Streetsblog Los Angeles

Starting on June 1, the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner service connecting San Luis Obispo to San Diego by way of Los Angeles is adopting a new policy that will make life harder for anyone planning on biking to or from the train. The policy is so onerous for bicycle commuters, one has to assume it’s intentional.

Click on the image to see their current rider brochure for the Surfliner. The new bicycle policy is after the timetable at the bottom of page 2.

Amtrak will require reservations and a $5 fee to “accommodate” bicycles on the Pacific Surfliner. A cyclist will either have to call Amtrak or go to the ticketing window to make a bike reservation and pay the fee; there isn’t any way to do this online because Amtrak apparently is operating in 1992. This change will apply to everyone: occasional riders, Amtrak monthly pass holders and Rail2Rail/Metrolink monthly pass holders.

“The Surfliner serves the most popular bicycle tourism route in the country, so it’s frustrating to see Amtrak California antagonizing what would otherwise be one of its most loyal customer bases,” writes Eric Bruins, the Program and Policy Director for the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.  ”

For any Surfliner rider who uses a bicycle to connect to the train this new policy will add $1250 a year in costs (one-way travel on Amtrak, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year), in addition to the time and hassle of making reservations for every Amtrak trip. The Streetsblog reader who pointed this out is already making commuter accomodations that don’t include riding Amtrak services.

“Instead of dealing with its capacity issues, Amtrak is suppressing demand with a reservation scheme that makes commuting prohibitively expensive and leisure travel burdensome,” Bruins continues.  ”I hope Amtrak reverses this poor business decision and instead seeks to grow ridership by promoting bike-train travel as a convenient and cost-effective way to enjoy California’s coastal destinations.”

Bruins’ anger was reflected by bike advocates at the other end of the Surfliner Tracks. Read more…

Amtrak has seen ridership grow 55 percent since 1997, faster than any other transportation mode. Image: Brookings

Let it be known: Amtrak is the fastest!

Fastest-growing, that is. Since 1997, Amtrak ridership has grown 55 percent — faster than the general population, faster then GDP, faster than air travel, faster than driving, faster than any other mode of transportation.

Even in a difficult political environment, more people are choosing Amtrak, according to a new analysis by the Brookings Institution. A record 31 million passengers took advantage of the rail service in 2012.

But the picture is very uneven. Almost two-thirds of Amtrak’s total ridership comes from just ten metro areas — mostly big cities in the Northeast Corridor and in California. The New York metro area alone accounted for more than 17 percent of boardings and disembarkments. Greater Washington, D.C. accounted for a 9 percent share and Philadelphia 8.5 percent.

Big cities, in general, make up a disproportionate share of Amtrak ridership. Together, America’s 100 largest metro areas combine to produce almost 90 percent of all the agency’s trips, Brookings found.

But it appears the single biggest determinant of the success of an Amtrak line, however, is the length of the trip. Routes under 400 miles — short-distance corridors — carried 83 percent of all riders. Almost all of the ridership gains over the last 16 years came from the 26 routes that travel distances less than 400 miles. These routes, taken together, operate at a profit.

“Simply put, short-distance routes are the engines of Amtrak ridership,” wrote authors Robert Puentes, Adie Tomer, and Joseph Kane.

Read more…

Photo:Wikimedia

With much ballyhoo two years ago Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner converted one of its morning trips between San Diego to Los Angeles into an express, removing stops to reduce running time.

I was startled at the headline for the Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada (RailPAC) latest e-newsletter blast: “Caltrans says dump the Surfliner Express”. This is based on a presentation made at the Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency Technical Advisory Committee meeting last week.

Here is the gist of the situation: Read more…

For the past two years, Amtrak has been under constant attack from House Transportation Committee Chair John Mica (R-FL), who has used his gavel to bully the rail company. He likes to call it a “Soviet-style” monopoly and he goads it for losing money on everything from long-distance routes to food service. His vitriolic diatribes against Amtrak have become white noise, and they’re about to fade into the background as Mica surrenders his post to Rep. Bill Shuster next year.

