Caltrain (SF Bay Area) goes broke, will likely wipe out night and weekend trains, half its service

[Newsjock]

Source: San Jose Mercury News

Caltrain is broke and will almost certainly need to wipe out half its service, leaving no trains on weekends, weeknights or midday and leaving the agency's future in doubt, officials said Thursday.

"And that's only if we're lucky," Caltrain CEO Mike Scanlon told the agency's board of directors. "This is not an April fool's joke. This is real."

Scanlon said the cuts would need to be completed by June 2011, although the agency may begin reducing its schedule as soon as this fall. The board would vote on the cuts at a future meeting.

Officials at the agency stopped short of saying they expected the railroad to fold, but said the news calls into question its ability to survive. Scanlon said the agency's business model is simply not sustainable.

Read more: http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14802053

[kestrel91316]

1. .....yet somehow we always find money to support the car culture.....

[geckosfeet]

5. And wars. Don't forget the wars.

[defendandprotect]

15. ...and without war, where would "national security"/MIC be . .. ???

[geckosfeet]

24. Depends on whose "national security" you are talking about.

Without war, everyone wins.

During a war, everyone loses.

Have never understood why war is such a popular pastime.

[defendandprotect]

26. I mean the issue of "national security" behind which so much crime/war takes place . . .

the secrecy -- the MIC --

[Kievan Rus]

29. Even Dubya admitted we're addicted to it

[RandomThoughts]

2. And in related news, a breaking story.

Hoarding, Not Hiring – Corporations Stockpile Mountain of Cash
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4328664


Hint Hint....

[Psephos]

44. Caltrain is not corporately owned or operated. n/t

[RandomThoughts]

46. Heh, guess hint hint, was not enough.

Why do things that have a societal interest have cash issues, and things that have the interest of a few people have a surplus. There is a group that wants to end all government, because profit motive is one share of stock one vote, and has no rules, anarchy.

why do people allow it?

[Psephos]

48. Big government is infected by the same disease as big business.

It's called "big."

Accumulations of power lead to self-serving behaviors, corruption, and disregard for the unpowerful.

In corporations, the focus is on profit. Whatever it takes.

In government bureaucracies like Caltrans, the focus is on power, which is used to extract ever more money from tax providers, and fees from users. Inefficiency is not punished; perversely, it's rewarded.

Neither group gives a shit about using money efficiently for purposes that maximize social good. They treat that as a second thought, after they butter their own bread.

The naivete of so many progressives about what big government really is never stops amazing me.

[salin]

3. What a mess this would/will be.

Haven't lived in the Bay Area for the past decade - but it was critical when I lived there. Guessing that it still is.

[truedelphi]

4. Obama recently saw to it that his Administration handed over 2 billion bucks

to the state of California. For bullet trains. On the surface, that seems promising, till you realize that it will be overseen by the politicos in Sacramento.

The strings attached to the money is that it must go to purchasing the land needed for the bullet train access. So a great deal of it, given the entire slimey culture of Sacramento and California elected officials, is that they will be making back room deals and parceling out the money to whomever among them can handle getting title to properties, for pennies on the dollar. Similar in nature to the George W Bush deals when he bought up land and then his stadium building friends helped him cash in on it.

Meanwhile the Caltrains system is going under. Too bad, because the last thing the smog-covered hills and vallies of the Bay area need are more cars on the highway.

[SocialistLez]

6. Well damn

I was so hopeful about bullet trains in CA but I should have known better.

Corporate rule strikes again.

::sigh::

[truedelphi]

9. Unfortunately, the transportation-related politics in this state has always

been unusually corrupt.

We The Public were not supposed to pay tolls for the bridges into and out of San Francisco, once they were paid off. But at a point in time when (for instance), the Golden Gate Bridge was about to be paid off, 1987, the politicians put together a fifty million dollar shin dig for people to celebrate the half centennial Birthday of the Bridge having been built. So the bridge's budget was immediately thrown back into deficit standing.

[Gormy Cuss]

21. The balkanized public transit in the SF Bay area makes me shake my head.

Too many agencies, too much counter-productive routing and scheduling -- and I say that even though Caltrain is one of the better agencies among the dozen or so.

