The Orangeville Trailways Committee is questioning its purpose after Councillor Sylvia Bradley announced last week she will vote against a proposed 1.2-kilometre section of trackside trail from Town Line to John Street.

Committee chair Bernadette Hardaker pointed out in an interview that the committee regards the section as “a critical link” in the Trails Master Plan for a loop of approximately 15 kilometres throughout the town.

She said that the project has been before council for three years, during which time it endorsed the project and a risk assessment, and supported an application for funding.

Ms. Bradley, council’s representative on the committee, supported the section in the past. Her change of vote means council is 4-3 against the project, which has already received $220,000 in federal and provincial grants; an amount that will be forfeited if it is voted out.

She is joined by councillors Scott Wilson, Mary Rose and Gail Campbell in opposition, while Councillor Gary Kocialek, Deputy Mayor Warren Maycock and Mayor Rob Adams support the railside trail section.

“To have so many votes in favour (of the project), and then have your committee councillor pull her support at this point, is demoralizing,” said Ms. Hardaker.

Should the rail-side trail be terminated by a vote of council, supportive council members could file a motion for reconsideration at a future council meeting. Such a motion, however, would have to sway the necessary number of council member who voted against the project in the first place.

Then, at yet another meeting, the original vote would be re-cast.

At a trails committee meeting last Thursday, committee member Bliss Daley questioned the point of the committee continuing. “Without the support of council, which we thought we had, there’s no point in proceeding. We’ll be spinning our wheels.

“We’re a body appointed by council. If we don’t have the faith of council, what’s the point of going on?”

Ms. Bradley has said she was never fully supportive of the rail-side trail. Rather, she was waiting until she had sufficient information to make up her mind. Besides her safety concerns, she told Thursday’s meeting that various railroad groups are also against the project, including The Highland Group, which is currently in the process of purchasing the railway from the Town of Orangeville.

Ms. Hardaker indicated that the committee was unaware of such opposition and asked Ms. Bradley if she had any documentation to that effect. Ms. Bradley replied that she had been made aware of the rail

groups’ misgivings through town staff.

Mayor Adams, also present at Thursday’s meeting, pointed out that the section of trail was part of the purchase agreement with Highland.

In an interview Tuesday, Highland spokesman Michael Daniher concurred with the mayor’s statement. “According to the agreement,” said Mr. Daniher, “the town retained the opportunity to construct the trail. The agreement has not concluded, since it is still in its due diligence phase.

“To my knowledge, no one from The Highland Group has expressed support for, or opposition to, the trail.”

Of the other councillors in opposition to the project, Ms. Rose and Ms. Campbell both made it clear that they would not be swayed from their position. Mr. Wilson, who was attending a municipal conference, was not available for comment.

While council support for the rail trail project appears to have tilted toward the negative, Mayor Adams has suggested that an information workshop and meeting be held to address problems and hopefully come up with solutions that could salvage the project.

“Having your day in court is sometimes better than the final judgement,” he reasoned in an interview Tuesday. “Considering that taxpayers’ dollars are already involved in a project that was approved three years ago and reaffirmed as recently as the last council meeting, Orangeville residents should have the right to participate and express their views.”

Ms. Bradley’s announcement was applauded by project opponents, one of whom has said she probably saved a life by coming out against the project.

This line of thinking appears to contradict the findings of a 2002 U.S. Department of Transportation study entitled Rails-with- Trails: Lessons Learned. The study reported that, between 1995 and 2002, trespassing fatalities in rail corridors without trails reached approximately 500 per year.

In contrast, the same report says nationwide American studies in 2000, 2002 and 2005 found two occurrences of injuries in areas close to rail corridors that had adjacent trails. One involved an Illinois cyclist who rode around a lowered crossing barrier and tried to beat the oncoming train, and an Alaska youth who left a trail and tried to hitch a ride on a slowmoving freight train.

Meanwhile, Mulmur Deputy Mayor and railside trail opponent Sue Snider was heartened by Ms. Bradley’s decision, but equally disheartened to hear that the committee was considering disbanding.

“The Trailways committee has done amazing work,” Ms. Snider said Tuesday. “The only thing we’re concerned about is a small portion of the overall trail. Our concerns certainly don’t impact the whole committee.”

Ms. Snider is executive director of Safe Communities of the Hill Country, an organization that aims to bring safety programs to Dufferin County.

As a member of county council and opponent of trails she feels would be dangerously close to railway tracks, she has regularly declared a conflict of interest when rail issues are presented to council.