Will Amtrak's reorganization plan be enough to turn the rail line around? And will it be enough for the GOP to call off the dogs? Photo: Amtrak/Gary Pancavage

Still, Mica got a chance to trot them out yesterday at a Transportation Committee hearing on Amtrak’s reorganization plan.

Mica and Shuster teamed up last year to push a plan to privatize Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor service – the only place where Amtrak makes money. Republicans have also ceaselessly advocated for ending – or at least dramatically cutting – Amtrak’s government subsidies.

That demand doesn’t sit well with Democrats like Rep. Laura Richardson, who pointed out in yesterday’s hearing — as some Democrat always does — that “we spent more in one year with the oil and gas and energy companies and their industry than we have spent in the life of the program of Amtrak.”

The Mica-Shuster privatization proposal also met with such a fierce backlash that Mica and Shuster were forced to shelve it.

Amtrak has a different idea for how it’s going to move into the 21st century and, they hope, become “more like a business and less like a government agency,” according to Amtrak CEO Joseph Boardman. The Government Accountability Office criticized Amtrak in 2005 for not having a strategic plan, and the rail agency jumped into action – if acting six years later can be considered “jumping” – and is now in the middle of a reorganization that started last year and is due to be complete by the end of next year.

The strategic plan includes safety improvements, better risk management, energy efficiency, and lots of internal operational changes that the public will probably not perceive.

The plan’s main dish is to segment the company into six “business lines”: Northeast Corridor Infrastructure and Investment Development, Northeast Corridor Operations, State Services, Commuter Services, Long-Distance Services, and Corporate Asset Development.

Again, such internal corporate restructuring may not get most people’s pulses racing with excitement – but Dan Schned of the Regional Plan Association says there’s a nugget of gold buried in there.

Read more…

Here are updates on two issues I have been paying close attention to: TAP and the LOSSAN takeover of the Surfliner.

With no fanfare several of the Los Angeles County municipal bus operators (including Foothill and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus) as of November 1st are providing paper TAP cards when patrons purchase transfers to continue their trip via Metro Rail. This resolves one of the outstanding issues that was blocking the locking of the gates at the Red/Purple Line stations.

Steve Hymon at The Source reports at last week’s Metro Board Executive Management Committee meeting the committee members gave a chilly reception to option 2 which would involve discontinuing Metrolink fare media including free transfers to Metro bus and rail service. I imagine the full Board when it meets next month will give a similar thumbs down to that idea. Which leaves the Metrolink ticket machine conversion option the only viable one on the table.

My reading of the minutes of the Oct. 12th Metrolink Board meeting (pp. 13-15 of the Nov. 16th agenda packet) is that they are rather unhappy at the position Metro’s handling of TAP and the gating has put them in. Even the Metro representative sounds a tad defensive and uncomfortable.

At least after I previously lamented the lack of details about how much having selected Metrolink ticket machines converted to issue TAP cards would cost Metrolink the Nov. 16th Metrolink Board agenda (which can be accessed by the link in the preceding paragraph) has two items, #7 & #8, that provide those details.

Forgive me but WOW!!! We are talking MILLIONS, kids. Be still my heart! Read more…

Temporary Solutions for Metrolink’s TAP Issue Shelved

The ongoing saga of Metrolink & TAP is apparently not going to end anytime soon. At the Oct. 12th meeting of the Metrolink Board of Directors, the Board decided to not adopt the proposed solution to the connectivity issues between Metrolink and Metro trains caused by the “locking” of the fare gates. The rejected plan involved paper TAP cards being distributed daily by hand to Metrolink patrons to allow them access to gated Red and Purple Line stations starting January 1. Starting in March,  Metrolink would have supplied monthly pass purchasers with a temporary plastic 30-day TAP card each month.

