https://www.midwesthsr.org/midterms-bring-new-leadership-midwest-capitols?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=51d6feb4-4ca9-419e-b6aa-15b6a204e4dd
It's unfortunate that whomever wrote that article is so politically slanted. The Walker administrations position on the Madison's service represented in that article is note exactly correct. First these were the conditions of the $810 million offered to Wisconsin and while I am not quoting the terms verbatum I am summarizing them accurately.
1. The $810 Million was to be considered a loan not a grant until system completion and the HSR was fully operational. Illinois is under the same terms with Chicago to St. Louis. The Governor thought at the time and correctly so the project would probably take longer than his term in office (note the Illinois project has) and he thought $810 million would not cover the full cost of the project. So looking at the big picture, Wisconsin be on the hook for a $810 million plus any other costs born by Wisconsin indebtedness if they missed the target date of operation of the HSR system. This is the main reason he declined the money and project. He stated publicly if it was an outright grant he would have taken the money and applied it.
2. The notion the Governor attempted to apply it to highway funding is totally false because it was written into the loan /grant that it had to be used for high speed rail and the Governor would have known this on first read of the terms as with point #1. Regardless of that provision it is true that several Council members in Milwaukee, that were ignorant of the terms laid out by Ray LaHood attempted to redirect to Highway. They were informed of the terms of the money and that ended their efforts. This attempted redirect did not happen at the Governor level as far as I am aware.
Milwaukee to Madison route was not really on the Amtrak restoration of passenger service plan that I am aware of. This was an entirely new bolt out of blue project in which no planning or pre-engineering work had been done prior to the money being offered by the Feds. Some pre-engineering was hastily done in the initial years after the program became public. Nobody knows if that was enough to have a successful project and there were an awful lot of assumptions on cost. This work STILL needs to be done before any Wiscosin Governor will get to track rehab as it was only partially done under Governor Doyle and then abandoned under Walker. For the record, Wisconsins future passenger routes which have been studied by Amtrak are Chicago-Milwaukee-Twin Cities, Chicago-Milwaukee and Chicago-Green Bay via the Fox River Valley. Those are the Official Routes that Amtrak had planned for expansion. Amtraks intent I believe was to keep Columbus and bus service to and from Columbus to Madison, WI for the indefinite future.
Average rail speed on the projected Milwaukee to Madison route after the over $1 Billion projected investment was projectd to be 58 mph with the current projected station stops (some political more than practical). Thats right, no faster than 58 mph which is about the same speed as a Badger Bus between those two cities. This is because of the relative urbanization along the route as well as it is not a very long route. So while 125-150 mph service sounds attractive, a higher average train speed is only achievable via elimination station stops and having express service.
WisDOT position on HSR on short corridors like Chicago to Milwaukee is that it is train frequency more than it is necessarily very high speeds that attracts the most riders and is the most economical from a taxpayer spending perspective. Even though Milwaukee to Madison is still not on the WisDOT radar screen, it could be with some careful planning from the state. A good first step would be for the state to at least pay for rehab of the Watertown to Madison route via Sun Prarie to 79 mph service, build the stations and at least initiate 1-2 round trip between Milwaukee and Madison as a proverbial toe in the water type experiment which would be less costly than what was proposed earlier. The Walker administrations DOT continues to work on improving Chicago to Milwaukee service as well as state it is open to Minnesota's proposal for a second Chicago to Twin Cities train. That's not necessarily an anti-rail position for Wisconsin to take in my view they are continuing with incremental and relatively low cost improvements to build ridership.
Before spending on Milwaukee to Madison, I feel a comparitive study should be done between Milwaukee to Madison and Fox Lake, IL to Madison to see which route is cheaper to upgrade. Ultimately in Milwaukee Road times the Madison to Chicago route had higher ridership when they had passenger trains on both routes. I seem to remember, though I could be wrong that Madison, WI to Chicago was faster than Madison to Chicago via Milwaukee.
I have serious doubts that Evers is going to be able to pull off Milwaukee to Madison rail service. The Watertown to Madison route you can see via YouTube with WSOR leasing the route, the route is very low speed maintenence condition my guess is 10-20 mph speeds in a lot of places. That has to be upgraded to higher speed, a lot of the cross bucks replaced with decent grade crossings and potentially a decent signalling system with PTC. All of that is going to be very expensive along with rehab or construction of train stations along the route.
Service on these routes still depends on Amtrak getting an increase of total operational inventory of cars and locos. That increase has to be parceled out to the many US short distance services that need more cars and more locos in some cases.
If CHI <> MKE goes to 10 RT trains will Amtrak need anothe train set for example ?
