Amtrak has recently requested additional funds to cover operating costs and reduced revenue because of the Covid-19 pandemic. A corollary to this request is a plan to reduce long distance service from daily (in most cases) to three or four times a week.
RailPAC President Steve Roberts replies:
Amtrak’s request for funds – How should advocates respond?
Identifying and defining the costs will be critical. Advocates should start first by strictly defining the assumptions and timeframe. The time frame Amtrak says it is addressing is a 9-12 month period (FY21) where overall travel demand remains substantially lower than normal and discretionary travel is dramatically less than has been seen historically. Ridership on the trains will average about 50% of historic norms. Assuming the roll-out of a vaccine or more consistent social protections and the slow continuation of an economic rebound in late winter/spring of 2021, there should be a steady growth in ridership by Summer of 2021. In short, we are looking at a one year event.
On the cost side there is a reason why this is important. It means the estimates of cost savings need to focus on short-term avoidable costs without allocated additives. (Additives are added to direct costs to account for overheads directly link with an activity, i.e. the cost of crew base management shared by many routes accounted for with an additive on for example a conductors salary cost, a specific known cost). When you make a change for only a year you save the cost of the conductor’s salary but the cost of the crew base remains. Any proposal to reduce service needs to focus on short-term avoidable costs – fuel, on-train wages, train supplies, turn around maintenance, etc. The decision should not be made based on fully allocate costs, i.e. backbone costs, that are allocated to train routes as part of the accounting process (A perfectly fine academic accounting exercise but totally useless for deciding tri-weekly vs daily).
The first is connections. It varies by route, but looking at arrivals at the major hubs around 30% of the riders are connecting to other trains. Many are connecting to corridor trains but many are also connecting to other long-distance trains. It is impossible to have all the long-distance trains operate tri-weekly and still have connectivity in Washington, Chicago, LA and Seattle. So that is a big loss in revenue from breaking those schedules. Only daily service can maintain the utility of the National Network.
The second is what is called “claw-back”. Claw back is the percentage of riders who will shift their travel date to match a tri-weekly schedule. Longer distance vacation/leisure travelers are those where the greatest percentage of riders will shift their travel days. For those traveling strictly for transportation, a lower percentage will shift. Sleeping car riders are more likely to shift, 300 to 500 mile coach travelers are the riders least likely to shift but will choose another mode. The key difference driving these differences is that leisure travelers are making longer duration trips with more options for layover days. Shorter distance travelers are making shorter duration trips where adding a day to match a train schedule can add 30% or more to the trip duration. Because there have been numerous instances of LD trains moving from daily to tri-weekly and then daily again Amtrak has data to correctly calculate “claw-back” should it choose to use it.
So why is this important? The answer is who is going to be traveling in FY 21? Will it be seniors taking long circle trips in sleeping cars around America or will it be coach passengers traveling between 300-500 miles on the long-distance trains, strictly for essential transportation, to handle personal business, a medical treatment, to help elderly parents, etc. The level of service required for this type of market in FY 21 is daily service. A tri-weekly train is exactly the wrong kind of service for the market in FY21.
Steve Roberts – RailPAC President
June 2, 2020
by Brian Yanity
火箭加速器 安卓 官网, LOSSAN, Metrolink/SCRRA, San Diego County
bugu下载
Click here for Metrolink May 29, 2020 meet agenda link showing the Item 8, draft recovery plan.
May 28, 2020
Chair Brian Humphries and Board Southern California Regional Rail Authority Los Angeles, CA
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING FRIDAY 29 MAY, 2020 PUBLIC COMMENT
RailPAC, the Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada has been a consistent supporter of regional rail service since 1978. We particularly welcomed the SCORE program, although we would rather have seen begun it in 1995 . We believe that CEO. Wiggins has put together a strong team capable of finally making Metrolink into a powerful regional transportation service, only to be frustrated and blown off course by Covid 19. But now is not the time to give up. The region still needs mobility and we cannot go back to the 60s.
