Not sure how anybody would figure it out this far away from the time, but I suspect ATSF dropping a separate line over the Tehachapis was just a money issue. Why spend a ton of money on a branch line (which is all the Valley/Bay Area line really is/was) when you can buy space on the existing (SP now UP) line cheaper. With BNSF being the major user of the Tehachapi line now and matching public money spent on upgrading it (NOT to HSR!!! just for freight) UP is probably seeing that as a good deal - income and cap improvements without spending a dime! Or is UP actually contributing to the work?

A good case can probably be made that CAHSR as it's presently (ill-)defined doesn't meet some Prop 1A criteria - except that I don't think Prop 1A had any particular timeframe (say, 10 or 15 or 20 years) placed on it. So as long as the piece that's being built can 1) be used for something; and 2) is compatible with eventual 200 mph operation and maybe could even be used as a test track (remember the BART line between Concord and Pleasant Hill that was the first piece built, as a test line for track construction methods and vehicles?) in between occasional Amtraks and BNSF intermodals; it might pass muster. The judge will probably be looking more at the politics than at the case details. And anyway, if it's a District Court the case will probably be dealt with fairly summarily to move it along to Appeals where the real examination will happen. The San Diego regional transportation plan had that happen. And the decision will probably be based more on CEQA grounds (always an easy hit, regardless of how big or small a project is) than on Prop 1A compliance.

The "blended" approach has real potential for getting enough operating soon enough to make the line kind of a system, and generate some revenue and get people used to it being there. By itself, it can't meet Prop 1A for sure. But as part of a long-range (50 year?) plan to complete the 200 mph line it should work. Assuming somebody who knows the business (not just consultants) is there to run the thing. Where's Gene S's clone when we need him!

FWIW, the first piece of I-5 in the state was built about 1956, I think. The last piece was built in the 1980s. The money for the whole thing was nowhere in sight when it started, even with a known gas tax. HSR is at least a big a job, and doesn't have an existing road over large parts of the route to use as a base. I figure 30-40 years, minimum, to get the whole thing in place. Unfortunately, Big Projects don't fit well with a society that says "I want it now and I want it my way and I want somebody else to pay for it."