(The following story by Nancy Remsen appeared on the Burlington Free Press website on February 26, 2009.)
MONTPELIER, Vt. — Amtrak officials told lawmakers Wednesday that they would help the state carry out whatever decision is made about Ethan Allen Express, a train running between Rutland and New York City.
Advertisement
But they offered plenty of arguments to keep it.
The Douglas administration proposed discontinuing the train, at least temporarily, and replacing it with a bus service that would connect passengers from Burlington south to Bennington with trains in Albany. The switch would save about $800,000 and help make up for shrinking transportation revenue. The state subsidy to keep running the Ethan Allen next year would be $1.49 million.
The Agency of Transportation proposed the cut in the fall, but lawmakers postponed their decision so they could weigh the policy implications. The Ethan Allen’s future will be decided when the Legislature makes a host of budget choices in late March and April.
In the meantime, train supporters have rallied and lobbied to keep the Ethan Allen because of its economic impact. Some also argue now is a good time to extend the train service to Burlington to tap into the biggest population base in the state.
“Would you be interested in running train service up to Burlington?” House Transportation Chairman Richard Westman, R-Cambridge, asked William Hollister, principal officer of Amtrak strategic partnerships.
“If you are interested, we are interested,” Hollister replied. “We are here to work with you.”
“We really do value our partnership with the state of Vermont,” added Ray Lang, senior director of government affairs for Amtrak. Vermont is one of 14 states that partner with Amtrak to offer passenger train service. Vermont has two lines, the Ethan Allen Express running on the western side of the state and the Vermonter, which runs from St. Albans to Essex Junction then southeast to White River Junction and south through Massachusetts and Connecticut to New York.
“Vermont is not alone in looking at whether or not to continue funding all or part of its passenger service,” Lang said. Still, he argued, “The future of rail is bright.”
For example, ridership on trains is increasing, he said. The number of passengers on the Amtrak system jumped by 3 million in the past year, Lang said. Riders continued to choose trains, he noted, even after gasoline prices declined.
There’s new political support for rail in Washington, D.C., Lang said. The economic stimulus legislation, for example, includes significant funding for Amtrak and for rail improvements, he said.
Lang urged Vermont to seek a grant for track improvements along the western corridor from an $8 billion pot of rail stimulus funding.
“I’m just so optimistic about that,” Lang said of that money. “It would help you save that train.”
Amtrak officials cautioned lawmakers that it would be challenging to resume the service if the state stopped running the train. The cars would be moved to other lines where trains are running at capacity.
Hollister said, however, that Amtrak would work with the state to establish a “thruway motorcoach connection” if officials chose to switch to bus service.
Lawmakers asked if the state bought its own cars, would Amtrak operate them?
“As long as it meets Federal Railroad Administration regulations,” Hollister said, “we will work with a state to operate that.”
Amtrak officials said no passenger car manufacturers remain in the United States. European cars aren’t built to the same crash standard because they are less likely to share tracks with freight trains.
Amtrak officials had a question for the House Transportation Committee. “What is your process?” Hollister posed. “When is your estimated date of decision?”
“No decision keeps the train running,” Westman said. “It’s still in the budget until July.”