We support the draft recovery plan in in general and would like to suggest a few additional points.
Health and safety – Consider the removal of some seat rows, b ot h to provide for greater physical separation between passengers and to off er more legroom. As load factors will be down there is no need for the cramped seating we currently “enjoy ”. RailPAC has received many complaints, especially about the Rotem cars, for longer journeys. Making the cars more comfortable will help win back passengers as well as improving separation.
Service coordination – Metrolink’s objective should be to squeeze as much productivity as possible out of every train mile. To accomplish this, we need improvements in coordination between agencies to reduce service overlap and to increase the service available to prospective passengers. This includes coordination with LOSSAN and Amtrak on the coast route, and NCTD Coaster connections at Oceanside.
火箭加速器永久免费版One of the big failings of Metrolink is the lack of connections at Los Angeles Union Station (“LAUS”). The necessary reduction in service can be an opportunity to expand the number of stations served from each origin point by timing trains to connect at LAUS, or by combining routes and offering through trains. The same train miles can thus be more productive. The statistics quoted in the recovery plan confirm that Metrolink cannot rely on its “classic” commute patrons alone. The market in Southern California is “everywhere to everywhere”, and Metrolink must start to use its network to better serve the region.
Yours sincerely, SIGNED Paul Dyson Vice President, Southern California.
June 2, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Central Coast, Coachella/Imperial Valleys, 火箭加速器永久免费版, Nevada, North Coast, San Joaquin, Thruway Bus
bugu下载
May 28, 2020
Honorable Vito Chiesa, Chair
San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority
949 East Channel Street
Stockton, CA 95202
May 29, 2020 SJJPA Board Meeting Agenda Item 7, Thruway Bus Network Changes
Dear Chair Chiesa and Board Members.
At this difficult time the Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada recognizes that with the reduction in ticket revenues those managing the San Joaquin service face tough challenges in keeping the operation solvent. Maintaining the service while balancing cost reductions while maintaining ridership and ticket revenues will represent a major endeavor. And needless to say, after years working to get SB742 passed shrinkage of the Thruway Bus Network is disheartening.
While it is critical to reduce expenses near term, at some point the country and economy will recover. These Thruway bus service reductions should be seen as temporary. As the market regrows the cities that temporarily lose service should still be seen as part of the San Joaquin franchise. Service may take another form than today, but the SJJPA should still keep its broad “border to border” perspective.
RailPAC has reviewed the Thruway Bus Network write-up and has the following comments and recommendations. The overall comments/recommendations are:
A major shortfall of the report is the lack of financial analysis. What are the estimates of the cost savings from this initiative, the ticket revenue losses?
The implementation of changes authorized by SB742 should be accelerated. This period provides an opportunity to develop multiple partnerships, new markets and an expanded bus network;
There are suggestions that there are opportunities for local transit agencies operating parallel routes being able to undertake replacement service. But these agencies are most likely undertaking similar service reductions to save expenses. Some of these service reductions may be routes suggested as Thruway Bus alternatives;
SJJPA staff should undertake a review after 6-months to evaluate the impact of these changes and the success or failure in expanding SB742 to additional routes, developing partnerships with local transit agencies and Greyhound;
At the 6-month review point, an outline of the timeline and strategy for returning full train and restoring Thruway bus service (where partnerships have not been developed) based on the information available at that time regarding the pandemic.
The comments and recommendations on the specific routes are:
• Route 7 – Elimination of stops at Rio Del-Scotia, Leggett and Laytonville; it is not clear how the elimination of these stops save any costs. All are located on two-lane stretches of US 101 which should facilitate stopping with limited time penalty. Also one of the talking points for SB742 was service to rural areas such as these towns. Finally, shouldn’t these stops remain while the Greyhound partnership is negotiated?
