Amtrak Southwest Chief New Mexico

[nmrxabqfan101]

Questions:

With all this government money, would BNSF still own the track?

Would Amtrak have to keep paying BNSF to use the track?

Would it be economical for the states to buy that section then rip off BNSF if and when they want to use it again?

If Amtrak went to the Transcon, what would BNSF do with the old route? Abandon it? If so, is it considered worthless or worth very little?

But Senators from NM asked what's in it for New Mexico if we upgrade this line, would we retain ownership? Since Amtrak did not have a for sure answer....I don't either..I will ask around.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

The studies also shown that the Southwest Chief is better served on Raton than Clovis due to the findings by an outside company who has experience in these matters. A final decision in regards to funding will be made during or after the 2015 legislation which starts in January.

Well when you put it that way, clearly the Chief MUST stay on the current route.

Basically New Mexico is asking BNSF & Amtrak this question?

If we give you the money needed to upgrade this line, would you all still keep SWC service running? Cause New Mexico tax payers are not gonna be open to this if there is no commitment from you (Amtrak & BNSF) both to keep service as is.

 

[jis]

Why do I have the feeling that Boardman wants to shut this line down?

Dunno! Why do you get such a feeling?

 

[VentureForth]

Why do I have the feeling that Boardman wants to shut this line down?

Dunno! Why do you get such a feeling?

Good question. It's not like Boardman has the money to do with what he wants. He wants (and has said so frequently) that he wants to keep the SWC on the current route. However, no matter how you figure it, the train is going to require a SIGNIFICANT amount of money to 1) Keep or 2) Reroute. It's who will do the most to finance option 1 or 2 that will ultimately make the decision for Boardman.

 

[the Duck]

It seems that everybody has forgotten how this has all come about, Shortly after Santa Fe completed the Transcon, they made a policy statemen tthat they no longer needed the Raton Pass sub. and ask Amtrak to please reroute at no additional expense. Amtrak balked like an ol ' mule. The merger took place with understanding of this. After merger the offer was again extended to Amtrak. Again Amtrak balked. Now we are where we are. The Contract that BNSF(originally Santa FE) and Amtrak ends at midnight on 12/31/15 Any thing past that date will be a NEW Contract what ever it is When Amtrak realized they may have to reroute They said .they would 1 year to get ready for the reroute. That Statement from Amtrak(was published) is either true or it is a lie. Time is fast approaching that day of 12/31/14. At that time we get to find out if Mr. John Boardman is a truthful man of integrity or a liar.

 

[jis]

It seems that everybody has forgotten how this has all come about, Shortly after Santa Fe completed the Transcon, they made a policy statemen tthat they no longer needed the Raton Pass sub.

Am I missing something here? Are you suggesting that the SantaFe Transcon through Amarillo was completed after Amtrak came into existence?

 

[zephyr17]

The Southern Transcon has been in existence for 100 years or more (don't the exact date, but it has been there A LONG TIME). The Northern Transcon was always more passenger train heavy and the Southern Transcon was always more freight oriented, but each hosted both passenger and freight back in the day.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

It seems that everybody has forgotten how this has all come about, Shortly after Santa Fe completed the Transcon, they made a policy statemen tthat they no longer needed the Raton Pass sub. and ask Amtrak to please reroute at no additional expense. Amtrak balked like an ol ' mule. The merger took place with understanding of this. After merger the offer was again extended to Amtrak. Again Amtrak balked. Now we are where we are. The Contract that BNSF(originally Santa FE) and Amtrak ends at midnight on 12/31/15 Any thing past that date will be a NEW Contract what ever it is When Amtrak realized they may have to reroute They said .they would 1 year to get ready for the reroute. That Statement from Amtrak(was published) is either true or it is a lie. Time is fast approaching that day of 12/31/14. At that time we get to find out if Mr. John Boardman is a truthful man of integrity or a liar.

Amtrak has said the early numbers of re routing the chief are too high for Amtrak's checkbook and is more expense to re route the Chief, then to just keep the chief where she is.

