Quick Take
The zero-emission passenger rail and trail project might cost billions without easing Santa Cruz County congestion, writes Kevin Maguire. Here, he takes a look at the logic and limitations of the rail trail and passenger rail, insisting the $4-$5 billion cost is too much for too little.
Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.
Santa Cruz County is being asked to commit to a $4 to $5 billion train project, at least 20% of which would need to come from local funds, to build a zero-emission passenger rail. We have heard promises of cleaner commutes and reduced traffic from those supporting the train.
But now, as these costs come into clearer focus, even local leaders are raising red flags.
MORE ON THE RAIL AND TRAIL: Lookout news coverage | Community Voices opinion pieces
Capitola Mayor Joe Clarke and Capitola City Councilmember Gerry Jensen, who is also newly appointed as Capitola’s representative on the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), raised concerns in a recent letter to the RTC director. They asked for clarification on “several elements of the rail and trail project that may directly impact public safety, private property, and the overall well-being of our community.”
District 5 RTC commissioner Steve Clark raised doubts about the projected ridership, noting, “to carry 3,500 riders, the train must run full 15 times a day. To reach 6,000 riders, 25 full trips. That’s a very tight operational box.”
District 1 County Supervisor Manu Koenig has warned, “This takes all the oxygen out of the room for funding any other service, pretty much ever again.”
District 2 Supervisor Kim De Serpa added that “improving roads should be prioritized,” and floated railbanking as a more flexible path forward.
Even RTC Executive Director Sarah Christensen, when asked directly if the zero-emission passenger rail and trail project (ZEPRT) is feasible, was blunt:
“This is an ambitious project … If we prioritize this over other needs, and we are serious about delivering it, our team is going to figure out how to get it done.”
Translation: ZEPRT works only if we sacrifice everything else.
A train that can’t meet commuter needs
ZEPRT proposes 40- to 45-minute train service between Watsonville and Santa Cruz, with a maximum of 234 passengers per train, only 116 seated. Because of the single-track corridor and limited passing sidings, this is the ceiling. There’s no ability to run more frequent or longer trains without major reconstruction.
Here’s what that means: If 334 people in Watsonville need to be in Santa Cruz by 8 a.m., only 234 can board the 7 a.m. train. The rest must take the 6:30 a.m. train or be late.
So we’re spending $4.28 billion to get 234 people to Santa Cruz by 8 a.m.? That’s hard to justify.
And if the train fills up before reaching Aptos, Capitola or Seabright? Those riders are out of luck.
This is a bottleneck system from the start. No surge capacity, no flexibility, no room to grow.
If you walk 10 to 20 minutes to the station and arrive 5 minutes early, your commute is already longer, and unless your job is within a half-mile of your destination station, you’ll need to take an even earlier train.
No real impact on Highway 1 congestion
Even at full capacity, ZEPRT would move just 468 people per hour per direction, a small fraction of one freeway lane.
And how many people will really stand for 40 minutes each way?
If the train doesn’t guarantee access, comfort or time savings, people won’t leave their cars. Highway 1 congestion will remain unchanged, but taxpayers will still be on the hook.
$4-$5 billion for a narrow slice of the county
ZEPRT’s estimated capital cost is $4.28 billion (in 2025 dollars). Local taxpayers would pay between $700 million and $2 billion, depending on how much state and federal money materializes. Operating costs are projected at $34-$41 million annually, and could top $70 million by 2045.
To pay for this, a countywide sales tax increase of 2%-2.75% is under consideration. That’s a permanent shift of funding away from housing, public safety, road repair and other local priorities.
ZEPRT has already been scaled back from 20 stations to just nine. Even assuming a generous half-mile walk radius, fewer than 5% of county residents live near a station.
This is not a countywide solution. It’s a niche rail line, funded by everyone, including families and neighborhoods that will never benefit from it.
ZEPRT is often pitched as a solution for UC Santa Cruz students. But the project’s own analysis shows that train-to-bus transfers add time, making the trip slower than the current Metro service.
It’s not faster. It’s not more direct. And it’s not what students are asking for.
A system that can’t grow
ZEPRT is already at capacity before it’s built.
Its 30-minute frequency is the maximum the corridor can support. Longer trains won’t fit at stations or in sidings without a major redesign.
This isn’t the start of a scalable system; it’s a financial commitment to something that can’t expand.
Santa Cruz is already one of the least affordable counties in California. A new 2%-3% sales tax – which is one of the proposals to fund the rail – would hit working families hardest, especially those spending most of their income on essentials.
Meanwhile, Metro, our existing transit lifeline, is already underfunded. Competing for dollars will make things worse, not better.
As rail costs rise, we risk cutting funding for schools, child care, housing and transportation that serves the broader public. We’re not talking just about a tax, we’re talking about a displacement engine.
This tax hike would put Santa Cruz among the most heavily taxed counties in California, and even the U.S. It risks crowding out funding for schools, hospitals, police and fire stations, parks, road repairs, libraries and more. We won’t just be overtaxed, we’ll be taxed out.
We all want clean, reliable transportation. But it must be:
- flexible,
- scalable,
- affordable,
- countywide.
We can expand METRO express routes, improve pedestrian and bike infrastructure and invest in transit that serves all neighborhoods — not just a narrow corridor.
For $4 billion, we can do better than a train that fills up at the first stop and reaches fewer than 5% of residents.
ZEPRT might look green and visionary. But it’s rigid, low-capacity and dangerously expensive. It won’t reduce traffic. It won’t serve most families. And it will drain resources from the services we actually need.
Kevin Maguire is a Santa Cruz County resident, parent, dog father and bike rider. He supports public transit and sustainability, but believes taxpayer dollars should fund solutions that are flexible, scalable and serve the full community. This is his first op-ed. Tell the RTC what you think here.