[Retrograde]

23. not to mention BART's acting like the 500 pound gorilla

There seems to be money to spend on grand, overblown new stations for BART (yeah, I mean Millbrae, and the recent tax hike in Santa Clara county to pay for the extension to San Jose - I'm not holding my breath) but not for existing services. Bus service in my part of the county was cut back again recently, Caltrain service was cut last fall - it goes on and on.

The irony is that Caltrain just spent a year modernizing the local station. So what if the morning trains are all packed - let 'em drive.

[truedelphi]

39. Follow the money. No politicians

Make money, in terms of campaign donations, or in terms of kickbacks, by having their municipalities' transit operations continue to provide services to the public.

But it is rather easy to make money by construction, if only on account of the gratitude of whomever does the repairs, and of whomever provides the materials as they show their appreciation and their "Free Speech" for having been chosen for any new building projects.

[CreekDog]

22. Holy cow...I shudder to think that folks will actually believe you

The Golden Gate Bridge is paid for, yes, it's construction, but hello, it's not exactly maintenance free with some 100,000 cars crossing each day...not free to maintain a bridge over a windy gap spanning the salt laden Golden Gate. Also not free to keep traffic on it moving by reducing the number of cars thru buses and ferries the bridge district operates. And all this for less than it costs to take a bridge from NJ to NY.

People who think the bridge can operate without tolls are living in fantasyland.

[truedelphi]

38. Please read my post 37.

And if every metropolis in the nation used whoever it is that gets the Bay Area contracts, this nation would be in a heap of trouble.

[CreekDog]

31. No

they didn't spend 50 million dollars on the bridge walk we all took in 1987.

you are so blithely making stuff up here it's just incomprehensible.

you are so utterly uninformed about these bridges, what has been done to them and what is done to operate them, including their finance, that nobody here should believe a word that you say.

incredible.

[babylonsister]

8. Links please, because I really want to know why it sucks so bad

that this admin handed over a cool $2B for transportation in CA when it seems they're having problems in that area.

Also, I sure would like to see an overall opinion from someone other than yourself, someone with credibility, that this admin did this for nefarious purposes, because that's the shit you're flinging here.

[truedelphi]

10. D-i-d y-o-u r-e-a-d my post? I-t really w-a-s n-o-t

An indictment of the O Administration.

It was an indictment of the politics related to the politicians here in California.

And tonight I do not have time to do research. You might try to google "San Francisco Bay Bridge" + "six billion dollars for repairs"


Then see what comes up. Then google for more information about how immediately after the six billion bucks of repairs were concluded, the bridge - huge chunks of it, started falling APART.

So everyone in the Bay Area had to go through the excruciating long waits and congestion all over again while they repaired the repairs. As one letter to the editor writer once detailed, if we had spent that six billion dollars on HC, we could have insured all seven million people in the region for about ten years! That would have saved many more lives than will be lost on any given stretch of bridge should major earthquake occur.

The Mafia has huge contracts all over the Bay Area. Often only one company in any given area of the S.F. bothers to submit any bids, because the Mafia has put out the word.

This is one of the reasons that an overpass burnt up when a gasoline truck caught on fire some months back. The proportion of cement to sand is always skewed in favor of SAND and other weird material, when it comes to construction in the Bay Area. And steel columns are less steel than they should be as well.

[babylonsister]

12. Read what you posted:

"on the surface, that seems promising...", 'strings attached.... '

That's why I wondered who was truly at fault.

And I know this is crucial, as I posted. I recall seeing a recent story of how just one person would be affected if their public ride was taken away from them, someone working and going to school. It would/will be ruinous.

[CreekDog]

30. I think you need to stop the massive misinformation that you are doing in this message

I don't know what on earth is wrong with you that you see fit to mislead them and trick them into believing what you've said about the bridge.

The Bay Bridge is TWO BRIDGES!!!

They retrofitted the western bridge, spending lots of money to make it last another 100 years.

The eastern bridge cannot be retrofitted, they have to replace it.

They are spending money on both the old bridge and the new bridge.

THE WESTERN SPAN OF THE BAY BRIDGE HAS NEVER HAD "HUGE CHUNKS" FALLING OFF OF IT, NEITHER BEFORE OR AFTER it was retrofitted for earthquakes.

The Eastern span of the Bay Bridge has never had "huge chunks" falling off of it and for that matter, they haven't spent 6 billion to repair that bridge. They simply have an eye bar that has cracked after 74 years of use and which needs to last 3 more until the new bridge opens.

