John Williams, NWP operator. Can the NCRA rein in this trail opponent?

Discussions at the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) meeting today seemed to indicate that the Board of Directors is making strides to meet trail advocates somewhere in the middle while the operator, Northwest Pacific Railroad (NWP), headed by John Williams, doesn’t have much interest in a cooperative relationship with trail advocates.

We’ve had our differences with the Board when it comes to the feasibility of rebuilding and maintaining the railroad from Willits up to Humboldt Bay, but in agreeing to disagree, we are seeing some trail progress. The Board continues to move slowly toward railbanking the Annie and Mary section of the Railroad from Arcata to Blue Lake to create a trail there, has directed staff to create guidelines for rail-with-trail projects, and will likely provide a letter of support for Arcata to commence a planning process for a rail-with-trail project along the railroad corridor in Arcata, possibly connecting with the Annie and Mary Trail, and continuing south to the Arcata Marsh.

But for some reason, John Williams of the NWP doesn’t see trail development as a good way for the railroad to gain public support. He has entered a lease to operate the southern portion of the line and has an option to operate the Eel River and Humboldt Bay sections.

Because the NCRA staff has little experience with the issue of rail-with-trial guidelines, they essentially asked Mr. Williams to draft them for the NCRA. With his own interests in mind, he did just that, setting setback requirements that far exceed those in other jurisdictions, including guidelines drafted by Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) which owns the rights of way from Healdsburg south (NCRA has an easement). These excessive setbacks could make approval of rail-with-trail projects difficult. Bike trails are critical to the passage of SMART’s quarter cent sales tax initiative on the ballot for this November to jumpstart SMART’s proposed passenger service from Cloverdale to Larkspur. Without them, the measure is not likely to garner the two thirds support it needs for passage in both Marin and Sonoma.

It may be in Mr. Williams’ interest to do what he can to sink SMART so he does not have to negotiate the scheduling of his trains on the south end around passenger service.

Rondal Snodgrass of Arcata astutely suggested the Board form a committee representing all the relevant interests to draft the guidelines, but the Board instead will post the guidelines online for a public comment period and finalize them in December.

John Williams’ other anti-trail stance was also anti-Arcata! After Karen Deimer of Arcata Environmental Services presented Arcata’s goal as moving forward with planning for a trail that fully accommodates the railroad, Mr. Williams pounced: “I am opposed to this project….It encroaches on my railroad….You have no right to take this railroad track and turn it into a trail.”

Deimer made it clear that they were only seeking a letter of support to go after planning dollars and they had every intention of using this as a test case to work with the rail-with-trail guidelines being developed.

Even uber-train booster Charles Olivier called for a new era of cooperation saying a “new beginning would be good here also for Mr. Williams.”

But Williams jumped in again to complain about Arcata Public Works destroying railroad track crossings. “Who’s going to stand up to the city of Arcata?”

Well, Mr. Williams, who’s going to stand up to a corporate welfare recipient claiming to own a railroad he has not taken his option on and doesn’t have the money to restore and operate? Is there some reason we shouldn’t do all we can to oppose use of our public dollars for “your railroad” on a publicly owned right-of-way when you seem interested in scuttling trail development, even when it allows for railroad operation?