State of California Department of Justice 1360 £Sueet, Suite 125 2.0. Ban S455 Memorandum ‘Secramenio, CA 9244-2550 From Sob Dew: January 25, 2010 Leta ‘rasptene: (916) 324-7862 sania : scinte: (916) 327-2247 California High-Speed Rail Authority Leashes 923 L Street, Suto 1425 au George Spanox@hk.0.50¥ Sacramento, CA 95814 George C. Spanos Deputy Attorney General Basiness.and Tax Section Office of tie Attorney General — Sacramento Whether Authority May Alter Definition of Phase 1 So That System Terminates in San Jose ‘You requested advice as to whether the Authority may lawfully change the phase 1 corridor of the high-speed rail project, as defined in Proposition 1A, so that the high-speed rail line would terminate in San Jose, with San Francisco-bound passengers transferring to Caltrain to complete their joumey. The Authority may not do so. Proposition 1A was approved by the voters on November 4, 2008. Proposition 1A defines Phase | of the high-speed train system os “the corridor of the high-speed train system between San Francisco Transbay Terminal and Los Angeles Union Station and Anaheim.” (Sts. & Hy Code, § 2704.04, subd. (b)(2).) Proposition 1A does not permit the Authority to redefine Phase 1-by eliminating a portion of it ‘Although your question refers to termination of the system in San Jose, the advice would be the same if the Phase 1 corridor were proposed to be terminated anywhere else in a manner inconsistent with Proposition 1A. Please note that this memorandum contains informal advice provided to you by me in my capacity as logal counsel to the Authority. It does not constitute a formal opinion of the Attorney General ' gesimes saztos103918 0s00208 oo