred sites for a station. > > > > "I thought it was totally inappropriate for real > > estate people to be > > involved at this stage, when they are deciding the > > route," one witness said. > > > > Gosting, who wants to see bullet trains zooming > > down California tracks > > someday, said that vision is destroyed if the Rail > > Authority and its allies such > > as the Merced group continue down the current > > track. > > > > "You end up with something that benefits land > > speculators and promotes > > sprawl, that decreases ag land instead of protects > > it," he said. "We end up with a > > debacle. We spend billions and billions of dollars > > for something that won't > > work." > > > > ETHICS TROUBLES > > > > Participants at the May 11 bullet train fund-raiser > > are no strangers to > > ethics probes. > > > > * Willie Brown had been investigated by the FBI in > > a 1980s undercover sting > > while he was Assembly speaker. His name surfaced at > > the FBI again when he was > > mayor, after questions of favoritism arose in > > airport construction > > contracts. Brown always denied any wrongdoing and > > has never been indicted or censured, > > either as a lawyer or a politician. > > > > * Terry Goggin fared worse. The Fair Political > > Practices Commission fined > > the then-assemblyman $13,500 in 1984 after he > > carried a bill to require > > telephones for the deaf. Only one firm could provide > > the devices, a firm owned by a > > close friend of Goggin, according to > > published press reports. > > > > * Richard Katz, who had a reputation as an effective > > state lawmaker, was > > fined $4,000 in 1997 after failing to disclose > > campaign expenses in a Los > > Angeles mayoral race. Questions surfaced again > > during the state energy crisis when > > he advised Gov. Gray Davis, while taking > > consulting fees from firms lobbying the governor. > > > > * Michael Bernick was one of the potential donors > > present and is now with > > HNTB, an engineering design firm. When he was an > > elected BART board member, an > > FBI wiretap caught him soliciting contributions > > from a firm after ensuring > > that the firm would get a BART contract. "We've got > > to keep it real clean," > > Bernick was taped saying in 1992. > > "You know, so there is nothing linking the two of > > us." > > > > Later Bernick told the media, "I'd do it again." He > > was taped as part of a > > bribery investigation that forced the resignation > > of BART board member > > Margaret Pryor. Current board member Dan Richard > > served at the time and said > > Bernick, who was never indicted, simply made a > > judgment error. > > > > This information is being provided to you as a > > service by the Rail Passenger > > Association of California (RailPAC), California's > > largest and oldest rail > > advocacy membership organization. > > > > If you would like information about RailPAC, simple > > send us your postal > > mailing address by return e-mail. > > > > Richard L. Silver, Executive Director > > Rail Passenger Association of California > > www.RailPAC.org > > 888-508-2640 > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush > >

1 0

Fwd: Say Goodby to High Speed Rail 1-2
by susan vaughan 23 Aug '04

23 Aug '04

Hi Norm, All of a sudden, high-speed rail and the Transbay Terminal are sounding do dleazy. Can you tell me what I should be supporting? What the Transportation Working Group of the SF Green Party should be supporting? Thanks, Sue Vaughan --- RicSilver(a)aol.com wrote: > From: RicSilver(a)aol.com > Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:08:38 EDT > Subject: Say Goodby to High Speed Rail 1-2 > > To: RicSilver(a)aol.com > > > > Say Goodby to High Speed Rail > > > > > Any Comments? Ideas? > > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > Tribune > > High-speed collision with conflicting interests > > Plans to link trains to Transbay Terminal run into > intransigent > developer and rail officials who appear to back him > > By Sean Holstege > Staff Writer > > Plans for a California bullet train network and > conveniently linked Bay Area > transit are joined at the hip in downtown San > Francisco. > > Yet top California High Speed Rail Authority > officials appear more > supportive of a downtown developer than either > public transportation project. > > A 51-story condominium development at 80 Natoma > Street stands in the path of > proposed bullet train lines into the new Transbay > Terminal's basement. > Attempts at diffusing a political collision course > there have raised questions > about conflicts of interest and new doubts > bullet trains will ever reach downtown San > Francisco. > > In May, Mayor Gavin Newsom invited Rail Authority > Chairman Joseph Petrillo > to intervene, Petrillo said. But city records show > that Petrillo's employer, > international law firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & > Walker, had helped 80 Natoma > developer Jack Myers execute > financial deals two months earlier. > > Myers' firm took title on March 25 for $10, plus > other undisclosed > "considerations," and then took out a $124 million > construction loan, city records > show. > > An attorney in Petrillo's division of the law firm > told Petrillo that he had > represented Myers, the rail chairman said in an > interview. > > Myers built the office complex where Petrillo's > firm is headquartered a > block away from 80 Natoma. Petrillo convened bullet > train contractors at that > office for a fund-raiser, also in May. > > San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly said 80 Natoma > and the terminal can't > co-exist, describing the collision course as "a > pretty significant conflict." > Last week he voted against a new plan that some in > San Francisco believe would > allow both projects to proceed. > > At stake is a downtown San Francisco terminal that > would allow people to > transfer between major Bay Area transit systems > under one roof while using one > fare. From the basement, bullet trains would carry > people to downtown Los > Angeles in 2-1/2 hours. > > The glittering $1 billion terminal could > revolutionize the region's > disjointed transit network. Sponsors envision one > of the world's great rail stations, > to rival New York's Grand Central, London's > Victoria and Paris' Gare du > Nord. > > Several state laws and voter-backed measures pay for > the terminal and > require rail platforms in the basement for Caltrain > and bullet train alike. > > The Rail Authority's environmental report projects > the future Transbay > Terminal as the busiest station in the entire > 700-mile network. > > Without trains, the Transbay Terminal would -- as > critics have called it -- > become the world's most expensive bus stop. > Independent engineers found no > option for tracks other than under Myers' property. > But while Rail Authority > Executive Director Mehdi Morshed was telling people > he didn't care if his > trains ever reach the terminal, Petrillo's actions > seemed to bolster Myers' > negotiating position. > > The public agency developing the terminal needs > Myers to suspend work until > it can tunnel under it. Myers refuses, and the > agency has begun an eminent > domain proceeding to buy the property. "Every dollar > going into that high-rise > is one-for-one coming out of the public's pocket," > said San Francisco transit > advocate Michael Kiesling. "I believe Myers is > trying to scam public money > out of this." > > Daly put it more politely, calling Myers effective > at "trying to better his > negotiating position." > > Myers said that's nonsense. "I don't want > condemnation, and I'm going to > fight it all the way," he said. He sued to overturn > the Transbay Terminal's > environmental study. > > In a May 4 meeting Petrillo tried to resolve the > dispute. "Petrillo was > acting like Myers' man, barking out stuff. He hasn't > been a friend of the > Transbay Terminal," said Jerry Cauthen, an engineer > on the terminal project. > > The Transbay Terminal authority paid two consultants > to assess whether > tracks could reach the terminal without tunneling > under Myers' project. They said > no. > > "Petrillo was involved on the phone. He was trying > to muzzle the > consultants," said Tony Bruzzone, AC Transit's > point-man on the terminal. > > The same two consultants are retained by the Rail > Authority and helped > prepare its environmental study. Petrillo > acknowledged they were placed in the > awkward position of serving two masters. > > Petrillo said he was merely trying to cut to the > chase to see if 80 Natoma > and the terminal could co-exist. "They were > debating numbers that didn't > communicate to