The high speed rail amendment in Florida was killed by overwhemling majority

[Sterling1]

The amendment was voted on Nov 2, 2004, the majority said yes to repeal the amendment
Go ahead and list or write about your feelings on this topic and how you feel about funding high speed rail and how and what we should use our equipment.

[dharmon]

Apparently the Florida voters said what they felt needed to be said.

[Modelcar]

....I spent 8 winters in central Florida up until just a few years ago and observing and driving in the traffic in that area...I wonder how they will soon handle the traffic especially in the corridor near Daytona Beach to Orlando and beyond. If not HSR, than what.....They better be figuring on doing something....They can't pave the whole area. Anyone that travels that area to and from work surely knows what I'm talking about. HSR will probably start someplace, in the near future so why not there where other people {tourists} can be a big help to pay for it....It's no surprise to me Jeb has figured a way to get that system nixed. Not the first time.

[Sterling1]

According to the ballot ( a copy of the ballot was in American Gov't class) the repeal would save $25 billion in associated costs.

[dharmon]

Based on what I read about it which admittedly is not a whole lot, it seemed it had as much to do with the politics of voter proposed amendments as it did with HSR itself, if not more. The original prop was put on kind of at the last minute and without much detail as to timeframe or funding.

I moved out of Florida before the 2000 elections, and it was not a big news item when I was there nor any mention as far as I can recall of an amendment.

[jeaton]

Ah, Florida. If sunshine was a government program paid by Florida taxpayers, they would probably amend their constitution to abolish it.

It may not be such a bad move to stop the high speed rail program. With global warming and the rise of sea levels the southern most Florida coast is going to be about 10 miles south of the Georgia state line. High speed ocean liners might be a better investment.

[Sterling1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

Ah, Florida. If sunshine was a government program paid by Florida taxpayers, they would probably amend their constitution to abolish it.

It may not be such a bad move to stop the high speed rail program. With global warming and the rise of sea levels the southern most Florida coast is going to be about 10 miles south of the Georgia state line. High speed ocean liners might be a better investment.

HAHAHA!!! the high speed boats are worse polluters than the trains, but all in good humor!!!

[Anonymous]

It's their decision, they are the ones living there, and it's their tax money that will be paying for it.

They like sitting in traffic, let them sit.

[Anonymous]

Guys -

I live in Florida and voted against the HST in 2002 and again Nov. 2.

The reason I did so was because its backers did not level with the citizens about the cost of the HST; indeed, it was more than implied a couple of times that the HST might even become profitable.

Now, I love passenger trains. I've ridden a couple. And Florida's traffic is bad and getting worse (I live with it every day.)

But if HST is going to be the answer, let some reputable promoter (not some fast-talking millionaire trying to get me and a few million other taxpayers to pay for his dream) come in and give us an honest appraisal of the problem and let us know, honestly, what it's going to cost.

And don't let him try to bamboozle me by telling me that it'll someday pay for itself. It won't. Nobody in the world makes money hauling people without one or both of two factors being present: he provides a premium service for which he can extract the last nickle from the rider that he'll pay (a taxicab company is a good example - he picks you up at your door and takes you to your destination door); or the government entities pay for his losses and provides him with a reasonable profit.

I worked for a commuter agency in a large city about 25 years ago, and our riders didn't want to know that the price of their ticket paid for about 45% of the cost of their ride. But we had a local agency that paid the other 55% and provided capital money for maintenance and improvements. Taxpayer money, that is.

I don't know what Florida's answer is, but I agree that something drastic must be done. But tell me honestly how it'll work and I'll be a lot more agreeable to it.

Old Timer

[Anonymous]

Goes to show just how much the people realy care about Rail travel nowadays [V][:(].
It's so sad to think of it that way but.........................

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by macguy

It's their decision, they are the ones living there, and it's their tax money that will be paying for it.

They like sitting in traffic, let them sit.

And your statement is the darn truth too..........It's just too bad the no one else is listening.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Old Timer

Guys -

I live in Florida and voted against the HST in 2002 and again Nov. 2.

The reason I did so was because its backers did not level with the citizens about the cost of the HST; indeed, it was more than implied a couple of times that the HST might even become profitable.

Now, I love passenger trains. I've ridden a couple. And Florida's traffic is bad and getting worse (I live with it every day.)

But if HST is going to be the answer, let some reputable promoter (not some fast-talking millionaire trying to get me and a few million other taxpayers to pay for his dream) come in and give us an honest appraisal of the problem and let us know, honestly, what it's going to cost.

And don't let him try to bamboozle me by telling me that it'll someday pay for itself. It won't. Nobody in the world makes money hauling people without one or both of two factors being present: he provides a premium service for which he can extract the last nickle from the rider that he'll pay (a taxicab company is a good example - he picks you up at your door and takes you to your destination door); or the government entities pay for his losses and provides him with a reasonable profit.

