RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
From The Dispatch:
Ohio transportation budget raises title fees, pushes rail
By James NashOhioans would have to pay triple the current $5 for vehicle titles and abide by new traffic and seat-belt laws under a new version of the state transportation budget headed toward approval.
The two-year, $7.5 billion budget also clears the way for toll roads in addition to the Ohio Turnpike. And it commits the state to move forward on developing passenger rail service connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati, with a possible link to Toledo.
@Jefe
I think one good thing we’re seeing of late (though in the larger picture it kind of shows where we’re headed in the economic mess) is just where the breaking point is to go from car to alternatives. Numbers stayed high despite gas dropping down and numbers are significantly up in relation to the current economic mess.
I think you’ll always have folks who just don’t care. And of course peoople who need a car for work. I think, though, that we are seeing more of the “mainstream” 9-5 crowd seeing the value of riding the express in.
I just made phone calls to all 4 representatives urging them to support the budget with the 3C rail plan.
Rep. Ron Amstutz – Ranking member – finance committee: l left a voice message
Rep. Ross McGregor – Ranking member Transportation sub-committee: talked to his aide Jason and he said there will be a vote Tuesday evening, the representative supports it overall but is not sure how he will vote as there are still some last minute amendments.
Rep. Barbara Sears – finance cmte: l left a voice message
Rep. Clyde Evans – Finance cmte: I talked to his aide and she was not aware of when the Finance Committee vote will happen, but she will relay my message of support.
Don’t let up with the House members. As soon as they are done, the GOP controlled Ohio Senate will take up the ODOT / ORDC budget and the passenger rail provisions. This will be a much tougher fight, though I am not sure which committee will get the legislation first… could be the Senate finance or Transportation commitee….transportation is the most likely.
Transportation: http://www.senate.state.oh.us/committees/com_highways.html
Finance:
http://www.senate.state.oh.us/committees/com_finance.html
To find your Senator:
http://www.senate.state.oh.us/senators/
Short, polite messages are the best….especially if you e-mail. But make sure you state how passsenger would positively impact your life and why you think it’s important to support it.
OK likely for Cincinnati passenger rail
By Jon Craig
A passenger rail line connecting Cincinnati to Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland and possibly Toledo is part of the $7.5 billion state transportation budget that could pass the Ohio House this week.
Mayor Mark Mallory supports the rail project, according to his spokesman, Jason Barron. Statewide passenger rail service would complement a separate local proposal by the mayor to resurrect city streetcars using $69 million in federal stimulus money, Barron said. Cincinnati proposes a streetcar system from Downtown to Uptown, the area around the University of Cincinnati and several hospitals.
READ MORE
@lifeontwowheels – again, you don’t have to convince me. I’m just saying, why wouldn’t we want to ensure success instead of gamble? This is also more of a gamble than current regional rail out east or local light rail. The DC-Baltimore-Philly-NYC-Boston corridor are expensive cities with tight car options and great local public transportation. It’s really convenient to drive and park in Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati. The “why not drive?” urge will be there and create a risk for the project. I appreciate your faith in 3C’s success, but I’d be more impressed if it were a sure bet—which it would be with higher gas prices, created by higher gas taxes, which also lead to more hybrids, more funding of mass transit, and lower pollution.
Again, trying to convince me is preaching to the choir. I’m all for 3C and the entire Ohio Hub project. I just don’t want to see it go away because people don’t use it enough and some public officials then object to subsidizing it.
Good article on what travel could be like on the 3-C. The story covers a similar corridor in California, where corridor trains are seeing booming ridership…especially ffrom younger professionals.
http://www.davislifemagazine.com/Content.aspx?m=3/1/2009&cId=2702
From Gongwer:
”
ODOT WANTS CALIFORNIA FIRM FOR $750,000 RAIL PASSENGER STUDY; TURNPIKE SEEKS BOND REFINANCE TO LOWER INTEREST COSTS
The Ohio Department of Transportation on Monday proposed hiring a California firm to conduct a $750,000 railroad capacity analysis for Gov. Ted Strickland‘s plan to run conventional speed passenger trains from Cleveland to Cincinnati.
Woodside Consulting Group, Inc., Palo Alto, Calif., was recommended for the study from six proposals submitted, including four from Ohio companies.
Woodside is to prepare a “capacity simulation analysis” in cooperation with Amtrak and freight railroads to identify one or more alternative routes using existing rail lines.
“Viable alternatives will be carried forward by Amtrak for detailed service planning, modeling, and forecasting,” ODOT said in a request to the Controlling Board. The department’s request for a waiver of competitive selection for the consultant contract was included on the board’s March 9 agenda.