More on everyone's favorite topic: TAP! Photo:The Source

The Board requested efforts be made to find a more permanent solution and requested that Metro delay the locking of the gates if need be until a more permanent solution can be found.. Scott Johnson, Assistant Public Affairs Officer at Metrolink, characterizes the situation thusly:

This is an ongoing collaboration between the two agencies and their respective boards. No definitive timetable has been established. The issue will continue to be discussed through internal meetings, alongside public committee and board meetings.

Status Update on Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner transition to local management

At its meeting on Oct. 15th, the Board of the Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN) adopted a new amended timetable for selecting a managing agency for the Surfliner. The new schedule is markedly less hectic than their original plans, and aimed at commencing early next year:

Overall, member agencies are asked to schedule consideration [of the amended Joint Powers Agreement and bylaws] by their individual governing boards between October 2012 and January 2013, at which time the LOSSAN Board would consider releasing the RFP, with a due date for proposals in early March and potential selection [of a managing agency] by the Board at their April meeting. SANDAG will continue to provide administrative support during this time. The start date of the negotiation period, July 1, 2013, does not change

Considering LOSSAN has nine member agencies, the process of having the amended JPA agreement and bylaws approved by the various governing boards indeed will likely take until early next year.

Metro and the Orange County Transit Authority are thus far the two agencies that have signaled they will be vying to be selected as the managing agency (which will provide office space, administrative support, etc. to the managing director who will be selected by the LOSSAN Board to handle day to day management of the Surfliner along with staff the Director will hire).

The FlyAway Read more…

A Surfliner plies the coast on the LOSSAN corridor. Photo by Nick Chill Photography.

Now that the Governor has signed the bills to allow local stakeholders to take over management of the Pacific Surfliner and San Joaquin Amtrak intercity rail routes the next steps are the formation of the joint power authority boards and in the case of the Surfliner the selection of a managing agency from among the members of LOSSAN (aka the Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor).

Metro has already declared it will be applying to be the managing agency. Now OCTA has an item on its agenda today (#8) from staff seeking from their Board the “Authority to Submit a Proposal to Assume the Role of Managing Agency for the Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor.”

In making the case for it to be selected OCTA states:

OCTA could be well positioned to assume the role of the LOSSAN managing agency, given its ownership stake in 42 miles of 351-mile LOSSAN Rail Corridor, between Fullerton and San Clemente, as well as its extensive experience in funding and managing rail capital projects on the LOSSAN Rail Corridor. OCTA had played an integral role in advancing and building consensus around the new LOSSAN governance initiative. In addition, OCTA brings a breadth of management experience in a number of different transportation enterprises, including bus transit, freeway projects, local street and road improvements, motorist services, the 91 Express Lanes toll road, and oversight of Metrolink commuter rail operations in Orange County.

Since 2009, OCTA has filled a similar role as the provider of administrative services to the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG), which reimburses OCTA for the shared services provided in support of OCCOG. Based on its experience with OCCOG, OCTA staff will work to develop a staffing plan and cost proposal to provide administrative services for LOSSAN, as the LOSSAN managing agency.

Nicely OCTA has an attachment to the staff report with details on LOSSAN’s process for selecting a managing agency including a draft timeline.

Should be interesting whether any other agencies step forward and decide to throw their hat in the ring.

BTW, the only media coverage I have found of this process is a recent brief article on the San Joaquin bill that appeared in The Riverbank News brought to my attention by local rail/transit enthusiast Ken Ruben. Other than that all there has been is the pick-up of my coverage of Metro’s plans to apply to be managing agency by The Source. And rest assured we will continue coverage of this process as it proceeds.

The Surfliner. Photo:Fast Lane

In my recent piece on the proposed local takeover of the Pacific Surfliner inter-city rail route the pivotal question I poised multiple times was which agency would take on the responsibility of managing the service.

The title of agenda item #46 among the consent items on the Metro Board agenda yesterday gives us the name of the first candidate agency to emerge: “Direct staff to prepare a Proposal for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) to become the Managing Agency of the Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Service”.