• Route 1b – Elimination of service to Long Beach and San Pedro; an interline agreement with LA Metro for its Silver Line and eventually the Blue Line would appear to offer a large expansion in connectivity to replace the bus route. Would it be possible to originate a Silver Line trip at the LAUS bus bays? Otherwise passengers would have to be provided detailed information on the Union Station stops and Silver Line stops. Major cities (i.e. Long Beach) could be shown in the Amtrak reservation system.
• Route 19 – Elimination of service to Hemet/Indio; these discontinuances would leave a large part of the Inland Empire without service. Many communities along the route are underserved from the transportation perspective. Recommend that this change be postponed until a service plan in conjunction with RCTC is developed. In addition an interline agreement Metrolink for the Indio branch is exactly the market opportunity that SB742 was designed to facilitate.
• Route 9 – Elimination of Las Vegas route; this would seem to be an opportunity to develop an interline service with Greyhound; direct Bakersfield to Las Vegas or via Los Angeles. Greyhound already has an interline agreement with Amtrak and one schedule currently stops at LA Union Station.
• Routes 10, 18a and 18b Elimination of service to Santa Barbara and the Central Coast; RailPAC is concerned that the combination of these two initiatives eliminates service to the fast growing Central Coast reducing the San Joaquin franchise. Also there may be ramifications on the political side. RailPAC recommends revisiting doing the combination of both of these initiatives. Which route change saves the most in costs?
As was noted earlier RailPAC understands the challenges that staff faces and we hope our comments are productive. Let me know if you have any questions.
Yours truly,
Steve Roberts, President Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada
cc: Dan Leavitt, SJRRC, RailPAC Board members
May 29, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Commentary, High Speed Rail, San Joaquin
bugu下载
California High Speed Rail Authority’s Draft 2020 Business Plan was issued February 12, 2020.
The public comment period is open until June 1, 2020
RailPAC’s submitted public comment letter is below:
California High-Speed Rail Authority 770 L Street, Suite 620 Sacramento, CA 95814
May 21, 2020
Dear CHSRA Board Members:
After review of the 2020 California High Speed Rail
Business Plan and the proposed Interim Operating Plan, the Rail Passenger
Association of California (RailPAC) recommends the Board adopt both the 2020
Business Plan and proposed Interim Operating Plan at its June Board
Meeting. RailPAC compliments CHSRA on
their continued focus on delivering a broad integrated California
transportation network with high-speed rail service as its core link.
RailPAC applauds the statewide reach of the proposed
network and the increase in frequencies that will make the rail mode more
competitive with the automobile. The
improved and expanded ACE/San Joaquin/HSR network will reach all of California
and leverage substantial synergies beyond the current individual systems. This network also creates the most
financially viable option for increased service reducing the required operating
subsidy compared to the current standalone ACE and San Joaquin services.
In addition, the Interim Operating Plan brings true
high-speed service to California sooner than any alternative option. It also demonstrates the potential of
high-speed rail while facilitating early testing of equipment and operating
systems speeding future expansion of service as future segments are
constructed. Finally, the construction
and operation of high-speed rail Merced to Bakersfield will greatly benefit
communities and cities in the San Joaquin Valley and allow them to move forward
on re-visioning themselves as city center focused transit oriented cityscapes.
Outlined below are a few comments on plan details:
• Page
64, third bullet, as part of system connectivity at Merced and Bakersfield also
note connectivity at the Kings-Tulare HSR station to the Central Coast and
eastern San Joaquin cities such as Visalia via the future Cross Valley Corridor
plan;
• Page
72, top column title, should be Memoranda not Memorandums;
• Page
84, Faster Bay Area Initiative, given the recent pull-back this should be
deleted or rewritten into a more generic “Future Funding via Local Initiatives”
discussion.
The Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada
is a two-state organization with membership throughout California and Nevada.