:rant:

[truedelphi]

37. There is no deliberate misinformation in this post.

Perhaps I was wrong to use the term huge chunks. If memory serves, it was a supporting member, or strut, and it was big enough to take out half a car. So I suppose it depends on what your definition of "huge" was. (Please - no Bill Clinton jokes about "is" or "huge".) I was thinking in terms of the occupants of the vehicle who experienced their vehicle being hit by that supporting strut. Public opinion was that people in the vehicle were lucky that they had not been killed.

So yes, if by huge, people think I meant a mountain-sized piece of material able to take out Tokyo, then I am wrong. If by huge, people think I am talking about a large item that you would not want to slam into your car, then I am right. It was no small pebble that hit that vehicle.

But let's get beyond semantics.

Every major newspaper in the Bay Area carried reports about all of this. San Jose Mercury, the Examiner, The San Francisco Chronicle, and many little weekly local papers.

Some historical facts about the S.F. Bay Bridge repairs:

Going back in time, one realizes that an upper deck of the eastern span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge had collapsed during the 1989 earthquake. (It fell away and landed in the Bay, and several cars went in the Bay also, one or two because police directions to traffic were that drivers continue ahead at high speeds to get off the bridge.)

So back at that point in 1999, this entire section was repaired in a month, and the repairs worked. But it was necessary to make the eastern span earthquake resistant. Estimates for the repairs and retrofits were that the cost would be about about $200M and take about 4 years. (Expected completion initially was like 2006 or there about.)

But then, after lengthy discussion and analysis, a suggestion was made in 1999 that a new bridge span would be better than just retrofitting the old one. Keeping the new bridge design simple would not increase the cost too much; the life expectancy of the new span would be 2-3 times longer than the old one; and maintenance costs would decrease. Sounded good.

Unfortunately, as usual, some people thought the simple design was not distinctive or dramatic enough and a committee was appointed.

The bridge span is still not finished; the cost is up with repairs already totaling six billion dollars; tolls have continued to increase; the cost has continued to increase; a major crack was found and repaired in September; and this repair recently failed and had to be re-repaired earlier this month.

One has to ask WHY? Who did the earlier repair, with the proper materials and did it quickly. And it was done well enough that it has survived the continual mayhem (Bay area routinely has 2, 3, 4,and 5 on the Richter scale events) for close to a decade.

Apparently the original bridge repair outfit had more expertise, and/or was more honest. While the group who handled the more recent repairs BLEW IT big time, and the day that the material fell off and landed on the highway and part of a vehicle, it is a miracle that no one was hurt badly or killed. (Note the section that flew off was not even an area where things are "dicier" in terms of repair - such as a ramp. Also it was NOT an earthquake that took this material down - just the vibrations of traffic.)

Oh and BTW that bridge re-design committee that came into existence when people (who, I have no idea) said the bridge plans were not elegant enough - they insisted on a design that includes a fancy new S curve where accidents occur weekly, always attributed to speed, but the public doesn't accept speed as being the only contributing factor.

[CreekDog]

40. I'm sorry, but what you've written is just a mess

first you said they spent 6 billion dollars fixing the bridge and then said where they fixed it, big chunks came off.

no. the new span was 6 billion but they are building it, so the 6 billion was not spent on something that has fallen apart, it's being spent on something that is not even finished yet!

the western span retrofit cost a pretty penny, but that was to make the western span sustain a major earthquake. the retrofit was a success, though there was a construction related death when a temporary panel on the lower deck fell off and hit a car, killing the driver. this doesn't make the retrofit of the entire bridge a failure, it was a screw up by the contractor of something not even attached to the bridge.

the eastern span work to shore up the broken eye bar, the repair that came down onto the road deck last fall did fail, but it cost nowhere near 6 billion. in fact, where you try to tell us that this repair was done to a bridge where 6 billion was spent only to fail --that's is maddeningly false.

the eastern span COULD NOT be retrofitted to sustain earthquakes as strong as the state is requiring the bridge be designed for, no matter how much money. thus they are building a new bridge. the only money they are spending on the old, 74 year old eastern span is what is necessary to keep is operable until the new bridge is finished in 2013. the old bridge is an old bridge, it normally requires maintenance anyway and that's all this is.

based on what you've written i simply think you are not knowledgable of 1) that there are two separate bridges with their own individual designs 2) that the western span is not being rebuilt but retrofitted to last longer 3) that the eastern span cannot be retrofit and is being replaced at substantial cost in order to be earthquake resistant and 4) the problems last fall on the aging and to be replaced span were not related to either the new bridge being built or the retrofit of the old bridge on the other side of the island. but you are conflating everything and by doing so, you present it as a massive conspiracy where 6 billion has been spent on repairs that fell onto the bridge shortly thereafter, a sexy and exciting statement --and a completely false one too.