Besides repeating some of the goals the local stakeholders have given for seeking to take over managing the route, the staff report lays out the reasons why Metro believes it should be selected to manage the Surfliner:

Metro is a major member agency of the LOSSAN JPA. We are centrally located on the

LOSSAN Corridor. Our agency has the structure and staff capabilities to provide

management services to the JPA. In addition, we have sufficient office space to house

the management staff of the service and are centrally located to southern California.

If the Governor signs the Surfliner bill (he has until Sunday to decide whether to approve or veto it) the next stage of this drama will be acted out at the Oct. 15th LOSSAN Board meeting to be held at the Metro Headquarters Building. This should be when it becomes clear besides Metro which other of the LOSSAN member agencies are interested in being the Surfliner’s managing agency.

Photo of the Surfliner at a station, via 33http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AAmtrak_Pacific_Surfliner.jpg

Some 14 years after administration of the Amtrak Capitol Corridor intercity rail service was transferred from the state to a local association of transportation agencies along its corridor; two bills (Senate Bill 1225 and Assembly Bill 1779) have reached the Governor’s desk that would allow similar transfers for (respectively) the Southern California coastal Pacific Surfliner and central valley-bay area San Joaquin.

A new first person report by Dana Gabbard, available exclusively on Streetsblog, traces the history of the Amtrak corridors in California, how regional and national politics have impacted statewide rail service, and how the local politics have brought the state to consider this transfer. Gabbard’s report is neutral, seeking to inform readers of the technical details that go into Amtrak and regional rail planning in California.

At our request, Gabbard introduces the piece:

Proponents point to the success of the Capitols under local management as the model they hope to emulate. Key concerns if the bills are signed by the Governor are can the local agencies work out tensions between them over how the Boards of the new entities are structured, will the new management appreciate the key role of Thruway connecting bus service and the importance of preserving and improving it and can the local elected officials exercise “big picture” thinking and resist parochialism. Certainly one hopes if the Governor signs the bill that through channels it will be communicated that the process will not be hands free and the state will on an ongoing basis monitor the two route’s performance and act if they appear in danger of spiraling downward.

If you wish to share with the Governor concerns like these regarding the bills they can be sent via this online form, specifying in the subject the bill you are commenting on. The deadline for the Governor to act is the 30th.

You can read the full report, by clicking here.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has examined the question of whether the GOP plan to privatize Amtrak’s most valuable corridor is constitutional – and it’s determined that it is not.

Warning: this is about to get a little wonky. But I figure if Streetsblog readers can get all nerdy on transit, you can probably geek out on legalese every once in a while too.

CRS looked at two constitutional provisions and found that the GOP plan violates them both.

First: the Takings Clause [PDF]. The government is allowed to take private property for public use, as long as the owner is justly compensated. The bill proposes to transfer the corridor and rolling stock from Amtrak to the USDOT.

According to CRS, this poses three constitutional questions:

• Is Amtrak an entity outside the government? (It’s not a “taking” if property is transferred to different agencies within the government.) On this question, CRS says that the federal statute creating Amtrak unequivocally stated that it “is not a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government.” The courts have upheld this definition.
• Do the assets to be transferred constitute “property” under the Takings Clause? CRS says they are “classic, well-established forms of Taking Clause property.”
• Is the transfer of assets from Amtrak to USDOT a taking? Indeed, it’s a “paradigmatic” taking, according to CRS. The only way for the term not to apply is if the transfer were somehow deemed non-coercive, since the draft bill contains no mechanism for enforcement. Still, CRS concludes that the “not-truly-coercive argument seems unlikely to succeed.”

OK, so it’s a taking. That’s fine – as we said, the constitution allows takings – as long as they’re justly compensated and for the public use. Whatever you think of the plan to privatize Amtrak, apparently just about anything Congress decides to do satisfies the “public use” clause. But the question of compensation is thornier.

Read more…