Rail trail cost overruns push RTC to revive railbanking debate

Faced with a $72 million funding gap for just over 8 miles of the Coastal Rail Trail, Santa Cruz County transportation officials voted Thursday to push ahead with finding the funds to cover the shortfall while also reviving discussion of a contentious proposal related to the future of a passenger train: removing the railroad tracks.

The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approved a motion 7-4 Thursday to begin developing a financing plan to cover project costs, along with seeking possible additional state and federal dollars to help pay for cost overruns for Segments 8 to 11 of the trail, which run from the Santa Cruz Municipal Wharf to State Park Drive in Aptos. It also directed staff to explore cost-reduction strategies with the relevant agencies.

MORE RAIL & TRAIL: Lookout news coverage | Community Voices opinion

The price tag for those sections of the trail has ballooned to $215 million, more than $72 million above original estimates, due to a number of factors including inflation and escalating construction and material costs.

RTC Executive Director Sarah Christensen emphasized the urgency of addressing the trail funding shortfall, noting that state grants set to expire in 2027 leave little time to secure additional money.

“We’re getting to the point now that we don’t have the luxury of time and multiple cycles of grants to pursue,” Christensen said. “Staff may not be able to just go out and try to find $72 million … there’s very few options at this point to go find additional money.”

Commissioners also voted to hold a discussion on railbanking, which would allow the RTC to build a trail on top of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line while theoretically preserving the corridor for future use for a train. The concept which would have halted plans for passenger rail service, was rejected by more than 72% of county voters in 2022’s Measure D.

The commission asked staff to return in December with a report on railbanking. That discussion will coincide with a planned vote on whether to advance the RTC’s $4.3 billion passenger rail project to environmental review. 

The discussion of railbanking emerged as some commissioners questioned whether building both a train and a trail remains financially viable.

Even with the RTC looking to borrow against future funds from 2016’s Measure D’s sales tax to help pay for a slate of transit projects, the agency warned it might still have to extend the time frame to complete Segments 8-11 of the trail, or scale back its design plans. 

“It’s clear to me that we cannot afford this. This is not feasible, and I regret to say that,” said County Supervisor Kim De Serpa, who voted against the motion along with Capitola City Councilmember Gerry Jensen, Scotts Valley City Councilmember Steve Clark and Jillian Ritter, the alternate for County Supervisor Manu Koenig.

De Serpa added that there are already several lawsuits tied to the trail segments, with more likely to come. Transportation planner Grace Blakeslee said that the money for the project does not contain contingency funds to pay for litigation.

Commissioners Eduardo Montesino and Felipe Hernandez also expressed concern with the length of time spent on trail segments and the high costs of the project, when Watsonville has only a fraction of the trail completed that does not connect to the rest.

“We would like to see some sort of projects happen in South County as well,” said Hernandez. “You look at the maps and there’s nothing really below Larkin Valley.”

The RTC is pursuing a plan to build the trail alongside the tracks, known as the “ultimate” trail. However, the commission had previously studied the possibility of building the trail on top of the tracks, known as the “interim trail,” a design favored by some train skeptics. 

De Serpa asked if there is enough money now to pursue the interim trail design. County planner Rob Tidmore said that, while the agencies’ latest cost estimate for the interim trail design was in 2023 and would need to be updated, it’s “relatively safe to say” that the agencies could afford the interim trail with the existing funding. However, the California Transportation Commission, which awarded the grant to the projects, would need to approve of any design change.

Such railbanking would effectively pause all work on passenger rail service indefinitely, said the alternate for commissioner and supervisor Justin Cummings, Andy Schiffrin, who agreed to add the plan to discuss railbanking to his motion despite opposing the idea himself. Clark had originally raised the idea.

“The commission will have the opportunity to decide whether it wants to go forward with railbanking, which means we’re abandoning any further work on passenger rail for the foreseeable future,” said Schiffrin. “But I think there are commissioners who feel that’s something that should be considered.”

Schiffrin cautioned that railbanking could potentially be a lengthy process that could stretch beyond the expiration date of the project’s state grants. He added that Roaring Camp, which runs tourist trains along parts of the rail line, is opposed to the idea, as are many community members and activists. Those issues would need to be addressed and the RTC would have to abandon the freight easement that legally exists on the line in order for a trail to be built on top of the tracks.

“That is a process the biggest proponents say will take six months,” Schiffrin said. “It could take two years, it could take five years, and it’s not even clear that it’s going to happen.”

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.