Skip to main content

California's high-speed-rail project goes ahead

The California Supreme Court decided last week not to consider an appeal of a case brought by opponents of the state’s $68 billion bullet train project, paving the way for the project to go ahead. Opponents had questioned whether the California High-Speed Rail Authority was complying with the terms of the ballot measure that funded the project. The appellate court agreed there are legitimate legal concerns about whether the “high-speed rail project the California High-Speed Rail Authority seeks to bui
October 20, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
The California Supreme Court decided last week not to consider an appeal of a case brought by opponents of the state’s $68 billion bullet train project, paving the way for the project to go ahead.

Opponents had questioned whether the California High-Speed Rail Authority was complying with the terms of the ballot measure that funded the project.

The appellate court agreed there are legitimate legal concerns about whether the “high-speed rail project the California High-Speed Rail Authority seeks to build is the project approved by the voters” but said the arguments were brought too soon.

Dan Richard, chairman of the board that oversees the high-speed rail project, said in a written statement that the state will move aggressively to build the system.

Demolition work and construction testing has already begun around Fresno, one of the hubs on the first 28-mile stretch in the Central Valley.

The decision concerns only one portion of the plaintiffs’ lawsuit. In a second phase still before the Sacramento County judge, attorneys will argue that compromises made to cut the price mean the bullet train won’t be able to travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two hours and 40 minutes as promised in the ballot measure.

Related Content

  • Transit’s Covid clean-up operation
    August 24, 2021
    The onset of Covid-19 saw ridership on public transport slump drastically. How will the organisations that provide these essential services persuade customers back on board?
  • Cost benefit goes under the microscope
    August 21, 2017
    Conventional cost benefit analysis (CBA) of plans for urban smart mobility initiatives needs serious rethinking, according to a recently-completed European study. The three-year Evidence Project (the Project) emerged in response to concerns about the availability and quality of documented research – including CBA – required to prove that investment in sustainable urban mobility plans (SUMPs) can be economically beneficial. Covering 22 sectors ranging from electric vehicles to shared spaces, the Project clai
  • Cooperative infrastructures, cooperative enforcement?
    March 2, 2012
    A dozen years from now, will enforcement still be constrained by the legislative thinking which currently prevails? Or will the needs of the wider transport community bring about some welcome changes?
  • California’s MTC expands Cubic Clipper card contract
    April 24, 2014
    California’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has awarded Cubic Transportation Systems a US$7.5 million add-on contract to expand the Clipper card fare payment system to more than a dozen suburban transit agencies in the San Francisco Bay Area. The system, which Cubic delivered and operates, will enhance travel options for commuters in parts of the East and North Bay. Under the updated contract, Cubic will install and configure Clipper fare collection equipment on all East Bay and North Bay o