The future of Wisconsin HSR / new passenger service?

[Great Western]

I have read that  the money put up for the WI rail project is for use towards a rail project only.   I am led to believe that If it is not used by Wisconsin then it could be given to another State if they want it for a rail project.

Moreover the Talgo company, now in Wisconsin, have said that without any Wisconsin rail project they would pull out and move elsewhere to another State  that is interested in passenger trains,  when their current building project is completed.   Doesn't sound very good for Wisconsin to me.

It seems that whilst coal is currently 'king' this will not always be the case.   Also cheap gasoline,   enjoyed in the Unites States compared to Europe, may not always be available.  So isn't it time to look ahead to the future - something that  America used to be extremely good at doing.  America used to lead the way in many things: for example by pioneering television which found little backing in the land that invented it.  I wish to see this Pioneering Spirit rise again in the United States - it is there but being held back it seems to me.   Gosh!  If the early railroad pioneers had dithered then Wells Fargo would still be very much in business with their stage coaches and horses.  

But I guess those early Pioneers, who made America into a great Nation, didn't concern themselves primarily about votes!!

 

 

[Murphy Siding]

Guys-  Let's try to keep this thread civil and focused on the railroad-related topic at hand.
Thanks.

-Norris  user/moderator.

[aricat]

Can you imagine if the Governor of Wisconsin in 1958 said to save money; we won't build I-94 or I-90. Good old two lane US 12 will just have to do, trucks and all. This is the same kind of lunacy that  the new Republican Governors in Ohio and Wisconsin are practicing today.

[cnwfan2]

I wouldnt be jumping that decision to soon.If the "new" governor here in Wisconsin does kill the HSR project,Im sure the contractor(s) will take the state to court for breach of contract.As I had stated earlier,the STB and the FRA have the authority to make the final decision on this.Look at the DME/ Rochester,MN fiasco.The city lost big time, and millions of dollars battling in the courts.Perhaps its time for this knucklehead Walker to "think outside the box",and start living up to his promise of creating jobs.....not causing more problems.

[schlimm]

Looks like HSR / new service is dead in Wisconsin and will be in Ohio as well.

 

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/11/wisconsin-halts-plans-for-high-speed-rail-to-madison.html

[Rwulfsberg]

Mr. Railman

The road builders know that if they upgrade the line for HSR, automatic upgrade for freight as well. They don't want their money taken away from trucks and taken to CP,WSOR,and CN

Ironic thing is that Edward Kraemer and Sons, a big Wisconsin road builder, has just been told to halt its work. A few weeks ago they were awarded the contract for three land bridges between Watertown and Waterloo.

For some in the industry, moving funds from rail to highway would be zero sum. They're in the infrastructure business regardless. If the $800M leaves the state, however, I can't imagine they'd be happy.

cnwfan2

The money hass already been given to contractors to start the HSR project.If Walker does succeed in preventing this HSR from getting going,each and every taxpayer in Wisconsin WILL be paying back the money to the contractors for the work that is being done.

Curious what sort of penalty clauses are typical for the cancellation design, engineering and construction contracts. Most of the work so far has been engineering. Anyone with experience on this?

And, in reply to several in this thread, agreed that the use of the term HSR is unfortunate. Even so, experience in regional corridors shows that frequent, reliable service is still an effective option for intercity passenger rail.

[GN_Fan]

Everyone please excuse me for my profound stupidity.  Um, HIGH SPEED RAIL at 79 MPH?  Is this a cruel joke or am I truly dumb.  I am an expat now living in Italy and normal local trains here make 90 MPH if the station stops are more than 5 minutes apart.  Ninety MPH is the norm for normal service while the newer truly high speed trains make 180 MPH runs.  Even Acela is a slow bird compared to the rest of the world, China included.

[cnwfan2]

The Federal Government gave Wisconsin the money for just this project.Walker cant use this money for nothing other than the HSR.Walker can stop,suspend,and "try" to deny the project from being  built.He can even sue  if the bozo (Walker) feels like it.Unfortuately Walker has very little authority in the mess he is starting.The STB,FRA,and the AAR,along with the railroads involved...Canadian Pacific,and the Wisconsin & Southern,are the ones that can say yes or no to halt the project.( The line is on CP's Milwaukee to LaCrosse and WSOR trackage.At Watertown,this is where the WSOR starts and goes to Madison).The money hass already been given to contractors to start the HSR project.If Walker does succeed in preventing this HSR from getting going,each and every taxpayer in Wisconsin WILL be paying back the money to the contractors for the work that is being done.Seems Walker wants to create JOBS here in Wisconsin.WOW!!!.JOBS!!!!!!....What a brilliant idea!!!!! Lets build this project and create jobs for the numerous unemployed here in Wisconsin!!!! FYI.....A person lives in Madison,works in Milwaukee....big commute,lots of gas and time to get to work.The HSR is built,saves the worker money on gas,repairs to the highway,and is one less vehicle on the road.Dont you think this person would love to take the train and save some "green"?How about people that want to shop in Milwaukee and/ or Madison,but dont want to,or like to drive? I personally am "pro" active for this project.It should also be noted that 52 of the 72 counties  in Wisconsin voted for a Transportation Fund,amended into the state constitution to be used for just transportation needs.Walker cant touch this money either for "other" things.Railway Age magazine (Railwayage.com) did an article on HSR,and they said the same thing....Walker has no decision / very little to say in this project.

[zardoz]

jeaton

The governor-elect's stated objection to the project is that Wisconsin can't afford the projected $11,000,000 annual state support that will be required to cover the difference between revenue and operating costs for the service.  That comes to less than $2.00 per capita per year.  At the peak of construction, it is estimated that 5500 people will be employed on the construction project, all earning wages subject to Wisconsin income tax-probably enough to pay for a year or two of the operating costs. 

