It will be interesting to watch how the debate over the expansion of southeastern Wisconsin’s mass transit system splits the region’s business community into two factions: those who want to invest public dollars to expand and improve the mass transit system, and those who do not.
The roster of the camp of supporters for improved and expanded mass transit reads like a who’s who of business in the region:
- “This is not a want, this is an absolute need for the community,” said Tim Sullivan, president and chief executive officer of South Milwaukee-based Bucyrus International Inc.
- “It’s critical that this legislation pass during the spring 2010 session,” said Robert Mariano, chairman and CEO of Milwaukee-based Roundy’s Supermarkets Inc. “It is foolish to ignore, this is an economic development issue. Transit builds the economy.”
- “For the vitality of southeastern Wisconsin, getting this bill through the legislature is critical,” said Scott VanderSanden, president of AT&T Wisconsin.
- “We believe regional transit and the KRM is an important investment in the future of our region,” said J. Fisk Johnson, chairman and CEO of Racine-based S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. “More efficient and more affordable public transit can help make a city an even more attractive place for business and can help the vibrancy of a community. The lack of accessibility to Milwaukee and Chicago is a big reason it is more challenging to attract key people to our company.”
- “It’s really frustrating to see the constant deterioration of public transit,” said Ed Zore, CEO of Milwaukee-based Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. “It’s really important for business to have a good public transit system.” Zore said about 700 of his company’s employees use public transit.
Add to this lineup the likes of Greater Milwaukee Committee president Julia Taylor and Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC) vice president Pete Beitzel, and we’ve got a critical mass of business interests lining up in support of mass transit.
Beitzel says the debate reminds him of the conversation that took place when the Eisenhower administration embarked on the creation of America’s Interstate Highway system. Public dollars created a system that was not financially self-sustaining, but provided benefits for the common good - mainly interstate commerce and travel.
“This is the beginning of a sort of mini interstate of rail service, and Milwaukee is lucky because some forms of manufacturing and maintenance will be done here and that’s a major positive for job creation,” Beitzel said. “The work being done on the track before, during and after construction will create jobs here, it will reduce travel time, and the additional set of trains will allow us to eventually increase service frequency back and forth. People will say it’s a lot of money, but they said the same thing when we were establishing the interstate highway program. When initially establishing any infrastructure it’s not cheap, but for Milwaukee the facility is already here, we aren’t going to have to put a lot of extra money into the project.”
The new debate over mass transit escalated late last week, when BizTimes Milwaukee broke the exclusive story that the Obama administration intends to spend $810 million in federal bucks to build a high-speed railroad to connect Milwaukee to Madison.
Normally, the news that the federal government will spend more than $800 million in a state is warmly greeted by the local folks. However, look for the local impact of the federal gravy train to be a focus of debate in Wisconsin’s gubernatorial race.
Critics of the high-speed rail project say the state will be left holding the bag for high maintenance and operating costs. Those fears will no doubt be fanned by Milwaukee’s talk radio hosts, who have been screaming for years against any public investments in things that go “Choo! Choo!”
We’ll explore the arguments both for and against expanded mass transit in future editions of BizTimes Milwaukee. Stay tuned.
Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.
24 Comments
Actually, Steve, you've summed up the two sides quite well. On the one side: calls for progress from civic leaders. On the other, name calling and the "not with my dime" crowd. Meanwhile, we watch as we repair the zoo interchange (only to have to repair it again later). Can't wait to see this one progress.
Mr. Jagler- you need to work harder at trying to appear to be neutral on this issue. You spend nearly all your discussion regurgitating the propaganda from the proponents of the train boondoggles and then write one sentence stating what the opposition is about, followed by a put down. You are not neutral or unbiased on the issue.
It is important to note that one of the primary reasons behind the $800+ million train to the Madison airport is to reduce carbon emissions. How many of these executives use a corporate private jet? If they are so concerned about carbon, why don't they show leadership and stoop down with the common folk they aspire to lead and sacrifice by using first class air travel on common public air transport? To make it easy, we won't hold it against them if they use the executive airport lounges. And to really show their leadership, why don't they get rid of their drivers, and ride the bus and the train to work and their appointments? I believe there is a bus route on Lake Drive.
PS- None of these executives would risk their personal or corporate monies on this supposed "investment" in trains. So can any of these execs or supposed civic leaders tell us what the estimated subsidy per rider is for Madison airport or KRM train? Maybe a hard analysis of these boondoggles would actually be a news story in a business journal or a newspaper. Nah, that's a lot of work.
Let's see, who should we really listen to? Radio talk show hosts? Or, truly successful business people like Messrs. Sullivan, Mariano, Johnson, VanderSanden Zore?
Hello,
First, Mr. Beitzel, a railroad is nothing like a highway. And we have a rail system that already costs us a lot of money.
My answer is simple, If all you folks feel that this is a great idea, Mr. Fisk, AT&T, Bucyrus, and Northwest Mutual should start a joint venture, no need for the federal grant, then as a Private rail, you can either make money or lose it. But I guess because you are not going to do this, and that you are smart business people, you won't.