 

[chakk]

If NMDOT has concluded that the SWC will stay where it is, does that mean they are going to pay for the upgrades to tracks in NM and KS and the maintenance of those tracks? :huh: They are not used by any other train, so BNSF or any other railroad will not do so, thus NM must.

. New Mexico is open to fund this Amtrak service but are looking at all options before any state money is committed. The Legal studies shown that the anti donation clause in the state consitituon allows the state to help out as long as it benefits the state under economic benefit. The studies also shown that the Southwest Chief is better served on Raton than Clovis due to the findings by an outside company who has experience in these matters. A final decision in regards to funding will be made during or after the 2015 legislation which starts in January.

And that legislative session that starts in January will end in either February or March, since by the state constitution, the legislative session is limited to 60 days or 30 days, in alternating years. Let's see if repairing railroad tracks makes it high enough up the agenda table to get some action in 2015.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

If NMDOT has concluded that the SWC will stay where it is, does that mean they are going to pay for the upgrades to tracks in NM and KS and the maintenance of those tracks? :huh: They are not used by any other train, so BNSF or any other railroad will not do so, thus NM must.

. New Mexico is open to fund this Amtrak service but are looking at all options before any state money is committed. The Legal studies shown that the anti donation clause in the state consitituon allows the state to help out as long as it benefits the state under economic benefit. The studies also shown that the Southwest Chief is better served on Raton than Clovis due to the findings by an outside company who has experience in these matters. A final decision in regards to funding will be made during or after the 2015 legislation which starts in January.

And that legislative session that starts in January will end in either February or March, since by the state constitution, the legislative session is limited to 60 days or 30 days, in alternating years. Let's see if repairing railroad tracks makes it high enough up the agenda table to get some action in 2015.

it made 6 bills in regards to Amtrak in the 2014 session and now for 2015 it is now a prioirity for the state.

 

[SANSR]

Can you proofread before posting? Interesting topic, but misplaced question marks, wrong use of synonyms, one run on paragraph, and generally poor grammar makes this really hard to read.

This.

Also, I don't see a whole lot of new information that hasn't already been posted elsewhere. We all know that Boardman wants to stay put. One of his executives personally posted that here on this forum.

With a healthy side dish of this. There's an already existing 27 page thread that's hashed all of this out:http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/53558-southwest-chief-re-route/page-27

If you're going to show up and say that we all don't know what we're talking about, you'd be much better served to write in something better than incomprehensible gibberish and to put it in the proper thread.

Well stated.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

Can you proofread before posting? Interesting topic, but misplaced question marks, wrong use of synonyms, one run on paragraph, and generally poor grammar makes this really hard to read.

This.

Also, I don't see a whole lot of new information that hasn't already been posted elsewhere. We all know that Boardman wants to stay put. One of his executives personally posted that here on this forum.

With a healthy side dish of this. There's an already existing 27 page thread that's hashed all of this out:http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/53558-southwest-chief-re-route/page-27If you're going to show up and say that we all don't know what we're talking about, you'd be much better served to write in something better than incomprehensible gibberish and to put it in the proper thread.

Well stated.

I am not here to please everyone. I am here to provide the RIGHT information not specualtion & rumors of what most railfans conclude.

 

[neroden]

nmrxabqfan101:

There is a VERY IMPORTANT issue which you have not mentioned. Which means that someone in these negotiations is being dishonest (probably the state government).

New Mexico is *prohibited by its constitution* from transferring money to BNSF (or any other private, for-profit railroad).

Neither the state nor any county, school district or municipality, except as otherwise provided in this constitution, shall directly or indirectly lend or pledge its credit or make any donation to or in aid of any person, association or public or private corporation or in aid of any private enterprise for the construction of any railroad;

New Mexico CANNOT, under its Constitution, pay for maintenance of a railroad line unless the state owns the line.

Furhter,

-- New Mexico has refused to spend one red cent on the line since Martinez got into office. (And ended state funding for RailRunner, which is now funded locally.)

-- Governor Martinez (recently re-elected) actually RENEGED on the purchase of the Raton Pass line from BNSF. There was a signed agreement to buy it for $5 million and she personally backed out of the deal.

