Both sides make some good arguments.....

Yes some trees will have to be sacrificed and there will be more congestion if more trains operate without building more grade seperated crossings.....It's expensive but hopefully money will be found to build more over and underpasses in the future.

I sympathize with people that live near the right of way and will have to put up with wires and substations in their neighborhoods...the wires will seem unsightly at first but people will get used to them and more frequent train service will benefit people that live along the right of way ...I don't think third rail is realistic on a system that has so many grade crossings but some decisions have to be made for the greater good of the area.

A lot of thought has gone into the electrification and people should accept it and not try to delay it with lawsuits and more studies. That will only delay or kill the electrification or make it more expensive if we delay it.

The Bay area population is growing rapidly, freeways are already gridlocked and alternate transportation is needed. I don't know if the HSR will ever be built but we should proceed with the electrification

I remember the time before Caltrain took over when there was infrequent service outside of the a.m. and p.m. rush hours and there was about two hours between weekend trains and Bay Area freeways were a lot less congested but those days are gone for ever. It would be nice if private railroads could have made enough money to run a system like Caltrain without spending "our tax dollars" but that didn't hapen and it's not going to.

Some people forget that a lot of tax dollars had to be spent to take over from SP and buy modern cars and engines, add track and make other improvements. We passed bond issues to raise money for passenger rail. That was money well spent.