Put your money were your mouth is folks.
I live in Oslo Norway part of most months as my partner Nick runs a global business from here. If people in Wisconsin could see what a train system---between cities and within cities --- provides to residents and business alike, we'd all be dancing in the streets. Wisconsinites need to think bigger and longer term.
Mr. Jagler says, "Normally, the news that the federal government will spend more than $800 million in a state is warmly greeted by the local folks." Translation: "Used to be the local rubes just assumed that no critical thought is needed when 'free federal money' is at stake." But, nowadays people are starting to realize that the Chinese expect that money to be paid back some day and our grandchildren will be the ones paying them. So, maybe we ought to actually have a firm understanding of the costs and benefits before we spend all that "free" money and undertake an endless future commitment of taxpayer funds to feed the transit beast Gov. Doyle proposes. Is it wrong for taxpayers to want robust, factual, credible justification when evaluating a potential boondoggle?
Mr. Jagler says BizTimes is going to provide a full discussion of the pros and cons. Well, in Tuesday's BizBlog, Julia Taylor's call to follow Gov. Doyle's massive initiative was a content-free exhortation to take the plunge as a leap of faith. She states that we have "transit shortcomings." We are told "local business, labor and civic communities...understand that funding for transit is critical to the future of our region...will preserve and expand job opportunities...allow us to be competitive in attracting and retaining top talent." And we get the mandatory promise of "jobs, economic development and property tax relief."
Speaking for taxpayers, the commenters to Ms. Taylor's blog seem to crave factual justification from the transit evangelizers. Commenter Bill Marsh repeats the often heard, but unanswered basic question: What is the projected taxpayer subsidy per ride? He even allows for the inevitable "pumped-up best case scenario" that the supporters are sure to provide. (Recall the healthy user predictions by the advocates for the federally subsidized bus bike rack program? Recall the pitiful actual user numbers this past year?) All we get are bare assertions by the "who's who of business in the region," no facts, no real arguments.
Tell us precisely: Who exactly is going to use these trains? In what numbers? For what purposes? At what fares? Tell us why our common sense doubts about efficacy and ridership will prove to be any less accurate than our now vindicated doubts about the bus bike rack program. Tell us what the initial outlay will be and what the continuing operating costs will be. (You'll excuse us if we allow for the customary governmental fudge factor.) Tell us why alternate, more flexible, less massive-infrastructure-dependent transportation options won't work.
Train advocates who want to counter the talk radio train skeptics whom they enjoy bashing so much, should understand that a fact-filled cost benefit analysis will go a lot further than the bare assertions of a lot of "business, labor and civic communities" and the journalists that repeat their talking points.
I really question if the utilization of this high speed line will cover the expense of operating it. It won't be cheap to operate it and unless it can support itself with users it's a bad investment. I like most other sales people won't use it. It won't get me to the 15 - 20 accounts in the Madison area that I need to call on. The cost of the train plus a bunch of taxi ride bills will most likely exceed the cost of driving to Madison and making the calls on my own. It won't save me any time, I get to Madison in 45 - 50 minutes from where I live. Getting from my home to a local stop plus the time the train takes to Madison will exceed that. The train will not be hitting the touted 100 MPH for a long time, there has to be major changes to the route to allow those speeds, unless a large number of deaths at grade level crossings from the Illinois border to Madison is an acceptable cost to State residents.
On the UP side if the Spanish manufacturer is really serious about build the trains in Milwaukee and continuing to build them here for US projects then that is a good idea, because the fools in Washington will keep pushing this as a Green Project. If they are going to sell a "Pig in a poke" it may as well be made in Wisconsin!
As an alternate to flying to the Twin Cities, it's probably a good idea, but again will it be able to support that use? You don't see all that much traffic on I-94 when you get past Wisconsin Dells when you eliminate the truck traffic. If 30% of the auto traffic count in that area at a price considerably less than air fare would support that leg, then maybe it would be a good idea, but I doubt it
Kay Plantes: We did "think bigger and longer term." It was in the 1950s and 60s. It's called the interstate highway system. If Norway had built one, its citizens would be driving on the streets, not dancing in them.
Hey, Steve! Howz that corporate jet?
Let's get the KRM Line line operating before I-94 is torn up for widening. We are the nation's last major population center without commuter rail.
RE Ms. Plante- I do find it comical that you speak of the wonders of the train system in Norway, a country with a large part of its wealth attributable to oil. Incidentally, Wisconsin and the US are not Norway, our governments are broke (we don't drill for all our offshore oil like they do in Norway), and a slow train to the Madison airport is not going to turn things around in the short or long term.
PS-I'm still waiting to hear from the train proponents what the taxpayer subsidy per ride is for the Madison airport and KRM trains. I believe most of the proponents don't know what it is, and those that do won't state it because it is indefensible. But obviously the proponents are the thinking ones.