[truedelphi]

49. I am sitting here eating humble pie

Parts of what you say are true.

[CreekDog]

53. thanks for posting that

and hearing me out. :)

:hi:

[KamaAina]

32. A fair chunk of the high-speed rail money is supposed to go to improving connecting service

such as Caltrain.

Also, San Mateo County could -- finally -- join BART, with the money from the half-cent sales tax going to fund Caltrain until BART could be extended south from Millbrae (near SF airport).

[dixiegrrrrl]

41. Both BART and Cal-trains declared huge budget shortfalls

every year that I was there ( 99 to late 05).
So how the hell they could function once the bubble burst left many wondering.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

50. This bullet train business is absurd

How it is even a priority is a mystery to me, lets start with improving public transit to the point it isn't strictly transportation of last resort for those who can afford cars and maybe at some point in the future get to bullet trains.

I can get from my office in Costa Mesa to our office in Burlingame in two hours flat flying SNA-SFO, which is roughly how long it takes me to get from my house to downtown Los Angeles in traffic.

Priorities!

I think the airlines have us pretty well covered connecting Southern California to the Bay Area and Las Vegas.

Want to help the environment? Make public transit useful to more people!

[babylonsister]

7. This sounds dire. On 3/5/10, $83.9M worth of stim funds went to CA for

CA transit. I'm sure more is needed, but who is at fault? Did anyone in CA see what was happening and try to derail this outcome?


http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/03/05/stimulus-money-for-california-transit/

Stimulus money for California transit

By Josh Richman
Friday, March 5th, 2010 at 2:04 pm in Barbara Boxer, John Garamendi, Transportation, U.S. House, U.S. Senate, economy.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced $83.9 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds for transit improvements in California.

Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove, issued a statement:

“Once again, where local and state governments are unable to afford needed transportation improvements, we see the federal government stepping up in a big way. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act continues to put our country on a path to recovery through smart investments in transportation, education, health services, and other sectors, creating jobs for people throughout our communities. There is much more to do to fix our economy, but let there be no doubt, without ARRA, we would be in much worse shape and countless more Americans would currently be unemployed.”

And U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said “(t)hese critical investments will put Californians to work on transit projects that will ease congestion, improve air quality and speed Californians on their way to work and school.”


# $18,221,874 to San Francisco’s MUNI for preventative maintenance and to replace light rail vehicles;
# $16,972,052 for BART railcar and station equipment improvements;
# $12,251,784 to the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to buy 20 buses;
# $6,682,626 to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District for preventative maintenance;
# $2,684,596 to the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board for the San Mateo Bridges replacement project;
# $2,045,371 to the San Mateo County Transit District for preventative maintenance and to replace buses;
# $2,009,466 to the City of Vallejo for a Vallejo Station;
# $1,107,398 to the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority for preventative maintenance;
# $1,054,888 to the Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority for preventative maintenance, bus lifts, and parking lot repairs;
# $983,249 to the City of Santa Rosa to buy two buses;
# $799,046 to the Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority for preventative maintenance;
# $788,484 to the City of Fairfield to buy six new buses;
# $721,312 to the Napa County Transportation Planning Agency for bus rehab and shop equipment;
# $527,655 to the City of Vacaville for the Vacaville Intermodal Station;
# $488,161 to Sonoma County Transit to replace a bus;
# $488,000 to the Sacramento Regional Transit District for six replacement minivans;
# $439,212 to the City of Vallejo for the Vallejo Intermodal Station
# $244,279 to the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District to replace bus wash equipment;
# $197,637 to the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority for preventative maintenance and the purchase of a generator;
# $172,340 to the City of Fairfield to install fareboxes;
# $115,330 to the City of Vacaville to install fareboxes; and
# $77,123 to Union City to buy two buses.

