When Governor Gavin Newsom swapped out the leadership of California’s High-Speed Rail Authority this week, he may have solved a procedural problem while creating a credibility disaster.
State Sen. Tony Strickland, vice chairman of the State Senate’s Transportation Committee, didn’t mince words about the abrupt appointment of Steve Kawa as the new board chairman. The criticism isn’t just about Kawa’s lack of transportation infrastructure experience—though that’s damning enough on a project that’s already ballooned from an estimated $33 billion in 2010 to over $231 billion today. The real problem, Strickland argues, is what the move signals about how this project is being managed.
Here’s the backdrop: In May, the original board chairman Tom Richards delayed a vote on the 2026 Business Plan after the State Inspector General called it“unrealistic”and warned it technically violated state law due to significant gaps. A bipartisan panel of lawmakers had just grilled project leaders on the plan’s feasibility and transparency. Then, days later, Newsom announced new board appointees. Kawa, who spent most of his career in San Francisco city government, was promptly elected chairman. Under his leadership, the board unanimously approved the project’s largest contract ever—$3.5 billion for track systems to be laid later this year—and rubber-stamped that controversial business plan.
The optics problem is compounded by Kawa’s other role: he runs the Protocol Foundation, a nonprofit that funds Governor Newsom’s out-of-state travel. Strickland put it plainly:“If people who are benefiting from the high-speed rail are giving money to a foundation that allows Gavin Newsom to travel around to become President of the United States, I think people should have a problem with that.”The High-Speed Rail Authority disputed this, stating Kawa has no financial interest in Protocol and won’t solicit contributions from entities doing business with the Authority. But the appearance alone erodes confidence.
And that confidence was already fragile. Strickland raised the fundamental question that should have been answered years ago: what will tickets actually cost, how long will the trip take, and who would ride it? These aren’t academic questions—they’re the basic business metrics any private investor would demand. Yet the project still can’t answer them. He also flagged controversial elements in the business plan: seizing local government tax revenue meant for law enforcement, a complete exemption from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, downsizing from two tracks to one shared with freight and MetroLink, and proposals to allow data centers along the corridor.
Strickland’s broader message is blunt: California should pull the plug. He compared it to a gambler who’s already lost $1,000 borrowing another $10,000 hoping to recover the original loss. The project was promised for 2020 at $30 billion. Now it’s 2026, and the tab is nearly the size of California’s entire annual state budget—for a single line that may never be built as originally envisioned.“It’s the most wasteful project in world history,”Strickland said, and even Democratic allies have called it a disaster.
The timing adds pressure. With Newsom’s governorship winding down and a new administration on the horizon, the question isn’t whether this project survives—it’s whether the next governor inherits a $231 billion commitment or gets the chance to make a fresh call. For now, California’s most expensive transportation dream is running on confidence that’s running on empty.
About the Author
Andrew Johnson
Andrew Johnson is a contributor to LocalBeat, covering local news and community stories.
