Passenger rail price estimates too high
One can never convince me that restoring the Santa Cruz Branch rail line for passenger rail would cost an estimated $4.2 billion dollars! I am not a transportation planner or consultant however it is obvious something doesn’t jive and I feel an investigation is warranted.
Since 2007 when the SCCRT purchased the line from Union Pacific, it has been one big fiasco! Study and surveys and foot dragging delay not to mention controversy and contention by shortsighted anti-rail folks!
Breaking ties with Progressive Rail as the common carrier sets a bad precedent. Furthermore the actions of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission may have future negative repercussions on freight train operations in Watsonville.
Remember regarding Measure D, the voters approved the Rail and Trail measure and that should be a done deal. “railbanking” or removal of the rails should never be allowed. It is against the voters wishes and yet more waste of money.
Gary Plomp
Gilroy
•••
New law will tighten immigration vetting rules
The recent House passage of H.R. 4371, the Kayla Hamilton Act, on Dec. 16 with strong bipartisan support, is a vital step toward preventing heartbreaking tragedies.
Kayla Hamilton, a vibrant 20-year-old with autism, was brutally raped and murdered in 2022 by an MS-13 gang member—an unaccompanied alien minor released to a sponsor without proper vetting. This preventable horror exposes deadly flaws in our system, endangering innocent Americans and vulnerable children alike.
The bill mandates rigorous background checks on sponsors and household adults, including criminal history, gang affiliations, and immigration status, to ensure safe placements. Democrats and Republicans in the House united, proving that protecting lives transcends politics. Now, the Senate must act swiftly—delays cost lives. I implore readers to contact their senators: Demand passage of this commonsense reform to honor Kayla and safeguard our communities. Justice and safety demand it.
Mike Lelieur
Santa Cruz
The $4.283 billion passenger rail estimate did not appear out of thin air. It comes from professional engineering analyses that account for the actual condition of the Santa Cruz Branch Line and modern regulatory requirements. Large portions of the track are warped, uneven, and structurally deficient after decades of deferred maintenance. There are over $980 million needed for bridge and trestle repairs and replacements. Bringing the line up to current federal safety standards for passenger service requires full reconstruction of the railbed, bridges, drainage, signaling, grade crossings, and seismic upgrades—not a cosmetic “restoration.”
History shows these estimates are not outliers. Recent rail projects across flat terrain, with fewer environmental constraints, routinely exceed $150 million per mile (See the recently completed OC Streetcar project). The Branch Line runs through wetlands, flood zones, coastal bluffs, and dense urban crossings—conditions that drive costs higher, not lower. Claiming “something doesn’t jive” without engaging the documented scope of work is not an argument.
Ending Progressive Rail’s role as common carrier corrects a longstanding problem; it does not threaten freight service, Progressive is an obstacle to our community. Freight operations would continue, now under direct public accountability rather than a private operator that failed to meet performance expectations. Suggesting otherwise confuses governance with operations.
Measure D only rejected changes to the County’s General Plan, that’s it! It was not a blank check for any rail project at any cost. Voters were never asked to approve multi-billion-dollar passenger rail expenditures, nor did Measure D prohibit reassessing feasibility as facts change. Responsible stewardship requires adapting to reality, not clinging to assumptions made decades ago.
Railbanking preserves the corridor for future rail use while avoiding ongoing waste on infrastructure that cannot currently support passenger service. That is not defying voters—it is protecting the public interest.
Belief does not override engineering, safety standards, or fiscal responsibility. Decisions about the Branch Line should be based on evidence, not incredulity.