What will Trump mean for Amtrak?

Backshophoss wrote:The only way to get more service to Boston is to get the"Inland route" back online,Hopefully President Trump can
find a way to convince CSX allow more passenger service between Springfield and Worcester or sell that trackage
to Amtrak,retaining the freight rights to Worcester.

Moving some of the Regional Service trains to the"Inland Route" would free up slots for Acela service.

As with all in coming presidential administrations,there's been plenty of "missteps" made.

The states are already working to revive the Inland Route. What do you think about the possibility of those trains going into North Station? I understand South Station is near capacity, and a connection to North Station would tie the Downeaster into the rest of the network.

Worcester-North Station has been a commuter dream for awhile. If it's possible to move the Worcester trains to N Station,
it should have happened by now
For Amtrak,everything is based at Southhampton St yard servicing wise,Amtrak stays in S Station,
except for the Downeaster service trains

The NIMBYS in Cambridge freaked out when they heard of plans to run trains through their city. There were plans to upgrade the Grand Junction to 40 mph operation. Can you imagine actually seeing that!

UPDATE: Elaine Chao was confirmed by the Senate yesterday and was shortly after sworn in by VP Pence.

Trump may reduce the number of foreign tourists using Amtrak.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/8897 ... boycott-us" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Backshophoss wrote:Worcester-North Station has been a commuter dream for awhile. If it's possible to move the Worcester trains to N Station,
it should have happened by now
For Amtrak,everything is based at Southhampton St yard servicing wise,Amtrak stays in S Station,
except for the Downeaster service trains

This has been thrashed around quite a bit in the MBTA section. Getting efficiently from the in Grand Junction to North Station, past the Boston Engine Terminal and through the Green Line (Light Rail) Extension project is supposedly tricky. And mostly the NIMBYs in Cambridge. Cambridge has very powerful, connected and rich NIMBYs. But if there is no room there is no room and they will have to do something.

More than a week has gone by since Trump mounted the white house. He has shown a preference for simple solutions over complex ones, and implementing shovel-ready projects. If Amtrak or state planners can provide solutions that come close to break even or the operating subsidies come from anywhere but the federal government, I bet he would fund it faster than any recent president.

Conversely, congress shows few signs of initiative. They will probably rubber stamp whatever the president wants, and more easily than when other modern republicans were president.

Surprisingly, Forbes' analysis shows 44.3% of the dollars and 52% of the jobs from Trump's top 50 projects are for rail and only 15.4% of the money and 20.9% of the jobs are for highways.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/datadesign/ ... b0855d1c52" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The most expensive rail project is the Second Avenue subway in Trump's hometown.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee started hearings today. http://thehill.com/policy/transportatio ... astructure" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

R36 Combine Coach wrote:I would prefer seeing Trump appointing members of the Amtrak board who are in favor of IPO/privatization (something the GOP would support). After all, isn't it fitting for "America's Railroad" to have an IPO?

Privatize what, exactly? Acela (maybe some NEC regionals, maybe Auto train) is their only service which cover operating costs & turn a very modest profit, and this is only based on costs from the wheels up. Everything else below it is a money loser. Act now get prefferred stock options for Amtrak's Initial Public Offerings to lose your money!

That said, the $12B gateway plan NWK-NYP is on Trump's short list for infrastructure. No funding plan, however. Paul Ryan sez 'money for infrastructure must be a net zero for the budget', as in it must be cut from another area.

Even if he manages get the Gateway project funded, the NEC needs another $19-20B for nuts and bolts state of good repair and longer term investment.

Moorman seems to be doing his job just fine with management trim work. Some sort of 'Dismemberment Plan' to sell the maintenance hungry Acela svs & Auto train to an unknown private operator before spending the requisite $32billion would leave us with a giant sized MBTA-Keolis or IP fiasco, IMHO.

FCM2829 wrote:

R36 Combine Coach wrote:I would prefer seeing Trump appointing members of the Amtrak board who are in favor of IPO/privatization (something the GOP would support). After all, isn't it fitting for "America's Railroad" to have an IPO?

Privatize what, exactly? Acela (maybe some NEC regionals, maybe Auto train) is their only service which cover operating costs & turn a very modest profit, and this is only based on costs from the wheels up. Everything else below it is a money loser. Act now get prefferred stock options for Amtrak's Initial Public Offerings to lose your money!

That said, the $12B gateway plan NWK-NYP is on Trump's short list for infrastructure. No funding plan, however. Paul Ryan sez 'money for infrastructure must be a net zero for the budget', as in it must be cut from another area.

Even if he manages get the Gateway project funded, the NEC needs another $19-20B for nuts and bolts state of good repair and longer term investment.

Moorman seems to be doing his job just fine with management trim work. Some sort of 'Dismemberment Plan' to sell the maintenance hungry Acela svs & Auto train to an unknown private operator before spending the requisite $32billion would leave us with a giant sized MBTA-Keolis or IP fiasco, IMHO.

I see the lessons learned by the BR privatization will fall on deaf ears.

For the record, I'm not in favor of privatization. Even the best case scenario looks unattractive to me if it means separating operations from infrastructure.

scratchy wrote:I see the lessons learned by the BR privatization will fall on deaf ears.

No, I have a feeling that at least some of the principals advocating privatization or a shared public/private operation have learned the BR lessons quite well. Of them, some see it as a "someone else's problem" situation, and others as a way to make a great deal of money while also looking good to shareholders & constituents.

To be fair, neither POTUS 45 nor Secy. Chao have made lots of noise about privatizing NRPC. Given both their backgrounds in public-private partnerships and stated interest in large infrastructure projects, they seem to be content to let a lean government entity operate itself. I would expect a heavy emphasis on monetizing Amtrak real estate, especially with projects at WAS, BAL, and NYP.

That said, Keolis, Veolis, DB, SNCF, JR, China Railways, Bombardier, and any other large transportation company must be salivating at the thought of a government license to operate over any rail line anywhere in the country. Control of the Amtrak charter would allow the holder(s) to undercut most other commuter operators and still make a tidy profit.

mtuandrew wrote:I would expect a heavy emphasis on monetizing Amtrak real estate, especially with projects at WAS, BAL, and NYP.

Any similar movement on other Federal properties such as GSA and USPS lately? The latter sold its main post office buildings at 30 Street, Farley (NYP) and BOS South Station for redevelopment. And the landmark Chicago Postal Building (over I-290) has been redeveloped.

R36: I haven't seen it, aside from a Federal trend toward leased space pre dating this administration, but it's only been two weeks into this... interesting term. As the proverb goes, may you live in interesting times.

mtuandrew wrote:I would expect a heavy emphasis on monetizing Amtrak real estate, especially with projects at WAS, BAL, and NYP.

Don't forget Chicago.

The four teams of finalists include Chicago-based development firms John Buck, Riverside Investment & Development, Golub and Sterling Bay; acclaimed architecture firms Studio Gang, Pelli Clarke Pelli, Skidmore Owings & Merrill and Gensler; and the world's second-largest commercial real estate brokerage: Jones Lang LaSalle.

Those finalists were selected from groups that submitted a request for qualification that began in May. The process now turns to more specific plans for the massive transit facility in the request-for-proposal stage.

Responses to the RFP are due by the start of 2017.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realesta ... evelopment" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The project could add up to 3 million square feet using the air rights on the 14 acres Amtrak owns.

Can Trump use rent to finance operations? Maybe he'll sell the air rights. http://www.chicagotribune.com/classifie ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Could be better than revenue neutral. Could be revenue positive.