News outlets in Ohio over the past few of days have reported stories about Amtrak service expansion plans in the state.
The intercity passenger carrier has been reported to be planning five new corridor services including Cleveland-Cincinnati via Columbus and Dayton; Chicago-Cincinnati via Indianapolis; Cleveland-Detroit (Pontiac) via Toledo; Cleveland-New York via Buffalo, New York; and Cleveland-New York via Pittsburgh.
Most of these routes would have multiple daily frequencies including four daily roundtrips on the Chicago-Cincinnati route.
The 3C corridor service would be three daily roundtrips while the Cleveland-New York service would be two daily roundtrips via Buffalo and one roundtrip via Pittsburgh.
Amtrak would fund these services through a program for which it is seeking $300 million from Congress.
For its part, Amtrak has been issuing a written statement to reporters seeking information that is far less detailed.
After stating that corridor services of 500 miles are the fastest growing segment of its network, the passenger carrier has said, “We have developed a visionary plan to expand rail service across the nation, providing service to large metropolitan areas that have little or no Amtrak service.
“We are working with our state partners, local officials and other stakeholders to understand their interests in new and improved Amtrak service and will be releasing that plan soon. We will call on Congress to authorize and fund Amtrak’s expansion in such corridors by allowing us to cover most of the initial capital and operating costs of new or expanded routes”
And that’s it. The statement did not provide any details about specific routes and service levels.
The specific information came from All Aboard Ohio, an advocacy group that has long sought without success to push for creation of a network of passenger trains in the Buckeye state.
But is this proposal the “game changer” that some on social media are calling it?
It could be but keep in mind it is simply a proposal. There is no guarantee Congress will approve funding for the corridor development program and no guarantee that any of the proposed Ohio trains will ever turn a wheel.
AAO public affairs director Kenneth Prendergast acknowledged in an interview with Trains magazine that the five corridors that his group has identified are “more of an outline or goal than a plan.”
Amtrak officials have been meeting with local officials throughout Ohio to discuss the corridor program proposal. Similar meetings have been held in other states, including Tennessee and Kansas.
Based on what Amtrak government affairs officials said during state legislative hearings in those states, Amtrak would front the costs of route development and pay operating expenses on a sliding scale for up to five years.
State and local governments would have to begin underwriting the service starting in the second year and assume all funding after the fifth year.
If you read the Amtrak statement carefully, it says the passenger carrier would pay for most of the initial capital and operating costs.
That is not necessarily the 100 percent federal funding factoid that AAO described in a post on its website and it officers have been talking up in news media interviews.
In fairness, though, the AAO post later said that Amtrak might pay up to 100 percent of the initial capital costs and up to 100 percent of the operating costs for the first two years.
Given that Amtrak has yet to release details about the corridor development program and has yet to formally ask Congress to fund it, there is much that remains unknown.
And given that the Amtrak statement falls short of saying it will pay all costs of getting a route up and running it is reasonable to conclude that state and local governments would need to pay something, although we don’t know yet what that would be.
One guess is local and state money would need to help fund station development.
Not even AAO expects the proposed services to come to fruition anytime soon.
Writing on Twitter, AAO said it can take three to six years to get a route started depending on its complexity.
In the meantime, AAO has said it will seek a “small appropriation” in the next biennial budget to pay for state-level planning of the five proposed corridors.
It is not clear whether Gov. Mike DeWine and Ohio legislative leaders would be receptive to that.
AAO argues that DeWine is more inclined to be supportive of passenger rail than was his predecessor, John Kasich.
As a gubernatorial candidate in 2010, Kasich adamantly opposed using a $400 million federal stimulus grant the state had received to start 3C service.
Upon being elected, Kasich returned that money to the U.S. Department of Transportation although not before making an unsuccessful pitch that the state be allowed to redirect the grant toward highway development.
AAO contends that DeWine has asked the Ohio Department of Transportation to put passenger rail “back on the radar.” But the scope of DeWine’s support for passenger rail has yet to be publicly articulated.
It is all but certain that once concrete proposals are introduced in the legislature authorizing spending state money on rail passenger service development that opposition will arise from opponents decrying wasting public money.
Another unknown is what demands the host railroads would make to agree to allow these trains to use their tracks.
We know that in the past host railroads have submitted lists of millions of dollars of infrastructure improvements as the price of acceptance.
How necessary those improvements were is debatable, but the demands seemed exorbitant enough to discourage the proposed service.
Such pricey demands have thwarted efforts to operate the Chicago-New York Cardinal and the Los Angeles-New Orleans Sunset Limited daily rather than tri-weekly.
Some of the articles and social media posts about the proposed Ohio corridors have noted that President Joseph Biden is an avid supporter of passenger rail and is expected to release an infrastructure proposal later this year.
Passenger rail advocates are hoping to use that as the springboard to shake loose billions of federal dollars for passenger rail development.
It may be a time to be optimistic yet nothing is certain. At best Amtrak’s proposal represents hope. But as we’ve seen in the past, those hopes can be a very fragile thing.