CMStPnP2. The notion the Governor attempted to apply it to highway funding is totally false because it was written into the loan /grant that it had to be used for high speed rail and the Governor would have known this on first read of the terms as with point #1.
Some additional information: The Walker 2010 campaign, through its PAC "Friends of Scott Walker" repeatedly quoted candidate Walker as saying he would prefer to see the money spent on roads and bridges.
WisDOT officials stated that they hoped that federal funds would cover 90% of the HSR service’s operating costs, as was already the case for the existing Milwaukee–Chicago Hiawatha service. This meant that, of the projected $7.5 million additional state HSR subsidy for the Milwaukee-Madison segment, state taxpayers might only pay $750,000.
Additionally, the cancellation cost the state ~$51.9 mil because of the Talgo fiasco, although it had the potential to recover 30% (up to a maximum of $9.7 mil) of the Talgo costs. It also cost the state and MKE the Talgo manufacturing plant and the employment there.
blue streak 1If CHI <> MKE goes to 10 RT trains will Amtrak need anothe train set for example ?
Yes, though because the Wisconsin contract is a Legacy contract not sure it will fall under the new requirements and it might be grandfathered. Note that Amtrak added new cars to the existing consists and Amtrak did not charge Wisconsin for new cars it added from the pool of old cars.
They did mention the purchase of an additional trainset though for the increase to 10 RT's per day and that was included in the cost of the expansion.
charlie hebdoSome additional information: The Walker 2010 campaign, through its PAC "Friends of Scott Walker" repeatedly quoted candidate Walker as saying he would prefer to see the money spent on roads and bridges.
Terms of the stimulus program and which state won the loan / grant were not public until late in the political campaign. So the timeline is off there.
charlie hebdoWisDOT officials stated that they hoped that federal funds would cover 90% of the HSR service’s operating costs, as was already the case for the existing Milwaukee–Chicago Hiawatha service. This meant that, of the projected $7.5 million additional state HSR subsidy for the Milwaukee-Madison segment, state taxpayers might only pay $750,000.
I find this very hard to believe or the information is another timeline issue as you will note with all the stimulus funds they are targeted to construction or physical line improvment only and not ongoing subsidy. In fact this was another reason the HSR proposal was rejected. It was not certain what the subsidy or ridership would be since this corridor was not previously studied prior to the Doyle initiative. Further, there was a concern Wisconsin would be stuck with high operating costs and low ridership as I touched on earlier. Such would not be a concern if the Feds covered the cost of operation. However the Loan / Grant was limited to just a portion of the construction costs and no more follow-on money or so Wisconsin was told by LaHood. So I look at all this as stated again publicly before the terms of the stimulus funds were known. The stimulus was first announced, states competed for the funds.........then LaHood wrote the terms of the funds, then the funds were awarded.
charlie hebdoAdditionally, the cancellation cost the state ~$51.9 mil because of the Talgo fiasco, although it had the potential to recover 30% (up to a maximum of $9.7 mil) of the Talgo costs. It also cost the state and MKE the Talgo manufacturing plant and the employment there.
Actually slightly less than $50 million. Parts of this are just untrue or no longer true. For starters Talgo has to pay the $9.7 million back to the state if they can sell the ordered Wisconsin trainsets for at least $28.9 million. Second, Talgo left the plant in huff after Wisconsin cancelled the deal but has since returned and the reason why is because Wisconsin sunk so much money into the Tower Automotive site Talgo could not really find a better deal elsewhere. Last I heard they were working on a LA Subway car contract there. Not sure if they still are.
There has been no Talgo train related business at the site because the Midwest Compact changed from Talgo to the Amtrak suggested standard for Corridor Cars (thank goodness).......they actually did that during the Doyle administration but Doyle continued with the Talgo Train madness. The fact that the business is still in Milwaukee but can't seem to sell Talgos to anyone else in the United States beyond Washington State should be telling in and of itself that the decision to cancel was a correct one. The Talgo contract was initially obtained via a political deal vs competitive bidding (two other railcar firms in Milwaukee, that complained they were excluded from consideration). Milwaukee really did not need a third railcar building business that was funded in part by the taxpayer. Tower automotive is a huge facility comparable in size to a modern auto assembly plant. At the most Talgo might take up 20-30% of the building. Having them in the building at all is not really a payback for what the State invested in the plant in the first place.......it's a whole nother financial fiasco.
blue streak 1 Service on these routes still depends on Amtrak getting an increase of total operational inventory of cars and locos.
