Indication for Amtrak Gulf Coast Service Looks Grim

(Southern Rail Commission illustration)

What a difference a few days can make! Only one week ago, on June 20, Railway Age covered the latest developments concerning the proposed Gulf Coast service, which would consist of two daily Amtrak passenger trains in each direction between New Orleans and Mobile, making intermediate stops at four towns along the Mississippi Gulf Coast.

Railway Age reported progress on the CRISI Grant Agreement, the environmental review for the Mobile Station Track Project, and negotiations with the City of Mobile as part of an overall story about status reports that the parties are making to the Surface Transportation Board (STB). The aspect seemed “green” and the indication “clear” as the Port of Mobile had agreed to share the estimated $3.048 million annual cost of operations with the City during the early years of operation, and the State was also exploring the idea of contributing. State-level elected officials and the Port, which carries a great deal of influence in the City, had strongly opposed the project, along with host railroads CSX, owner of most of the railroad that the trains would use, and Norfolk Southern (NS), owner of the Back Belt in New Orleans, which would be used from the passenger station to CSX’s Mobile & New Orleans line. After lengthy litigation before the STB, Amtrak, CSX, NS, and the Port reached an agreement in 2022, and many of the required conditions have been met, or are on the way to being fulfilled.

Everything changed, however, over the past week, and the new indication calls for “an approach at restricted speed,” with a probable “red” aspect and an indication for “a full stop” coming soon. The problem is the Mobile City Council, which must approve the lease that would allow construction of a new downtown station, along with a platform and layup track. The station would be located in downtown Mobile, at the site of the former station that was used until 2005 when Amtrak service was disrupted by Hurricane Katrina and never resumed. The layup track would be about 3,000 feet long, even though plans call for four-car consists pulled by one locomotive. In short, it takes five of the seven members of the Council to act (we will have a detailed explanation for this soon in a separate commentary), and it now appears that only four members are willing to support the current plan.

On Feb. 4, 2020, the Council voted 6-1 to provide the roughly $3 million in operating funding. That was almost 4-1/2 years ago, before the COVID-19 virus struck and brought many changes to the American and global scenes. The makeup of the Council has changed, too. As recently as May 26, the city’s Zoning Board of Adjustment had given its approval for the project, but that agency is not the Council.

The Southern Rail Commission (SRC), a longtime supporter of Gulf Coast service and sponsoring agency on some of the applications for grants that would help pay for construction, on June 25 expressed concern about the outlook at the Council, and quoted a report from the Associated Press (AP) that Council member Josh Woods said he did not support the proposal and member Ben Reynolds would also vote “no.” They would join Council member Joel Daves, who has consistently expressed his opposition to the project. The SRC also cited a story by Brendan Kirby on WALA-10 that said Woods would not support the project. Kirby reported: “Woods said Tuesday [June 25] that he is not so much concerned about the cost over three years but what happens after that. After the first three years, the port’s commitment would end, and a federal operating subsidy would be lower. That could cost city taxpayers millions of dollars a year.”

Only one month ago, the SRC was much more optimistic. A report at that time by John Sharp in the Mobile Press-Register and on the web site www.al.com, quoted Commission Chair Knox Ross as saying: “Having the CSX and the Port (in attendance) is a big thing” and “Everyone is on the same page. That makes a big difference, and it shows that we are able to, in the end, find something that works for everybody.” It now appears that Ross’s hope does not apply to enough Council members.

Woods’s argument, or something similar, was proffered by Republican governors when the Obama Administration offered grants for the “High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail” program and several states rejected them. That argument appears to have an ideological tone. WALA-10’s Brendan Kirby quoted Woods as saying: “At the moment, I am a ‘no’ vote” and “Still, obviously hearing concerns. But, you know, there are pro-Amtrak comments that I’ve been hearing. But I’d also tell you some of my constituents — the vast majority of my constituents — are kind of opposed to the city subsidizing a federal Amtrak program.” Kirby also reported that Mayor Sandy Stimson “would present the package to the council when it is ready regardless of whether it looks to have super-majority support.”

On May 28, John Sharp of the Mobile Press-Register reported that skepticism among Council members had been developing. He wrote: “Skepticism also continued among some Mobile leaders over whether anyone would take Amtrak to visit the Alabama Port City, despite estimates from Visit Mobile that hotels would see a shot of new business and the city’s lodging tax would increase by $1.7 million annually.”

In his report that also quoted SRC’s Knox Ross, Sharp mentioned that the proposed station would be an “interim” structure in downtown Mobile, and that the platform would be 106 feet long and 12 feet wide, according to city documents. Although not included in Sharp’s report, a platform of that length would allow riders to board or alight from three cars.

So far, the debate has not mentioned the currently available public ground-transportation alternative: a Greyhound bus station located about four miles from downtown Mobile in a place described by local transit and environmental advocate Alan S. Drake as “unappetizing” and not served by local buses for all bus departures, which number three daily round-trips. Drake told Railway Age that circumstances forced him to take the bus from Mobile to New Orleans recently, but he did not enjoy the experience. He said: “I would take the train to Mobile for a visit, but I would not take that bus trip again unless I have to.” Megabus recently ran one daily round-trip between New Orleans and downtown Mobile, but it has been discontinued.

Can one of the recalcitrant Council members be convinced that non-motorists living in the Crescent City, the Mississippi Gulf Coast and elsewhere would enjoy direct access to downtown Mobile and motorists would take the train to avoid the hassle of the highway? Time will tell.

There hasn’t been any mention of the possibility of running the trains on an experimental basis for three years, and then evaluating the ridership and revenue results before deciding to continue service. While Alabama has generally opposed the service expansion, Mississippi and Louisiana have been supportive— especially Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, one of the few Republicans who has actively promoted restoring an Amtrak route. Given the requirement that the states contribute to the routes proposed in Amtrak’s ConnectUS plan, this might be a viable option.

People who are skeptical about the proposed service now include three members of the Mobile City Council; enough to derail it. It has not yet been announced when the vote will take place, but that will probably happen sometime this summer. Joel Daves was the lone dissenter when the Council voted its support for the project early in 2020, so the question is whether it is now possible to convince either Ben Reynolds or Josh Woods to change his mind and vote in favor. After years of planning, negotiations, and litigation, which we have been calling the “Second Battle of Mobile,” unless either Reynolds or Woods does change his mind, the proposal for passenger trains along the Gulf Coast will have reached the proverbial “end of the line.”

For more Railway Age coverage on implementing Gulf Coast Service, click here.