I suggest you go back to Joe Boardman and remind him of these FACTS.

NM CANNOT hand out state funds for improving the line unless NM purchases the line. It is PROHIBITED BY THE STATE CONSTITUTION. If NM does not purchase the line, then NM can contribute ZERO DOLLARS, PERIOD.

Does Joe Boardman understand this? You actually met with him. Is there any way to get this little fact through his head?

As long as the Raton Pass line is owned by BNSF, New Mexico is *prohibited* from spending money on it. And so Amtrak had damn well better move to the Transcon.

If you can set me up for a meeting with Mr. Boardman, even a phone meeting, perhaps I can get this key fact through his head. If not, maybe you can meet him again explain it to him yourself. The constitutional rule is critical here.

From everything you said, he seems to be ignoring this critical Constitutional provision, negotiating as if it doesn't exist. This is *stupid*. He needs to be informed of it.

Boardman needs to tell New Mexico coldly and bluntly

"We'll keep running on the Raton line if you buy it, but as long as the Raton line is owned by BNSF, New Mexico simply can't legally contribute to the upkeep and so Amtrak will HAVE to move."

Everything NMDOT is saying about contributing money is LIES unless NMDOT purchases the line first. NMDOT has made no move to purchase the line.

 

[neroden]

If Susana Martinez was against Rail she would not have kept NMRX running.

She didn't! She removed state funding. NMRX is locally funded now. At least she allowed it to be locally funded.

But Senators from NM asked what's in it for New Mexico if we upgrade this line, would we retain ownership? Since Amtrak did not have a for sure answer....I don't either..I will ask around.

As I noted above, the state of New Mexico MUST buy the line BEFORE the state can spend ANY money upgrading it. This is REQUIRED by the state Constitution. It's called the "anti-donation clause".

If you have any contacts with the state legislators, they need to understand this.

Boardman needs to understand this.

Matt Rose needs to understand this. BNSF cannot get earmarked money from the state for a line owned by BNSF, it's unconstitutional.

The state DOT needs to understand this.

I actually think Martinez already understands this and is playing everyone else for suckers, but she needs to understand it too.

Any negotiations with people who don't understand this are wasted negotiations. Any agreement which claims that NM will spend money on the line without buying it is *unconstitutional* and will not be implemented.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

If Susana Martinez was against Rail she would not have kept NMRX running.

She didn't! She removed state funding. NMRX is locally funded now. At least she allowed it to be locally funded.

But Senators from NM asked what's in it for New Mexico if we upgrade this line, would we retain ownership? Since Amtrak did not have a for sure answer....I don't either..I will ask around.

As I noted above, the state of New Mexico MUST buy the line BEFORE the state can spend ANY money upgrading it. This is REQUIRED by the state Constitution. It's called the "anti-donation clause".If you have any contacts with the state legislators, they need to understand this.Boardman needs to understand this.Matt Rose needs to understand this. BNSF cannot get earmarked money from the state for a line owned by BNSF, it's unconstitutional.The state DOT needs to understand this.I actually think Martinez already understands this and is playing everyone else for suckers, but she needs to understand it too.Any negotiations with people who don't understand this are wasted negotiations. Any agreement which claims that NM will spend money on the line without buying it is *unconstitutional* and will not be implemented.

.

Southwest Chief Rail Service: An Examination of State Authorities and Limitations Pursuant to the Constitution of New Mexico. Arthur J. Waskey, Contract Staff Attorney Legislative Council Service presented. This study focused in particular on the "anti-donation" clause in the Constitution that the New Mexico DOT has sited numerous times as preventing state support for the Chief.

Mr. Waskey summarized his findings right at the beginning of his presentation by saying that he found nothing in the anti-donation clause that would prevent the state from financially supporting the Chief. The clause prohibits donations to private enterprise and the cost of railroad construction. Waskey emphasized that Amtrak is a federally charted corporation, funded by the government and under Congressional control -- essentially an agency of the US government and therefore not a private enterprise. Supporting the Chief is not a donation: in this case Amtrak would have "an obligation" back to the state to provide a service. Waskey emphasized that the NMDOT would have to follow all state procurement rules in negotiating a contract, including a careful determination of costs. The contract would include defining the agreement with appropriate terms, a termination clause, a recognition of limits on state funding, and that the state be held harmless in the event the agreement is terminated. According to Waskey, the NMDOT has a "statutory duty to take all practical steps to improve rail freight and rail passenger service . . . transportation is an essential governmental function . . . the DOT is authorized to enter into an agreement."

