It’s hard to believe we’ve been haunted by Jerry Brown’s “Unicorn Legacy of the Bullet Train” for 10 long years.

In keeping with Brown’s typical fairy-tale wishes, this toy had no reasonable plan, or candor, in mind as to practicalities in building it or in operating it. The only concrete part of the scheme is that it was to be sold to voters so the sycophants could declare, “hey, it was voter-approved.”

Once again, the public was deceived by Sacramento’s lies of Proposition 1A.

Gullible people liked the “feel” of high-speed rail transporting people from L.A. to San Francisco. Others knew better.

Nearly four years ago, I wrote and gave these facts on how Jerry Brown Inc. sold his maniacal legacy:

* Before promotion 1A began, somebody with the checkbook had already spent $58 million on consultants, impressive brochures and European travel (enamored with Japan’s system and others) without “one inch of track.”

* $33 billion final cost for 800 miles of track;

* (to be) completed by 2020;

* no increase in taxes, yet “appropriates money from the general fund to pay bond principal and interest;”

* travel time from L.A. to San Francisco in 2 hours, 40 minutes, for $50 (per ticket);

* no subsidies necessary for operational expenses;

* all funding and environmental approvals will be obtained before construction starts.

* Shortly the reported cost tripled. Channel 7-NBC San Diego covered a news conference as late as Nov. 6, 2011, giving a figure of $98.5 billion with completion stretched to 2033.

* Mysteriously, the number shrank to $68 billion; the $33 billion vanished.

An October 2015 Los Angeles Times headline read: “$68-billion California bullet train project likely to overshoot budget and deadline targets.” There have been numerous negative headlines about this massive taxpayer onus since that time. The latest projected figure is $77.3 billion, with expectations of the cost being $100 billion.

That’s about right. The politicians sell it at $33 billion but it’s really $100 billion. That cost is now coupled with a completion date of 2033.

Inarguably, this project was ill-conceived. The crux of the debacle was the absence of any credible explanation on building it. Other components causing skyrocketing costs are:

* Continuing changes; more here, less there;

* Needed land has not been acquired timely and property values are increasing;

* More land is needed;

* More necessary utilities are needed;

* Safety barriers are required keep the bullet train from crashing with private freight trains;

* “so-called third-party negotiations were difficult;”

* Lawsuits exist, and more are threatened (taxpayers must pay those bills).

One contractor, “Spanish construction giant Dragados, was hired in 2014 and as of six months ago, had not started construction. They are “seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in additional payments.” They are contracted to build only a 65-mile section.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office gives a dismal report about funding risks. Attracting outside investors would need California to offer ridership-revenue guarantees. However, back in 2010, the LAO opined that “appears illegal.”

Quentin Kopp, retired judge and Bay Area politician, was once chairman of the High-Speed Rail Authority and helped sell the bullet train to voters. He’s now suing to stop it, saying, “It is foolish, and it is almost a crime to sell bonds and encumber the taxpayers of California at a time when this is no longer high-speed rail. … And the litigation, which is pending, will result, I am confident, in the termination of the High-Speed Rail Authority’s deceiving plan.”

One year ago, the state Legislature allowed the Rail Authority to sell “voter-approved” bonds, calling it a “milestone.” The angered Kopp responded: “It’s deceit. That’s not a milestone, it’s desperation, because High-Speed Rail Authority is out of money.”

Baruch Feigenbaum, an assistant director of transportation policy at Reason Foundation, agrees with Kopp. The Rail Authority’s own hired analyst reports this system will not be self-sustaining but will require “massively high-ticket prices” or $100 million of taxpayer money annually.

Environmental attorney Stuart Flashman, co-litigant with Kopp, says the “often-promised environmental benefits” won’t happen. Other countries have shown no decrease in cars on the road, and initial construction alone of the system will generate “more greenhouse gases that the train could recoup in 80 years.”

A rowdy taxpayers’ revolt is long overdue in California.

Betty Arenson is a Valencia resident who believes in the Constitution in its entirety and that laws should be upheld and apply to everyone equally.