me the basics I needed to know: > whether there were any fatal > flaws," Petrillo explained. > > AC Transit fired off a letter to San Francisco > officials two weeks later, > arguing: "Failure to acquire this parcel will cause > the entire Transbay program > to collapse." > > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > Tribune > > Truth may have come off the tracks > > Rail Authority efforts leave some legislators > questioning if > proposed high-speed rail project is 'a fraud' > > By Sean Holstege > Staff Writer > > Lawmakers say California High Speed Rail Authority > work is not just sloppy, > but misleading. > > Sloppiness was evident: a business plan that never > mentioned an Oakland > track, a $20 million environmental plan describing > a future BART station six > months after it opened. > > The route into the Bay Area is one of the biggest > controversies in the plan > for the 700-mile system. The Rail Authority dropped > an Altamont Pass route in > favor of two South Bay alternatives. > > On Feb. 17, Rail Authority Executive Director Mehdi > Morshed told the state > Senate Transportation Committee that years ago > French, German and Japanese > rail experts had blessed the plan to run tracks > through San Jose rather than > over the Altamont Pass. > > Morshed couldn't document the claim. > > The Train Riders Association of California filed a > public records request > for all communications with the French, German and > Japanese consultants. > Morshed provided what he described as a full, > unedited set of documents. > > "None of the documents we were provided contained > any information to support > Mr. Morshed's statement," TRAC's Oakland lawyer > Stuart Flashman wrote > lawmakers. > > In a rebuttal letter, Morshed reasserted the > documents that led to the > Altamont decision "were peer reviewed by German, > French and Japanese experts," > adding the reviews marked "general agreement." > > But a month after Morshed's testimony, Rail > Authority Deputy Director Dan > Leavitt wrote a Japanese rail expert, asking for "a > brief analysis" of the > environmental study's conclusion that an Altamont > Pass route would be > "impractical." > > On March 16, Leavitt wrote "the task should take no > more than $10,000." > > On April 23, the Japanese expert duly complied with > a three-page report, > finding "it is reasonable to eliminate the > (Altamont) option." On May 10, came > the bill. "Cost for the review task: $10,000," the > Japanese expert wrote. > > Morshed said the letters stemmed from a U.S. > Environmental Protection Agency > request. A Feb. 27 EPA letter copied to Morshed > noted concern that the > Altamont route "appears to have been prematurely > eliminated." Morshed said his > Senate appearance was all > a misunderstanding. > > "The question was 'Why didn't you study it?' and I > said we did," Morshed > said. He said he only intended to imply that foreign > consultants reviewed the > whole plan and "did not find fault with our > assumptions," including the > Altamont. > > "How they construe that to be misleading, I don't > know," he said. > > But lawmakers on the committee had no doubts. "It > sounds like Mehdi said he > had a study that predated their decision and it > informed their decision. Now > it looks like they are making it up as they go > along," said Sen. Tom > McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, who sat on the > committee hearing. > > "I am not surprised that phantom studies are being > waved before the > Legislature," McClintock added. "I think this entire > project has been a fraud since > the day it was proposed." > > "I don't know how you could interpret it any other > way," said Brian Perkins, > transportation adviser to Sen. Jackie Speier, > D-Hillsborough, who also sat > on the committee. > > More troubling to Perkins, who called Morshed's > actions "not intellectually > honest," was a document missing in his public > records disclosure. > Correspondence between Leavitt and the Japanese > expert refers to an e-mail dated Feb. 17 > -- the same day Morshed testified. > > "It's like the missing 17-1/2 minutes," Perkins > said, referring to the > erased gap in the Oval Office tapes that helped > force Richard Nixon from the > presidency. "They apparently learned from Mr. Nixon > that you burn the evidence." > > French consultants, working under a High Speed Rail > Authority contract, also > had offered an opinion to the authority. They noted > an Altamont route "would > not be practical," and they peer-reviewed the > agency's work in 2000 and > found it "sound and reliable." > > The Feb. 11 letter was written by engineers at SNCF, > parent company to > Systra Consulting. Systra is one of three firms > picked for the "Project > Implementation Team," which stands to make $10 > million a year if California's rail bond > passes. > > Flashman said Morshed's team "got back what they > wanted" from a firm with an > incentive to deliver. > > Veteran San Diego lawmaker James Mills, who quit > the California High Speed > Rail Authority board, is not surprised. > > "One of the reasons I left is I couldn't get the > truth out of Mehdi Morshed. > Mehdi is one of those people who has a hidden agenda > on everything," Mills > said, "He would only tell the truth when it was > convenient." > > Mills described the entire project as "based on a > fallacy" of wildly > exaggerated ridership projections. It stems, he > said, "from hiring a consulting firm > (and) letting them know what you want them to