RailPAC is a strong advocate for an expanded comprehensive public
transportation network serving the entire state of California as well as
Nevada.. RailPAC is an all-volunteer non-profit passenger rail advocacy group,
founded in 1978.
cc: Brian Kelly, CEO California High-Speed Rail Authority Stacey Mortensen, Executive Director San Joaquin Regional Rail Authority Dan Levitt, Manager of Regional Initiatives San Joaquin Regional Rail Authority
Subject: Streamlining the Caltrain Extension Project
During these difficult times of shutdowns and reduced
resources, it is both necessary and prudent to conserve transit resources
wherever and whenever possible.
With that in mind the Bay Area Transportation Working Group
(BATWG) has updated its previous statements about the DTX project. There appear
to be opportunities to significantly reduce costs without cutting into or
otherwise undermining the passenger rail service into the Sales Force Transit
Center. We are joined in these recommendations by the two preeminent rail
advocacy organizations of California; namely, RailPAC and the Train Riders
Association of California as well as by TRANSDEF, SaveMuni and other DTX
supporters. These opportunities relate to the 4th and King Station, the
proposed Pennsylvania Avenue subway extension, the Tunnel Plug and the subway
under Second Street:
1.) The Fourth and King Station: In places where there are busy streets and sidewalks and no private land available, it is usually necessary to create an intermediate fare collection level between street grade and the train level. However in the case of the Fourth and King Station, there is a generous amount of at-grade space including an attractive at-grade existing terminal available between King and Townsend Streets. In this situation it would not be difficult to route people through fare gates and then to an escalator or stairway leading directly to the train level. To access the west end of the station there could be one or more entries along Townsend Street frontage where travelers would pass through fare gates and then descend to train level. Since the first vertical 30 feet of air space at the site between King and Townsend is under Caltrain control, arranging this should not be difficult to arrange. This change would save an estimated $300,000,000.
2.) The Pennsylvania Avenue Subway Extension: At the February 7, 2020 meeting of the Caltrain Joint Powers Board one of the individuals testifying questioned the need for a two-mile long, “$2 billion+” Caltrain subway under a PennsylvaniaAvenue alignment. As the caller implied it would be much cheaper to depress 16th Street and perhaps also Mission Bay Blvd under the existing tracks than dig two additional miles of parallel subway and tunnel.
The SF Department of City Planning’s 4.5 year long RAB study
was completed late in 2018. In the early years the RAB planners were loudly
critical of all aspects of the TJPA’s design. However, their proposals were discredited
one-by-one, and eventually virtually all of them were quietly dropped.
Reportedly intent on showing a positive result for its effort,
the RAB team latched onto parochial demands that 16th Street remain at grade and
therefore proposed that the existing Caltrain surface alignment be shifted from
its current location under the elevated I-280 freeway to a new subway alignment
under Pennsylvania Avenue. In an effort to justify this odd decision, the RAB
group claimed that the 16th Street underpass would have to be 60′ deep and over
3/4 of a mile long. When asked why the underpass couldn’t be 25 feet deep and
1/4 mile long as most underpasses are, RAB’s Project Manager made a vague
reference to sewers in the street, but refused to elaborate. Subsequent written
questions and comments on the subject were ignored. The official price put on
RAB’s subway extension was “$2+ billion”. An auto underpass at 16th would
provide the necessary grade separation without the need of building an entirely
new two-mile long rail subway. Building the underpass, with elevated
pedestrian/bicycle paths separated from traffic, would allow the surface mainline
Caltrain and future high speed rail alignment to remain at grade.. Estimated
savings: $1,800,000,000+.
3.) The Tunnel Plug: A few years ago it was decided to add $100,000,000 to the DTX budget to make things easier and less costly if the Pennsylvania alignment were ever built. In the event that it were determined that the Pennsylvania Avenue subway was not necessary the Tunnel Plug could be deleted for an additional savings of $100,000,000.
