Sen. Ted Cruz, voice of reason on debate about new railroad bridge in Stuart (No joke)

Even Ted Cruz gets it.

The U.S. senator and former presidential candidate, who lives more than 1,000 miles away from Stuart, recognizes the importance of ending a dispute about how often the drawbridge over the St. Lucie River should be open.

During his opening remarks at a U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation meeting last week, the Texas Republican urged the U.S. Coast Guard to consider a schedule proposed by Brightline passenger rail service and Florida East Coast Railway that would keep the drawbridge in the up position most of the day.

In doing so, Cruz suggested a schedule the Coast Guard recently adopted on a trial basis was unworkable because it would disrupt the flow of goods and services along the rail corridor, as well as potentially creating safety hazards for other modes of transportation.

"For example, a recent schedule change on a drawbridge on a rail corridor along the east coast of Florida threatens freight rail service stoppages that would block nearby grade crossings and severely restrict the operations of passenger service," Cruz, the committee's ranking member, told his colleagues. "I understand a proposal has been offered by the railroads that would provide mariners with access to the waterway for 60% of the daylight hours. The Coast Guard needs to promptly adopt a workable schedule that recognizes all the stakeholders, gives certainty to the mariners, the railroads and their customers."

I'm not privvy to the details of the Brightline/FEC proposal, but I think Cruz's grasp of the big picture is correct. It's not in anybody's best interests to have a bridge schedule that causes undue disruptions in car, boat or train traffic.

And if we can all agree on that, then it's a short hop to reaching agreement, as TCPalm's editorial board advocated a few days ago, that a new bridge all but eliminating those disruptions on a permanent basis is what we really need.

Oh, I know there's been a lot of angry rhetoric lately that makes it seem like a potential end to the bridge kerfuffle is nowhere in sight.

After the Coast Guard announced the trial schedule, which would leave the bridge in the up position at 15-minute intervals starting at the top and bottom of every hour, the train companies said the schedule would severely impact rail operations for both freight and passenger service. Freight trains waiting for the drawbridge to come down could be stopped on the tracks in downtown Stuart or on the north side of the bridge into Rio, Ben Porritt, Brightline's senior vice president of corporate affairs, said at the time.

In response, in a letter to the head of the Federal Railroad Administration last month, U.S. Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fort Pierce, accused the railroads of acting in bad faith by suggesting a transportation logjam was unavoidable. Brightline never could have gotten the permits needed to move forward with its planned service expansion between West Palm Beach and Orlando if the company had been honest about those expected disruptions, Mast wrote to FRA administrator Amit Rose.

Sounds hopeless, right? I think it's all political posturing, though.

In a conversation with me last week, Mast said he would be willing to start working to get federal funding for a new railroad bridge if ― but only if ― the train companies will agree to a satisfactory interim schedule for the current bridge.

Mast told me a satisfactory schedule would involve the bridge being open so boats could pass underneath at least 50% of the time, with no road blockages.

"If we can get to that point, then I will work on a new bridge," Mast told me.

If what Cruz said in the committee meeting was correct, the railroads have offered a schedule that would at least meet the minimum standard for the amount of time the bridge would be up. Porritt wouldn't discuss the specifics of the railroads' counterproposal with me.

However, he expressed optimism agreements could be reached for both a short- and long-term solution.

"We are confident a resolution can be found prior to Brightline's scheduled Orlando launch (in September)," Porritt texted me. "However, we are equally focused on building a new bridge and actively working with local partners on federal and state funding opportunities while kicking off the design and engineering work that will position us to be ready for construction as early as 2025."

If you follow sports, you know the cliche about player trades that "help both teams." Well, a new bridge would help boaters and the railroads.

If designed properly, a new bridge would be high enough above the river so most boat traffic could safely pass underneath without waiting for a raised drawbridge. It would also allow the railroads to use a double-track design, as opposed to the existing single track that creates a bottleneck in the rail system.

Nobody is saying it would be cheap. A new bridge might cost $100 million to $150 million, depending on whose estimates you believe. However, with the railroads working together with partners in federal and state government, the resources are available to do this.

Federal and state transportation dollars are going to be spent somewhere, so they might as well be invested here on the Treasure Coast.

The alternative, to keep bickering about the short-term bridge schedule, or to make unreasonable demands the railroads pay the entire cost of a valuable piece of transportation infrastructure, are going to leave boaters, motorists and train users with a less-than-satisfactory status quo.

If that happens, there will be plenty of blame for everyone to share.

This column reflects the opinion of Blake Fontenay. Contact him via email at bfontenay@gannett.com or at 772-232-5424.

This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Ted Cruz (yeah, that Ted Cruz) has good take on Stuart railroad bridge