Dear editor, I was genuinely disappointed to read the expression of your short-sighted opposition to Proposition 1A, the California High Speed Rail Project bond measure on the Nov. 4 statewide ballot.

You rightly declare that the project “would reduce pollution and dependence on oil, take pressure off our roads and airports and move us a giant step toward a more sustainable, transit-oriented future.” The project will indeed reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 12,000,000,000 tons annually in California and the need to import annually 22,000,000 barrels of oil; it would, on the other hand, cost $82,000,000,000 to build 3,000 lane miles of freeways, five new airport runways, and 90 new gates to accommodate the transportation load high speed rail removes from California’s highways and airports, two to three times the cost of high-speed rail from Sacramento to San Diego, and San Francisco to LA, the latter in two and a half hours at speeds up to 200 mph.

Be advised that the state treasurer and recognized financial experts conclude the total bond measure cost is within the state’s bonding capacity. Moreover, in a time of economic vicissitude, the project creates about 150,000 construction jobs and, upon completion, 460,000 new permanent jobs! It’s called “priming the pump.”

As repeatedly proven since 1933 and the WPA era, the high-speed rail project will indeed be a great “economic engine” (your phrase) for California. The project is viable, financed in equal one-third shares with the federal government and private investors, attracting 70,000,000 to 105,000,000 rides a year and $1,000,000,000 in surplus revenue, without taxpayer operational subsidy. With a forecasted 50,000,000 people in California by 2030, high-speed rail constitutes an imperative for every California voter, especially your now better-informed readers.

Quentin L. Kopp, chairman California High Speed Rail Authority