The move cuts funding for four projects related to the high-speed rail, including the Le Grand Overcrossing on the Merced Extension ($89.6 million), the Southern San Jose Grade Separations ($7.5 million), the final design for track and rail systems at the Transbay Terminal ($24.7 million), and the Madera High-Speed Rail Station ($54.5 million).
Duffy’s department cited the $15 billion expended and projections ballooning to $135 billion, despite that not a single mile of operational high-speed track exists.
“In 20 years, California has not been able to lay a single track of high-speed rail,” Duffy said in a statement on Aug. 26. “The waste ends here. As of today, the American people are done investing in California’s failed experiment.”
Duffy also directed the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) on Tuesday to review all obligated grants for the project.
In July, Duffy terminated $4 billion in unspent grants to the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), after the authority’s responses to a compliance review were deemed inadequate in addressing the administration’s concerns, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation..
In response, the California High Speed Rail Authority sued the Department of Transportation over its clawback of the $4 billion in funds, calling it “illegal.”
The High Speed Rail Authority was first established in 1996 to plan a railway connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles. Costs for the project were originally expected to reach $33 billion, and Californians were told it would be completed by 2020. Voters authorized the rail line in 2008, but to date, the state has not laid any track, and the railway is now expected to cost up to $128 billion.
The project was originally envisioned to connect San Francisco and Los Angeles, but it was later reduced to 170 miles through central California, connecting Merced and Bakersfield.
The California High Speed Rail Authority has not returned a request for comment, but previously told The Epoch Times that the investigation was “baseless.”
“This is yet another baseless attempt to manufacture controversy around America’s largest and most complex infrastructure project,” an authority spokesperson said in an email. “The Authority has already addressed these recycled criticisms in its response to the FRA’s compliance review supported by facts, noting the ridership critiques are ‘nonsensical, cherrypicked, and out of date, and, therefore, misleading.’”