Service on these routes still depends on Amtrak getting an increase of total operational inventory of cars and locos.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
CMStPnPCMStPnP wrote the following post 5 minutes ago: charlie hebdo: Some additional information: The Walker 2010 campaign, through its PAC "Friends of Scott Walker" repeatedly quoted candidate Walker as saying he would prefer to see the money spent on roads and bridges. Terms of the stimulus program and which state won the loan / grant were not public until late in the political campaign. So the timeline is off there. NO, it is a fact, reported repeatedly.charlie hebdo: WisDOT officials stated that they hoped that federal funds would cover 90% of the HSR service’s operating costs, as was already the case for the existing Milwaukee–Chicago Hiawatha service. This meant that, of the projected $7.5 million additional state HSR subsidy for the Milwaukee-Madison segment, state taxpayers might only pay $750,000. I find this very hard to believe
Terms of the stimulus program and which state won the loan / grant were not public until late in the political campaign. So the timeline is off there. NO, it is a fact, reported repeatedly.charlie hebdo: WisDOT officials stated that they hoped that federal funds would cover 90% of the HSR service’s operating costs, as was already the case for the existing Milwaukee–Chicago Hiawatha service. This meant that, of the projected $7.5 million additional state HSR subsidy for the Milwaukee-Madison segment, state taxpayers might only pay $750,000.
I find this very hard to believe
You may find it hard to believe, but given the choice, I will trust WisDot.
PJS1For 2017 the State Supported trains had an average load factor of 40 percent. The Hiawatha’s had an average load factor of 37 percent, while the Chicago to St. Louis trains had average load factor of 45 percent. None of Amtrak’s reported numbers for the State Supported trains, including the Hiawatha’s, suggest that lack of capacity is a problem. Of course, it could be over the holidays or at select periods, but the number of holidays with heavy travel is relatively small. Maybe a better outcome could be achieved by restructuring the schedules of the existing Chicago to Milwaukee trains. On the surface it appears that the Hiawatha’s had an operating profit in 2017 of $600,000. However, based on ticket sales, the trains lost approximately $4.7 million before depreciation, interest, and miscellaneous charges. The loss has to be made up by the state governments or the federal government. The notion that Illinois can step its funding of passenger rail projects may be dampened by the fact that its bonds are just one tick above junk status. Moody’s rates them at Baa3. S&P and Fitch have rated them similarly.
There are problems here with stats gathering and they are as follows:
1. Chicago to Milwaukee Trains are fixed price, they do not use yield management pricing system which I have no freakin idea why even though I have asked officials and tried to find the answer on the Internet.
2. Chicago to Milwaukee Trains are unreserved. What that means is you only have ticket sales to GUESS what ridership actually is. The problem here is the Conductor does not always make his/her rounds in time to get all the riders on the train ticket scanned....seen it myself on one or two rides. This throws off revenue and ridership stats. Some people ride with no ticket or some buy a ticket and never ride....hopefully it is a wash but we will never know for sure unless every ticket is scanned by every conductor on each train.
3. Yes the trains are loaded near capacity in the morning and afternoon and used are a commute to Chicago. More and more Milwaukee is becomming a bedroom city to Chicago. Between the Morning and Evening trains they do run 50% or less of capacity. So currently if I had to estimate 2 of the 7 trains now are well used. WisDOT is aware of the scheduling issue and wants to experiment with the 3 extra frequencies they are trying to get. They were talking about two of them being express trains only but with an extra charge for skipping all or most all the stops between Milwaukee and Chicago (I think they would still need to stop at the Airport Station since so many board there now). Skipping stops only results in a 10-15 min time saving in each direction so I am not sure what that means for how much extra they can charge for an "express" train.
Also the subsidy between Illinois and Wisconsin is based on route miles in each state. Thats how they do it so each route mile in each state is a % of the subsidy.....I don't remember the split you will have to look at map or timetable but Illinois pays a third or less than a third of the subsidy I think.
CMStPnP.I don't remember the split you will have to look at map or timetable but Illinois pays a third or less than a third of the subsidy I think.
Of the 85 route miles between MKE and CUS, about 52 are in Illinois. In the past you have complained about delays to Hiawatha riders caused by "lunch bucket" Metra train interference at the A-2 junction. Fact: In January 2017, the Hiawatha Service’s endpoint on-time performance was 97.4 percent, which was steady for the last 12 months. Train interference (48.7 percent of all delay minutes), other issues (22.0 percent), and track and signal issues (12.3 percent) were the primary causes for delay. In Illinois, Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service respectively crosses at grade the Union Pacific at A-2 and Mayfair Junction and the Canadian National at Rondout. [from the IDOT report]
charlie hebdoYou may find it hard to believe, but given the choice, I will trust WisDot.
