The obscene 80,000

State officials said the billions will be spent on buying rights of way, realigning roadways, relocating existing rail and utilities and building the two stations and rail bridges. Constructing the initial segment is expected to create more than 80,000 jobs.
To show commitment to expanding the route, board member Rod Diridon proposed dedicating $2 million each for environmental, engineering and design studies for high-speed rail stations in Merced and Bakersfield. That suggestion will be taken up at the authority's next meeting...Assemblyman Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo -- Galigani's colleague on the Assembly high-speed rail committee -- notes that if the rail authority's "worst case" funding scenario plays out, the Corcoran-to-Borden line would be the only stretch built.
In that case, Authority Deputy Director Jeff Barker said, the tracks could join another rail line. That requirement is included in the fine print of the bond voters approved to launch the project.
Amtrak trains on the San Joaquin line, which connects Oakland, Sacramento and the Central Valley, could travel up to 125 mph on the 65-mile stretch of "higher-speed" track, Amtrak spokeswoman Vernae Graham said. Currently, the limit is 79 mph.
"Our passengers would benefit," she said. -- Oakland Tribune, Dec. 2, 2010
In a February letter to President Obama, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, claimed, as he did in many other venues: "A simple measure that would save up to 80,000 jobs (in the lower San Joaquin Valley) would be to relax restrictions on pumping facilities in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta that have caused the regulatory drought that my constituents are experiencing..." -- Badlands Journal, Sept. 22, 2009

Officials at the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority issued a statement Friday claiming100,000 acres went unplanted and 2,000 jobs have been lost on the Westside because of federal pumping cutbacks to protect the endangered Delta smelt fish... -- Hanford Sentinel, Sept. 19, 2009

Badlands Journal skepticism about the famous California high speed railroad hit a new low when its "Authority" announced that the first, 65-mile stretch of the road -- from a point somewhat north of Fresno to a prison town somewhat south of Hanford -- would produce "80,000 jobs". Assemblywoman Kathleen Galgiani, D-Stockton, claimed up to "83,000 jobs."
Calling on our authority to doubt when evidence is lacking and common sense suggests something else entirely, we wondered where the 80,000 figure might have come from. Then we remembered Rep. Devin Nunes of Visalia, a city near the proposed route, and his claim last year that environmental protection of water in the San Joaquin Delta would cost farmers, not far from the proposed high speed rail route, "80,000 jobs".
Click!
We realized that lies are far more infectious than truth here in the Valley and -- who knows? -- perhaps in other parts of the nation as well. The 80,000 jobs, we believe, are a figment of flak in that particular area. Although eventually defeated by more prosaic and truthful figures, the "Big 80,000" worked was great fear mongering throughout the 2009 growing and harvesting season on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley.
Now we have its propaganda opposite: the Big Promise of 80,000 jobs for railroad work in the same general area. Both of these obscene lies are expressions of the brutal oppression of the unemployed in our region, which has some of the highest rates of unemployment in the nation. Both the federal and state governments are complicit in this obscenity, concocted by the high speed rail authority's talented, amoral public relations taskforce.
We are grateful to Californians Advocating for Responsible Rail Design (see below) for some thoughtful analysis on the topic of how many jobs willl be generated by construction of the famous high speed railroad. We found their "Fact Check on Jobs" buried among half a dozen references to the "80,000 jobs" on Google.
Badlands Journal editorial board
 
 
12-2-10
Oakland Tribune
State high-speed rail officials approve $4.3 billion stretch of track derided as "train to nowhere."
By Daisy Nguyen Associated Press
http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_16764968?source=rss
SACRAMENTO -- State officials on Thursday approved a $4.3 billion plan to build California's first segment of high-speed rail -- despite carping from critics that the stretch would be a "train to nowhere."
The seven-member California High-Speed Rail Authority unanimously backed the staff recommendation, turning aside dozens of comments from people who questioned the viability of the 65-mile Central Valley route.
Engineers called the route the best choice, given limited funding and a tight deadline to begin work. And board members indicated the stretch is essentially a test drive until the system expands.
"We're not looking to put trains on this particular piece," board member Fran Florez said. "This is just the beginning."
The route would start from the tiny town of Borden, connect to a new station in Fresno and end in Corcoran, another small town.
