Amtrak Part II

[zstyles]

Amtrak announces record annual ridership

The company has posted six years of ridership and revenue growth, recently benefiting from high gas and airline prices. The number of trips over the past year increased 11 percent over the 25.8 million taken in fiscal year 2007.

Earlier this month, Congress passed legislation that sets funding targets of $13 billion over five years in a major vote of confidence for the company. President Bush, a staunch Amtrak critic, is expected to sign the bill, which also includes broad new rail safety provisions.

I might be for a route that has stops between say south bixby, BA/ downtown Tulsa etc..if there are matching grants..but only if it can support itself....

[cannon_fodder]

The schlubs in the state legislature don't care about seeing Amtrack service come to Tulsa.  If more funding comes by having the line to to Kansas consider it done.

Odds of plans and funding in the next 2 years:

Wichita line: 65%
Tulsa line: 20%

[TheTed]

The odds of anything with the Tulsa line happening in the next two years are .00001 percent.

[Transport_Oklahoma]

People.  Get it through your heads.  Everthing in transportation gets some form of government subsidy.  

The city streets are largely paid for from sales tax.  Whether you drive or not, you pay.

The city had to buy the right of way (and therefore remove it from the tax rolls) for a good chunk of the Tulsa expressway system.

Because the gasoline and diesel tax "user fee" revenue base are declining, the Oklahoma Legislature has used appropriations of general revenue and general obligation bond money to increase highway and county road funding for several years.

The federal gasoline-diesel tax funded Highway Trust Fund went to a zero balance a month ago.  Congress used general revenue to patch it through.

Not counting Iraq, the U.S. Navy spends billions every year protecting the WORLD'S crude oil supply routes.  You pay whether you drive or not.

Most fuel tax revenue is generated in the metropolitan areas where motorists are using primarily non-state roads.  But that revenue is spread (a cross-subsidy) thoughout the state, including to essential, but lightly used roads in the rural areas.

Vehicle registration fees have ALWAYS been primarily to fund eduction and general government.  The "diversion" thing you hear about is a fiction invented by the highway construction lobby and politicians trying to get press attention.

The M-K Navigation System was built and is largely maintained with general tax revenue fund.

Airline passengers paid no ticket taxes prior to the early 1970s by which time most airports had already been constructed.  The operational costs of the FAA and its air traffic control system is funded from the general fund.

The intercity bus companies are exempt from paying federal diesel tax.  Other than state taxes, they use the roads for free.

Car buyers will soon get a new round of federal tax credits to buy electric cars.  Then those drivers won't be paying any/as much fuel tax tax user fees.

And yes Amtrak and public transit is funded by state and federal funds.

The notable exceptions are the freight-carrying railroads (4-5 western roads got free land 130 years ago) and SOME of the turnpikes.

Now even the rail freight carrriers are seeking public-private partnerships to expand capacity.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Transport_Oklahoma

People.  Get it through your heads.  Everthing in transportation gets some form of government subsidy.  

Get it through your head, almost nothing in Tulsa gets a subsidy from the state.

While Amtrak would be nice there are more important things that Tulsa does not have because of a lack of state funding. While we are the third largest city in the nation without Amtrak service we have a highway system that is literally crumbling and are the largest city without nontoll interstate access, the largest city without a public hospital, the largest city without a four year state university campus.

The state just recently refused to fund ongoing operations at the OSU Medical Center. If the state had the owner Ardent was going to give OSU the $100+ million facility.

Tulsa would have a real public hospital at a fraction of what is currently spent on care in Oklahoma City but the state said no. And the cost of that ongoing care was only going to be a small fraction of the cost of Amtrak service to Tulsa and far more important. The state has proven again they don't give a sh!t about the Tulsa area. There isn't going to be any rail service to Tulsa because there's more important funding priorities like $60 million tax rebates to basketball teams in Oklahoma City.

[Transport_Oklahoma]

FACT

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Transport_Oklahoma

Everthing in transportation gets some form of government subsidy.  

OPINION

While Amtrak would be nice there are more important things that Tulsa does not have because of a lack of state funding.