I worked for a commuter agency in a large city about 25 years ago, and our riders didn't want to know that the price of their ticket paid for about 45% of the cost of their ride. But we had a local agency that paid the other 55% and provided capital money for maintenance and improvements. Taxpayer money, that is.

I don't know what Florida's answer is, but I agree that something drastic must be done. But tell me honestly how it'll work and I'll be a lot more agreeable to it.

Old Timer

We not having the opportunity to review the initiative we will take your opinion at face value. It wouldnt be the first time a proposal was tacked onto a ballet with no real meat on the bones. hopefully someone will reintroduce a serious proposal thats thought out and clearly understandable.

[jeaton]

Old Timer

You understand that I was being a little smart-... about it, and I will grant your point.

I would question whether either side had any decent numbers on the issue. Unfortunately, a carefully prepared and realistic calculation of the numbers for high speed rail and any other options would probably not do much more than cause eyes to glaze over. Hang a multi-billion dollar price tag on any proposed government program and unless the average taxpayer perceives an immediate personal benefit, it is not likely to fly. Of course, I realize that your experience would take you out of that "average" group, and I am sure that if I was in your spot, I would want to base my position on valid numbers.

At any rate, I apoligize. I won't be visiting or living in Florida anytime, and accordingly I will butt out now, as I should have at first.

Jay

[Anonymous]

Florida does not have room for 4 letter words in their vocabulary.

P L A N

The state has no plan for the future and the defeat of the HSR initiative is just another example of denial at work.

[daveklepper]

Isn't the real answer the sort of partnership that Virginia is doing with CSX on the old RF&P line between Richmond and the Potomic bridge south of Washington? To improve what already exists and make it more useful? This was also sold as a highway congestion relief program, involving more trucks and fewer private autos, but it would seem the right model and the way to go. If I am not mistaken, Illinois is doing something similar with the UP Chicago - St. Louis. The track from Miami to Orland and then to Jacksonville exists, and from Aurbendale (south of Orlando) south to Tampa. These existing lines can be upgraded, then the line from Orlando to Jacksonville, and then the direct FEC Miami - Jackonville line. This would provide improved freight service and well and competitive passenger service. Initially, taking 20% of the traffic off the roads should be the goal, and speeds comparable to the Northeast Corridor would be sufficient to do that. Not very fast by European standards, but enough to do the job.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

Isn't the real answer the sort of partnership that Virginia is doing with CSX on the old RF&P line between Richmond and the Potomic bridge south of Washington? To improve what already exists and make it more useful? This was also sold as a highway congestion relief program, involving more trucks and fewer private autos, but it would seem the right model and the way to go. If I am not mistaken, Illinois is doing something similar with the UP Chicago - St. Louis. The track from Miami to Orland and then to Jacksonville exists, and from Aurbendale (south of Orlando) south to Tampa. These existing lines can be upgraded, then the line from Orlando to Jacksonville, and then the direct FEC Miami - Jackonville line. This would provide improved freight service and well and competitive passenger service. Initially, taking 20% of the traffic off the roads should be the goal, and speeds comparable to the Northeast Corridor would be sufficient to do that. Not very fast by European standards, but enough to do the job.

For an effective HSR operation (even at NEC speeds) you can't have them share the track with freight. The pounding of the track structure by heavy haul freight trains would beat the track back to the level of todays track in no time. HSR must operate on is own track structure to make maintenance affordable.

The VRE/CSX enhancements are for commuter operations on the I-95 corridor from Fredericksburg VA to DC and potentially further South to Richmond. This will NOT be a high speed corridor.

The rights-of-way of freight railroads were laid out in the days of manpower, pick, shovel, mules and black powder being the earth movers that engineers had to work with and plan for, as a consequence current rights-of-way meander around river, creek and stream beds as being the 'water level' routes through the areas they traverse. These 'water level' routes inheiret most of the meandering curvature of the bodies of water that they follow and as such those alignments are not fit for 'high speed' operations.

To be effective and economic, HSR must be built with the best construction technology that is available today. There is no rail passenger operation in the world that is truly profitable by its own operation, they are all dependent upon the public dole as a public service to keep the bills paid and the trains operating.

HSR is a public service. HSR in Florida would be capacity enhancement to the Air and Highway structures that are already at practical capacity....additionally the existing freight lines in Florida are at or near their practical capacity (at least for the infrastructure that currently exists).

