RTC needs to answer hard questions about rail trail

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

Santa Cruz County residents should realize that in the past 12 years at least half of the time at Regional Transportation Commission meetings and staff work has been devoted to the rail trail. The result? Almost no transportation benefit for long-suffering county residents.

The commissioners seem incapable of asking and answering the hard questions that any for-profit, nonprofit or government entity should ask at the outset of a big project:  What are the benefits and costs for the proposed project and how do they compare to the alternatives?  

The most fundamental questions on the rail trail have never been addressed, despite eight studies over 30 years costing tens of millions of dollars. This is because of the original lack of due diligence that occurred before the RTC took $10.4 million in state Proposition 116 rail money in 2012 to buy the corridor.  From that original poor judgment (attempting to mandate the use of the corridor for rail and trail) has come years of spending and delays with no transportation benefit. In fact, the RTC has spent multiples of the Proposition 116 money in studies and staff time. By taking the state money, we have now spent much more Santa Cruz County taxpayer money than we got from the state.

What are the fundamental questions we need to ask? Here is a list:

• How long after the “trail” is detoured off the Capitola Trestle into and out of Capitola Village will the first biker or pedestrian incur serious injury or death on  (steep) Cliff Drive (which splits onto Opal Cliffs Drive and Portola Drive before becoming East Cliff Drive), Monterey Avenue or in the village?
• What is the cost per passenger mile for the estimated ridership of a train that goes near only a couple of major employers in the county? How does that compare to the alternatives? 
• Who exactly will commute from South County? How long will it take compared to their other options, and how will they get from their stops to employers?  How much will a round-trip fare be?
• Above the revenue from fares, who or what will subsidize the annual cost of operational personnel and maintenance?
• What expertise in the county exists to operate a commuter rail system? 
• The carbon dioxide emissions from building the so-called “ultimate trail” are multiple times those of the interim trail. When talking about a “zero-emission electric train,” are the excessive carbon emissions from the concrete and steel needed for the ultimate trail’s retaining walls and massive infrastructure taken into consideration? If not, why not?
• Why is the RTC proposing to clear-cut thousands of mature trees for the ultimate trail when it has no budget or realistic plan for a train when an alternative exists to cut a smaller percentage of trees that provide a critical carbon sink and habitat for local wildlife?
• What is the traffic impact of a commuter train at 38 places where the train crosses the road (level crossings)? 
• Our current Metro bus system has low ridership and requires heavy operational subsidies. Many rail systems in the Bay Area and around the country with much larger populations are currently facing low ridership and financial disaster. On what ridership or financial basis does a train in Santa Cruz County make sense?
• Why is the county spending hundreds of millions of dollars to repair a rail line that would primarily benefit Roaring Camp Railroads, a private company?  
• Why is the county proposing to go forward with track and bridge designs for freight transit when the last heavy industry freight customer, the Davenport Cement Plant, closed over 14 years ago? The design for freight transit will cost tens of millions of additional charges in materials and demolish 27 of 33 bridges and trestles, including the iconic San Lorenzo River Truss Bridge (along with the recently constructed pedestrian and bike path cantilevered on this same bridge) and the Capitola Trestle, which could also be renovated as a bike and pedestrian path at a fraction of the cost.
• Three freight operators on the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line have failed in the past 10 years, but still, train proponents are talking about freight (as they promoted the past three failed operators). Have commissioners not learned from actual experience, losses and contracts not fulfilled?

Many residents asked and answered most of these questions years ago and continue to do so, but commissioners continue to fail to heed the facts … so on we go. We don’t need to answer the hard questions mid-project when the money runs out, insurmountable environmental obstacles confront us, or more data on failed rail projects comes out. 

Everything we need to know is known. The circus and waste will continue until commissioners fulfill their obligation to county residents: ask and answer the hard questions now before wasting more of our money.  

Jack Brown is an IT program manager in the transportation industry who lives in Aptos. He is an avid bike commuter and volunteers with many environmental and social equity organizations in the area.