[cannon_fodder]

+1 Swake

Either there is a vast conspiracy against Tulsa, or our legislators have not been doing a good job for a couple decades.  Everything nice in Tulsa was paid for by Tulsa.  The nice highways (all tolls to, from, and around Tulsa), the BOk center, our sports teams, our hospitals, downtown development, economic development (or lack thereof), our universities (U Tulsa, ORU, and TCC foremost), and even our jobs.

I'm sure we get state money, but we would be far better off not sending money than sending $1 to OKC to see 50 cents come floating back our way.

All roads to OKC but from Tulsa are free.  Their highways and bridges are pristine compared to most of ours, 2 public hospitals, the largest state University, and on and on.  We even kicked in some millions for their NBA team.  Not too mention the government jobs in OKC that Tulsans pay for.  We do, however, get to keep our own medical examiner... which is nice.

Not so much that I fault OKC for it.  If you can take something from another city and give it to your own, it is human nature to act in your interest.  That's where our legislators are supposed to step up.  Very little indicates that Tulsa gets what it pays for from the State and it is because we can't get our **** together.

[perspicuity85]

The squeaky wheel gets the oil.  Contact your state house representative or senator.

State House Directory

State Senate Directory


OKC has always had the benefit of being the capitol city.  Their cries are heard the loudest because they live in the state legislature's backyard.  Tulsa has to fight to be heard.  I absolutely agree with those on this board on the topic of Tulsa's conspicuous lack of state investment.  And perhaps the word investment is the keyword.  The state legislators of the Tulsa MSA, yes the entire MSA, have to make a coordinated effort to make the state realize the important mutual benefit of investing in health care, education, and transportation infrastructure in Tulsa.  The state as well as the city benefit from the aforementioned infrastructure investment.  The Tulsa MSA represents about 25% of the state's population and 30% of the state's GDP.  OKC's MSA represents 31% of the state's population and 37% of the state's GDP, respectively.  Given the stats, it's would seem Tulsa'a economic health is pretty damn important to the state's economic health.

source of statistics

Call your legislator.  Maybe we will see a TulsaNow-organized lobby effort...

[rickwestcott]

I think you guys are right.  It's time for those of you who are in favor of extending passenger rail service to Tulsa and northeastern Oklahoma to contact your State Representatives and Senators.  I've been trying to make all the noise that I can, but I am only one small City Councilor.

Below is the text of a letter which the Tulsa City Council recently sent to each and every State Representative and State Senator.  No one has yet responded.

Thank you all for your honest discussion on this issue.  I certainly don't have all the answers, but I believe that this is an issue which must be pursued.  I believe that it is one part of the answers to several problems which we face.

Thanks,

Rick Westcott
Tulsa City Council
District 2



Dear Senator Pro Tempore Morgan and House Speaker Benge:

We are writing to urge you, in the strongest terms, to begin taking steps to bring passenger rail service to the Tulsa metropolitan area and all of northeastern Oklahoma.

In 1993, the Oklahoma Legislature passed a law which only allows state funding for passenger rail service that includes both Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

In 1999, the Heartland Flyer began operating between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth.  At that time, the Oklahoma Legislature promised northeastern Oklahomans that we would soon have passenger rail service.

The Heartland Flyer still does not serve Tulsa, yet it receives approximately two million dollars in state funds each year.

In 2006, the Tulsa City Council, the Indian Nations Council of Governments' Board of Directors, and other municipalities in this area unanimously passed resolutions asking you to extend Amtrak service to northeastern Oklahoma.

In 2006, Tulsa hosted an Amtrak conference, which many of you attended.  Amtrak executives expressed a strong interest in extending the Heartland Flyer from Oklahoma City to Tulsa.

Early in 2007, the Oklahoma Department of Transportation asked Amtrak to conduct a study on the Oklahoma City-to-Tulsa route.

In 2007, the City Councils of Oklahoma City and Tulsa presented a joint state legislative agenda to you.  One of the items on that joint agenda was extending passenger rail service to Tulsa.  The agenda said, in part, "Oklahoma City and Tulsa both support any state efforts to secure Amtrak service for Tulsa, whether it is northeast to Missouri or southwest to Oklahoma City."