The analysis is the first step toward implementing the governor’s proposal to restore state-sponsored intercity passenger rail service along a route linking Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati.
The project was posted on ODOT’s Website last December. Six proposals were received, including four from consultant/engineering firms in Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus. A fifth proposal came from a Maryland company.
ODOT said the consultant selection rating form used included evaluations of the firms’ project managers, staff experience, workload, past performance and other factors.
An Ohio Rail Development Commission selection committee evaluated and ranked the letters of interest from the six firms. A statewide committee that included the director of transportation and 14 other ODOT officials approved the final selection.
“One or more alternative routes, involving multiple railroads, will be advanced for detailed analysis, modeling and simulation,” ODOT said in its request.
“The ‘Railroad Capacity Analysis” for the 3C Corridor will provide insight for making cost-effect decisions in improving train performance by expanding railroad capacity and improving operations,” the department said.
ODOT said its consultant selection procedures are subject to approval of the Federal Highway Administration, and that federal requirements do not permit any local preferences such as the Buy Ohio program.”
If you want to push for passenger rail with your state Reps and Senators…..
Access All Aboard Ohio’s new advocacy portal here:
http://209.51.133.155/cms/index.php/content/advocacy
If you’re looking for a quick & easy spot to send a message to your Ohio legislators, this is it:
http://www.progressohio.org/page/speakout/passengerrail
The email is already written – you just enter your zip code etc. to have it automatically sent to the right Ohio House Rep & Senator.
Customizing your letter (including the subject line) will make it even more effective. Personal impact stuff is great.
Unlike our U.S. Senators & Reps, our Ohio legislators aren’t (yet) used to receiving hundreds of messages in their inboxes on a particular issue. So these emails really can make a difference. Phone calls are great too.
And to give you an idea what passenger rail advocates are up against in the Ohio Senate, check out the quote from State Sen. Neihaus from Hamilton County. If his comments don’t get you motivated to e-mail or make a phone call, then what will?
So do as Lorraine suggests:
http://www.progressohio.org/page/speakout/passengerrail
Excerpt from Gongwer News Service – Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Ohio Senate President Pro Tem Tom Niehaus (R-New Richmond) said
Republicans would like someone to point out how the rail plan could pay
for itself.
“It’s one thing to use federal stimulus money to build the
infrastructure. The question is how do you pay for it once you have it.
We’re already in a serious financial situation of being able to pay for
the bills that we currently have,” Sen. Niehaus told reporters.
“Now we’re creating another program that we have to find operating
revenue for. We can’t even pay for what we have today,” he said.
Sen. Niehaus said the economic reality is that passenger rail does not
pay for itself. “It sounds wonderful, it’s romantic, but economically,
it doesn’t work,” he said.
Someone needs to tell Niehaus that American car culture sounds wonderful, is romantic, but doesn’t work economically either.
Rail and cars should be on equal footing. We should capture the costs of driving by increasing gas taxes. THEN Niehaus will see what makes sense economically. Troglodyte.
Excerpt from Gongwer News Service – Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Ohio Senate President Pro Tem Tom Niehaus (R-New Richmond) said Republicans would like someone to point out how the rail plan could pay for itself.
“It’s one thing to use federal stimulus money to build the infrastructure. The question is how do you pay for it once you have it. We’re already in a serious financial situation of being able to pay for the bills that we currently have,” Sen. Niehaus told reporters.
If anyone wants to email Mr. Niehaus and help answer his question, his email is SD14@senate.state.oh.us.
There may be a vote this afternoon at 4 PM.
House Finance & Appropriations, (Chr. Sykes, 466-3100), Rm. 313, 4:00 pm
HB 2 TRANSPORTATION BUDGET (Ujvagi) To make appropriations for programs related to transportation and public safety for the biennium beginning July 1, 2009, and ending June 30, 2011, and to provide authorization and conditions for the operation of those programs. –7th Hearing-Possible amendments & vote
If you want to argue with Republicans on rail, give them one of their own leaders to do it:
http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/weyrich.cfm
“Someone needs to tell Niehaus that American car culture sounds wonderful, is romantic, but doesn’t work economically either.”
Can you explain how you came to the conclusion that car culture doesn’t work economically? Thats a pretty hefty statement to make considering that passenger rail requires many times more subsidies per passenger mile than highways. As for romanticizing, I think a lot of that occurs on the passenger rail front as well.
House Finance Committee postponed until 7 PM tonight.
Karl,
I’ll let some one else speak specifically to the economics, here’s my take:
1) Unless the government starts taking some proactive steps, the current funding for freeways/roads is going to be a major issue with more efficient vehicles. Even more so if electric vehicles become a reality.