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately high speed rail probably won't become popular until Americans start paying the same gas prices as the rest of the world. I don't know about you, but if I had to pay $5 a gallon for gas, I'd be asking lots of questions about how to get an interurban started up again. People need to start thinking about the future, I mean there's only so much oil left. Even if we start drilling the oil out of the shale in the Green River valley and sucking up every last drop it's still going to run out eventually. As a nation we need to put more of our money towards technological innovations instead of policing the world. [2c]

Old Timer,

I do agree with you that someone of better standing with a more articulate plan should be in charge of such a project. The guy you almost desribed sounds like the one in that episode of the Simpsons that sells Springfield the doomed monorail and then runs with the money. [(-D]

[Modelcar]

....Pretty good, regarding high water inundating Florida up to 10 miles just south of the Georgia border, but isn't the highest elevation down in central Florida near Clermont....So maybe we'd have an island down in that area.

[SALfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....Pretty good, regarding high water inundating Florida up to 10 miles just south of the Georgia border, but isn't the highest elevation down in central Florida near Clermont....So maybe we'd have an island down in that area.

Don't know where Clermont is, but IIRC the highest point in Florida is somewhere in the Panhandle. At least based on appearance a lot of NE FL is less than 20 feet above sea level, as is a lot of SE GA. If the water gets that high, the most southeasterly point (of dry land) in the US could be the bluffs along the river in Savannah, GA.

[Overmod]

JOdom -- you're correct; the highest point in Florida (at present) is in the Panhandle, between Alabama line and DeFuniak Springs; I believe there's a park at that location which can be reached (if the signs don't lie!) from Rt. 331.

Don't forget the lesson of the Netherlands, however; you can expect substantial levee and dike building in the event of even 'catastrophic'-rate melting of polar ice, which should maintain a substantial percentage of the higher-value Florida real estate in dry and habitable condition. Be interesting to see, though, if there's a 21st-century equivalent of the Key West Extension if the levee'd enclaves wind up having a substantial extent of flooded 'new ocean' between their borders and the rest of the lower 48...

[dharmon]

I'm trying to bash Floridians, but as a former resident, I think I can say long term infrastructure planning has not been a trademark. Geographically a HSR would seem...I'm not a geologist nor an enginneer....a good choice for Florida based on topography, due to the lack of natural barriers such as grades to overcome or go around and the relative proximity of population centers. However, would organic ridership between the centers justify such a project. Florida's cities, like those in Texas, have sprawled, so taking a train from business center to business center, like can be achieved on the NEC is harder, which is how the NEC makes it's money. Because, unless the HSR can be linked to a greater overall system, it will cut out the lucrative tourist market. I don't want to have to change modes if I can avoid it. There has to be a time savings & convienience factor like the NEC can provide to get folks from point A to point B. If they still have to drive to the train station, to ride then drive again or fly from there, what's the point. Orlando already has a major airport, so why not fly to Orlando and rent a car to go to Disney?

[vsmith]

Hey Dan
How much you wanna bet Kalifoonia will get a HSR long before Florida even reconsiders thiers.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

Hey Dan
How much you wanna bet Kalifoonia will get a HSR long before Florida even reconsiders thiers.

I with you on that one...Now if we can get Ahnold to put the three strikes lifers that won't be parolled by Prop 66 to work a diggin'. Terrain not withstanding, CA has the organic ridership and more geographically centered business areas creating natural corridors.

[AntonioFP45]

I live in Florida.

A much cheaper and more practical solution:

Up until the late 60s Florida had excellent passenger service from the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad. The tracks, which still exist (though single track), ran into all of Florida's major cities.

I don't see why a state or federal funded agreement couldn't be worked out with CSX to:

[1] Upgrade the tracks to Class 5 (90+ mph) standards.
[2] Have an agency like Tri-Rail or Amtrak, provide intra-state service.

Hasn't something similar happened with NS recently in a northern state where they're getting government grants for track upgrades to get commuter rail on the move?

Also has it not been successful in California?

In Florida, Interstates I-4, I-75, and I-95 are nightmare highways to cruise on. While bullet trains can run at close to 200 mph, the costs are prohibitive. But potential passengers would likely be willing to travel on conventional trains that can hit speeds of 90 to 100mph, which in a state the size of Florida, still means that trains would be safer, faster, and more comfortable than buses and more convenient than a commuter airline.

Funny thing is that in the 1950s Florida had a much smaller population. Today's population is double or triple of that time period but passenger rail service is less than 1/4 of what it was back then!

[daveklepper]

Incremental improvements need not stop at the level of the Virginia partnership. They can continue to the level of the NE Corridor and even further, building ridership as the work progresses. The Downeaster Portland Boston service seems to be doing all right despite an inconvenient connection with the rest of the Amtrak system and a 70mph top speed. If 10% of the highway traffic can be put on the rails, the remaining drivers will consider the reduction in congestion worthwhiile and support further expenditures, I would hope.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

Incremental improvements need not stop at the level of the Virginia partnership. They can continue to the level of the NE Corridor and even further, building ridership as the work progresses. The Downeaster Portland Boston service seems to be doing all right despite an inconvenient connection with the rest of the Amtrak system and a 70mph top speed. If 10% of the highway traffic can be put on the rails, the remaining drivers will consider the reduction in congestion worthwhiile and support further expenditures, I would hope.