[madrchsod]

11. caltrain is so expensive is it any wonder why it`s broke?

[defendandprotect]

14. Any chance, they've pulled subsidies from mass transporatation?

[defendandprotect]

13. Unfortunately, we've bailed out the auto industry/oil and have no $$ for mass transportation...!!!

Certainly we don't want to tax the rich -- !!

[truedelphi]

19. Especially not the rich in California.

We could save this state a lot of grief by re-writing the Prop 13 laws such that no corporations are offered any deals. I mean, does Disneyland really deserve all that access to tax breaks? Or Wells Fargo, or Chevron? If those corporations cannot afford the property they are situated on, in terms of state real estate taxes, then Boo Hoo Hoo.

[defendandprotect]

27. Agree . . . and didn't know about those tax breaks . . .

Evidently Wells Fargo has some connection to Federal Reserve Bank?

Hartmann mentioned that recently?

Basically, capitalism is a parasite living off the American taxpayer!!!

[pinniped]

16. I guess people on the peninsula don't go to baseball games on the weekends....

down at AT&T Park.

[EFerrari]

28. My mom isn't driving at night any more and Caltrain is how she visits

the grandkids -- on nights and weekends. :(

[alp227]

17. This sucks! I'll have to sit through traffic jams!

As a Bay Area resident I am very disappointed at this decision. :cry: I'd rather sit in a crowded train than pollute the air while driving in bumper-to-bumper traffic for 10 miles.

[Dreamer Tatum]

18. So raise fares. nt

[KamaAina]

33. They say that would drive away even more ridership.

What they could do is charge extra for peak-hour trains, as most commuter railroads do.

[CreekDog]

20. As a San Mateo County resident, this really sucks

I don't think they'll fold but I wonder if they'll discontinue service nort of Millbrae (where BART connects).

[KamaAina]

35. Hmmm... not sure they can turn the trains around at Millbrae

there's no yard there. They'd have to spend more money they don't have to build at least a "pocket track".

I've been wargaming this all morning. Perhaps Amtrak could run off-hour trains along the route, similar to the Capitol Corridor, making the "Baby Bullet" stops only. Of course, the Amtrak fare from SJ to Oakland (same distance) is $15, nearly double the $7.75 Caltrain fare to SF. :eyes:

[CreekDog]

36. Caltrain doesn't "turn trains around"

They just run them backwards one direction.

They don't have a turnaround in SF either. So, going northbound into SF the loco is on the front of the train, going southbound, the loco is at the back.

:hi:

[KamaAina]

42. In that case, they could also stop at Mountain View

with the connection to VTA light rail going south. Sort of a night/weekend/midday "shuttle service".

[CreekDog]

43. I wonder if they'll turn over the operation to BART

and run it as a shuttle like you said.

of course, the problem is that they have been busily securing the funding to bring Caltrain's station from 4th and King to the Transbay Terminal (I think they should actually be more linked to BART/MUNI instead of stopping at Transbay).

[KamaAina]

47. My thinking exactly

in terms of BART taking over, or at least joining the Joint Powers Authority, much as they play a key role with the Capitol Corridor (without which I couldn't go to any meetings in Sac).

What's the status of the downtown extension? Perhaps those funds could be raided much like BART's for the Oakland airport connector just were.

We might wish to bring this to DU's Public Transportation and Smart Growth Forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=398

Oddly, though I helped start it, I haven't been on in months. :shrug:

[Rapier09]

25. California is dying day by day

Shame to see such a great state go under.

CalTrain is a great service and it makes life easier for people going from San Fransisco and back.

[KamaAina]

34. So everyone down here will have to ride the bus to BART

on weekends, that's one bus. Every 40 minutes, whether you need one or not. :eyes: One regular-sized bus. Not even the larger articulated ones. About 40 or 50 people from this whole, big valley can go to BART every 40 minutes.

Remind me again why I came up here? :grr: :banghead: :nuke:

[Jkid]

45. They might as well tell everyone who uses Caltrain for the weekend to get a car and be done with it.

By the way it looks like it, the service will possibly be restricted to rush-hour use ONLY.

[Odin2005]

51. A slap in the face to everyone who CAN'T drive.

To those of us who can't drive the lack of good mass transit in this country is a human rights violation.

[Lost4words]

52. And the snow ball continues to grow larger and is rolling faster.

how can anyone deny things are getting worse?