Greenway adherents to blame for rail trail delay

Jack Brown is a Greenway diehard. (Letter to the Editor, May 15, “Little to show on trail ‘progress.’”) Since the crushing electoral defeat of the Greenway Measure D in 2022, he has persistently demonstrated that he will say any damn thing to defame, disparage and malign anyone who supports the public rail and trail project, including the RTC commissioners, their professional staff, municipal and county public works engineers, more than 56,000 rail and trail proponents who voted no on D, Friends of The Rail And Trail (FORT), and me.

Yet again, Greenway’s inveterate propagandist Mr. Brown complains about the pace of progress in the RTC’s rail trail construction work, not acknowledging the fact that Greenway’s political actions have produced lengthy delays and obstructions every step of the way since the Santa Cruz Branch railroad corridor was acquired by the RTC with state of California funding in 2012.

The Greenway game is well-funded naysaying. In the shiny universe of their desire, they would privatize the RTC’s railroad corridor and repurpose it as a “linear park.”

— Jim Weller, Capitola

RTC tried to save money at Capitola’s expense

Sorry, Sally Arnold, Capitola is not against the rail or trail (Guest Commentary, May 13). We were assured there was room for both rail and trail in the rail corridor. Now the RTC needs to save money at the expense of Capitola. Turn Park Avenue into a narrow race track with no parking and route pedestrian, bicycles, skateboards, and the disabled down steep inclines through the narrow busy village streets. In Santa Cruz the RTC built the trail in the rail corridor.

At the April 17 meeting in Capitola, FORT supporters made up silly scenarios how the train won’t stop for ice cream because Capitola hates trains. FORT supporters also hissed and booed councilmembers.

Is it that difficult for the RTC and FORT to see that Capitola citizens love their community and want the rail and a first-class trail?. We want it built as we were sold on it, and if that means trail only in the corridor until the train is financially viable, then bank it — and build, baby, build.

— Mark Ban, Capitola

An account of walking on the SC Westside trail

I’m older, live on the Westside, and mostly walk to get around town. The trail’s smooth surface sure beats curbs and broken sidewalks, so I often use the Bay to Swift portion and sometimes the Bay to Wharf portion, even prior to its opening. I walk on the far left, facing traffic as I would when walking along a road, because I usually can’t hear bikes approaching from the back. The path isn’t wide enough for me to feel safe with the difference in walking and riding speeds.

And the graffiti on the wall going down to the wharf is pretty colorful — wish I understood what was being said.

— John Rible, Santa Cruz

Rideshares would be cheaper than bus system

I just looked up the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (the Metro) FY23 and FY24 final budget, and found it easily online. It shows that the Metro runs about 2.8 million miles per year, and costs about $70 million each year. That comes to about $25 per mile.

Since the riders only pay about 15% of the costs of running the buses, it seems like it would be much less costly to the taxpayers if rideshares (Uber, Lyft) were subsidized to people instead. They cost from $1 to $2 per mile. Then we would have much more money to fix the roads.

— Paul Peterson, Aptos

Vietnam protests and the plight of Palestinians

People change over time. The idealism and moral certitude of youth eventually gives way to the need to earn a living and make a home for oneself and one’s family. These new challenges can sometimes change how the world is seen.

I’m old enough to remember the Vietnam War so loudly denounced as cruel and unjustified by the idealism of youth. Certainly avoiding the draft may have motivated some, but as it turned out they were right. Today, our country faces similar “idealism and moral certitude” from young people regarding the plight of Palestinians. To be pro-Palestinian is not necessarily to be antisemitic, but to be filled with idealism about the world and moral outrage at the conduct of the war.

Maybe we should again listen to what they have to say, instead of depriving them of their First Amendment guarantee of free speech.

— Mike Melville, Santa Cruz