INDIANAPOLIS - Supporters of passenger rail service are making a last-ditch attempt to save the Hoosier State train.

The four-day, Indianapolis-to-Chicago line will end operations on July 1 unless state lawmakers restore $3 million in annual funding that was cut from the upcoming biennium state budget. While ridership fell nearly 18% between 2014 and 2018, Steve Coxhead, presidnt of the Indiana Passenger Rail Alliance, said the state hasn't invested in improving the service.

"It is kind of a Catch-22," she said. "The governor says ridership has been disappointing, and we make the case that you have to have at least two trains in each direction each day, possibly three, in order to have a realistic chance of generating enough ridership to cover an operating cost."

Without the 196-mile Hoosier State train, the three-day-a-week, long-distance Cardinal train is the only other route option. Officials with Amtrak Midwest, Indianapolis and Beech Grove will make a plea to save the service today at a 2:30 p.m. event at the Amtrak Beech Grove Shops. A state budget must be approved by April 29.

If the service ends, Amtrak estimates 59% of passengers would drive instead. Coxhead said that would collectively amount to more than 4 million miles by car annually.

"If you monetize the cost of putting all those extra cars on, like, I-65 for instance, it's actually quite a significant cost," he said. "The train actually would save the state about $3,154,000 in road maintenance and congestion costs."

Indiana began funding the Hoosier State train in 2015 after federal funding ceased for Amtrak routes shorter than 750 miles. Coxhead contended that $3 billion annually is a relatively small part of a $34 billion budget.

"The governor is planning to spend something like $80 million on hiking and bike trails in the state," he said, "and while there's certainly nothing wrong with that and they're probably needed, it seems disproportionate when you talk about what's potentially the most important passenger rail corridor in the state."

Amtrak recently shaved 15 minutes off the route, which it said saves the state $72,000 each year. Supporters have said the route generates about $10 million annually for local communities.


get more stories like this via email

City and county governments are feeling the pinch of rising operating costs but in Wisconsin, federal incentives are driving a range of local projects, taking off some of the pressure in making communities economically viable.

Dane County is no stranger to embracing clean energy and federal aid from policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are spurring more activity.

Joe Parisi, Dane County executive, said there have been past government credits for things like solar installations and the latest approach is more expansive, with a robust list of those who can benefit.

"Everybody -- a business, a nonprofit, a church, a temple, even a government, and a local government -- gets 30% back on renewable energy projects," Parisi pointed out.

For example, a local construction company put solar arrays on several of its facilities. Parisi noted the new credits speed up the pace of reimbursements, creating more energy savings in the near future. Federal officials said demand has been strong for the programs but Parisi said one challenge is creating broader awareness so under-resourced areas can apply.

Locally, the website for the Dane County Office of Energy and Climate Change has posted details about project opportunities and investments. Beyond clean energy, Parisi emphasized the federal government's push for more "Made in America" manufacturing creates opportunities for local plants and regional economies.

"There's money to help retooling to manufacture (products)," Parisi stressed. "Then, there's a stronger market for those components now because they are made in America."

National polling shows Americans are greatly concerned about things like inflation but Parisi argued long-term investments stand to help reduce operating expenses for government agencies and businesses, hopefully keeping local taxes in check and providing savings for consumers.


get more stories like this via email

Two pieces of legislation in Connecticut could bolster public transportation if they make it through the General Assembly.

Senate Bill 277 would restore funding to Shore Line East to increase rail service. Ridership plummeted during the pandemic, though it's been growing modestly since then.

But as more people opt to work from home instead of commute, some question whether there's a need for more rail service.

Jay Stange, coordinator with the Transport Hartford Academy, said state investments can help transit lines attract the riders they need.

"Ridership on the Hartford Line, which has been supported by state investment, is up every year," said Stange. "We also are seeing huge increases on the Waterbury Line in Connecticut, where those service investments have been made. The bottom line is that if you don't have the service, you won't have the riders."

The 2023 budget cut funding for Shore Line East to 44% of what was required for pre-pandemic service.

The bill received wide support at a public hearing, but some residents don't agree that funding cuts cause low ridership.

Stange said restoring this funding would provide economic benefits through growing jobs and tourism.

Another bill incentivizes transit-oriented development.

House Bill 5390 would provide water and sewer funding for land-use planning and other developments, making it easier to build housing where transit and rail services exist.

Stange said it's time for the state to build better.

"Connecticut is starting to see," said Stange. "that the development pattern of the last 70 years - where we build new interstate to green-land development that's mostly single-family homes - is a money-losing proposition, in the long term."

Studies show transit-oriented development reduces air pollution and uses large plots of land to accommodate growing populations.

The bill faced opposition from communities concerned about the need for local control for developing these projects. The new version of the bill allows communities to "opt in" for these incentives instead.




get more stories like this via email

Federal and agency officials convened with stakeholders in Southeastern Utah to discuss how federal funds can help grow and strengthen local economies.

Lenise Peterman, mayor of Helper in Carbon County, said money from major legislation like the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act often bypasses communities like hers, which are often the most in need.

Peterman was part of the "Coal Country at a Crossroads Listening Session," examining the challenges of smaller, rural communities in addressing needs for clean energy, workforce and economic development, and infrastructure.

"I felt very optimistic, because I felt like I was no longer just this region, somewhere tucked away in the intermountain area, but somebody that they had to look at and see, and hear them say, 'I need to get this funding. How do I do this?'" Peterman recounted.

Like many rural towns, Helper has seen a declining coal industry. In 2022, five operators in Utah produced coal worth $504 million, down 15% from the previous year. Peterman pointed out power plants and coal mines have traditionally been the sources of well-paid jobs, but communities like hers are figuring out how to adapt with the times and ensure people can continue to call rural Utah home.

Peterman said she considers the listening session a success, as it brought together federal officials and local leaders to focus on possible solutions. She noted one message was the government may need to do more to ensure communities like Helper, as she put it, "don't fall through the cracks."

"How do we equate a rural community with these more urban areas that have headcount, and have people on staff who can look into these federal funding opportunities and collect them?" Peterman suggested.

She added she works with a team of 15 other individuals but is the sole grant writer for her town. Legislation in Congress, called the "Rebuild Rural America Act," would have allocated money to help smaller communities compete for federal dollars but got stuck in a Senate committee last year.


get more stories like this via email