Town Square

Post a New Topic

Rod Diridon not renamed to rail authority board

Original post made on Jan 1, 2011

Longtime transportation advocate Rod Diridon Sr. will not be reappointed to the California High Speed Rail Authority board, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced in a last-minute round of appointments Thursday.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Saturday, January 1, 2011, 10:01 AM

Comments (17)

Posted by The Terminator
a resident of College Terrace
on Jan 1, 2011 at 10:12 am

Arnold is trying to kick all the Bay Area people off the HSR board. He thinks they are all girly men who are stalling his big project. He is stacking the board with southern California people will ignore the whiners and NIMBYs and develop his HSR legacy quickly.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Jan 1, 2011 at 1:11 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Southern Californians get things done. Northern Californians are non-functional above the atomic level.


Posted by Paul Losch
a resident of Palo Alto
on Jan 1, 2011 at 1:44 pm

Paul Losch is a registered user.

Rod Diridon lost his way.

The notion of local light rail transit, such as we have it in SV, it largely due to his efforts some years ago. We need more of it in these parts, it lacks critical mass and consequently is a financial sinkhole. We have "Light Rail Light."

Had Rod kept his energy and competence on local transit, we may have seen more here, and his impact could have had affected similar programs in other urban areas that are entirely dependent on the automobile. Denver, Houston, Dallas are some examples.

He became "Rod Quixote" chasing a foolish windmill project, along with his companion, Sancho Quentin.

The Governator can appoint whoever he wants to this boondoggle. No rational appointee will agree to it actually happening. But this is California, where apparently being a public figure requires a lack of rationality.

I thought Jerry Brown was an awful governor back in the 1970's. I actually think he may have some common sense about this matter and other things. Maybe he as aged like a good wine over the years. We shall see


Posted by That's My Tax Money
a resident of Barron Park
on Jan 2, 2011 at 9:06 am

VTA light rail only covers 14% of its cost. Giant joke. And I love railoads. Good to see him go.


Posted by Bill
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 3, 2011 at 10:16 am

Government subsidized "Mass Transportation", at least in California, is nothing more than a power-grab by those involved, and a wealth-redistribution scheme that benefits labor unions more than any other segment of the population.

Diridrn won't be missed.


Posted by Northern Californian
a resident of Duveneck School
on Jan 3, 2011 at 12:29 pm

Wasn't Southern California the place that got rid of public transportation and commuter rails for highways and cars? So now you're going to tell me they know how to do public transportation. Ha Ha.


Posted by Mike
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 3, 2011 at 12:46 pm

SoCal (LA) got rid of its old streetcar system about the same era the the Bay Area drastically cut back its once extensive ferry services (because they expected the bridges to carry the traffic.) So there is no reason to think the Bay Area has it together and they don't-SoCal used to be a can-do place 20 years ago, but like our area they have lost it.

They just don't discuss it ad-infinitum before finally electing to make bad choices- like we do up here.


Posted by Inside Observer
a resident of University South
on Jan 3, 2011 at 1:47 pm

"VTA light rail only covers 14% of its cost. Giant joke."

Roads, highways, and "freeways" cover 0% of their costs. Gianter jokes.

"Wasn't Southern California the place that got rid of public transportation and commuter rails for highways and cars? So now you're going to tell me they know how to do public transportation. Ha Ha."

Don't laugh; it was private industry wot done it. GM bought up the rail lines and closed them down so people would use cars and buses made by (guess who) GM. Turned a good profit, they did. That was back in the days when private industry got things done on its own, without government life support.


Posted by Don
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jan 3, 2011 at 3:44 pm

None of our public transportation systems breaks even. Every one is subsidized to a greater or less extent - BART, VTA, CalTrain, CalTrans, etc.

I have no doubt that the HSR will meed subsidies as well. The only question is how much - probably anywhere from 35 to 85% if other rail lines are any example. At least airlines, which are privately owned, rise and fall without taxpayer's money.

Died in the wool Republicans claim they want to reduce taxes and government spending, but when they see a chance to leave a "legacy", all else goes out the window.


Posted by Don
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jan 3, 2011 at 3:46 pm

Oops, Dyed, not died.


Posted by Frank Flynn
a resident of Ventura
on Jan 3, 2011 at 8:41 pm

"None of our public transportation systems breaks even. Every one is subsidized to a greater or less extent - BART, VTA, CalTrain, CalTrans, etc."

