City Council votes to leave rail district

Gonzalez had twice proposed leaving the district in the past two years during budget discussions. The city pays about $50,000 a year for its membership.

"I recently ran a campaign—and was re-elected—on which the rail was not one of my issues, but it was my opponent's primary issue. And residents and citizens of District 7 by a large percentage re-elected me, validating that question that rail is not something that they want to spend their tax dollars on at this point," Gonzalez said. "I understand that there is a very vocal minority that supports the rail, but we can't disenfranchise the majority and continue to spend their tax dollars in a way that they do not want to spend it."

Gonzalez said there were too many unknown details about the rail, including how the project's construction and operation would be funded.

Proponents for the rail system gathered at the council meeting to express their desire for the city to remain in the district.

"I believe that we should support the Lone Star Rail project. This is a very important investment," resident Ron Trimmer said. "[Being involved in] this project in the early stages keeps our options open and it gives a voice in the discussion about rail coming to our area."

Some citizens asked the council to consider hosting public forums before making a decision, while others supported the city's exit from the district.

"More public forums, I think, are always necessary before you rush to a decision," resident Leeta Shands said. "We could open this up and then you would really find out; do you really have a vocal minority or do you have a large silent majority? I didn't ever get a survey; I didn't ever talk to anyone. I think this type of issue—$50,000—[you can put it] off for one more year, and say, 'Let's just get together and have some meetings—big ones.' What's wrong with a little more time?"

Some council members who supported the motion said that the city would be able to return to the district in the future, and that the city does not currently have the population density to support a passenger rail.

"This system is going down the pike to an unaffordable destination," Councilman Steve Fought said. "I don't think we have the riders to support that."

Councilman Jerry Hammerlun said he would like the city to take a step back and start the process over to make a good investment with the city's $50,000.

"Even though it's only $50,000, that's a significant amount of money as far as I'm concerned," Hammerlun said. "I want us to make a good investment with that $50,000, and I cannot support continuing to pay that money."

Other council members questioned the city's return on investment with the project.

"I get very frustrated when people try to talk about the value of alternate transportation as if it should somehow pay for itself or even make money when no one asks those kinds of questions when it comes to roads," Jonrowe said. "Earlier today, we looked at paying almost $3,000 next year just for repaving projects, just for upkeep on some of our roads. And we didn't sit down and say, 'Well there are only 10 houses on that road so let's just let it fall apart.' We make a commitment as a community to take care of our people, and part of that is making sure they have transportation options."

The council will consider the resolution to officially leave the district at a future meeting.