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

Southwest Chief Rail Service: Engineering Cost Estimate Review and Economic Analysis. Frank Sharpless, Transit and Rail Director, Department of Transportation (DOT) presented.

Sharpless provided an overview to Amtrak and the Southwest Chief route and a summary of how the studies were researched. In New Mexico, the study estimates the annual cost for annual operational and maintenance costs at $9,375 million (Amtrak's most recent estimate is $6,727 million/year). For the economic impact, the study compared the economic impact of the current route vs. moving the Chief to the Southern Transcon. If the train is re-routed, ridership to and from New Mexico destinations is estimated to be reduced by 13,000. For employment, - 65; output (Labor and Gross Regional Product -- a measure of newly created value through production within a region) - $3.7 million; and taxes -$800,000.

These statistics -- particularly the economic impact numbers -- require further detailed study. One statistic highlighted by the study is the economic impact to Colfax, Mora, San Miguel and Santa Fe counties if the line is abandoned: $1.1 million annually from BNSF.

During the hearing, Ray Lang, Amtrak Sr. Director for State Relations, answered legislators' questions. He said that "we are approaching an existentialist moment" for the future of the train, and that lacking an agreement, "Amtrak will explore all its options." Tom Church, NMDOT Secretary, later countered, "Amtrak must make a commitment to this route before we fund it -- my opinion." Lang also emphasized that moving the Chief to the Southern Transcon will be a very expensive proposition -- much more expensive than retaining the train on the current route -- due to the need to lengthen sidings, re-time grade crossing signals, and upgrade the signaling system to handle the Chief which operates at speeds higher than freight trains. He also emphasized that Amtrak does not have the funding available to re-route the train.

While Lang said Amtrak would work with BNSF to redo the cost estimates for each of the states in light of the recent TIGER grants to Kansas and Colorado, he did not commit to a timeframe as to when this will be completed.

While the resolution of the anti-donation clause is very positive, we are rapidly approaching the 2015 New Mexico legislative session without a clear definition of Amtrak and BNSF's needs. Church's opinion that Amtrak should commit to the route before the state commits funds for operations and maintenance is very concerning. It has been confirmed in private conversations with several legislators at the hearings.

Although the DOT studies increase the possible needed funding for operations and maintenance and (perhaps) under-estimate the positive economic impact of the Chief

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

Las Vegas

The 13,500 resident town of Las Vegas, New Mexico saw 5,400 board and alight the SWC in

2013. Local schools and universities include New Mexico Highlands University and the United

World College. Albuquerque is the primary commercial airport serving the city, although the

far smaller Santa Fe municipal airport is closer.

Raton

Raton, New Mexico currently has a ridership of 15,700 annually, of which more than 80 percent

of the traffic is associated with the Philmont Ranch (approximately 9,400 passengers) and the

connecting motor coach service (approximately 3,800) to Denver. In addition to Philmont

Ranch, other popular destinations include Sugarite Canyon State Park, Capulin Volcano

National Monument, Cimmaron Canyon State Park, and the National Rifle Association’s

Whittington Center. The major Denver and Albuquerque airports are equidistant from Raton,

with Colorado Springs being closer.

Stations Located on Both Alignments

Albuquerque

Ridership at the Albuquerque, New Mexico station is anticipated to increase by 1,700 from

78,100 to 79,800 riders annually if the SWC were rerouted to BNSF’s Transcon across Texas and

Oklahoma. This net increase in volume is associated with ridership to and from the new SWC

cities of Amarillo and Wichita, KS (approximately 4,800 riders) offsetting the loss of existing

ridership to and from Lamy, Las Vegas, and Raton (3,100 riders). Half a million residents reside

in the city of Albuquerque while the metropolitan area encompasses over 900,000 total

residents. Albuquerque hosts the only major commercial airport in New Mexico, with the

International Sunport handling around 6 million passengers annually in recent years.

