Belmont Not Speeding Toward Lawsuit Against High-Speed Rail

As some Peninsula cities are gearing up for a legal fight against the California High-Speed Rail Authority, Belmont is hoping a more cautious and calculated approach will spur the parties back to middle ground.

The Belmont City Council considered joining Menlo Park, Atherton and Palo Alto in a lawsuit challenging the high-speed rail authority's environmental review process, but decided against the move in closed session at the Sept. 28 council meeting. The Cities of Burlingame and Redwood City have made similar decisions in recent weeks.

But legal action is not completely off the table for Belmont, according to a memo from City Manager Greg Scoles. The City Council decided in its closed session that suing the rail authority once it moves from planning to construction phase would offer a more formidable opportunity.

"The City Council continues to have serious concerns about the impacts that high-speed rail may have on the community," Scoles states in the memo.

Belmont's concerns center around the rail authority's plans to erect a 35-foot tall structure that could reach 80 feet across. It's still unclear how many tracks would run on the structure, but to handle Caltrain and the 120-mile-per-hour bullet trains, three would likely be the minimum, though two might suffice at certain junctures, Caltrain spokesman Mark Simon told the Council on Sept. 28.

Passed by roughly 52 percent of voters in 2008, Proposition 1A ushered in a plan to lay down tracks form the greater Los Angeles area to the Bay Area. The rail authority estimates the travel time at 2.5 hours. The bond measure allocates more than $9 billion in state funds for the project that must be matched by outside sources, said Rachel Wall, spokesperson for the high-speed rail authority.

With infrastructure projects of this scale, she said lawsuits are not uncommon.

"And we'll adhere to any rulings that result," she said. "But this will not affect our outreach efforts to the communities involved."    

Belmont officials are reaching out to Caltrain as a possible facilitator between cities and the rail authority. As owner of the Peninsula right-of-way, Caltrain has to approve high-speed rail. This gives it leverage, Councilmember David Braunstein said at the Sept. 28 meeting. He asked Simon if Peninsula cities would be able to fend off the high-speed rail authority through Caltrain.

On the flipside, Caltrain has $1.5 billion in improvements planned, including the electrification of its entire system.

"We're stopping short of saying (to high-speed rail), 'Thou shall not pass,' " Simon told the Council. He added, however, that Caltrain's not taking the rail authority's money at any cost.   

In coming weeks, the city is also forming an ad-hoc committee tasked with searching and analyzing all aspects of high-speed rail.

Planning Commissioner Kristin Mercer spearheaded the committee effort and said the city has received at least eight applications so far. Commissioners from planning, parks and finance will also sit on the body, along with community stakeholders such as local school districts, Notre Dame de Namur University and business owners, Mercer said.

"It's unfortunate that we didn't do it a year ago," Mercer said. "Our population is largely unaware. They remember voting for it, but many people are unaware there is even a proposal."

An avid and articulate critic of the rail authority's plans for the Peninsula, Mercer said Belmont's quality of life and economic viability are under threat, especially if an aerial structure runs through town.

Although it's the best in a worst case scenario, Mercer said a tunnel or trenched rail system is far more suitable to Belmont. City engineers sent this opinion to the rail authority in early summer, but heard nothing back from Sacramento, Mercer said. And on Aug. 5, Mercer said the rail authority announced its decision to move forward with the aerial structure. Wall said the authority based its decision on several factors, such as safety, risk, and construction logistics, but added that the process is still in a very early phase.

Along with other Belmont residents, Mercer is confused as to why high-speed rail doesn't terminate in San Jose and team up with Caltrain to finish the leg to San Francisco. Former Belmont City Councilmember Adele Della Santina posed that question at the Sept. 28 meeting.

"We voted for high-speed rail, but we weren't given a check box for 'not in my backyard'," Santana said. "Wouldn't it be easier to just stop it in San Jose?"

Undoubtedly, that scenario would be cheaper and less invasive, Mercer said. But a clause in the fine print might make it impossible.

Wall said Proposition 1A's wording mandates that the high-speed rail line terminate in San Francisco. Since voters passed the plan, any modifications would need to go back to the ballot. Tweaking its current form could open the door to legal issues, Wall said.

"Connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles in two hours and forty minutes is a key mandate in this project," Wall said.