Get Involved
Stay up to speed with updates, politicain positions and press releases.
Click
HERE to subscribe to the RSS feed and receive new posts in your reader. HERE to subscribe to the RSS feed and receive new posts in your reader.
HERE to subscribe to the RSS feed and receive new posts in your reader.
Comments
#1 All I can say is if the
#2 Interesting...
#3 23:52 You are wrong. This
#4 Predatory business practices
#5 reply to anonymous
#6 Here you are...
#7 Wrong study - wrong time
#8 price tag
#9 Price Tag
#10 Reply to: Here You Are, from ProCitizen Media
1. ON SECRECY: Yes, after the fact, many documents were released because citizens faced enormous difficulty in getting answers from FDOT and so were forced to make public-records requests. And yes, after the fact, DOT began holding meetings to sell the deal. But are you saying this deal wasn’t struck in secret? Or that the people in Lakeland and Plant City knew about the plans for a freight super-railway? Or that state lawmakers were aware that hundreds of millions of dollars had been shuffled to Orlando by DELAYING PROJECTS in EVERY OTHER DISTRICT of Florida for two years? (See documents under Too Costly)
2. ON LIABILITY: First, the agreement DOT signed with CSX totally indemnifies the railroad (see Exhibit 19, under Too Risky). Last year’s legislation would have amended that provision to become what you call no-fault, but which citizens call no-accountability. If, after finally getting input from the Legislature, the railroad is willing to change the liability provision in a terribly negotiated agreement, it should be willing to change a few other provisions, too. That includes the route of the freight super-railway.
Second, Central Florida is NOT ASKING for what Tri-Rail has. Tri-Rail contractually indemnified CSX, even after buying its tracks. This is like selling someone your house, letting them live in it, and then paying for any damage they cause! But NEVER did the Legislature sign off on this contract, which poses significant risks for taxpayers. There’s a question about whether Tri-Rail’s contract would hold up in court. That’s why Tri-Rail now wants what Central Florida seeks – bad public policy written into law!
Third, at least one state is refusing to give CSX the store. Massachusetts is taking the fight to Congress, rather than roll over on indemnification. As government continues to outsource work, California statutorily prohibits government bodies from indemnifying these private companies – public policy that protects citizens.
3. ON COSTS: Your argument is hard to follow, but thanks for acknowledging the purchase agreement says Florida would pay just $150 million for the tracks. So why are we spending $641 million to compensate CSX? This figure is IN ADDITION to the $615 million (that we don’t have) to build the system. And thank heavens the feds are making FDOT determine the operating and maintenance costs for which, again, there is no local funding source. FDOT has either failed to determine these costs or is refusing to tell citizens what they are. Isn’t FDOT supposed to be working on behalf of citizens?
You should know that for tax purposes, the state values the land at $22 million and that when the deal was struck in 2005, FDOT valued the land at $89 million. (See the documents under Too Costly) Given the economic earthquake, how could the value have suddenly inflated to $491 million? Does this pass the smell test for fiscal conservatives?
Besides, the Federal Transit Administration says this project won’t relieve congestion on I-4. For $1.2 billion, this route will take only 3,600 cars off the road! Today, I-4 has 170,000 daily car trips. While commuter rail is a great goal, this route will become a white elephant that gives commuter rail a bad name. And should anyone care about improving statewide passenger rail service, they should realize that this project will create an enormous barrier to improving service to the Tampa Bay area.
One last point. FDOT says Orlando’s commuter rail system has nothing to do with CSX’s plans for a freight super-railway through Florida’s interior. DOT Secretary Stephanie Kopelousis insists the two projects aren’t linked. If that’s true, why not give Orlando the $150 million to buy the tracks and be done with it? Why do Orlando lawmakers insist that commuter rail can’t go forward without taxpayers building CSX a freight super-railway through the state’s interior? Does Tallahassee have any fiscal conservatives in leadership?