I believe that he is saying not that WisDOT said it, or even believed it, but that it would be hard to believe taxpayers would pay only that amount at the 'end of the day'. (Things being as they usually are with Government underwriting of rail service.)
Overmod charlie hebdo You may find it hard to believe, but given the choice, I will trust WisDot. I believe that he is saying not that WisDOT said it, or even believed it, but that it would be hard to believe taxpayers would pay only that amount at the 'end of the day'. (Things being as they usually are with Government underwriting of rail service.)
charlie hebdo You may find it hard to believe, but given the choice, I will trust WisDot.
I stand by my post and the only study made (by WISDOT). CMStPnP is not a more credible source than WISDOT, which he clearly said he found hard to believe.
charlie hebdoCMStPnP is not a more credible source than WISDOT, which he clearly said he found hard to believe.
Let's see what he says next.
OvermodI believe that he is saying not that WisDOT said it, or even believed it, but that it would be hard to believe taxpayers would pay only that amount at the 'end of the day'. (Things being as they usually are with Government underwriting of rail service.)
Key phrase being missed in the Charlie Hebdo quote of WisDOT is WisDot Officials HOPED it would pay a subsidy. When officials hope for a subsidy it implies they either do not know the details yet.......and they didn't in the timeline that Charlie Hebdo quoted from.
Here is what I meant and if you read the passage carefully quoted by WisDOT it is clear they are unsure what was in the proposal and have not come upon the details yet. Two of the items Charlie Hedbo quoted could have happened but would have been on a timeline where the officials did not have all the details yet and were commenting ahead of time. Much of what I wrote was based on GOVERNOR Walker, Much of what Charlie Hebdo quoted was based on CANDIDATE WALKER. There is a timing difference there. What is more accurate for the HSR Website to cite. What Candidate Walker said and did before achieving office or what Governor Walker did after achieving office. Not sure if this was deliberate by Charlie Hebdo or if it as an oversight.
Really not a case of my credibility more a case of quoting in a timeline I am not commenting on.
Factually the LaHood written stimulus did not provide for nor did it promise and opearating subsidy to any state that accepted the funds. Hence the HOPED emphasis, WisDOT had no clue at the time, that quote was made.
Previous Governor to Walker was Doyle. He jumped on the stimulus funds idea only knowing the amount and not really the terms as the terms were not released until late in the campaign. So the timeline is an issue of when those quotes were taken. Candidate Walker was commenting in a vacuum of not knowing the terms as well. Governor Walker knew the terms of the stimulus.
charlie hebdoOf the 85 route miles between MKE and CUS, about 52 are in Illinois. In the past you have complained about delays to Hiawatha riders caused by "lunch bucket" Metra train interference at the A-2 junction. Fact: In January 2017, the Hiawatha Service’s endpoint on-time performance was 97.4 percent, which was steady for the last 12 months. Train interference (48.7 percent of all delay minutes), other issues (22.0 percent), and track and signal issues (12.3 percent) were the primary causes for delay. In Illinois, Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service respectively crosses at grade the Union Pacific at A-2 and Mayfair Junction and the Canadian National at Rondout. [from the IDOT report]
Sorry but noway is it only 33 miles to the Illinois border from Milwaukee. I think your mileage is off a little.
Since most of this was covered before in another thread I am not going to argue it again. Amtrak does not count the first 5 or 10 min a train is late for starters (Amtrak admits this in the footnotes if you check). Secondly who is at fault is never accurately attributed. Thats all I am going to comment on this since it was covered before.
But I will comment on the subsidy has Illinois well in the minority so it is either 60-40 or 70-30 (I kind of lean towards 30% because I was surprised how minimally Illinois contributes to the Amtrak service). Wisconsin pays the larger share of Chicago to Milwaukee Amtrak subsidy. Thought it was based on mileage to the State line. I don't think it would be mileage direct from Union Station as I don't see Wisconsin paying to upgrade the approach tracks to Union Station. Perhaps they start at where the Metra ownership starts North of Union Station and where it ends North of Union Station on the Chicago to Milwaukee Line (Rondout)......apportion that to Illinois.
Bottom line is Wisconsin can cover the Illinois part of the subsidy easily if Illinois backs out of the agreement or cannot afford to pay it in any given year......and that was really the point of that part of the post.
Typo. 43 miles. So based on route miles, the subsidy should be about 50/50. You provide no sources for your various guesses as to the apportionment.
Now that Illinois and Wisconsin voters have dumped their two anti-rail guvs (Walker and Rauner), it is more likely that passenger rail services can be expanded. This would include Chicago to Dubuque via Rockford. Perhaps someone will figure out that extending rail services from Rockford to Madison could be very successful and take some traffic off I 90.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.