Civil Grand Jury raises concerns over Silicon Valley BART extension

VTA officials will provide more clarity about the finances and long-term costs of the massive Silicon Valley BART extension in response to a Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report that criticized the agency’s management and oversight of the project.

The June 17 report raised concerns about VTA’s financial planning and oversight of the roughly $13 billion effort to bring a six-mile BART extension to Santa Clara and San Jose — including its lack of a dedicated cash-flow model, reliance on uncertain funding sources and failure to consistently account for long-term operations and maintenance costs. It recommended VTA develop a cash-flow model, create an alternative funding strategy and require staff to analyze future operations and maintenance costs before signing off on major design and construction decisions.

“The (VTA board of directors) has recognized the need for additional oversight and guidance, but the board has failed to exercise its obligation to provide the strategic direction needed for a successful project,” the report reads.

On Aug. 13, the BART Silicon Valley Phase II Oversight Committee — a subcommittee of VTA board members — unanimously recommended the full VTA board of directors adopt a revised response to the recommendations. A VTA spokesperson told San José Spotlight the agency will incorporate the oversight committee’s comments before presenting the response to the board on Sept. 3. The public transit agency must submit its final response by Sept. 15.

Board members discussed the project’s costs at the recent meeting. Since 2019, VTA’s general engineering contracts have totaled roughly $544 million, with the oversight committee recently approving a $150 million extension for additional design work. VTA has also been working to patch a nearly $1 billion funding gap in the project.

VTA officials said the transit agency maintains several financial models and daily cash-flow reports, but acknowledged the information could be presented more clearly to decision makers. Deputy General Manager Greg Richardson said VTA needs to better consolidate information so officials have a clearer picture of the project’s finances.

“The model exists, but what we’re attempting to do in 2027 is provide that cash-flow report to this body, to the board, so that it’s … a more succinct, summarized version,” Richardson said.

The discussion comes as the BART extension has undergone significant changes in its design, construction strategy and cost estimates. VTA selected a single-tunnel design for the underground portion of the six-mile extension as it sought to reduce costs and close a funding gap. The project will connect Berryessa/North San Jose to downtown San Jose and Santa Clara with four new stations. The committee also backed a change involving operations and maintenance costs.

The civil grand jury also recommended that VTA require staff to present an operations and maintenance cost analysis when considering major design and construction alternatives. The revised response commits VTA to implementing the recommendation by Dec. 31, 2026.

Suds Jain, a VTA board member and Santa Clara councilmember, said those costs need to be considered when making design decisions because choices made during construction can create expensive maintenance obligations later.

“So that’s why there’s decisions that have to be made looking at how much it’s going to cost to maintain those systems,” Jain said at the meeting. “We have these elevators at the Milpitas station that have glass panels that are custom glass panels, and they break, and they’re unbelievably expensive to maintain. So why do we pick those panels?”

VTA officials said the agency considers cost, schedule, risk and operations and maintenance impacts when evaluating major design changes. Staff also work with BART, which will operate and maintain the extension, to evaluate how design decisions could affect long-term costs.

The committee also discussed the role of Auditor General Scott Johnson, who provides independent oversight of the project, and whether the committee’s charter and bylaws should be reviewed by the VTA board. Officials agreed to continue evaluating the charter and bylaws rather than create a temporary subcommittee to study the issue. They also agreed to include Johnson’s written response as supplemental information alongside VTA’s official response to the civil grand jury report.San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, who sits on the VTA board and oversight committee, said the report provides an opportunity to improve the transit agency’s governance, but disagreed with its broader characterization of the committee.

“I think this is an exceptionally complex and fast moving project,” Mahan said at the meeting. “We do have to ensure the governance model is very clear, providing a charter, showing communication and continuous improvement.”

Monica Mallon, a transit advocate and San José Spotlight columnist, has independently advocated for the BART extension since 2017. She said the civil grand jury’s report raises legitimate concerns about transparency, but should not derail the project.

“I do think that VTA and BART should improve transparency, and should clarify things as much as possible,” Mallon told San José Spotlight. “I don’t think that anything in the report is reason to dramatically change course or stop the project, or stop pursuing state and federal funding for the project in any way.”

 Contact Maryanne Casas-Perez at [email protected] or @CasasPerezRed on X.