Extending passenger rail service to northeastern Oklahoma will carry a high price tag.  But, federal assistance may be available.  In late September, 2008, the House of Representatives passed a major funding bill for Amtrak.  The Senate passed it on October 1, 2008.  It still must be signed by President Bush and then go through appropriations.  But, one of the major features of the bill is a $1.9 billion matching grant program for states that are expanding passenger rail service.

Alternative forms of transportation make more sense now than ever before.  Oil and gasoline prices are, at the moment, decreasing.  However, we need only to look back a few weeks to see the potential for sudden, skyrocketing increases.  Besides offering a more economical way of travel, passenger rail service helps to decrease our dependence upon foreign oil.  Increased highway traffic congestion and increased delays at our airports also signal a need for an alternative method of transportation.  A very large percentage of our population would rather take the train than drive.

It now appears that the Heartland Flyer will be extended from Oklahoma City, north along Interstate 35, to Newton, Kansas.  Such a connection would serve an additional population of approximately one-half million people who live in the vicinity of Interstate 35.  Once again, over a million people who live in the Tulsa metropolitan area and northeastern Oklahoma would be left out.  Once again, northeastern Oklahomans would be forced to subsidize alternative transportation for others.

We have no objection to extending the Heartland Flyer to the north.  It is our desire to work with Oklahoma City, not against it.  However, we have strong objections to any plan to expand passenger rail service which leaves out northeastern Oklahoma.  The two plans are not mutually exclusive.  They can be jointly pursued.  Both parts of the state can be served.  The state of Oklahoma, perhaps with federal matching dollars, can provide passenger rail service from Oklahoma City to the north and also the the northeast, to Stroud, Bristow, Sapulpa, Tulsa, Claremore, the Grand Lake area, Vinita and Miami.

We ask you, please do not leave out northeastern Oklahoma again.  Begin the process, in a real, meaningful way, to bring passenger rail service to us.  Allow us the same alternative method of transportation available to the central corridor.  

Please contact us, especially if you have any objections to extending passenger rail service to northeastern Oklahoma.  We would like to have open discussions with you on this issue and help resolve any problems with might exist.

Sincerely,

The Tulsa City Council

[perspicuity85]

quote:Originally posted by rickwestcott

I think you guys are right.  It's time for those of you who are in favor of extending passenger rail service to Tulsa and northeastern Oklahoma to contact your State Representatives and Senators.  I've been trying to make all the noise that I can, but I am only one small City Councilor.

Below is the text of a letter which the Tulsa City Council recently sent to each and every State Representative and State Senator.  No one has yet responded.

Thank you all for your honest discussion on this issue.  I certainly don't have all the answers, but I believe that this is an issue which must be pursued.  I believe that it is one part of the answers to several problems which we face.

Thanks,

Rick Westcott
Tulsa City Council
District 2



Dear Senator Pro Tempore Morgan and House Speaker Benge:

We are writing to urge you, in the strongest terms, to begin taking steps to bring passenger rail service to the Tulsa metropolitan area and all of northeastern Oklahoma.

In 1993, the Oklahoma Legislature passed a law which only allows state funding for passenger rail service that includes both Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

In 1999, the Heartland Flyer began operating between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth.  At that time, the Oklahoma Legislature promised northeastern Oklahomans that we would soon have passenger rail service.

The Heartland Flyer still does not serve Tulsa, yet it receives approximately two million dollars in state funds each year.

In 2006, the Tulsa City Council, the Indian Nations Council of Governments' Board of Directors, and other municipalities in this area unanimously passed resolutions asking you to extend Amtrak service to northeastern Oklahoma.

In 2006, Tulsa hosted an Amtrak conference, which many of you attended.  Amtrak executives expressed a strong interest in extending the Heartland Flyer from Oklahoma City to Tulsa.

Early in 2007, the Oklahoma Department of Transportation asked Amtrak to conduct a study on the Oklahoma City-to-Tulsa route.

In 2007, the City Councils of Oklahoma City and Tulsa presented a joint state legislative agenda to you.  One of the items on that joint agenda was extending passenger rail service to Tulsa.  The agenda said, in part, "Oklahoma City and Tulsa both support any state efforts to secure Amtrak service for Tulsa, whether it is northeast to Missouri or southwest to Oklahoma City."

