CEO Roelof van Ark resigned from the high-speed rail board today, seemingly out of nowhere. The executive was with the Authority only since May 2010. He said his proudest accomplishment was delivering an honest business plan and leaves to focus on his family and other interests. Listen to his resignation. The video quality is poor but the audio is quite clear. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f4iCeE0w78&list=UULpiKaBjaacPw7g5K1nkRXw&index=1&feature=plcp
Realistically, the project has taken some big hits in the last 45 days and it has to have been a difficult ride for van Ark.
- The House Transportation Committee assaulted the project’s worthiness December 15th, during a multi-hour hearing with witnesses from the Central Valley and the Peninsula http://www.examiner.com/transportation-policy-in-san-francisco/house-transportation-committee-exposes-problems-with-california-s-rail-project. In the end, several members of the House sent a letter requesting an independent investigation of the project by the General Accounting Office (GAO).
As an example of the questioning, see CEO van Ark being questioned about the fantasy capital sources in the business plan by Congressman Gary Miller (R). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXDeu_4-AXs&list=UULpiKaBjaacPw7g5K1nkRXw&index=4&feature=plcp
- The Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) questioned many elements in the new business plan including if it meets the requirements for IA funding. Their statements were made at both Assembly and Senate meetings. In a very interesting turn of events, the Assembly Transportation Committee, usually friendly toward the Rail Authority, put them on the spot with probing questions about the business plan as well as the general condition of the project.
The most critical testimony came from the LAO Farra Bracht who told the panel that the bond act “did require certain things be included prior to requesting an appropriation of bond proceeds for construction of the high-speed rail system. These include identifying a corridor or usable segment thereof, all sources of committed funds, the anticipated time for receipt of those funds and completing all project level environmental clearance for that segment. [And] so far our review finds that the funding plan does not meet these key statutory requirements.” She went on to explain that “committed funding sources are only provided for the ICS [initial construction section], which is 130 miles that runs south of Merced and North of Bakersfield."
For a complete view of Ms. Bracht’s opening statement see the You-tube (5 minutes).http://www.youtube.com/user/derailhsr#p/u/7/QZJTTmuAf90Bracht also expressed many other concerns. The complete outline can be found at:http://www.lao.ca.gov/handouts/transportation/2011/HSRA_Business_Funding_plan_11_29_11.pdf Pg 5 begins the concerns.
- The Independent Peer Review Committee published their document on January 3, 2012 with their document on the funding plan concluding “We cannot over-emphasize the fact that moving ahead on the HSR project without credible sources of adequate funding, without a definitive business model, without a strategy to maximize the independent utility and value to the State, and without the appropriate management resources, represents an immense financial risk on the part of the State of California.” http://www.cahsrprg.com/files/CommentsonCHSRA2010FundingPlan.pdf
…a bad couple of months indeed, compounded by the departures today of Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director who specialized in California Environmental processes and Matthew Toledo from the board, Tom Umberg from the board will step down as chair but is reported to be staying on the board, and Rachael Wall, press secretary, who announced earlier in the week, all whose departure is seemingly out of nowhere. See what Cynthia Ward has to say about these strange happenings: http://redcounty.com/content/rats-fleeing-sinkingtrain
Mr.van Ark’s resignation leaves the Authority with no one with high-speed rail experience. The board will be led now by Dan Richard, a recent Brown appointee, who replaced Tom Umberg as chairman. Umberg will remain on the board for about a month while another board appointment is found. These changes indicate an injection of new blood into the project but basically leaves the project under the control of Governor Brown.
Comments