Critics were upset the route won't reach major population centers Merced or Bakersfield, as had been considered in environmental studies and public meetings.
A Democratic congressman asserted the proposal violates a 2008 state bond measure that requires any high-speed rail segment built be "usable."
"The process used to come to this decision was deceptive and suspect at best," said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced.
The authority must pick a route and enter a funding agreement with the Federal Railroad Administration by the end of the year. Last month, federal officials said they wanted a project that can be operational by 2017.
Supporters believe the Central Valley is the most suitable location to begin construction; the region's flat terrain will let trains reach top speeds of 220 mph. The 800-mile system is ultimately envisioned to extend to San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego.
"With additional investment, this initial segment will demonstrate the speed, convenience and economic development potential of high-speed train travel," the Federal Railroad Administration said in a statement.
State officials said the billions will be spent on buying rights of way, realigning roadways, relocating existing rail and utilities and building the two stations and rail bridges. Constructing the initial segment is expected to create more than 80,000 jobs.
To show commitment to expanding the route, board member Rod Diridon proposed dedicating $2 million each for environmental, engineering and design studies for high-speed rail stations in Merced and Bakersfield. That suggestion will be taken up at the authority's next meeting.
Assemblywoman Cathleen Galigani, D-Livingston -- who introduced the bill that put the $9.95 billion bond measure on the November 2008 ballot -- said she's confident the Corcoran-to-Borden stretch is only the beginning.
She expects the rail authority to pick up enough funding in the next six to 12 months to approve extensions to Merced, Gilroy or Bakersfield. She noted Republican governors in other states have relinquished $1.2 billion in federal funds, for which California is fighting.
But federal officials have yet to say if they'll give those funds to other states.
Assemblyman Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo -- Galigani's colleague on the Assembly high-speed rail committee -- notes that if the rail authority's "worst case" funding scenario plays out, the Corcoran-to-Borden line would be the only stretch built.
In that case, Authority Deputy Director Jeff Barker said, the tracks could join another rail line. That requirement is included in the fine print of the bond voters approved to launch the project.
Amtrak trains on the San Joaquin line, which connects Oakland, Sacramento and the Central Valley, could travel up to 125 mph on the 65-mile stretch of "higher-speed" track, Amtrak spokeswoman Vernae Graham said. Currently, the limit is 79 mph.
"Our passengers would benefit," she said.
9-22-09
Badlands Journal
After all the crap, some real numbers
http://www.badlandsjournal.com/2009-09-22/007426
In a February letter to President Obama, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, claimed, as he did in many other venues: "A simple measure that would save up to 80,000 jobs (in the lower San Joaquin Valley) would be to relax restrictions on pumping facilities in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta that have caused the regulatory drought that my constituents are experiencing."
In January, the state Farm Bureau reported that, "UC Davis agricultural economist Richard Howitt that the drought would cause a lost of "40,000 jobs, and these are job losses for those who can least afford them in the valley's small, rural towns."
9-19-09
Hanford Sentinel
Water officials: Pumping restrictions cost Westside agriculture 2,000 jobs...Seth Nidever
http://hanfordsentinel.com/articles/2009/09/19/news/doc4ab5679f27c3f041959766.txt
Officials at the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority issued a statement Friday claiming100,000 acres went unplanted and 2,000 jobs have been lost on the Westside because of federal pumping cutbacks to protect the endangered Delta smelt fish.
The statement refutes a document released Thursday by the U.S. Department of the Interior that claims it’s “not true” that “water shortages and high unemployment rates in California’s Central Valley are the result of a man-made, ‘regulatory’ drought, as opposed to natural conditions.”
“Interior is lacking candor in explaining and accepting the human impacts of the Endangered Species Act restrictions,” said Jason Peltier, deputy general manager of Westlands Water District.
Westlands, a member of the authority, has about 80,000 acres in Kings County that rely on federal Central Valley Project water from the delta.
“I would just say in general we look forward to ... working with the local and state government, as well as the water authorities and our other partners, to solve this problem,” said Interior spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff.
Barkoff declined to get into specifics about how much of a role environmental regulations play in the current situation.
Current laws call for a certain percentage of the Central Valley Project water to go to environmental protection and ecosystem preservation in the delta and other areas. These rules are not suspended in drought situations like the current one — California is in its third consecutive dry year.
