Update: check this page for current top actions to save Caltrain.
On Friday, the Federal Transit Administration postponed a grant for the ready-to-go, high-ranking, congestion-relieving Caltrain electrification project, deferring the decision to the months-long federal budget process.
An administration with stated goals to revitalize US infrastructure and create millions of jobs is risking a project that would modernize an aging diesel system, take over 619,000 daily vehicle miles from the region’s congested roadways, and create over 9600 jobs in places like Salt Lake City, UT, Jacksonville, FL; Littleton, CO and more.  According to Caltrain, if the project is rejected for funding, it would be the first project in history with a similar high ranking to be rejected at this stage.
The delay to the project puts it at risk, because Caltrain will need to renegotiate the contracts for trains and construction if the delay extends past March 1, which waiting through the full budget schedule would do.
Politico’s transportation reporter assesses the transportation projects in major metropolitan areas that might be at risk due to a policy of retribution against cities with policies to protect the local immigrant population, including San Francisco and San Jose.  We wonder whether the action to delay electrification is the first step toward politicizing transportation, using transportation funding to reward and punish regions based on their voting patterns and unrelated policy preferences.
So what can we do?
The first step is still supporting the project with the administration. Â Sign Caltrain’s White House Petition.
Also, call Transportation Secretary Chao and senior FTA staff and urge them to take the professionally responsible step of approving this project. Â Send a letter to Secretary Chao here, and call their offices. Please be polite. Â Welbes and Lana Hurdle are career employees and we’ll continue to need their help.
Elaine Chao -Â 202-366-4000
Matthew Welbes -Â 202-366-4040
Lana Hurdle – Â 202-366-6031
You can also send a message to the Transportation Secretary on Twitter, @SecElaineChao. Â Click here to see what others are tweeting to Chao.
Another step is calling out California’s representatives who have advocated against Caltrain electrification funding. There is an event coming up on Tuesday evening in Bakersfield with Congressmen McCarthy and Nunes. These reps are getting an earful from their constituents on healthcare and foreign affairs.  There is a dinner in Bakersfield on Tuesday night, if you or anyone you know is in or near Bakersfield. It’s not free, but it is a chance to talk to the representatives who’ve been working hard to kill electrification with falsehoods about the project.
We’ll keep an eye out for more opportunities – let us know if you want to help with research on events in the districts of electrification opponents. Contact  adina.levin@friendsofcaltrain.com if you want to help with this task.
We should remember to thank the Bay Area representatives who have been fighting to keep electrification moving forward:
Anna Eshoo (650) 323-2984
Zoe Lofgren (408) 271-8700
Kamala Harris (415) 355 – 9041
Dianne Feinstein (415) 393-0707
Please share more good ideas to support electrification funding in comments.
What if Plan B is needed?
And what if the administration is dead set on defunding good, job-creating, congestion-relieving transportation projects for political reasons? Â Here are some brainstorm thoughts on Plan B approaches, in the unwelcome event that we need to go there.
The project could be “value-engineered” – reduced in scope to cost less. A challenge with this approach is that alternatives such as electric locomotives don’t accelerate as fast as the “electric multiple units” that Caltrain has chosen. Â Because the Caltrain corridor serves cities and stops that are relatively close together, the EMUs will do the best job of serving more stops in less time.
The Bay Area is planning a “Regional Measure 3“, the next generation of bridge toll funding. Almost everyone who crosses a bridge across the bay turns right or left to get to where they’re going; the Caltrain/101 corridor is part of the route for many transbay commuters. Â This funding package could pick up the tab.
This past fall, Los Angeles and Seattle raised $80Billion and $50Billion respectively for transit. Â If the Bay Area got its act together for a regional ballot “megameasure” on that scale, we would have enough funding to not care about politicized federal transportation funding. Â If Caltrain electrification is at risk, the promised federal funding for other major projects in the queue, BART to San Jose and the Downtown Extension to Transbay is likely also at risk. Â We may want to self-fund rather than wait to see when and if the federal government returns to merit-based transit project funding.
But we’d need to wait until November 2018 at earliest to see if an RM3 measure would pass, and a regional megameasure would likely take longer.  In the mean time, would the region be able to put up enough money to keep the project going?  This past fall, Santa Clara County raised $6.5Billion over 30 years, including $1Billion for Caltrain capacity increases and grade separations, and $1.5 Billion for the BART project to San Jose, which is now also at risk from politicized federal transit funding. Would the VTA board be willing to shift major transit funding to help get basic electrification done, and get compensated by the region when we take the next steps to self-fund?