Gallup

Ridership at the Gallup, New Mexico station is anticipated to increase by 1,200 from 15,600 to

16,800 due to the proposed new alignment of the SWC. With roughly 22,000 residents, there are

numerous hotels for visitors along the historic Route 66. Gallup serves as the closest location

for various national parks and monuments, including El Morro, El Mapais, Chaco Culture,

Aztec Ruins, Canyon de Chelly, and the Hubbell Trading Post. Combined, these national sites

receive over 1 million visitors annually, largely due to Canyon de Chelly’s position as one of the

most visited national monuments in the United States. The closest major commercial airport is

Albuquerque.

Proposed New Mexico Southwest Chief Stations

Belen

Belen, New Mexico is projected to serve 7,800 riders with the new alignment of the SWC.

Located approximately 35 miles south of Albuquerque, this town of 7,000 residents anchors thesouthern extent of the Albuquerque metropolitan area. Since 2006, Belen has been the southern

terminus for the Rail Runner Express that operates between Belen, Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

While the Southwest Chief could carry passengers between Belen and Albuquerque, it is

presumed potential riders would prefer to use the more frequent, and less expensive, Rail

Runner Express service.

Vaughn

Vaughn, New Mexico is projected to serve 2,600 riders with a rerouted SWC. With a current

population in the 400’s, Vaughn and environs is not a significant tourist draw, with the closest

outdoor recreational opportunity being White Sands National Monument, located 150 miles

south of this town. The nearest commercial air service can be found in Albuquerque. Vaughn

would be the closest Amtrak station to the New Mexico cities of Santa Rosa (39 miles away), Las

Vegas (69 miles), Roswell (96 miles), and Artesia (130 miles). The model cannot estimate how

many passengers to or from these cities would use an Amtrak station in Vaughn.

Clovis

Ridership in Clovis, New Mexico is projected at 7,400 with the new alignment of the SWC. With

a population of nearly 40,000, Clovis is an essential air service community served by Clovis

Municipal Airport, which has roughly 1,400 enplanements a year. The nearest major

commercial airport is located in Amarillo. While some distance from national parks, a station at

Clovis would service several universities including Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University at

the nearby Cannon Air Force Base as well as Eastern New Mexico University 20 miles to the

south. Clovis would be the closest Amtrak station to the New Mexico cities of Portales (18 miles

away), Tucumcari (83 miles) Lovington (102 miles), and Hobbs (116 miles). The model cannot

estimate how many passengers to or from these cities would use an Amtrak station in Clovis.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

Now if you all would like a copy of the NMDOT findings let me know.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

If Susana Martinez was against Rail she would not have kept NMRX running.

She didn't! She removed state funding. NMRX is locally funded now. At least she allowed it to be locally funded.

But Senators from NM asked what's in it for New Mexico if we upgrade this line, would we retain ownership? Since Amtrak did not have a for sure answer....I don't either..I will ask around.

As I noted above, the state of New Mexico MUST buy the line BEFORE the state can spend ANY money upgrading it. This is REQUIRED by the state Constitution. It's called the "anti-donation clause".If you have any contacts with the state legislators, they need to understand this.Boardman needs to understand this.Matt Rose needs to understand this. BNSF cannot get earmarked money from the state for a line owned by BNSF, it's unconstitutional.The state DOT needs to understand this.I actually think Martinez already understands this and is playing everyone else for suckers, but she needs to understand it too.Any negotiations with people who don't understand this are wasted negotiations. Any agreement which claims that NM will spend money on the line without buying it is *unconstitutional* and will not be implemented.

fares cover about 14% of the operating costs. Fees paid by BNSF and Amtrak cover another 7%. The voter-approved tax for Rail Runner operations contributes another 54%, and Federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality funds from the New Mexico Department of Transportation cover the remaining 25%, which is approximately $5 million per year. To put this expense in perspective, the total State of New Mexico FY10 approved budget is $5.47 Billion; therefore, the State's contribution toward operation of the Rail Runner is .0005% of the total state budget.However, it's also important to know that the Rail Runner operation pays about $1.2 million a year in New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax. Additionally, the implementation of Rail Runner service eliminated the need for the bus service the State was providing between Albuquerque and Santa Fe. This bus service wascosting the State $1.3 million a year. Therefore, the net contribution the Rail Runner makes to the State of New Mexico is about $2.5 million a year.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

$5M in fed funds relieves Rail Runner budget crunch

The New Mexico Rail Runner Express is receiving nearly $5 million in additional federal funds.