Many of the regulations were included in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, passed in 1992, which reserves some water for fish and wildlife protection and ecosystem preservation.
But this year Westside farmers are facing additional regulations stemming from a 2007 federal court order to protect the delta smelt fish and a 2009 federal biological opinion mandating additional cutbacks to protect other fish species including salmon and steelhead.
The cumulative impacts have left giant bare patches of earth on the Westside and created high farmworker unemployment in small towns like Avenal, Huron and Mendota.
Westlands officials predict district farmers will lose 1 million acre-feet of water as a result of both the court order and the biological opinion.
The Interior Department is right about the fact that there is a natural drought, but has tried to “minimize the role that regulatory decisions play,” said Dan Nelson, executive director of the authority.
9-18-09
Fresno Bee
Valley jobless figures improve
Fresno County rate falls while statewide number increases...Tim Sheehan
http://www.fresnobee.com/business/v-print/story/1643491.html
California's unemployment rate has risen above 12%, setting a record for modern times, officials said Friday. But across the central San Joaquin Valley, unemployment rates headed in the opposite direction.
An estimated 2.2 million Californians were out of work in August, the state Employment Development Department reported. That represents 12.2% of the state's work force, excluding discouraged workers who have given up looking for jobs. That's the highest since 1976, when current tracking methods began.
Joblessness in Fresno County remains well above the statewide figure, but gains in agriculture and manufacturing helped drive the county's unemployment rate from 15% in July to 14.6% in August -- the lowest it's been all year.
Similar improvements were reported in neighboring Valley counties. Across Fresno, Madera, Merced, Kings and Tulare counties, the number of people out of work fell from 136,200 in July to 133,200 in August.
Despite the statewide record, there were signs California may be emerging from recession as the rate of job losses slowed. The number of jobs lost from July to August was just 12,000, down from about 35,000 in the previous month. From November 2008 until last June, the state lost 65,000 or more jobs each month, said Jerry Nickelsburg, a senior economist with the Anderson Forecast at the University of California, Los Angeles.
In February alone, the state lost more than 110,000 jobs.
"The big story is the continued decline in the rate of job loss in payroll employment," Nickelsburg said. "That's much more significant than the slight uptick in the unemployment rate."
Among Valley counties, Merced County saw the greatest drop in the jobless rate -- almost a full percentage point, from 17.6% in July to 16.7% in August.
In Kings County, the rate fell to 14.2% from 14.4%. In Madera County, it fell to 13.3% from 13.8%, and in Tulare, to 15.2% from 15.3%.
The seasonal nature of agricultural employment is one factor nudging Valley unemployment rates down while California's rate rose.
But Alexander Whalley, a professor of economics at University of California, Merced, said he believes it also has to do with the Valley getting hit harder and earlier than other parts of the state when the recession began.
"I think the Valley has had more time to make that adjustment," Whalley said. Some people out of work for months have likely uprooted and moved to other parts of the country to find work, Whalley said, perhaps thinning the ranks of the unemployed here. "We don't have a good measure of that, but I do get a sense that in the Central Valley, things are going to start getting better."
Whalley added that he doesn't expect to see unemployment rates in the coming winter -- when farm jobs seasonally dip -- climb as high as last March, when it reached 17% in Fresno County.
California was one of 42 states to lose jobs last month, when the national jobless rate hit 9.7%, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. The state is tied with Oregon for the fourth-highest unemployment rate nationally, behind Michigan, Nevada and Rhode Island.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said earlier this week that the recession is likely over but warned that the economy will not grow quickly enough to lower the nation's unemployment rate in the short term. Economists expect the national jobless rate is expected to peak above 10% next year.
The U.S. lost 216,000 jobs in August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said earlier this month, down from 276,000 in July. Employers have eliminated 6.9 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007.
"You are seeing the pace of job losses slow a little bit," said Mike Lynch, a regional economist at IHS Global Insight. But states "are not out of the woods yet" ...

December 2009
calhsr.com
Prepared by Elizabeth Alexis
ealexis@gmail.com
Factcheck on Jobs
http://www.calhsr.com/funding/how-many-jobs-will-the-california-high-speed-rail-project-create/
This recent economic downturn has focused attention on job creation.