And after that, they'll go back on unemployment. Then what?

jeaton

Compare that to the $240 million Wisconsin drivers are putting up for their share for the rebuild/expansion of the 40+ miles of I-94 between the Illinois state line and the Milwaukee airport.

I went to one of the planning meetings and suggested that 94 be turned into a toll road, with a booth at the Illlannoy Illinois state line and another one at the ramp to the airport I was told the idea had already been considered, then rejected). All this I-94 improvement is going to do is make southeastern Wisconsin even more crowded.

[dakotafred]

When Mr. Walker says he would rather spend the money on roads, I'm sure he's talking about the $11 million in STATE money that would be required annually to support the passenger rail service.

[YoHo1975]

CShaveRR

Thank you, Jay, for summing this up so nicely.  I just might go spend two bucks a year in Wisconsin, just to help reduce the tax-burden on your put-upon governor.  You're definitely one of the "cooler heads" that should have been around to prevail--could have saved some people a lot of effort and grief.

 

And, just for fun, I won't use 94!

 

You could buy Fireworks.

 

Or go to Door County. That's always good for making the locals mad. 

 

Also, its been a few years since I've been, but when was the last time I94 between Il and the Airport wasn't under construction? 

 

Also Also, of course a Train from Kenosha to Milwaukee doesn't make sense.

Kenosha isn't an Ex-urb of Milwaukee anymore, it's an Ex-urb of Chicago now. (Part of the Chicago Metropolitan Statistical Area) :D

[jeaton]

The plan calls for daily service of 6 trains (each way) between Madison and Chicago.  A 7th trip between Milwaukee and Chicago will remain on the schedule.  The Madison-Milwaukee portion of service will start with top speeds of 79MPH and increase to 110 MPH with the deployment of PTC.

The cost of the Madison-Milwaukee construction project averages out to about $10 million per mile.  That compares to ballpark numbers for 200MPH service of $40-$50 million per mile.

All though somewhat apples to oranges, The Milwaukee-Chicago passenger count for FY 2010 was 783,000 making it the 7th highest among the 27 defined "State Supported  and Other Short Distance Corridors."  The Chicago Milwaukee service has one of the best on time records, but given the short haul, current traffic levels, and double track main line, that should be expected.

 

[Phoebe Vet]

High Speed Rail is a much abused term.

Actually, the new Southeast HSR corridor in VA & NC will be 110 MPH to Raleigh and then 90 MPH to Charlotte.

You are absolutely correct that frequent and on time are more important than high speed.

http://sehsr.org/ 

[Dakguy201]

I believe proponents of Madison service are doing themselves a disservice by referring to it as HSR.  That isn't what is going to be built, and selling it that way creates in the public mind a vision of what is done in France or Japan.   The reality will be a major disappointment.

I think North Carolina and Virginia are illustrating a more important feature than top speed -- frequency of service.  Several departures a day operating at 79 mph will serve the public better than the current travel alternatives.

[Mr. Railman]

first off, . and second off. The road builders know that if they upgrade the line for HSR, automatic upgrade for freight as well. They don't want their money taken away from trucks and taken to CP,WSOR,and CN

[CShaveRR]

Thank you, Jay, for summing this up so nicely.  I just might go spend two bucks a year in Wisconsin, just to help reduce the tax-burden on your put-upon governor.  You're definitely one of the "cooler heads" that should have been around to prevail--could have saved some people a lot of effort and grief.

 

And, just for fun, I won't use 94!

[jeaton]

CNW 6000

I thought the money was earmarked for a specific purpose and would be lost if it wouldn't be used for that purpose.

It doesn't fall into the typical definition of an "earmark" which is usually a term applied to congressional appropriations targeted to specific projects.  This money came from funds appropriated in a federal law that directed the Department of Transportation to distribute the funds to passenger rail projects..  To the best of my knowledge, the applicable law does not allow the funds to be diverted to any other form of transportation project.

It would probably require an act of the US Congress to even allow the money to be returned by the state and I would put the probability of the US Congress letting Wisconsin just divert the funds to Wisconsin highway projects at a flat zero.  There are 49 other states that would want a piece of that action.

The governor-elect's stated objection to the project is that Wisconsin can't afford the projected $11,000,000 annual state support that will be required to cover the difference between revenue and operating costs for the service.  That comes to less than $2.00 per capita per year.  At the peak of construction, it is estimated that 5500 people will be employed on the construction project, all earning wages subject to Wisconsin income tax-probably enough to pay for a year or two of the operating costs.  Not bad since no Wisconsin tax funds are required to pay for the construction.  Compare that to the $240 million Wisconsin drivers are putting up for their share for the rebuild/expansion of the 40+ miles of I-94 between the Illinois state line and the Milwaukee airport. 

[zardoz]

Running high-speed trains between Milwaukee and Madison makes about as much sense as running passenger trains between Milwaukee and Kenosha.

[CNW 6000]

I thought the money was earmarked for a specific purpose and would be lost if it wouldn't be used for that purpose.

[overall]

I don't see how the agreement talked about in Newswire could be enforced. My guess is that the local Road Builders Association in Wisconsin , with their deep pockets, will help Walker to stop HSR since it will benefit them. Walker has already said he will spend the money on highway projects.

George

[eolafan]

With the apparent election as Governor in Wisconsin of Scott Walker...who I recall being openly anti-new passenger rail service/HSR...what do you all think is the future of such service in the Badger State?

Edit: Yes, I did read the Trains newswire piece on current Governor Doyle's signing legislation ensuring the building and operation of such service, but just the same...politics being politics...I'd like some opinions from my fellow rail supporters.