#11 Whatever
#12 At least you believe that by
#13 reply to: Whatever, from ProCitizen Media
#14 Again...here you go
#15 Who is Anonymous?
#16 Reply to "Again, Here you Go," from ProCitizen
1. You question why the S-line is being called a “freight super-railway” since, after the improvements, CSX plans to add only four more trains. But consider this: the S-line already has the capacity to handle four more trains. In fact, without any improvements, the S-line has the capacity to handle nine more daily trains. So why is CSX demanding that taxpayers pay nearly $200 million to upgrade the tracks and create the capacity for 54 daily trains? Judge this fact for yourself in the back-up document that pops up when you click on “54 trains.”
2. You might be right that Orlando, compared to most counties, sends more gas-tax dollars to Tallahassee because of the region’s tourism industry. But understand that gas-tax dollars are only one funding stream for the CSX deal. DOT also took money out of the 2005 growth-management reform law, (general revenue, not gas-tax dollars,) which appropriated an extra $1 billion for roads, schools and water projects. Yet that same lucrative year, DOT delayed every road project in every district of the state except Orlando – for two years! The facts are found in the 2005 Deferred Projects list found on the site.
3. Tri-Rail gave CSX indemnity by writing it into a contract, without any legislative input. If Central Florida wants what Tri-Rail has, why doesn’t it simply write indemnity into the contract, no matter that it represents bad public policy? Doesn’t your side argue that Central Florida only wants what Tri-Rail has?
4. Tampa isn’t seeking commuter rail, which runs on heavy freight tracks. Tampa wants a light-rail system that parallels the highway between the University of South Florida and Tampa International Airport. This is a route that makes sense and might actually take commuters off the congested interstate. And so that you know, CSX has told Tampa it wants nothing to do with commuter rail in Tampa Bay.
5. The federal General Accounting Office, in a study on Amtrak, reported that California statutorily prohibits the indemnification of private companies. I will further explore the answer to your question. But you fail to acknowledge that Massachusetts is refusing to roll over for the railroad’s demands, or that many citizens have been harmed by the railroad’s past negligence. Do you think taxpayers have a bottomless purse?
6. The agreement says the state would pay $150 million for the tracks (still one of the highest prices ever.) Given how DOT let railroad executives redirect taxpayer money for projects that benefitted them, and hired a consultant who negotiated the deal to do the analysis on behalf of taxpayers, and refuses to answer questions from interested citizens and elected representatives, you’ll have to forgive citizens for distrusting DOT’s recent appraisal.
7. As for land values, property appraisers by law must appraise land at its actual value, not something less. Though the railroad is free to try to sell its land for whatever it can get, the land is appraised at $22 million. And get this. CSX is fighting the appraisal, saying it’s too high!
8. You’re right. As part of the federal application, DOT does have to identify how much it will cost to operate and maintain the commuter-rail system. Have you seen this document? Has anyone? If so, what does it say? Could you please send a link? It seems only insiders, not ordinary citizens, can get answers from DOT.
9. You’re right that the Tampa Bay Partnership, an economic development group, has endorsed the CSX deal. For some reason, business interests believe CSX must have immunity to make rail-transit work in Tampa Bay. But remember, the partnership is not answerable to citizens.
10. You’re wrong in saying that the Tampa-area rail authority, called TBARTA, has endorsed indemnification for CSX. It has not. Indeed, Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio, a member of the board, has given up on CSX because it refuses to work with the Tampa Bay region. TBARTA is compromised of elected leaders and so better reflects the concerns of taxpayers, to whom it is answerable.
11. You dismiss a key point with the word “craziness.” But it’s a key point. FDOT says Orlando’s proposed commuter-rail system has nothing to do with CSX’s plans for a freight super-railway through Florida’s interior. If so, why not give Orlando the $150 million to buy the tracks and be done with it? Why spend another $200 million to upgrade the S-line, which already has the capacity to handle those four daily trains CSX says it wants?