say." > > Morshed said Mills is "full of (it)," describing him > as someone who used his > position on the board to help California's intercity > Amtrak service and > undermine the bullet train. > > But some Central Valley politicians involved in the > rail issue side with > Mills. > > "Their story changes depending on their audience," > Kings County Supervisor > Alene Taylor said. "They have not been honest with > the public. It's how they > do business." > > Published Sunday, August 22, 2004, in the Oakland > Tribune > > Bullet Train to Nowhere > > Critics say politics and back-room deals cast > serious doubt on whether a > proposed $37 billion high-speed rail system will > ever be built > > By Sean Holstege > Staff Writer > > The marbled conference hall buzzed with that potent > mix of money, power and > anticipation. > > It was May 11, 10:40 a.m. Willie Brown was late to > his own meeting, well > under way in the 24th floor boardroom of an > international law firm's downtown > San Francisco office. > > Around the U-shaped, polished wood table assembled > heavyweights in the rail > engineering and construction world, including the > CEO of Parsons Brinkerhoff, > one of the country's biggest transportation firms. > They came to the private > meeting to throw money and political > clout behind a proposed $37 billion bullet train > network. Big deals were > afoot. > > As the dozen or so guests waited, they schmoozed > for 40 minutes with three > top officials from the California High Speed Rail > Authority, the public agency > planning the 700-mile rail network, ultimately > stretching from San Diego to > San Francisco, Oakland and Sacramento. > > Without asking for it directly, Rail Authority > chiefs told industry leaders > -- including those with authority contracts -- that > the rail agency needed > money and political backing to carry on. > > Brown took his place at the head of the table. His > resume as powerful San > Francisco mayor and Assembly speaker well known to > everyone in the room, Brown > now markets his influence in the private sector. He > looked over the group and > explained that he and former state lawmakers > Richard Katz and Terry Goggin > wanted a fee of $1 million. > > In return, they would steer a favorable budget into > law by lobbying all the > key state politicians. Then they'd launch a campaign > to convince California > voters to pass a $10 billion rail bond. > > The author of California's political reforms and > good-government watchdogs > said -- absent any overt coercion -- such > fund-raisers are legal, but raise > doubts about appearance and propriety. > > "How can the public be confident that decisions > would be based on merit and > not undue influence?" asked Andy Draheim of Common > Cause, a government > watchdog group. > > That's exactly how several industry sources took > it. In describing the > meeting and events surrounding it, they portrayed a > below-the-radar state agency > run amok with a history of back-room dealing, > conflicts of interest and > secretive money-gathering. One called the > meeting a "classic shakedown" -- and not the first. > > Industry sources spoke on condition of anonymity > because their employers > prohibit media interviews. In the close-knit world > of transportation > engineering, sources fear their firms would be > blackballed or they would earn > career-ending reputations by talking openly. > > They say the Rail Authority's cavalier tactics raise > serious doubts about > whether the Golden State can ever build a "bullet > train" network, which could > relieve Californians of congested in-state air > travel. > > Three days after the San Francisco gathering, > Brown, Goggin and Katz wrote a > follow-up memo to invited donors, detailing the > first and only meeting of > Friends of California High Speed Rail. > > 'Substantial retainer' > > The memo, obtained by ANG Newspapers, confirms a > picture that emerges from > interviews with more than half of the participants > and dozens of > transportation sources familiar with high-speed > rail. > > "Over the next 60 days we propose to concentrate > our considerable political > resources and campaign experience," the memo states. > "This will require a > substantial initial consultant retainer for our fees > and expenses of $400,000." > > Another $600,000 was needed to start the bond > campaign, the memo said. > Overall, Brown would get half of the $1 million, > while Katz and Goggin would split > the rest. > > Public agencies, including BART and AC Transit, > often ask consultants and > vendors for big political checks, officials at each > agency, and others, say. > > "If you say, 'Give me a campaign contribution and > I'll give you contracts,' > that's a bribe. If you say, 'You won't get a > contract unless the bond > passes,' that's OK. That's just normal politics -- > getting contributions from those > that benefit," said Robert Stern, a UCLA professor > who helped write > California's Political Reform Act. > > He found no transgressions in the Brown letter. > > Top Rail Authority officials say concerns about > influence-peddling are > misplaced, because the appointed governing board > will be almost entirely replaced > before it votes on contracts. > > "Any competitive bid at the High Speed Rail > Authority will be based on > merit, as it always has been," authority board > member Rod Diridon said. > > "The people who benefit from high-speed rail should > organize themselves, > because otherwise it may very well remain > unaccomplished," Rail