神奇火箭队手机版下载- 全方位下载:2021-1-26 · 神奇火箭队手机 版 神奇火箭队 时间：2021-01-26 大小： 时间：2021-01-26 星级： 立即下载 神奇火箭队最新版是一款画面风格体验极佳的特色休闲类游戏。游戏拥有精美的画风，精致的画面，简单易上手的操作。游戏中，你将遇到武藏、小次郎这些 ... Second Street is not a particularly busy or fast- moving street, certainly not as jammed with traffic as First and Fremont are. Even so the plan has always been to tunnel most of the Second Street subway. However at the north end of the line where the tracks turn right into the six-track train terminal, the width of the trackway gradually increases to 165 feet. It would be extremely expensive and risky to attempt to tunnel this short section leading into the Sales Force Transit Center. It is estimated that cut and cover excavation at this location could be staged in a manner requiring that only half the street be closed at any one time…and then only until temporary street decking could be put in place. It is estimated that using cut-and-cover methods to excavate this northerly section of Second, as well as the section immediately to the east of the Fourth and King Station where it is too shallow to tunnel, would drop the cost by another $200,000,000.
It goes without saying that the more cost-effective the project
the better the chances of attracting the capital needed to build it. We urge
you to explore these possibilities.
Sincerely,
Gerald Cauthen
May 16, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Antelope Valley Line, 火箭加速器 安卓 官网, Commentary, Metrolink/SCRRA
bugu下载
RailPAC has been urging LA Metro and Metrolink to double truck the line between Burbank and Santa Clarita for more than two decades. We finally have a down payment from the State, with some matching funds from other sources. Why am I less than excited by this news? Two and a half decades have passed since the start of Antelope Valley service after the Northridge earthquake, during which time hundreds of millions of dollars have been poured into widening Interstate 5 and State Route 14. This weekend (April 25) Burbank Boulevard is closed while the bridge over I-5 is demolished for the second time to accommodate two more freeway lanes. Meanwhile Metrolink has struggled for over twenty years with a predominantly single track railroad with consequent lack of capacity to build a robust, reliable service.
The 2020 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) award
still leaves single track between Sheldon Street and San Fernando/Sylmar station.
Between Van Nuys Boulevard and San Fernando Metro intends to build the East
Valley light rail in the Metrolink right of way, and I am very concerned that
they will use this as an excuse to defer this last bottleneck
indefinitely. In my view the Light Rail route is a mistake and a high
risk idea, given that the route also hosts 15,000 ton Union Pacific rock trains
from Little Rock on the Palmdale cutoff. No doubt the consultants have
demonstrated that it is possible, in theory, to run a certain number of
frequencies over that single track, just as they have with Raymer Bernson on
the Coast route through the San Fernando Valley. The problem is that
Metrolink has demonstrated that it is almost impossible to run an on time
service in an urban area with poorly protected grade crossings and unreliable
equipment. Thus an early delay to the service will result in late trains
all day.
In the report presented to the Metro Board in 2019, the route is broken up into sections for costing purposes. The two gaps in double track that will be left after this round of construction are priced as follows:
It’s a lot of money for a little over 5 miles of track with
no property acquisition. One certainly wonders if it would be less if the
contract were to be let as a single project from Burbank to Sylmar now, rather
than break it into segments and then come back in a few years to bridge the
gap. I can only guess at the mobilization, demobilization and general
overhead costs of multiple stages versus a continuous program.
But still, it’s a step forward. It’s hard to believe
that it has been 25 years since Mike McGinley and his team threw up some
“instant” stations and bootstrapped a service while Caltrans rebuilt
the 5/14 interchange. These 25 years have been wasted, the agencies
failing to capitalize on growing rail traffic and instead continuing the failed
policy of investing in more lanes on the parallel freeway. Let’s hope
this investment will be successful in growing the passenger count, and not be
too little, too late.
火箭加速器永久免费版
Vice President, South, RailPAC
April 26, 2020
by Brian Yanity
火箭加速器下载官网, CalSTA TIRCP, Central Coast, Electrification, LOSSAN, 免费翻国外墙的app, Rail Technology, San Diego County, Technical and Rolling Stock
bugu下载
This past week the California State Transportation Agency
announced the 2020 grants distributed as part of the Transit and Intercity Rail
Capital Program (TIRCP). Created by SB 862 in 2014, the TIRCP utilizes revenues
from the State of the California’s cap-and-trade program and vehicle
registration fees to fund capital projects that reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs)
and increase transit and rail ridership.