As a former resident of Maine also, I'd like to congratulate Amtrak on making rail service successful, making Maine a more attractive and reasonable homestead opportunity for the beloved Bostonians, who are now inflicting their brand of social reform on Maine. [V]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: n_stephenson Posted: Today, 08:39:05
Unfortunately high speed rail probably won't become popular until Americans start paying the same gas prices as the rest of the world. I don't know about you, but if I had to pay $5 a gallon for gas, I'd be asking lots of questions about how to get an interurban started up again. People need to start thinking about the future, I mean there's only so much oil left. Even if we start drilling the oil out of the shale in the Green River valley and sucking up every last drop it's still going to run out eventually. As a nation we need to put more of our money towards technological innovations instead of policing the world.

And what's bad is that it won't be until the point that people are paying that much for gas that they'll want it, and then it will take a good 20 years for studies, planning, building/upgrades, rolling stock, etc. etc. for everything to get done. It's ashame things like this can't get a good start now so that these services will be there when America is really going to need them. Otherwise it'll be too late.

[Sterling1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Old Timer

Guys -

I live in Florida and voted against the HST in 2002 and again Nov. 2.

The reason I did so was because its backers did not level with the citizens about the cost of the HST; indeed, it was more than implied a couple of times that the HST might even become profitable.

Now, I love passenger trains. I've ridden a couple. And Florida's traffic is bad and getting worse (I live with it every day.)

But if HST is going to be the answer, let some reputable promoter (not some fast-talking millionaire trying to get me and a few million other taxpayers to pay for his dream) come in and give us an honest appraisal of the problem and let us know, honestly, what it's going to cost.

And don't let him try to bamboozle me by telling me that it'll someday pay for itself. It won't. Nobody in the world makes money hauling people without one or both of two factors being present: he provides a premium service for which he can extract the last nickle from the rider that he'll pay (a taxicab company is a good example - he picks you up at your door and takes you to your destination door); or the government entities pay for his losses and provides him with a reasonable profit.

I worked for a commuter agency in a large city about 25 years ago, and our riders didn't want to know that the price of their ticket paid for about 45% of the cost of their ride. But we had a local agency that paid the other 55% and provided capital money for maintenance and improvements. Taxpayer money, that is.

I don't know what Florida's answer is, but I agree that something drastic must be done. But tell me honestly how it'll work and I'll be a lot more agreeable to it.

Old Timer

Yeah Old Timer's right, by the way the contract would have been design and buildby Fluor-Bombardier. Talk about cost overuns!!! Orlando to Tampa just needed something like the CalTrain's Baby Bullet and MP36PH-3S if they really wanted to develop the traffic and ridership on publicly funded existing infrastructure.

[BaltACD]

QUOTE: Original Trains News Wire

Voters kick high-speed train off state's agenda

ORLANDO, Fla. – The high-speed bullet-train network approved by Florida residents in 2000 was killed Tuesday. Opponents convinced voters that the project was an expensive boondoggle, according to a story on Canada’s Globe and Mail website and an Associated Press story in the Bradenton (Fla.) Herald. The amendment to repeal the bullet train passed by 63 percent. Although no construction had started, the first leg connecting Orlando and Tampa had been laid out and Montreal-based builder Bombardier had been selected to run the project. The cost of that first leg was estimated at more than $2.3 billion. The high-speed network was to eventually connect both cities with Miami.

Leading the charge against the project was Florida Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and the state's chief financial officer, Tom Gallagher. An anti-train political action committee spent an estimated $3.5 million on a high-profile campaign that included television and radio ads in the major markets. Financial backers included the state's road builders and two theme parks that were upset that the first leg of the rail network would stop at Walt Disney World but not theirs. The pro-rail side raised less than $1 million and conducted a basic grassroots campaign.

I think it is significant to understand who was against HSR and also understand their transparent reasons for being against it..

Two things that were deceptive in the politicising of the measure....To vote IN FAVOR of HSR you had to vote AGAINST the question. Secondly, those against HSR hid their true identitys behind a PAC name....while the above deciets are fully legal they are also fully deceptive. Much too deceptive for the average voter to decipher the real politics behind the situation.

[RudyRockvilleMD]

Old Timer has hit upon the curse of high speed passenger rail - an inadequate assessment of ridership. Because the plan wasn't well thought out it was readily open to attack. I agree with all of those who feel high speed rail between Miami - Orlando-Tampa is needed, but true high speed rail passenger service involves average speeds of at least 150 mph.