Steven Shaw, chairman of the Rio Metro Regional Transit District, said the money will offset the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality federal funds the Rail Runner is losing, which had the train facing a looming deficit of $1.2 million as of July.

The new funds are not actually new. Albuquerque has received the Federal Transit Administration 5307 Urban Area Formula funds for years because of the ABQ Ride bus service.

The city of Albuquerque’s Transit Department has received about $8 million annually to help support bus operations. FTA increased the award because the commuter rail system makes the area eligible for funding under another portion of the formula, according to a news release.

This money means the need for state funds or federal highway funds to help support the Rail Runner’s annual operations is essentially eliminated, said Larry Abraham, chair of the Rio Metro Sustainability Task Force.

“If the final population figures for the Albuquerque Urbanized Area being released by the Census Bureau this spring top 750,000, this new funding source could increase even more,” Abraham added.

For federal fiscal year 2011, the funding distribution through the FTA 5307 program included an additional $4.8 million to the Albuquerque area because of the Rail Runner. In fiscal year 2012, based on current federal policy, Rail Runner operations are expected to result in $6.4 million coming into the region, according to Rio Metro.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

If Susana Martinez was against Rail she would not have kept NMRX running.

She didn't! She removed state funding. NMRX is locally funded now. At least she allowed it to be locally funded.

But Senators from NM asked what's in it for New Mexico if we upgrade this line, would we retain ownership? Since Amtrak did not have a for sure answer....I don't either..I will ask around.

As I noted above, the state of New Mexico MUST buy the line BEFORE the state can spend ANY money upgrading it. This is REQUIRED by the state Constitution. It's called the "anti-donation clause".
If you have any contacts with the state legislators, they need to understand this.

Boardman needs to understand this.

Matt Rose needs to understand this. BNSF cannot get earmarked money from the state for a line owned by BNSF, it's unconstitutional.

The state DOT needs to understand this.

I actually think Martinez already understands this and is playing everyone else for suckers, but she needs to understand it too.

Any negotiations with people who don't understand this are wasted negotiations. Any agreement which claims that NM will spend money on the line without buying it is *unconstitutional* and will not be implemented.

. Table 4.22 FY 2013 Rail Runner Operating BudgetMillions

Source: Rio Metro RTD

Revenues (millions)

Local Gross Receipts Tax $12.51

Federal Revenue $7.83

Farebox $3.28

BNSF and Amtrak $2.00

Advertising $0.24

Total Revenue $25.85

Expenses (millions)

Rail Runner Service $15.22

Systemwide Maintenance $5.50

Management and Administration $1.83

Insurance $1.90

Communications, Utilities & Other Services $1.40

Total Expenses $25.85

 

[like_abq]

I been in ABQ once in my life -- last spring.

I'm a railfan and a rational qualified transport economist.

I love NM, Not just cause of one visit, cause lover lives there also.

This whole re-route been discussed and rediscussed but blathering discussers discuss -- h h hn.

Anybody wanna make better -- good good.

 

[Ryan]

You need to provide citations for all of these documents/articles you seem to be quoting from.

 

[nmrxabqfan101]

You need to provide citations for all of these documents/articles you seem to be quoting from.

I'll do you one better...I'll email you the PDF copies and or a physical mailed copy, or how bout a link?

 

[Like NM]

You need to provide citations for all of these documents/articles you seem to be quoting from.

I'll do you one better...I'll email you the PDF copies and or a physical mailed copy, or how bout a link?

GOOD ON YOU!