True but don't forget the streets, roads and freeways - which would be in the category of subsided to a greater extent.

But the article was about Mr. Diridon; my thoughts of him are mixed. He has a careers worth of work in public transportation but at several points in this process he came across as arrogant and uncaring. Perhaps the media, but some of the things he's said seemed particularly un-astute politically for example talking about using eminent domain before he had a clear idea of how much land and which specific properties would be affected allowed opponents a huge burst of organizing energy. There were a few time I heard him on the radio he did not come across well.


Posted by Mike Schadlich
a resident of Professorville
on Jan 3, 2011 at 11:13 pm

This is good news for Palo Altans. Diridon has been obsessed with the Pacheco Pass route for HSR, and is THE reason why it was chosen over Altamont. Environmentalists, the majority of Peninsula residents, and the majority of Altamont-route cities favor the Altamont route.

Several studies have shown the Altamont route to have higher ridership, serve more cities, and provide a faster route. Diridon pushed and led the HSRA to pick Pacheco Pass, due to his obsession that San Jose be the 1st bay area station, and fulfilling his lifelong dream of a rail network centered on SJ. It even went as far as resulting in a faulty EIR that was tossed out as inaccurate.

Diridon's single-mindedness has result in wasted time and perhaps millions of wasted dollars. Let's hope Arnold saw the light and appointed members who will be objective, consider the needs and desires of all Californians, and not just one man's (Diridon's) agenda for HSR in California.


Posted by About Development
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 4, 2011 at 9:46 am

Folks, HSR is not about providing HSR between SF and LA, it's about an opportunity to develop the entire line through the central valley and over the Pacheco Pass.

In fact, about 18 months ago I read that Schwatzenagger had appointed a committee of developers to see how development could be expanded all the way along the HSR line to LA, but nobody seemed to notice. Now I read that one of the leading southern California developers has been appointed to the HSR Board.

Read - lets open up and build all over California to make as much money for the developers as we can!! Meanwhile farmland and open space will be swallowed up and we'll be as densely populated at south-eastern England.


Posted by Crescent Park Dad
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 4, 2011 at 11:24 am

To NC: Yes, SoCal, mainly LA, got rid of its famous (red car) trolley lines. But peel back the onion and you'll find corporate greed behind the move, not the people. GM and Firestone bought the rail transit company...do the math...GM made and sold city buses...Firestone provided the tires.

Stinks from the head down...


Posted by Inside Observer
a resident of University South
on Jan 4, 2011 at 4:00 pm

"At least airlines, which are privately owned, rise and fall without taxpayer's money."

Um, you left out some huge government subsidies, like the federal Air Traffic Control system that keeps those airplanes from bumping into each other in the sky and becoming falling flaming balls of fire, the Federal Aviation Administration which makes sure the airlines maintain their airplanes ultrasafely (nullifying the free-market forces that encourage a "tolerable" risk of losses), and the taxpayer money to build the airports and the roads that service them.

" Diridon pushed and led the HSRA to pick Pacheco Pass, due to his obsession that San Jose be the 1st bay area station,..."

That is, the San Jose Diridon Station would be the 1st bay area station. It's already named and waiting.


Posted by Less-Government
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2011 at 10:22 am

> you left out some huge government subsidies, like the federal
> Air Traffic Control system

You might want to check the surcharges on your next airplane ticket. There are fees for the FAA, and many airports are also adding "landing/takeoff" fees. Whether these funds are booked as "revenue", or "subsidy" probably doesn't matter--it is money that is directly paid by the users of the transportation service.

Once the government gets involved, financial transparency becomes an instant casualty.


Posted by Inside Observer
a resident of University South
on Jan 6, 2011 at 10:43 am

"You might want to check the surcharges on your next airplane ticket."

Those nominal little fees don't begin to cover the cost of establishing and providing the services. Look it up. It's your tax dollars (more accurately, your grandchildren's tax dollars, since the current deadbeat anti-tax generation prefers not to pay its own way).

"Once the government gets involved, financial transparency becomes an instant casualty."

As the new Republican Congressional majority has just demonstrated.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

On Wednesday, we'll be launching a new website. To prepare and make sure all our content is available on the new platform, commenting on stories and in TownSquare has been disabled. When the new site is online, past comments will be available to be seen and we'll reinstate the ability to comment. We appreciate your patience while we make this transition..

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.