More Hope Than Plan at This Point
February 3, 2021News outlets in Ohio over the past few of days have reported stories about Amtrak service expansion plans in the state.
Most of these routes would have multiple daily frequencies including four daily roundtrips on the Chicago-Cincinnati route.
The 3C corridor service would be three daily roundtrips while the Cleveland-New York service would be two daily roundtrips via Buffalo and one roundtrip via Pittsburgh.
Amtrak would fund these services through a program for which it is seeking $300 million from Congress.
For its part, Amtrak has been issuing a written statement to reporters seeking information that is far less detailed.
After stating that corridor services of 500 miles are the fastest growing segment of its network, the passenger carrier has said, “We have developed a visionary plan to expand rail service across the nation, providing service to large metropolitan areas that have little or no Amtrak service.
“We are working with our state partners, local officials and other stakeholders to understand their interests in new and improved Amtrak service and will be releasing that plan soon. We will call on Congress to authorize and fund Amtrak’s expansion in such corridors by allowing us to cover most of the initial capital and operating costs of new or expanded routes”
And that’s it. The statement did not provide any details about specific routes and service levels.
The specific information came from All Aboard Ohio, an advocacy group that has long sought without success to push for creation of a network of passenger trains in the Buckeye state.
But is this proposal the “game changer” that some on social media are calling it?
It could be but keep in mind it is simply a proposal. There is no guarantee Congress will approve funding for the corridor development program and no guarantee that any of the proposed Ohio trains will ever turn a wheel.
AAO public affairs director Kenneth Prendergast acknowledged in an interview with Trains magazine that the five corridors that his group has identified are “more of an outline or goal than a plan.”
Amtrak officials have been meeting with local officials throughout Ohio to discuss the corridor program proposal. Similar meetings have been held in other states, including Tennessee and Kansas.
Based on what Amtrak government affairs officials said during state legislative hearings in those states, Amtrak would front the costs of route development and pay operating expenses on a sliding scale for up to five years.
State and local governments would have to begin underwriting the service starting in the second year and assume all funding after the fifth year.
If you read the Amtrak statement carefully, it says the passenger carrier would pay for most of the initial capital and operating costs.
That is not necessarily the 100 percent federal funding factoid that AAO described in a post on its website and it officers have been talking up in news media interviews.
In fairness, though, the AAO post later said that Amtrak might pay up to 100 percent of the initial capital costs and up to 100 percent of the operating costs for the first two years.
Given that Amtrak has yet to release details about the corridor development program and has yet to formally ask Congress to fund it, there is much that remains unknown.
And given that the Amtrak statement falls short of saying it will pay all costs of getting a route up and running it is reasonable to conclude that state and local governments would need to pay something, although we don’t know yet what that would be.
One guess is local and state money would need to help fund station development.
Not even AAO expects the proposed services to come to fruition anytime soon.
Writing on Twitter, AAO said it can take three to six years to get a route started depending on its complexity.
In the meantime, AAO has said it will seek a “small appropriation” in the next biennial budget to pay for state-level planning of the five proposed corridors.
It is not clear whether Gov. Mike DeWine and Ohio legislative leaders would be receptive to that.
AAO argues that DeWine is more inclined to be supportive of passenger rail than was his predecessor, John Kasich.
As a gubernatorial candidate in 2010, Kasich adamantly opposed using a $400 million federal stimulus grant the state had received to start 3C service.
Upon being elected, Kasich returned that money to the U.S. Department of Transportation although not before making an unsuccessful pitch that the state be allowed to redirect the grant toward highway development.
AAO contends that DeWine has asked the Ohio Department of Transportation to put passenger rail “back on the radar.” But the scope of DeWine’s support for passenger rail has yet to be publicly articulated.
It is all but certain that once concrete proposals are introduced in the legislature authorizing spending state money on rail passenger service development that opposition will arise from opponents decrying wasting public money.
Another unknown is what demands the host railroads would make to agree to allow these trains to use their tracks.
We know that in the past host railroads have submitted lists of millions of dollars of infrastructure improvements as the price of acceptance.
How necessary those improvements were is debatable, but the demands seemed exorbitant enough to discourage the proposed service.
Such pricey demands have thwarted efforts to operate the Chicago-New York Cardinal and the Los Angeles-New Orleans Sunset Limited daily rather than tri-weekly.
Some of the articles and social media posts about the proposed Ohio corridors have noted that President Joseph Biden is an avid supporter of passenger rail and is expected to release an infrastructure proposal later this year.
Passenger rail advocates are hoping to use that as the springboard to shake loose billions of federal dollars for passenger rail development.
It may be a time to be optimistic yet nothing is certain. At best Amtrak’s proposal represents hope. But as we’ve seen in the past, those hopes can be a very fragile thing.
Tags:3C passenger corridor, All Aboard Ohio, Amtrak, Amtrak in Ohio, commentaries on transportation, intercity passenger rail service, Ohio's 3C Corridor, On Transportation, posts on transportation
Posted in Railroad News | Leave a Comment »