It's a pretty poorly written and sourced story, both on the Channel 5 telecast, posting as a Mouse dropping. And, if you bothered to read Vartabedian's usual poor quality of journalism in the original article, in the El Segundo Advertiser (former LA Times...), it isn't much better. You end up knowing absolutely nothing meaningful about the actual finding or the basis for these purported audit "findings" in either story.

Mouse probably didn't bother to read it, as usual. He was too busy coming up with his "meme" and his "spin".

That said, the CAHSRA, from all appearances, was somehow apparently allowed to "front load" the use of Federal funds, which is not the usual practice.

In all Federally funded projects I have worked on or managed, you are required to spend local funding up front, including the required local match, and then ask the FRA, FTA, or FHWA for "reimbursement of the 50%, or 80% (depending on your match requirements).

This could be a serious issue, but, if FRA allowed it, and then, though this is an unusual (and extremely unwise in my best professional opinion) it is not illegal, and CAHSRA will likely prevail in a court challenge.

That's not to say the CAHSRA has "won" anything of value. CAHSRA "winning" and continuing to piss away these scarce taxpayer dollars on this fiasco everyday, is the taxpayers losing, and dozens of other more beneficial and cost effective rail improvements in CA delayed, in my best professional opinion... And, we all lose from that.

The second "audit" issue (that's not an audit issue that's a political one) of if the CAHSRA will "keep" their promise to finish a "whole" system from LA to SFO is a "red herring", as the funding and funding agreement was to fund this "segment", and FRA seems to be making a political case, not an audit case, from that FRA "spin". It would be like stopping the first segment of the I-210 back in 1965, because the funding to complete it through La Canada hadn't been found yet, and so, that's complete bull$hit...

I, as most regular AP folks know, think that CAHSRA is an incompetently planned, utterly mismanaged, taxpayer funded boondoggle and cluster-f#ck. That aside, this current "tempest" is CYA from FRA, and a healthy dose of administration political theatre, versus, the usual line of BS, you told us we could, defense, from the dysfunctional mismanagement at the CAHSRA "runaway money train", about who's pot or kettle is what color...

Poorly planned systems, and the impacts this has on things like, resulting poor performance, have been the topic of much of the discussion of the SMART problems, and the upcoming re-authorization of SMART's sale tax in Marin and Sonoma Counties.

Poor planning is one of the main reasons for the CAHSRA fiasco, as well.

But, look at the good side, at least Farhad got his train built and running (albeit, with poor performance and poor ridership), as opposed to CAHSRA, which will be lucky if they can even finish, much less operate, the current segment.

All projects have political pressure, and all could be called "patronage" (Mouse's new big word of the week), because you're supposedly giving your constituents what they want...

When I worked on things like the 210 extension, was it the need for better access, and travel options for their constituents in San Bernardino County, with more folks moving in and more congestion? Or, was it just the desire of some "wired" developer paying those campaign contributions, for the on ramp to be next to his or her development, that guided those Republican County Supervisors I worked with on that project? Or, was it maybe just a little bit of both?

I know that if we elect Mouse Governor, he will solve it all, make mankind less greedy and flawed, and we will live in a perfect world, right?