High-speed rail ... or fail? When it comes to California's plans for high-speed rail, scads of people have strong opinions. But that shouldn't be a surprise. As I noted in Wednesday's column, voters in 2008 approved a 520-mile train route that was supposed to cost $33 billion and be completed in 2020. Since then, not 10 feet of track have been laid, the estimated cost has tripled and the completion date is now 2033. And those are just guesstimates. Readers by the hundreds weighed in after that column. Many of them were still passionate about moving ahead, while others insisted it's time to give up the dream. And quite a few couldn't believe Gov. Jerry Brown is still pushing the project despite the state's staggering financial burdens. When you can't figure out how to pay for schools and colleges, road improvements, support for the elderly and disabled - not to mention a hundred other things - should you begin building a railroad no one is sure how to pay for? Especially when several recent reports, including one by the railroad authority's own peer review group, suggest there's a huge risk of financial disaster? Those seemed like fair questions to put to Dan Richard, who served on the Bay Area Rapid Transit board for 12 years and has been picked by Brown to save high-speed rail. My first question, when we spoke Thursday, was one that lots of readers asked. What went wrong between 2008 and now? Two things, Richard said. First, it became increasingly clear that the completion date had been too optimistic. Second, revisions on the precise route and station locations added more time, inflation and expense. "It's not a great answer," he admitted. Richard wasn't involved in the beginning, but said he recently met an early critic who had warned that the system would cost closer to $90 billion than $33 billion. Richard complimented him on his prescience. So how can Richard win back onetime supporters who feel like they've been swindled? "The first thing you do is tell the truth," he said about costs and everything else. The current estimated cost of $98 billion, he said, is based on $65 billion in 2010 dollars, plus inflation. But his orders from Brown, he said, were to find out whether there's a way to build the line cheaper, faster and better. Well, is there? Richard thinks so, but he's still working on convincing himself and others. A lot of people have lost faith, he knows. So his task is to prove there's "value in this" for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. OK, but where would he get the money? Voters approved less than $10 billion in startup funds in 2008, and Richard said he won't go back to them with another bond. So that means years of begging in Sacramento and Washington, both of which are underwater. Richard said the railroad authority has to build a better model and convince lawmakers it's a wise investment, and a big piece of that is finding ways to lure private investment. He hopes to draw $11 billion to $20 billion of the construction cost from private sources and then essentially have private companies run the railroad once it's completed. Why would investors be interested? Because in other parts of the world, Richard said, high-speed systems have operating profits, not counting the initial investment.