2) I think a major thing to look at in cost is the social cost. I can’t think of one recent roadway project that hasn’t negatively affected a community. There are definite positives to maintaining that infrastructure, but when you factor in the businesses and residents displaced is it worth it. Another thing to consider is the productivity costs during major freeway projects. What are they projecting for the split? 8 years?
3) I think between the 2, transit costs and subsidization is far more efficient in it’s application. When you look at local transit, COTA is conducting daily studies on each bus and route for the number of passengers. This allows them to maximize the product/service they offer while keeping costs down. Same, I am sure with trains. If one route isn’t seeing the same numbers as the other you move the rolling stock around and play with the schedules to maximize the service on both routes, while minimising costs.
Going back to the social costs, transit doesn’t have the same impact as the roadways. Want more capacity? You aren’t paving under area residential and commercial to do it.
Karl,
It’s not that sweeping a statement. Actually, it’s a quite mild statement once you look at the total costs of transportation.
Driving a car has massive negative externalities. In the US, driving creates $20 billion of costs societal costs due to emissions; $78 in lost productivity due to congestion; and $220 billion in accidents, including higher insurance costs for everyone. Those are just the biggest examples. Then we have the direct subsidies of highways and driving. Also, I should note that this does NOT include any costs of global warming, which is deemed “controversial” enough to remain out of much economic analysis. However, it is likely rather small anyway.
To recover these costs, economists estimate that gas taxes should be about $2/gal. This amount would properly pay in a direct for the externalities caused by driving. Right now, gas taxes are 18.4 cents a gallon in federal taxes, and 28 cents a gallon in Ohio state taxes. Our 46.4 cents/gal lags behind Illinois (54.5 cents/gal), Michigan (52.4 cents/gal), and Pennsylvania (49.5 cents/gal).
Lest you think higher gas taxes be a tool of the crazy green environmentalists, I should note that the strongest opponent of such a tax is an economist named Greg Mankiw. Mankiw was W’s head economist for 3 years.
Lest you think higher gas taxes would be too expensive, I would counter with the fact that they can (and probably should) be offset by dollar-for-dollar cuts in payroll taxes. Granted, my personal preference would not be to do this. I’d rather put the generated money towards mass transit. But economically, I’ll concede that the cuts make more “sense.”
What’s more, were gas taxes to be this high, demand for hybrids and mass transit would increase greatly. With such demand, hybrids would be more and more popular, their prices would reduce, they would become more competitive, more popular, and eventually the MPG in the average vehicle would be much higher. Higher MPG, of course, would mean folks don’t spend as much on gasoline anyway… and less money goes to foreign petrol dictators.
I thoroughly apologize for my longwindedness.
Any questions?
[url=http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/analysis.cfm?ID=128_HB_2&ACT=As%20Introduced&hf=analyses128/h0002-i-128.htm]House Bill 2[/url], the transportation budget, passed out of finance committee tonight. In this bill are the provisions needed to fund passenger rail in Ohio. Also in the transportation budget was a last minute amendment to allocate over $2 billion in federal stimulus money to various programs from weatherization to school lunches.
Nearly all votes on amendments and the final vote went down partisan lines. This may provide a challenge once the bill passes the house and heads to the Ohio Senate. The demographics of the senate has a strong republican majority that will certainly make drastic amendments to the legislation. One of the main points of contention was after the study is completed by Woodside Consultants on expected ridership and revenue, what body has oversight to allocate funds for rail. Republicans wanted the legislature to have oversight arguing that this would be a drastic change in funding where the democrats seemed more concerned with expediting passenger rail while funds are available and said the Ohio Controlling Board along with the [url=http://www.dot.state.oh.us/TRAC/Pages/Default.aspx]O.D.O.T. TRAC [/url]provided ample oversight.
After the bill leaves the senate, most likely it will go to a conference committee. The conference committee will be composed of six legislators. The Speaker of the House will appoint two majority members and one minority member as will the president of the senate. This will result in an even mix of three republicans and three democrats to hash out the final bill.
GOP can’t stop governor’s rail idea
Republicans demand more oversight in bid to run trains between Ohio cities
Thursday, March 5, 2009 3:29 AM
By James Nash
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Ohio House Republicans yesterday accused Gov. Ted Strickland of throwing them in the caboose of his plan to revive passenger rail service in major cities, but they were unable to muster enough votes to derail the plan.
The four-city rail idea — which would bring passenger trains to Columbus for the first time in a generation — is a key component of Strickland’s plan to lessen Ohio’s dependence on highways.
http://dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/03/05/TRANSPORT.ART_ART_03-05-09_B1_VTD4FDT.html?sid=101