The California High Speed Rail Authority has generated a lot of
excitement with the promise of creating jobs, lots and lots and lots of jobs.
The claim: more than 600,000 new construction-related jobs will be
needed to build the system.
Conclusion: Unless a very odd definition of "job" is being used, High Speed
Rail won't generate a lot of jobs for Californians during the construction
phase. In fact, jobs may actually be lost.
How can this be? Let’s do the math.
1) Many different definitions of a job exist. The most common sense
definition, full-time employment during the construction period, is almost
never used when politicians are throwing around job creation numbers.
Sometimes they mean one year's salary for a full-time employee. In this
case, a job that lasts for five years would count as five jobs. Sometimes
"job" is even defined as someone who gets a check for more than $1. A
job that lasts for one day would count for a job. We don't know which
definition is being used here.
2) Construction creates fewer jobs per dollar spent than a lot of other
public spending. It is skimpy on labor in favor of equipment (dump trucks,
cranes, rollers) and materials (steel, concrete).
Across the entire country, there are only about 6 million construction jobs,
and that includes home building, office construction, highways and Bay
Bridges. The heavier the construction, the smaller the proportion of the
overall bill that will go to hiring workers. A landmark study by the Federal
Highway Administration found that $1 million 1996 dollars bought a little
over 8,000 hours of labor in California. With inflation, $1 million in spending
is now down to about 6,000 hours of labor or full-time work for three
people for one year.
$ 1 million spent on heavy construction = 3 full-time construction jobs for
one year.
3) Every dollar that has to support the bond measure is money NOT spent
on education/ home health care.
Prepared by Elizabeth Alexis
ealexis@gmail.com
Unlike the Federal government, which is still spending like a 2005
homeowner with a big home equity line of credit, California is a 2009
consumer. Whatever is spent in one sector is money not spent in another.
As the spokesperson for the California treasurer recently said, "It's a zero
sum game."
While the High Speed Rail's finance team acknowledged the economic
reality of a constrained budget, it decided to ignore this inconvenient
truth "for the purposes of analysis". Given the recent rounds of budget
cuts, we have some information as to what California will cut in order to
fund bond payments. School funding and services like home health care
were the first on the chopping block. For example, the Madera Unified
School District recently faced over $7 million in budget cuts. While some of
the cuts affected things like cell phone allowances, staffing took the
brunt. The $7.5 million reduction resulted in a 150 headcut reduction.
$1 million spent on services = 20 full-time jobs for one year.
4) Construction is only one part of the capital cost of a high speed rail
network. A significant portion of the budget will go for trainsets that
are currently not manufactured in California and another chunk will go for
buying land.
For the initial route, $6 billion out of the $33 billion total capital cost is for
trains and land. An additional $5 billion is for specialized high speed rail
equipment that is not all currently manufactured in California but might
be. $25 billion is a reasonable estimate of the money that will be spent on
planning and construction.
So, how many jobs will be created?
The $25 billion will generate the equivalent of 75,000 years worth of
employment using the 3 jobs/ $1 million ratio. Over the 10 years that
planning and construction are expected to last, this would mean about
7,500 more Californians at work each year. In addition, some of the raw
materials used in construction might be produced in California. The total
number of construction-related jobs could be 100,000-120,000 one year
jobs, equivalent to 10-12,000 jobs that last the 10 years that construction is
expected to last.
This number should be netted against the job losses from not spending
money on education and health care. A really simple and conservative
Prepared by Elizabeth Alexis
ealexis@gmail.com
way to do this is to look at the size of the bond measure. Diverting $9
billion to High Speed Rail is the equivalent of cutting 180,000 one year
jobs, with most concentrated in health care and education. A more
complicated way is to look at the debt servicing costs that could be
spread out for as long as 30 years. Using this approach, there would be
11-14,000 fewer jobs each year for the next 30 years. If project cost were
to escalate or private sector financing to fall through, this number could
go even higher.
Either way, California workers could actually lose jobs when the math is
done. If you just look at the numbers for the stimulus request funds, it looks
even worse because California has promised to put up 50% of the funds.
Source materials:
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20080529154909_Ch_5_
EconomicGrowth.pdf
http://www.madera.k12.ca.us/dmdocuments/0910AdoptedBudget.pdf