More information is available on the 火箭加速器永久免费版.
Two major 2020 TIRCP awards for intercity and commuter rail were $107 million for improvements to Metrolink’s Antelope Valley Line (see RailPAC 4/26/2020 commentary), and $38.7 million to LOSSAN for new maintenance facilities in San Luis Obispo and San Diego counties along with overhaul and modernization Pacific Surfliner railcars. Detailed description of these two major rail project awards are quoted below from the 2020 TIRCP Detailed Project Award Summary. A particularly positive detail in the San Luis Obispo maintenance facility description is where it was noted that “facility is also supportive of future service expansion to northern California once additional investments are made in improving the infrastructure on the Central Coast.” This is one of the many small steps to build the foundation for frequent Central Coast – Bay Area service, which RailPAC has long supported.
Another TIRCP grant awarded to San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), with San Diego MTS & North County Transit District, includes $4.9 million in funding for Del Mar Bluffs Stabilization Project, which is critical to a reliable and safe corridor for passenger and goods movement. This TIRCP funding will “expand the work achieved by Phase 5 of the Del Mar Bluffs Stabilization Project, in combination with other federal, state and local funds committed and being pursued for the project”.
bugu下载
Project: Metrolink Antelope Valley Line Capital and Service Improvements
This award builds on the investment in Phase 1 of the Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) Program awarded in 2018 and expands those benefits. This award accelerates delivery of key AVL Projects, which provide regional “bookend” capacity for state-supported Intercity and High-Speed Rail, as well as significantly advances the County’s ability to integrate the regional rail system into the Metrolink station communities.
In addition, this project includes funding for a zero-emission rail multiple unit (ZEMU) equipment pilot to assess potential to provide more cost-effective and flexible rail service and reduce the carbon and emissions footprint of rail service. The ZEMU pilot tests rail technology in one of the more challenging Metrolink corridors due to topography, density, temperature variations and elevation differences between Lancaster and Los Angeles. If the pilot project is successful on this corridor, it will bode well for ZEMU operations throughout the entire Metrolink regional rail network and help provide data and performance measurements useful to other agencies in California seeking to implement similar ZEMU rail technology. Technical assistance will be provided by the California Department of Transportation to integrate rail demonstration pilot efforts with statewide rolling stock planning.
Over 1 million residents of the 3.3 million residents in the census tracts in the Antelope Valley station catchment areas are from Disadvantaged Communities. The AVL investments will improve rail mobility and access for these priority populations to major employment centers and other regional destinations, including Hollywood Burbank Airport.
Due to the extended timeline for delivery that goes beyond this cycle’s 5-year program (completion date: 2027), the project is expected to receive allocations over the life of the implementation schedule.
Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN)
Project: Building Up Control: LOSSAN Service Enhancement Program
Provides for design and construction of an expanded maintenance and layover facility south of the station in San Luis Obispo, allowing for the storage and maintenance of additional and longer trains (up to 4 7-car trains, or equivalent). Allows for train movement between maintenance facility and station without impacting mainline passenger and freight train operations. Facility design and construction will be coordinated with the City of San Luis Obispo to integrate the facility into the community plan for the roundhouse district and provide the opportunity for the City to connect the surrounding development within the district to the station in San Luis Obispo by way of a pedestrian and bike trail that will also provide a natural barrier between the facility and the existing and planned developments within the district. Ability to maintain more trainsets in San Luis Obispo is aligned with the State Rail Plan and allows for better departure times that capture higher ridership. Facility is also supportive of future service expansion to northern California once additional investments are made in improving the infrastructure on the Central Coast. The San Luis Obispo investment is coordinated with additional investment through Proposition 1B and the State Transportation Improvement Program, reflected in the project matching funds.