Authority > Chairman Joseph Petrillo said. > > Petrillo, Diridon and Rail Authority Executive > Director Mehdi Morshed "were > very careful not to cross a line that might exist," > said one industry player > who attended the May 11 meeting. > > Questions of influence > > But Common Cause's Draheim said the public should > naturally ask "if future > decisions on public policy will be unduly > influenced by the position these > officials put themselves in." > > Morshed and Diridon said they felt no such qualms, > because, they said, it > was Willie Brown's meeting. > > Petrillo, whose law firm hosted it, apparently was > less comfortable. Not > long before Brown arrived Petrillo told the group > "I shouldn't be here," and he > recused himself. Diridon and Morshed remained. > > No contributions were reportedly made, and a > follow-up telephone conference > call was canceled. No public records for the > political group are on file with > the Secretary of State's office, and Brown, Goggin > and Katz are not > registered lobbyists. > > Brown and Goggin did not return calls to their law > firms made over several > weeks. > > Sources familiar with their request for money > called it premature amid > persistent doubts that California's dream of a > European-style rail system will > bear fruit. > > Funding for the Rail Authority was -- and remains > -- uncertain. A lengthy > environmental study is under review and significant > challenges are expected. > > The Legislature passed a bill, which Gov. Arnold > Schwarzenegger signed, > delaying a November bond vote by two years. Later > he trimmed the rail agency's > budget and his reform advisers recommended > scrapping the Rail Authority > entirely. > > Its plans assume America's first bullet train will > carry 68 million > passengers a year, enough to cover costs and debt, > with spare money to finance an > expansion beyond the first San Francisco-to-Los > Angeles track. > > No bullet train system in the world, nor any large > U.S. transit system, is > self-sufficient, let alone profitable. > > But believers say tactics, not merits, threaten to > kill bullet train > prospects in California. > > "They are going to screw high-speed rail all up if > they keep playing around > like this. It's already radioactive," one industry > leader said. Union Pacific > lobbyist Wayne Horiuchi skipped the Willie Brown > fund-raiser and others by > rail commissioner Rod Diridon. > > One, at Diridon's South Bay home, raised re-election > campaign money for Gov. > Gray Davis one day after Davis signed the $10 > billion rail bond bill. > > Davis challenger Bill Simon showed up with the > media, raising allegations of > payback. > > Diridon said the fund-raiser had been planned weeks > beforehand and the > timing was "an unfortunate coincidence." > > 'Pay-to-play' > > "Rod Diridon called me personally and wanted me to > contribute to Gray > Davis," said Horiuchi, who declined the offer > because "we didn't want to get into > the political sensitivity of pay-to-play." > > Said another rail industry source: "Rod Diridon is a > one-trick-pony. All he > knows is shaking people down." > > "I can't control that (perception),"said Diridon, > adding the Rail Authority > is "gun-shy of pay-to-play accusations." > > But several rail sources said they felt compelled > to donate to scholarship > dinners at the Mineta Transportation Institute, > which pays Diridon $138,834 > annually to be executive director. Engineers, > consultants and rail firms fear > losing favor at the High Speed Rail > Authority if they don't support the foundation at > the government- funded San > Jose State University think tank, some said. > > "No one has ever discussed it with me, and if they > were honorable and > seriously concerned, they should. I'm not going to > turn down scholarships because I > recently became a member of the High Speed Rail > Authority, " Diridon said. > "Unnamed sources don't have much > credibility with me." > > Diridon said he's been at the Mineta Institute > since 1992 and has invited > the same donors to the scholarship dinner for > years. Davis appointed him to the > High Speed Rail Authority in 2001. > > Diridon said two firms with Rail Authority contracts > -- French rail company > Systra and political consultants Townsend Raimundo > Besler & Usher -- never > gave money to the Mineta Institute. Other firms have > donated and never received > Rail Authority contracts, he said. > > But the institute's brochures list Bechtel Corp. > and Parsons Brinkerhoff > Quade & Douglas as big donors in 2002 and 2003. > > Both firms are part of the Rail Authority's Project > Implementation Team, > which is paid $10 million a year to steer the > project from plans to > construction. Tax law exempts the foundation from > disclosing contributors, but an > institute brochure listing sponsors reads like a > who's who of high-speed rail > wannabes. It includes at least seven attendees of > Willie Brown's May 11 meeting and > at least two no-shows. > > One no-show was LTK Engineering Services, which is > represented in Northern > California by former Sacramento transit director > Tom Matoff. He said Willie > Brown's $1 million request -- $100,000 per donor -- > was out of his league, but > he buys $2,000 tickets every > year to the Mineta Institute fund-raiser. > > Although he said he's never felt pressured, he > added, "We want to be viewed, > like everybody else, as a friend of the project." > > He said there's no clear connection between > contributions and work, but his > firm doesn't leave it to chance. > > "It's the way it's done, and everybody does it," > Matoff said. > > Critics of the High Speed Rail Authority's work have > long suspected Diridon > had an overlapping role between the Mineta Institute > and the rail board. Last > year the institute sponsored a discussion of the > bullet train proposal at > the Commonwealth Club of California. > Diridon was the featured speaker. > > Diridon also introduced himself at the Willie Brown > fund-raisers > representing the Mineta Institute. > > "Over the past two years the lines of distinction > between the authority and > institute have been blurred," wrote Ken Gosting, > executive director of > Transportation Involves Everyone, in a letter > to Diridon. > > Similar questions of overlapping interest and > hidden political influence > also hover over a community campaign that's sprouted > in Merced. > > Lee Boese Jr., an orthodontist, chairs the Merced > group, whose literature > advocates high-speed rail somewhere in Merced > County. The area is a key > battleground because that's where the route would > split into the Bay Area -- one of > the plan's hottest controversies. > > Boese says bullet trains will boost the Central > Valley's tepid economy and > help clean its smog-heavy air. > > The Merced County High-Speed Rail Committee, has 24 > active members from all > walks of life, Boese said. A spring fundraiser > raised $25,000, and all > donations were tax-deductible, Boese and group > literature said. > > Questionable filing > > But the group's filing with the Secretary of > State's office describe it as a > 501(c)4 nonprofit, a charitable civic organization. > > Tax laws allow such groups to conduct "unlimited" > political lobbying without > disclosing contributors, according to IRS > advisories. > > The IRS also says that contributions to civic > charities are not > tax-deductible. > > The money, Boese said, pays for the help of > Sacramento political consultant > Elaine Trevino, who lobbies local governments and > organizations. > > Trevino is not a registered lobbyist. Neither she > nor Boese explained the > discrepancy in the organization's filing and its > pitch for tax-free > contributions. Nor did they explain why the group > didn't organize as a simple political organization. > > Boese and Trevino attended the Willie Brown > meeting, representing themselves > as Merced real estate interests. Several members of > the group have business > interests in the Los Banos area, one of the > preferred sites for a station. > > "I thought it was totally inappropriate for real > estate people to be > involved at this stage, when they are deciding the > route," one witness said. > > Gosting, who wants to see bullet trains zooming > down California tracks > someday, said that vision is destroyed if the Rail > Authority and its allies such > as the Merced group continue down the current > track. > > "You end up with something that benefits land > speculators and promotes > sprawl, that decreases ag land instead of protects > it," he said. "We end up with a > debacle. We spend billions and billions of dollars > for something that won't > work." > > ETHICS TROUBLES > > Participants at the May 11 bullet train fund-raiser > are no strangers to > ethics probes. > > * Willie Brown had been investigated by the FBI in > a 1980s undercover sting > while he was Assembly speaker. His name surfaced at > the FBI again when he was > mayor, after questions of favoritism arose in > airport construction > contracts. Brown always denied any wrongdoing and > has never been indicted or censured, > either as a lawyer or a politician. > > * Terry Goggin fared worse. The Fair Political > Practices Commission fined > the then-assemblyman $13,500 in 1984 after he > carried a bill to require > telephones for the deaf. Only one firm could provide > the devices, a firm owned by a > close friend of Goggin, according to > published press reports. > > * Richard Katz, who had a reputation as an effective > state lawmaker, was > fined $4,000 in 1997 after failing to disclose > campaign expenses in a Los > Angeles mayoral race. Questions surfaced again > during the state energy crisis when > he advised Gov. Gray Davis, while taking > consulting fees from firms lobbying the governor. > > * Michael Bernick was one of the potential donors > present and is now with > HNTB, an engineering design firm. When he was an > elected BART board member, an > FBI wiretap caught him soliciting contributions > from a firm after ensuring > that the firm would get a BART contract. "We've got > to keep it real clean," > Bernick was taped saying in 1992. > "You know, so there is nothing linking the two of > us." > > Later Bernick told the media, "I'd do it again." He > was taped as part of a > bribery investigation that forced the resignation > of BART board member > Margaret Pryor. Current board member Dan Richard > served at the time and said > Bernick, who was never indicted, simply made a > judgment error. > > This information is being provided to you as a > service by the Rail Passenger > Association of California (RailPAC), California's > largest and oldest rail > advocacy membership organization. > > If you would like information about RailPAC, simple > send us your postal > mailing address by return e-mail. > > Richard L. Silver, Executive Director > Rail Passenger Association of California > www.RailPAC.org > 888-508-2640 > > > > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