Some experts believe that Caltrain could make a profit for a private operator, since Caltrain’s farebox recovery (revenue from riders) has been quite high, over 60%. For that matter, add the Downtown Extension to Transbay as part of the deal, which would provide a major increase in ridership.  A challenge for our local leaders in crafting such a deal – the US has a mixed record with public-private partnerships, since we tend to think of such deals as “privatization” – handing over infrastructure to a private company whose sole goal is making a profit.  Elsewhere in the world, regions craft deals with private operations to balance the private goal of making a profit with public goals supporting market share and congestion relief, transit-oriented development, and other such public goals.
Some are hoping for tech companies such as Google, Apple, Facebook, Genentech would put up corporate funding to help get the project done.  Today, full-time employees of major corporations already pay lower fares than other commuters.  Would corporations funding Caltrain be public spirited to maintain and improve access for all, or would a corporate-funded service look even more like the private buses that are inaccessible to other commuters?
Re-organizing and combining with BART could help provide more stable operating funding and better transit connections, but wouldn’t directly help fill the big hole in capital funding caused by federal defunding of electrification.
What do you think about these ideas, and what ideas do you have? Please share in comments.
The step to delay electrification is a major blow, and a challenge to supporters of Caltrain, the region, and public transit in the region and around the country to find ways to upgrade and improve our transit infrastructure.

By Kabelleger / David Gubler (http://www.bahnbilder.ch) – Own work: http://bahnbilder.ch/picture/7847, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=14816326
Given who’s in charge there now, it was deliberate competitive action against public transit, because the fossil fuel and automotive industries do more business if there is no transit (and even more because of replacing all the crashed cars).
One possible silver lining is that by delaying the project and defunding it at current market prices of conventional infrastructure and vehicles, we can buy a few years — not for its inflation as expected, but to get a replacement system design off the drawing boards and into production.
An ultra-lightweight, high-strength infrastructure and vehicles will drastically reduce the total energy requirements and cost of the system. This will reduce the amount of solar energy needed to power it — if we go ahead and load up the solar anyway, we can partially power the communities along the right-of-way as well, earning money to offset the cost of operation, thus enabling fares to be reduced by expanding the Clipper Card senior and child discounts to people using social services assistance, or living in disadvantaged communities.
The Politico article makes it clear that getting federal funds will be challenging in the next 2-4 years.
re: quick plan B, might be worth discussing shifting some funds/priorities. For instance, postpone (maybe indefinitively) the Santa Clara BART extension and electrify Caltrain instead.
re: other local/regional funding measure, I’d like to see first an employers tax (or fee via TDM type contributions) towards Caltrain/public transit.
An upgrade to Caltrain is needed but is it enough to keep up with our growing amount of jobs and housing? What does 619,000 passenger miles per day mean in terms of additional riders? What increase in capacity would be gained? Could we have more transparent reporting to help us work together to come up with solution?. We need a comprehensive solution and master plan to solve the problem, and we need to fund it ourselves.
Adina,
I really appreciate your clear, well reasoned, and level headed response to the curveball that may be in mid-flight from the new Presidential administration to our region. Your paper shows that even in the face of adversity our region still has options for solving our traffic mess. They may be less palatable than the solution that months ago seemed finalized, but there is no reason for us to stop working toward a better Bay Area.
Now is the time for Bay Area companies, governments, and citizens to fight for what we need. Thank you for all of your hard work.
I’m not sure full privatization of Caltrain will succeed unless the competing modes are also privatized. If 101, 280, and El Camino were to become toll roads then Caltrain would compete better. But so long as driving on highways remains “free”, transit should also be subsidized.
What kind of privatizing is being promoted, and what is the purpose? Transit is a social good and a public good. Privatizing it enables the 1% to charge extra ‘rent’ on a good that was already paid for by the public, and they can generally set whatever price they choose.
It is possible to have public-private partnerships with contracts that call for goals other than maximizing profit. The US historically hasn’t been good at this, but it would be possible to do.
[…] the risk to the $647 million in federal funding for Caltrain electrification, several readers ask whether electric locomotives would be a reasonable backup plan. Caltrain’s […]
[…] deferred decision on Caltrain electrification by Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao is a concerning sign for federal transit funding. Is it a canary in a coal mine for risks to […]
[…] you for mobilizing to save Caltrain electrification. Federal funding for this essential project has been delayed by the administration waiting for the president’s budget in […]