As part of the overall scope of this project, state funding from the Public Transportation Account will be used to enhance the condition of the Pacific Surfliner fleet, providing a fleet that has improved reliability and meets customer expectations. Technical assistance will be provided by the California Department of Transportation to integrate maintenance facility planning with statewide rail planning, facility development, and fleet deployment efforts.
Project benefits are enhanced through complementary service improvements in the corridor awarded in previous years, which includes investments in signal optimization and various capital improvements which prepares the corridor for higher frequency services to be introduced by the Pacific Surfliner.
Due to the extended timeline for delivery that goes beyond this cycle’s 5-year program (completion date: 2026), the project is expected to receive allocations over the life of the implementation schedule.
April 26, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Editorials, eNewsletter
superⅴpn 下载
Download the pdf version of Steel Wheels, 1st Quarter 2020 by clicking here.
火箭加速器永久免费版
RailPAC aims for 2020
SMART, two viewpoints
Daily Sunset campaign
UK vs USA intercity rail
Editor’s pages
Arizona news
Railroad finance
Russ Jackson column
April 24, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Commentary
Coronavirus Relief Package Includes $1 Billion for Amtrak, $25 Billion for Transit Agencies
In late March 2020, RailPAC was one of over 240 signers from across the country (including elected officials, cities and organizations) on a letter written by Transportation for America (T4America) and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). The letter urged Congress to provide $13 billion in emergency funding for public transportation and passenger rail service.
Due to critical social distancing practices required to slow
the spread of the novel coronavirus, public transit and passenger rail agencies
are experiencing significant decreases in ridership and farebox revenue while
simultaneously incurring increased costs for additional cleaning.
The full letter is available to view here. , and click here for more information on T4America’s admirable efforts to help secure this funding.
Thankfully, the emergency funding which has since been awarded by Congress for transit and passenger rail meets or exceeds the amounts requested by both the national Rail Passenger Association and the American Public Transit Association. It also includes help for states to offset lost ticket revenue from their state-supported passenger rail services.
Below is a good summary of the CARES act, quoted from the
Rail Passengers Association’s March 27th weekly news:
Coronavirus Relief
Package Includes $1 Billion for Amtrak, $25 Billion for Transit Agencies
The U.S. House voted
to send the CARES Act to the president’s desk this afternoon, enacting a $2
trillion coronavirus relief package into law and providing critically needed
financial assistance to rail and transit operators across the country. The bill
(H.R. 748) provides Amtrak over $1 billion in aid to weather the precipitous
drop in ridership, and directs $25 billion to the nation’s struggling transit
providers—the largest single-year transit appropriation in U.S. history.
“I want to thank the
members of Congress who supported this aid package for rail transportation on
behalf of the more than 40 million passengers in the U.S. who depend on
passenger rail to work and travel—whether it’s intercity, commuter, or
transit,” said Rail Passengers President & CEO Jim Mathews. “While addressing
the health crisis will always be the most important part of our response, it’s
important that we all understand the gravity of the current moment for our
nation’s infrastructure. If we want these services to be there when we start
traveling and commuting normally, then the time to act is now.”
The funding directed
by Congress to intercity rail operators and transit agencies in Phase 3
legislation meets or exceeds the levels outlined in the Rail Passengers’
COVID19 request. This financial aid includes:
We’re actively tracking any additional needs at RailPassengers.org/COVID19 , and will continue to work with Congress to ensure that these systems are able to return to full service once travel restrictions are eventually eased.
April 14, 2020
by Brian Yanity
Older Posts
火箭加速器 安卓 官网
Our Mission is to promote the development of a modern, sustainable, environmentally friendly passenger rail system through education of the public and government officials.
Our Vision is a comprehensive rail network of long distance, intercity, and regional trains, supported by and integrated with local transit, bicycle access, and pedestrian friendly stations.
We accomplish these objectives via print publications, electronic media, testimony at government hearings, direct contact with elected and agency officials and conferences.
