BART Slams VTA for Cost-Cutting Secrecy in $12.7 Billion Silicon Valley Extension

In the midst of a critical moment for BART’s long-delayed $12.7 billion Silicon Valley extension, the agency’s leadership is calling out South Bay transit officials for a lack of communication about cost-cutting measures and other key elements of the project.

Shane Edwards, BART’s assistant general manager, wrote a scathing Aug. 15 letter to Carolyn Gonot, general manager of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, which is building the six-mile extension through downtown San José and into Santa Clara for BART.

Edwards wrote that his agency is “gravely concerned” that VTA failed to alert BART of an Aug. 11 press release about a report of the costs of a potential twin-tunnel design for the extension. VTA managers used the report to justify doubling down on a single-tunnel approach for the project, despite concerns from some independent experts.

Edwards also said VTA publicly presented the project’s oversight committee board members with a cost-saving proposal to significantly scale down the planned Newhall Yard in Santa Clara without having advanced discussions with BART.

“Both actions violate established protocols, undermine the trust and coordination that have guided this partnership, and represent serious breaches of process,” Edwards wrote in a letter obtained by KQED. San José Spotlight first reported news of the letter to VTA.

“These lapses are incompatible with the level of transparency and cooperation expected between primary project partners,” Edwards continued, saying VTA’s actions could affect BART’s ability to safely operate the extension.

“Given the scale, complexity, and visibility of this project, these failures are not minor oversights; they are unacceptable breaches of trust,” he said.

The VTA is nearing the final stages of a nearly yearlong process to look for ways to cut as much as $1 billion off its total project cost, to bring the extension in line with an approximately $12.1 billion budget, including a $5 billion pledge from the federal government. The agency originally hoped to receive as much as $6.3 billion in federal money.

The agency also announced earlier this summer that it plans to ditch its primary tunneling and trackwork contractor to find a new one, due to a dispute over cost.

Edwards also said he was “formally notifying VTA” that BART rejected the yard redesign that was floated at the oversight meeting.

In an emailed statement, VTA said it “remains committed to a strong partnership with BART and to delivering the BART Silicon Valley Phase II project to the highest standards of safety, efficiency, and fiscal responsibility.”

The statement said VTA takes communication concerns seriously, and highlighted regular updates made to its oversight committee and detailed monthly reports on the progress and finances of the project.

“We are addressing the concerns raised in BART’s August 15 letter and are ensuring the Newhall yard design fully supports BART’s safe and efficient operations,” the statement said.

Barney Smits, a retired engineer who worked for BART for 25 years, said “it’s about time that BART management stepped up” to raise concerns about communication, transparency and the apparently stressed partnership between the two agencies.

“They always, for either political reasons or whatever, paint it as they’re getting along,” Smits told KQED. “But VTA has not followed the BART standards, and does not comply with the comprehensive agreement” between the two agencies focused on safety, convenience and customer service standards.

“Assistant General Manager Edwards slammed them, but unfortunately, it’s too little too late, if you ask me,” he said, adding that BART’s rejection of the Newhall Yard redesign is significant.

“That’s a pretty strong stand from this partner that supposedly you always work with hand in hand,” Smits said.

VTA, in its statement, said the two agencies “continue to work closely, with BART staff embedded in the project office and BART has been actively involved in the design process.”