1 0

Re: [Transpo] [susan_e_vaughan@yahoo.com: letter re. bike plan update, can you post this for more feedback?]
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 23 Aug '04

23 Aug '04

I'll make it more detailed; however, though I've looked over most of the items, I find it difficult, without more expert guidance, to object to any of the elements. The Central Freeway item is not in there because technically it isn't part of the bike plan update. There is already a bike lane along that stretch of Market -- peds and bikers want right turns prohibted from Market onto the Central Freeway, and they want a bulbout there to make illegal right turns more difficult. Sue Anybody on this list can send messages to the list; it's "transpo(a)sfgreens.org". I shut down the Yahoo group because I was only getting spam from them. I think the letter should be a little more detailed (i.e., say we like "all elements" of the update if we do). Has anybody else read them? I've only followed the Market street updates closely, as I was trying to figure out what they wanted to do about the proposed expressway touchdown (it wasn't in there as far as I could tell). JMC ----- Forwarded message from susan vaughan <susan_e_vaughan(a)yahoo.com> ----- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:02:50 -0700 (PDT) From: susan vaughan <susan_e_vaughan(a)yahoo.com> Subject: letter re. bike plan update, can you post this for more feedback? To: John-Marc Chandonia <jmc(a)sfgreens.org> Transportation Working Group San Francisco Green Party 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, California 941__ August 20, 2004 The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition 1095 Market Street, #215 San Francisco, California 94103 Sustainability is one of the ten key values of the Green Party. The current reliance of many San Franciscans on personal vehicles for transportation is not sustainable in the long run. For this reason, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party believes bicycles are a key element in transitioning the nation ? and eventually the rest of the world ? to more environmentally friendly means of transportation. The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party thus endorses the Bike Plan Update. Sue Vaughan John-Marc Chandonia Co-Chairs, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party

1 0

Re: [Transpo] Call the Governor TODAY to save regional transit projec ts.
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 23 Aug '04

23 Aug '04

Is it kosher to forward something from a WG list to the staff list? Don't know, but probably not. However, the TALC e-mail is meant to be forwarded far and wide. Sue

1 0