The Stanford Review recently ran an editorial presenting an argument against constructing a high-speed train in California in order to foster more debate on the subject. The Editorial Board commends the Review’s interest in debating this topic, but wants to preface this debate with few important points.

For starters, California residents need to understand that it is rather unlikely that the plan to build a high-speed rail through the state will now be abandoned when over $11 billion in public funds have already been committed towards the project. We must also reiterate the fact that the residents of California approved this project in a referendum in 2008. The question is no longer whether California should build a high-speed rail, but how California can build this high-speed rail to provide the greatest benefits to the state at the lowest cost to Californians. This question is significantly more difficult to answer.

Today, the High Speed Rail Authority of California should unveil a long-delayed plan that will detail the authority’s plan for constructing the segment of the train that will run through the Peninsula. This plan was originally scheduled to be released in December, but was delayed after significant opposition from Peninsula-area neighborhoods in which the proposed rail could stop–Menlo Park, Palo Alto and Los Altos. Since the government announced over $2 billion in additional funding for this project, this process has been mired in unexpected delays. While the Editorial Board does not withdraw its support for this project, we do realize that these delays place the residents of California in a very unfair situation. Considering that most of the public funding for this project comes with the stipulation that it is completed according to defined timelines, any delay comes at the expense of taxpayers.

This delay in particular has perplexed concerned residents of the Peninsula for months, leaving them to wonder whether they will have to gather in protest of the plan or whether the plan has spared their communities from any perceived inconvenience. Because the project’s start day cannot be delayed, the time that is being lost is coming from the valuable period of debate, in which compromises and adjustments can suit the state best. Because these delays are diminishing the public’s opportunity to debate, it becomes an important concern that taxpayers will not be satisfied with this project, making it much more of a burden to a state that already suffers from an intolerable budget deficit. The communities in opposition of this rail are not only concerned with the fiscal costs of this project, but also concerned with what such significant construction and subsequent structures can do to their cities integrity and atmosphere. If recent events are example of things to come, then significant changes must be made to the timeline for this project in order to allow an adequate deliberation process.

We look forward to reviewing the Authority’s plan for this project and hope to debate the merits and shortcomings of this proposal in the near future. Despite all of the estimations of this project’s cost to taxpayers in the long run, no accurate estimates can be made until the High Speed Rail Authority’s plan is disseminated to California residents. We emphatically disapprove of the delays that have occurred and warn the High Speed Rail Authority that delays like this in the future may cause the Editorial Board, as well as the residents of California, to withdraw their support for this project.