As I said in Ms. Taylor's post I just do not see who the target market for this train is. I have several clients in the Madison area and quite frankly the car commute up there is very easy. It's far different than going into Chicago where a high speed train connection might make some sense.
The fact is that the train will not save anyone any time nor will it save any money over a commute by car. So who is the ridership?
I have respect for the executives who are in favor of this. However, I've noticed that once a person has more money than they know what to do with a la Fisk Johnson, they tend to become liberal in their views almost so they can seem like they really relate to the common man. If the train is such a great idea, Fisk Johnson has more than enough money to start his own line and profit off of it.
Another point is that this is not money from the Obama Administration. It is money from us, the taxpayers. It's money we don't have judging by the deficits we are running
This is going to be fun to watch: The curmudgeons try to stop the state from getting $800 million to build a great new high-speed rail system that will put thousands of people to work in Wisconsin. When this thing hooks up with the Twin Cities and Chicago, and from Chicago to St. Louis, Indianapolis and beyond, it's going to change the way we travel, work and do business. The opponents are on the wrong side of history on this one!
I don't expect Steve to actually research his assertions; he's had opportunity prior this posting and never followed through. So let's ask the thoughtful proponents for some of the simple answers.
John W - How many thousands will work and what will they be doing? According to the post the rails are in place.
John W - We have had a train for over 30 years to Chicago. What is going to change the way we travel with yet another train?
Lou - We have a train now. Do you believe it will actually reach capacity when I94 construction starts? Especially given I94 has been under construction for the last 4 years and the train is still not at capacity.
Kay - Please tell us what percent of the population of Norway uses the train. Is it more than 2%?
John m - at the moment the talk show hosts are the only people actually doing research and providing NUmBERS. Can you refute the facts and figures they are providing?
Bob W - Are you aware you are the person who is 'name calling'? Second progress moves forward by definition. What about a train can you back with facts that is progress in contrast to the mass transit already in place?
Ok, guys and gals; start your research and the rest of us bad people; who want to KNOW the facts before jumping in will wait for your answers. By all means; feel free to jump in Steve.
I am willing to give successful business people the benefit of the doubt if they are truly confident that high-speed rail will have an economic benefit to the region.
Why not split the cost in half between the taxpayers and the businesses. In addition, pledge to pay back the businesses the $400 million after 2 years if the project is a success and can stand on its own.
Man, the "Just say no" to any kind of progress crowd is obnoxious and mean. Good thing they're still out of power. Just flatulent.
Excellent argument Bakken. Now go home and tell your mommy.
You stay classy, Bill Marsh.
Paul, they wear their ignorance with pride. You can't reason with that, best case scenario is to shake your head and don't let them stop you.
They aren't looking out for the country's best interests, they're not even looking out for their own. The goal is obstruction by any means necessary.
If more liberals and moderates learn this, high speed rail will be the least of our country's accomplishments.
Spending money you don't have is an accomplishment?
I thought BM would be the first to pounce... I tip my hat to you Chris, you've proved my point.
Bob Johnson writes: "Lou - We have a train now. Do you believe it will actually reach capacity when I94 construction starts? Especially given I94 has been under construction for the last 4 years and the train is still not at capacity."
Bob - you're referring to the Amtrak Hiawatha, I believe, a fast Chicago-Milwaukee intercity/interstate train with three intermediate stations that zooms past farms and fields away from the population centers. I see you didn't know it's at record ridership and at capacity.
I assume your argument is based on that we already have the one rail line, the Hiawatha. Besides that it's not a commuter line and is far from the population centers along the North Shore, we also have numerous highways and several airports. And now Milwaukee County wants us all to buy them yet another highway, I-794 from Milwaukee southward, despite a record of past massive opposition from Racine County. Our attentions should be based on that unnecessary, unwanted waste of farmland and money.
Good morning Lou, thanks for asking the question. Ridership is up; 738,000 per year 2009 on 7 daily rounds trips only averaging 2300 passengers per day (counting weekends as one day to give the benefit of the doubt). Sadly no where near the maximum capacity of roughly over 2,000,000 and less than uses I-94 in a single week. It just does not work, especially if the governent runs it. Remember it is governent that regulated and taxed the old rail system to extinction. The downfall is most often attributed to the rise of the automobile. Not true, the two modes lived together well for decades UNTIL government start to tinker with regulating and taxing the rails to death.
True that it is not a commuter line; commuter lines are slower due to the increased number of stops. They are report as "capable" of one hundred miles per hour but will never average more than 45 or 50 when the stops are factored into the route.
I don't support the I-794 extension, it is not warranted or needed (like KRm or madmil). There is not demand for it. I'm pretty sure you can reach the Hiawatha in five to ten minutes from the north shore, I doubt they will move it closer.
There is another parallel between the interstate highway system and high speed rail. Both have to do with national security, and are being sold on that basis. Clearly, any steps we can take towards energy independence only improve our national security. High speed rail helps us be less dependent on foreign oil. And though it did not get much publicity, poor rail service and disrepair actually delayed the transportation of supplies needed by our military to fight the Gulf War in Iraq.