A special meeting by the Merced City Council on Tuesday night might just end up being a small footnote in what has been a decades-long process to bring a High Speed Rail station to Merced.
Or, as some have expressed, it could end up being a tipping point that leads to far-reaching and lasting impacts for the city. The legacies of elected leaders are on the line, they add.
City leaders voted 6-1 to authorize the City Manager to send a letter to the California High Speed Rail Authority expressing “the City’s support in a collaborative review of the concept of moving the Merced High Speed Rail station to southeast Merced.”
The carefully worded document went through a bit of editing, thanks to Councilman Darin DuPont who added “collaborative review” to the city administration’s draft phrasing that had more directly expressed “conceptual support” of the station relocation. Those latter two words in quotes were defined by Deputy City Manager Frank Quintero as “supporting the idea.”
It was only two weeks ago when a member of the Rail Authority presented to the council a proposal to move the long-planned HSR station in Downtown Merced to another site on unincorporated county land about four miles southeast. The official and subsequent documents stated the move could save the project $1 billion, avoid the destruction of downtown business and the traffic disruption that could come along with it, and possibly improve the certainty of delivering the station project as part of the Initial Operating Segment (IOS) of the HSR project.
Authority officials say they are trying to meet a Jan. 31 deadline to complete an updated draft business plan for HSR. The plan is set to be delivered to the State Legislature in May. The City Council and County Board of Supervisors were urged to submit a letter of support to consider the plan.
The backdrop to these latest moves is the fact that any relocation would still require approval from elected state lawmakers. The authority is statutorily obligated to build the downtown station and include it in the IOS under Senate Bill 198.
Meanwhile, in recent days, the Council’s subcommittee on transportation has met with local partners and HSR officials. They say Merced County government agencies, as well as officials from the cities of Livingston and Atwater, have all met on the topic. Local officials also provided testimony at a Board Authority meeting. And city leaders say they discussed the move with residents during at least two of its annual Town Hall meetings.
On Tuesday night, members of the public were permitted to speak on the station relocation before the council made its decision. About a dozen residents spoke up, and they were evenly split between the relocation idea and keeping the station firmly positioned in the center of town. Three people stressed that there has not been sufficient communication with residents to move forward with the discussion. About just as many warned the council to not underestimate the gravity of their decision.
“The decision you make here today will be your legacy, and the legacy of those who live, work and enjoy what our gem of a downtown has to offer,” said Richard Barnes.
Marilyn Sobel told leaders they were facing a “very momentous and expensive decision, and it’s being made extremely hastily.”
“I know you technically aren’t making the decision to move the station, but you’re certainly showing a lot of support for it,” she pointed out. “And inch by inch, we’re going to see that it’s going to become more and more difficult to keep the station downtown where it should be. It’s only been two weeks since the last meeting, and I do not believe that you have had time to answer the many, many questions that people had, particularly: How much is this going to cost taxpayers?”
Another community activist said: “I’m wondering why you’re continuing to push this fast agenda without involving any of the residents that have been showing up, and giving their time, their commitments, and their opinions, and their priorities to you, directly, through workshops, through City Council, through study sessions.”
Ingrid Brostrom echoed concerns about a “sense of urgency driving the decision-making process.”
“The planning process that initially led to the selection of the current station location was many, many years in the making. And now the city is being asked to consider significant changes to the project in a matter of months. … The implications of this important decision cannot be overstated. The station location will drive community development and opportunity for generations to come. It is important that the City Council not only act as stewards for the current residents of Marced, but also for many future generations to come.”
In an email to the city, the group Strong Towns Merced warned city leaders about the City of Merced being in the “cross-hairs of mega projects before, with consequences that have seriously impacted this community.”
“We’re being asked to look at another option,” Harris said. “We’re not being asked to endorse it. We’re not being asked to fund it.”
Said Smith, “The reality is that we don’t have answers. That’s because we still have to have the conversation. It’s an important conversation to have. There’s gonna be tremendous opportunity for community engagement along the way for discussions. As a council, I don’t think a decision is even, this year. Maybe it’s next year. But if we’re not open to considering an option from a government partner who’s going to build this asset for us, then I think that we’re basically turning our back on the whole idea of high speed rail coming to Merced, and that’s not something I’m willing to do right now.”
Councilman DuPont had another take that he put bluntly: “I do not trust the High Speed Rail Authority. One bit.”
He shared concerns that’s he’s been hearing and learning about that have to do with the Rail Authority’s regulatory powers, including zoning and land use permitting over land it owns and land within a 1/2 mile radius of HSR stations, and capturing sales and property tax increment from the development of “transit oriented communities” to support station investments.
“So I go to Sacramento, and this was actually a topic of conversation at the League of California Cities,” DuPont revealed. “There’s actually been conversations within the Legislature. … I do not want our citizens to be burdened by the fact that the station comes, puts a station here, takes sales tax and property tax within a half mile, and has permitting controls within that half mile. And we’re left to maintain the infrastructure that is in and around the station. I mean, let’s be honest, the federal government took away $4 billion from this project.
They’re looking for funding.”
Councilman Fue Xiong, who voted against the letter being sent, repeated his earlier calls for more engagement with residents: “I think we’re playing our cards if we show support now, rather than hearing from community members.”
Here’s a copy of the draft letter to Ian Choudri, the chief executive officer of the HSR Authority with corrections made during Tuesday night’s meeting:
Mr. Ian Choudri
Chief Executive Officer
California High-Speed Rail Authority
770 L Street, Suite 620
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: City of Merced – Conceptual Consideration of Station Relocation
Dear Mr. Choudri,
On behalf of the City of Merced, thank you for your continued engagement with our region as we collaborate together to deliver a transformative statewide high-speed rail system.
As a result of our mutual desired goal of ensuring the successful buildout of a high-speed rail system that includes in its first phase a station location in Merced, I am writing to express the City’s support in a collaborative review of the concept of moving the Merced High Speed Rail station to southeast Merced.
As you consider a potential shift to a site in southeast Merced, I look forward to continuing our dialogue and partnership that we have established over the past decade to ensure a a comprehensive, thorough, transparent, and collaborative evaluation of this alternative, including its consideration for inclusion in the upcoming draft business plan.
We recognize station siting involves difficult tradeoffs among system performance, constructability, long-term operations, environmental considerations, community access, and regional economic impacts. A thorough review can help determine whether the changed location better advances your goals while delivering clear and measurable benefits to the Merced region. The southern Merced County site warrants analysis particularly given impacts including, but not limited to infrastructure, utilities, and City services and potential advantages related to land availability, construction logistics, multimodal connectivity, and access for residents across the county and surrounding communities.
The City emphasizes that any station location should promote equitable access, support sustainable economic development, and integrate existing and planned transportation networks and local land-use priorities. We appreciate the Authority’s ongoing communication and encourage continued coordination with Merced County, the City of Merced, and regional partners as this evaluation moves forward. The City stands ready to work in partnership with the Authority to support a data-driven process and identify solutions that maximize regional benefits in a timely manner.
Thank you for your leadership and continued work to advance a high-speed rail system that will serve Californians for generations. We look forward to a continued relationship and dialogue to help assist you in completing this transformative high-speed rail project in a manner that maximizes the benefits and vision for the Merced region.
Sincerely,
Scott McBride
City Manager