Strickland, Lawmakers Climb Aboard Slow Train to the Past

Strickland, Lawmakers Climb Aboard Slow Train to the Past

New Train Technology Company Says Ohio Headed Down Wrong Track



Opeditude by John Michael Spinelli

COLUMBUS, OHIO: After weeks of political bickering over a $9.6 billion Ohio Transportation Budget that included a controversial plan to return antiquated passenger trains to the old freight rails that connect Cleveland with Cincinnati via Columbus, it appears both Democratic Governor Ted Strickland and Republican lawmakers area ready to board their slow, expensive train to the past.

The main talking point touted by government officials and their spokesmen, dutifully regurgitated without challenge by the media, was the "very rough" estimate of $250 in federal economic stimulus money to re-start the debt train to the past. The debt associated with this ill-defined, costly train is the estimated $10 million annual operating subsidy Ohio will be forced to supply for decades to come. This figure, along with the misleading statement that pricy upgrades to existing freight tracks over many years will eventually accommodate high-speed trains by 2016 at the earliest, were purposely downplayed to mainstream media sources that either didn't know the right questions to ask or were to castrated to challenge these estimates, which cannot be substantiated by any independent source even many studies undertaken over four decades.

While Republican legislators did challenge Strickland and his new transportation director, Jolene Molitoris, a former Federal Railroad Administration Administrator, on the real demand for and cost of passenger rail service and whether this is the right time to enter into such a big-ticket spending plan given the state's ailing economy and cascading budget shortfalls, the Controlling Board,a bi-partisan, bi-cameral group that approves certain state expenditures, did agreed to allow the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), through its captive agency on rail service, The Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC), to contract with the Woodside Consulting Group for $450,000 (downsized from $750,000 earlier in the year) in federal funds to prepare an analysis on railroad capacity. Woodside is to submit its findings by June 30, 2009.

Published reports quoted an ODOT spokesman saying construction costs for the return of passenger rail service were "very rough" estimates (translation: we don't know but it will probably cost more) and, therefore, not listed on the re-start funding request to the Controlling Board, now controlled by Democrats.

ODOT and ORDC want to spread $21 million in consulting contracts around to 42 consulting firms during 2009. Studies generally reflect the agenda of those paying for them, so one could conclude this is merely a way to fix the facts to the misguided policy to resume old train technology.

Media reports consistently failed to inform Ohioans that another $800 million or so will be needed to make this plan work. For their financing scenario to hold water, ORDC, defending its out-dated and inaccurate Hub Plan, says 80 perent of furture costs must come from Washington. This condition is pure fantasy, given how broke Washington is and how broke Ohio is to do much more itself. One Ohio blogger, David Esrati of Dayton OS , while he didn't talk about the full costs of the train or its ongoing subsidy or the liability (indemnification of the freight railroads) the state will assume for accidents that occur between freight and passenger trains running on the same track, he did say that if they don't go as fast as the Euro-style train he rode on between Paris and Long, the "slow train might as well be no train at all." Those like Mr. Esrati and me, who have not followed in lock step with administration officials and their supporters, have had to express contrary views in different ways.

The story by AP reporter Matt Leingang that appeard in the Newark Advocate about the competition Ohio finds itself in among other states with rail service far more advanced, may cause a pause for Ohio officials who know their plan will be idled if they don't get some of the $8 billion in stimulus money for rail projects.

The AP report said Illinois wants $500 million to upgrade Amtrak's Chicago-to-St. Louis passenger service so trains can zoom at up to 110 mph. New York Gov. David Paterson wants stimulus money to upgrade crossings so some trains could go from 79 mph to 110 mph within five years. Federal standards for high speed start at 120-mph. In California, where voters in November approved borrowing $9 billion to begin building a train that can reach 220 mph, the state has outlined $2 billion in rail projects that could be started before Sept. 30, 2012, the deadline for committing the $8 billion.

Ohioans, Leingang wrote, had a chance in 1982 to raise the state sales tax 1 percent to build an $8 billion high-speed rail system modeled after those in Europe. But they turned it down.

Molitoris, the first woman to head the FRA and ODOT, showed her commitment to rail when she testified this week to a House subcommittee studying high-speed rail.

While her commitment is what the press focuses on, its the technology that's key. Which technology is chosen determines costs, times and turnout of riders. The question is not whether passenger rail should return, it should. The question is what technology are you going to use.

If Ohio chooses, as it appears it will do, an old, slow, heavy and costly surface rail system, then that will be a bad decision that will haunt Ohio for decades to come. Molitoris and Gov. Strickland should be investing in future, not past, train technology.

As the Director of Ohio Operations for a new train technology company, Tubular Rail , we believe Ohio's decision to jump aboard the slow train it seemed destined to fund is the wrong decision at the wrong time. With alternative train technologies to choose from, it's unfortunate that state officials are so stuck in the past.

The New York Times reported today that China wants to be the leader in electric vehicles. Times reporter Keith Bradsher said China is "behind the United States, Japan and other countries when it comes to making gas-powered vehicles, but by skipping the current technology, China hopes to get a jump on the next."

Ohio is curiously incurious about new transportation technology. If the pharmaceutical industry were as innovation averse as Ohio transportation officials are to new train technology, aspirin and penicillin would be the best tools we have to overcome sickness.

By choosing the old train technology it has in this Transportation Budget, Ohio will only become more uncompetitive as other states or countries, like China, want to leap frog to the future. Being a leader means going first, not waiting for the all-safe siren to sound. No guts no glory. And Ohio needs some glory these days, what with jobs tied to Detroit's Big Three hanging in the balance and Ohio manufacturers, whose ranks were thinned by nearly 27,000 jobs in 2008, need a new industry to make parts for.

Charles Kettering, the Ohioan who invented the electric car ignition and got a suburb of Dayton named after him said of where his focus is, "My interest is in the future because I am going to spend the rest of my life there." Ohio leaders should heed his call to look forward not backward. Their decision with this Transportation Budget tells tell the world Ohio would rather look to the past for inspiration than to the future where innovation resides.

John Michael Spinelli is an economic development professional, business and travel writer and former Ohio Statehouse political reporter. He is also Director of Ohio Operations for Tubular Rail Inc. To send a tip or comment, email ohionewsbureau@gmail.com