Advocates urge Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission to ‘save the tracks’
- Friends of the Rail and Trail
- May 20
- 7 min read
by PK Hattis, Santa Cruz Sentinel.
LIVE OAK — Dozens of local transit advocates gathered in Live Oak Wednesday to kick off what they called a “summer of action to save the tracks” along the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line.
“Here’s the problem. Traffic is a nightmare, climate change is getting worse and our county is segregated by that 20-mile parking lot we call Highway 1,” said Sally Arnold, one of the leaders of Santa Cruz County Friends of the Rail and Trail, which organized the rally. “We all know the solution: We need to add dependable passenger rail service to our transit mix.”
But Arnold and the more than 60 people who attended the event at the tracks along 17th Avenue near Simpkins Family Swim Center fear that the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, which has owned the rail line since 2012, may be putting a future passenger rail project in jeopardy as it pursues a new vision for the corridor in the near term.
In December 2025, the commission voted 7-5 to redesign segments 9 through 11 of its flagship Coastal Rail Trail project to put the bicycle and pedestrian trail at the center of the corridor rather than beside the tracks. The side-by-side trail and track design, which the commission and its partner agencies at the county and local cities have been pursuing for years, is known as the “ultimate” design, while putting the trail at the center of the corridor is known as the “interim” design.
The commission decided to lean into the interim design in order to preserve $115.8 million in grant funding that state authorities awarded the segments in 2022, a package that included the largest active transportation category grant in state history. But costs quickly began to balloon and if progress was halted or materially altered, the California Transportation Commission — which provided the grant — could claw the money back.
So the commission, in collaboration with segment leaders at the city of Santa Cruz and the county, chose the interim design for the Mid County trail to keep progress moving forward, while pledging to pursue a passenger rail project long term.
Arnold said she has learned in passing conversations with commission staff that new designs for the segments could be unveiled in August or September. Believing that a decision may be only a few months away, Arnold and the Friends of Rail and Trail are pushing for what they call a “hybrid” trail design that keeps the steel tracks intact and incorporates them into the trail.
Commission Executive Director Sarah Christensen estimated Wednesday that trail designs could be unveiled in the fall.
In a media statement, Christensen said the commission shares the community’s vision for passenger rail, but that the project still faces major obstacles. Planners are still searching for ways to close a $15 million gap to complete environmental reports, but even if that money was secured today, Christensen previously said a passenger rail project wouldn’t be operational for 22-25 years. Plus, voters would need to approve a 1.5% countywide sales tax at minimum to fund the project.
“The existing tracks, while symbolic of this corridor’s potential, were built for occasional slow-moving freight and cannot support passenger rail without complete reconstruction. Saving the current tracks does not mean saving a ready-to-use passenger rail corridor — it means preserving a right-of-way that would need to be entirely rebuilt,” said Christensen.
She later added, “The RTC will continue to be transparent about the timelines and costs, because this community deserves honesty, not false hope. This is not a project that can begin tomorrow — it is a generational infrastructure investment. And we will continue to pursue every available opportunity to advance both rail and trail on this corridor.”
‘Hybrid’ design
The hybrid design, according to Friends of the Rail and Trail, has worked well in Humboldt County and would allow the commission to get the trail in place while keeping a passenger rail project viable. This is important, the group argues, because once tracks are ripped out, they have found no examples of them getting put back.
Arnold and other rallygoers pointed to the 2022 defeat of the Measure D Greenway Initiative as evidence that most of the community wants the tracks preserved. The measure, which aimed to update the county’s General Plan to favor the interim design, was defeated with 73% of county voters opposing and 26% supporting the initiative.
“In 2022 we voted ‘no’ to track removal,” said Arnold, adding that the measure was defeated by a majority in every local city and in every supervisor district. “They said ‘no’ to destroying our transit future. So I wonder what part of ‘no’ doesn’t the commission understand? Is it the ‘N’ or the ‘O?’ No.”
Manu Koenig, a member of the commission and of the Board of Supervisors, supported Measure D in 2022 and helped craft the December motion that the commission approved. In an email statement to the Sentinel, he said the commission is honoring the will of voters by continuing to plan for passenger rail service. This has manifested in many ways, Koenig wrote, most recently with formation of the Santa Cruz County Coastal Rail nonprofit that now serves as the commission’s non-operating common carrier for the line.
“I don’t think that Measure D’s failure in 2022 dictates anything so nuanced as whether or not the tracks should be left in place. That decision is going to come down to engineering and financial reality,” he wrote.