Extending passenger rail service to northeastern Oklahoma will carry a high price tag.  But, federal assistance may be available.  In late September, 2008, the House of Representatives passed a major funding bill for Amtrak.  The Senate passed it on October 1, 2008.  It still must be signed by President Bush and then go through appropriations.  But, one of the major features of the bill is a $1.9 billion matching grant program for states that are expanding passenger rail service.

Alternative forms of transportation make more sense now than ever before.  Oil and gasoline prices are, at the moment, decreasing.  However, we need only to look back a few weeks to see the potential for sudden, skyrocketing increases.  Besides offering a more economical way of travel, passenger rail service helps to decrease our dependence upon foreign oil.  Increased highway traffic congestion and increased delays at our airports also signal a need for an alternative method of transportation.  A very large percentage of our population would rather take the train than drive.

It now appears that the Heartland Flyer will be extended from Oklahoma City, north along Interstate 35, to Newton, Kansas.  Such a connection would serve an additional population of approximately one-half million people who live in the vicinity of Interstate 35.  Once again, over a million people who live in the Tulsa metropolitan area and northeastern Oklahoma would be left out.  Once again, northeastern Oklahomans would be forced to subsidize alternative transportation for others.

We have no objection to extending the Heartland Flyer to the north.  It is our desire to work with Oklahoma City, not against it.  However, we have strong objections to any plan to expand passenger rail service which leaves out northeastern Oklahoma.  The two plans are not mutually exclusive.  They can be jointly pursued.  Both parts of the state can be served.  The state of Oklahoma, perhaps with federal matching dollars, can provide passenger rail service from Oklahoma City to the north and also the the northeast, to Stroud, Bristow, Sapulpa, Tulsa, Claremore, the Grand Lake area, Vinita and Miami.

We ask you, please do not leave out northeastern Oklahoma again.  Begin the process, in a real, meaningful way, to bring passenger rail service to us.  Allow us the same alternative method of transportation available to the central corridor.  

Please contact us, especially if you have any objections to extending passenger rail service to northeastern Oklahoma.  We would like to have open discussions with you on this issue and help resolve any problems with might exist.

Sincerely,

The Tulsa City Council

Mr. Westcott,

Your letter makes excellent points, and flows nicely.  The only critique I have is the lack of disclosed benefits to the state of Oklahoma as a whole and OKC.  Your letter does an excellent job of explaining why Tulsa and NE Oklahoma benefit from Amtrak service, but I think the letter would be more powerful if you mentioned the general state and OKC's benefit.  Tell them how the Tulsa MSA leads the state in export value, with $2.2 Billion worth of goods each year, while simultaneously lacking important means of transportation for business travelers.  Or, possibly mention the fact that the Tulsa MSA accounts for 30% of the state's GDP, while the OKC metro area accounts for 37% of the state's GDP.  Why wouldn't the state want to connect its two main economic engines, which account for 2/3 of the state's GDP, with every mode of transportation infrastructure available?

I just think making people recognize "what's in it for them" aids in the decision process.  Thank you for your attention to this issue.

[rickwestcott]

I agree and I appreciate your input.  We plan to follow-up with another letter in a couple of weeks which will discuss economic factors.  My intent, in this one, was to begin laying out just a little of the history of the development of the Flyer and the Legislature's neglect of NE Oklahoma.

This was just a first shot.  It's going to be a long fight and I welcome the help.

Thanks,

RDW

[Transport_Oklahoma]

Yes thank you councilor for your work on behalf of the region regarding this important issue!

[Transport_Oklahoma]

California voters approved a $9.9 billion bond issue to build high speed rail between San Francisco and Los Angeles.

[PonderInc]

I think that there are a lot of Tulsans who would support this service (and other rail options), but are unaware of how to help/get invovled.

Perhaps it's time for some sort of transit alliance in Tulsa?

I really appreciate Councillor Westcott staying on top of this issue, and posting the above information.  Thanks for being an advocate for rail in Tulsa.  

It will take a lot of Tulsans coming together and speaking with a unified voice to be heard in the OK Legislature.

Please let me know what I can do to help.

[Gold]

Good thread and Mr. Westcott's thoughts are much appreciated.