By Rosie Campagna
Merced is being asked to consider a major change to the California High-Speed Rail station location, moving it from Downtown to a site near Highway 99 and Mission Avenue. The Rail Authority says this could save around $1 billion and move the project along faster. The proposed site is on county land just outside the current city limits, about four miles southeast of Downtown.
I understand why that $1 billion number makes people lean in. Merced is not swimming in extra money. But here’s the thing: big headline numbers can pressure a city into nodding along before we’ve actually done the local math. That is how communities get railroaded, even when everyone involved thinks they are being practical.
If Merced is seriously considering switching station locations, we deserve something simple and basic first: a clear side-by-side comparison and written answers to the questions that matter to residents, not just the project.
Merced is not some optional stop
We need to be clear about what Merced is supposed to be in this project. Senate Bill 198 describes the Merced-to-Bakersfield initial operating segment as a 171-mile electrified, dual-track line that includes a new combined station in downtown Merced with connections to Amtrak San Joaquins and the Altamont Corridor Express. The Rail Authority’s 2024 Business Plan also states that the Merced station location has been fixed Downtown between O Street and R Street.
So when people ask, can they just bypass Merced, it should not be that simple. If there is going to be a major shift, Merced deserves a real public process, not a rushed reaction to one savings claim.
The side-by-side, in real life terms
Strong Towns Merced has been working on a side-by-side analysis workbook so we can compare the Downtown site and the 99 and Mission site using consistent criteria. Here is a simplified version.
1) How do people actually get to the station?
Downtown site
Downtown is the one place in Merced where you can realistically say some riders can arrive without a car. Transit already points there. The street grid exists. There are nearby neighborhoods and services. And connections to other trains and buses make sense in one place.
99 and Mission site
A station by the freeway usually means most people drive. Unless we fund high-frequency shuttle service from day one, it becomes a parking lot station. This is the reality of how travel behavior works when a station is outside the city center.
If we pick a peripheral station, we are also picking years of car-dependent access unless connecting transit is fully funded and operated at a high level.
2) What does each site cost Merced over time?
Downtown site
Downtown uses infrastructure and services we already have: streets, utilities, public safety coverage, sidewalks, existing services. Investing in the core is usually less expensive to serve long-term because the city is not extending itself outward.
99 and Mission site
A station outside the city limits is rarely “just a station.” It usually comes with new access roads, new utilities, new stormwater systems, new service coverage, and more lane miles to maintain forever. Even if the Rail Authority saves money on construction, Merced could inherit the long-term cost to serve and maintain a new growth area.
This is the key issue. Merced has to separate what saves the Authority money today from what costs local taxpayers and local agencies money for decades.
3) What kind of growth will each station pull in?
Downtown site
A Downtown station supports infill. It reinforces the city we already have. It can help drive housing, small business growth, and investment in the core, where we can actually capture value without stretching infrastructure.
99 and Mission site
A freeway-adjacent station can pull growth outward. If land use rules are not strict, it tends to attract low-yield patterns: surface parking, auto-oriented development, wide roads, and big setbacks. Those patterns can look busy but often do not generate enough return to cover their long-term public costs.
Growth is not the enemy. Unproductive growth is.
About that $1 billion savings claim
If the Rail Authority wants Merced to take this proposal seriously, we need receipts. How was the $1 billion calculated? What is included, and what is left out? Does it include new local road construction, utility extensions, transit operations, and long-term maintenance? Or is it a savings number focused on what the Authority pays, while other costs land on local agencies and taxpayers?
There’s another wrinkle people should know about. CAHSRA has talked publicly about seeking station-area zoning control and “tax increment value capture” within a half-mile of stations, meaning the agency could potentially take a share of the new sales and property tax growth around station areas to pay for station-related infrastructure. That might sound fine until you ask the obvious question: if Merced still has to provide services and maintain streets, what happens if the revenue growth gets pulled away from local budgets? Merced needs that to be spelled out clearly before any station decision gets rushed.
Asking for the full math is not being difficult. It is being responsible.
Three questions City Council should ask, in writing
Before anything gets locked in, City Council should direct staff and consultant teams to answer these questions publicly and in writing:
-
Who pays, and for how long?
For each location, what is the full lifecycle cost, including construction plus ongoing operations and maintenance, and which agency pays each piece? -
How does someone get there without a car?
For each location, what is the transit and first-and-last-mile plan, including frequency and reliability, and how will it work in year one? -
What does Merced get back?
For each location, what is the projected value per acre and net fiscal impact over 30 years, and what assumptions drive that result?
Where I stand
I support a Downtown station because it strengthens the city we already have. It supports walkable access, stronger transit connections, and reinvestment in Merced’s core. It gives Merced the best chance to grow in a way that builds long-term stability rather than long-term liabilities.
If the 99 and Mission location is still being seriously considered, Merced should only move forward with enforceable commitments up front: real transit connections, strict land use rules that prevent sprawl pull, and clear responsibility for who pays not just for construction, but for the ongoing costs.
Merced deserves clear answers before we get pushed onto a track we cannot afford.
Rosie Campagna is a Merced resident, estimator and project manager with Buzz’s Perfection Glass, and a Strong Towns Merced volunteer.