Koenig said the hybrid design in Humboldt County is “interesting” and that the commission is evaluating it. But he said that particular segment is short and the design is expensive.
“Such a design could add millions of dollars in cost to the Rail Trail, money that the RTC doesn’t have,” wrote Koenig. “Finally, there are liability concerns. My understanding is the rubber flange around the tracks in this example is still a hazard for bikes to get stuck, especially as it degrades over time. Again, the RTC is evaluating it, but engineering and financial reality will decide the outcome.”
The commission’s December motion included direction for its staff to include an alternative that does not require removal or a complete covering of the rail tracks when designs are brought back for consideration.
Heated debate
The commission’s future design decision appears to have already revived years-old heated debates within the community about the rail trail and about transportation decision making more broadly.
Wednesday’s event featured several speakers including Adam Spickler, a member of the Cabrillo College Board of Trustees, Housing Santa Cruz County Executive Director Elaine Johnson, transportation commission alternate and former Watsonville Mayor Lowell Hurst and Stephanie Auld, who advocates for people with disabilities.
Spickler said he believes in a future where a passenger rail system could easily move students from Cabrillo College to UC Santa Cruz.
“I want (students) to be able to get on (a) light rail. I want them to go to UCSC to complete their studies and get a degree in the kind of engineering and sciences that will move us away from fossil fuel reliance in permanency,” said Spickler, who also did not mince words when criticizing some who believe tearing out the tracks is crucial, though he didn’t name any specific individuals or organizations.
“The idea that a monied, wealthy few individuals and groups in this county can take over the narrative around the importance of keeping the tracks in place (and) preserving the rail as part of this larger framework of housing, transportation, economic and social justice is maddening,” said Spickler. “Is it because they don’t see themselves as needing to rely on the workers and the infrastructure necessary for all of us to age safely in place in this community; for our children and our grandchildren to have a place to grow and live and thrive in this community? It’s probably a reality that is going to hit them even if they think their money is going to buy them out of it.”
Auld called the commission’s Zero Emission Passenger Rail and Trail project a “leap forward that automates mobility,” and that is worth considerable financial investment. Earlier this year, the commission finalized a sweeping passenger rail study that assigned the 22-mile project a $4.2 billion price tag.
“It’s about updating our entire social fabric,” said Auld. “Passenger rail also promotes dignified independence for seniors and disabled (people).”
Still, there are some in the community who do not view the “hybrid” design as reasonable alternative. Jack Brown, who was a spokesperson for the Yes Greenway campaign in 2022, told the Sentinel in an emailed statement that the design is both impractical and dangerous.
“The so-called ‘hybrid’ example in Humboldt County involves rail filler used only across short bridge spans, not for miles through an active community corridor. Attempting to create a smooth trail surface alongside uneven, obsolete rails would be extraordinarily expensive and inherently unsafe,” wrote Brown. “Even if constructed, the combination of slick steel rails next to grippy rubber filler and asphalt creates a serious hazard for cyclists and pedestrians alike, increasing the risk of crashes and injuries. All of this would be done to preserve derelict tracks that would ultimately need to be completely replaced anyway if passenger rail were ever actually approved and funded.”
Although Friends of the Rail and Trail leaders said they were unaware of any examples of rail lines where the tracks were removed to make way for a trail only to be reinstalled later for a passenger rail project, Koenig shared two: The Purple Line/Capital Crescent Trail in Maryland and the A-train in Denton County, Texas.
Arnold also expressed fear that pulling out the tracks could cut the commission off from federal rail funding. Commission leaders said they have received assurances from state officials that removing the rail line as part of the interim pivot would not cause the commission to be cut from the federal Corridor Identification and Development Program. But Arnold believes that while the commission would remain in the programs, it would likely become ineligible for grant funds that flow through them.
Christensen told the Sentinel that this assertion is flatly false and that state officials have repeatedly shared in public and private that the commission’s December move would not impact its status within the program, which supports rail projects across the country.
“We’re in the corridor ID program and, you know, that’s that,” said Christensen. “Removing the tracks doesn’t change our eligibility or level of competitiveness.”
Meanwhile, advocates at Wednesday’s event pledged to relentlessly pursue the rail and trail goal.
“Let’s focus on the future and let’s make sure we have passenger rail, improved infrastructure, provide a lovely trail all the way down,” said Hurst, “and let’s don’t get spooked off about all these folks that want to sell a different narrative to us.”
Read the original article at Advocates urge Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission to ‘save the tracks’ – Santa Cruz Sentinel
Comments