The Rail Trail is a Lemon – Don’t Buy It!

A Letter to the Editor from Claire Barden:

Let me explain: it’s marketed nicely as a low/no-cost beautiful amenity benefiting all (in other words, a no-brainer), yet it’s full of problems just beneath the surface that you won’t fully know about or pay for until after you’ve taken ownership.

I am not an abutter. I love boardwalks, public spaces, and being outdoors with my children. I am the rail trail’s target demographic. Here are some reasons why I don’t support the rail trail:

1) The likelihood of discovering contaminants in the soil during construction (which will cost you and me (Lynnfield taxpayers) $50,000 a pop). Doesn’t the fact that the state won’t let us (Lynnfield taxpayers) test the soil before taking ownership of the land, and that the “free” 99-year lease we would sign holds the state completely harmless, make anyone else scratch their heads? It’s a huge red flag to me. I believe the state is trying to dump this undesirable property (and its associated costs) onto the towns. Remember, the state itself abandoned use of the land.

2) Likelihood of drug/alcohol use and other crimes. Ask any police department what the single largest driver of police activity is: it’s drugs. 70%-80% of police calls are drug-related (either direct drug use or crimes committed due to drug use (violence, theft, vandalism, trespassing, etc.) A corridor through a secluded area that police can’t access via roads (meaning slower response time) seems like the perfect invitation for those looking to be out of plain sight. None of us can be ignorant to the opioid epidemic right here at home or the impacts of these horrific drugs on users, families, and communities.

3) Maintenance and policing costs. I’ve seen supporters present ideal-case scenario calculations that show the rail trail costing residents just cents in tax dollars (volunteers will clean it for free and small businesses will chip in!). Fiscal responsibility would have us plan for a likely-case scenario (not best-case), and be prepared to cover a worst-case. There are always unforeseen costs that arise in construction. The combined costs of expected regular-use maintenance of the property (e.g. trash pickup, waste removal, boardwalk short and long-term care/replacement, landscaping), plus unforeseen costs (testing for and remediating contaminants), plus extra policing man hours that Lynnfield doesn’t have now, add up to far more than pennies, as some supporters purport.

When I was young my parents used some adages that in my adult life I have found to be true over and over. Here’s one: “there’s no such thing as free.” Somehow, supporters of the rail trail have referred to the proposed project as “no cost”, “$0 cost to town,” “low cost,” “pennies on the dollar,” or even as “an opportunity” to access “free” money from the state. Another truism: “if something’s too good to be true, it probably is.” There are benefits to a rail trail (in fact, I would probably use the rail trail if it goes in!), and I do not discount those. However, to me, the many costly and dangerous risks outweigh its benefits.

Voters: your decision-making process is flawed from the start if you don’t consider both pros AND cons. Please be savvy customers: the rail trail is a great deal for the state and a costly, potentially dangerous one for us. Don’t buy the lemon, Lynnfield! Bail on the rail trail and vote NO on April 9.

Respectfully submitted,

Claire Barden, Forest Hill Avenue