12. The bottom line is that this system, which would cost more than $1.2 billion and take just 3,600 cars off the road, will become a white elephant that hurts rail-transit efforts more than it helps. It also demands that taxpayers keep their checkbooks out to pay for the railroad’s negligence. And it insists that taxpayers build a freight super-railway through inland Florida communities that had no say in this 100-year decision. So once again the question is, are there any fiscal conservatives in Tallahassee?
#17 Who's Behind This
#18 Thanks Rosemary
#19 Thank You Rosemary
#20 Just a few comments
I'd like to make a few comments to some of your points and some of the information on the site.
You continue to allocate $89 million to the land, based on a document you reference on the Too Costly page. That is clearly incorrect.
The document states, "...the estimated present value for the 61 miles of track structure (rail, ties, ballast, culverts, at-grade crossings and other track materials) is approximately $89 million in 2005 dollars. The present value estimate does not include costs for bridges, signals, systems, and right-of-way acquisition."
The $89 million allocation, as the document states is for the track improvements (rail, ties, ballast, etc...). In fact, it states that it does not include the cost of the right-of-way acquisition, which is the cost of the land. So the $89 million is the 2005 present value of the track improvements only. By continuing to state it is the land value is doing your cause much disservice.
Another point you continue to make is that the assessed value is the market value of the land. Assessments are well known not to be market value. How many people do you know that sell their property for the amount the assessor values their property for? Additionally railroad property is assessed differently than that of other properties (residential, commercial, industrial, etc..). It is not assessed based on market value of the land they own. Call the county assessors and ask them if they have appraised the railroad land, and if they have, how did they value it. Then you will have your answer. I can guarantee you that the $22 million is not based on the land value.
As the Purchase and Sale Agreement outlines, the State is purchasing the corridor land and the track improvements within that land. CSX is reserving a freight easement and Amtrak is keeping their intercity passenger agreement. In addition, the State has the option to purchase the Aloma and Deland Spurs (a substantial addition to the 61.5 miles).
The Purchase and Sale Agreement gives a purchase price of $150 million. This $150 million is the value of the corridor land and the track improvements less the freight easement reserved by CSX. The likely market value of the land and improvements is something greater than the $150 million.
Now if we take the $150 million purchase price in the Purchase and Sale Agreement and the $89 million present value of the track improvements from the Track Assessment and Maintenance Plan Report that would leave $61 million attributable to the land. However this is not necessarily the full market value of the land, because of the freight rights reserved. We do not know what the state and CSX valued those freight rights at.
The value of a corridor is generally valued by taking the value of the across-the-fence (adjacent) land values times a enhancement factor. The enhancement factor measures the advantage of the corridor to connect Point A to Point B. It is not the same as a assemblage factor, which is a measure of the premium to purchase many parcels to assemble a corridor. However, the enhancement factor does recognize the benefit of already having an assembled corridor.
The land values along the 61.5 miles vary widely. The corridor extends from outside Deland, through Sanford, Lake Mary, Longwood, Maitland, Winter Park, downtown Orlando, Kissimmee to Poinciana. Many of these areas have high land values, while there are many areas with lower land values.
For instance there was a recent purchase of 3 acres in downtown Orlando for $7 million. That is $2.3 million per acre.
In a quick look at vacant land listings in Volusia County near the 61.5 mile corridor shows listings ranging from $80,000/acre to $270,000/acre. Osceola County shows similar listing prices. This was just a quick non-scientific random look at vacant listings.
If you were to assume a average width of 100 feet for the 61.5 mile corridor the total acreage would come out to be approximately 745 acres. I do not know what the actual acreage is, but I believe this is an adequate assumption. That would mean the $61 million attributable to the land (doesnt consider the value of the freight rights) would come out to approximately $82,000 per acre. Lets assume the freight rights were valued as 25% of the total land value. Therefore the total land value would be $82 million and the freight rights would be worth $21 million. Thus the per acre value of the full corridor land value would be $110,000/acre.
Remember the value of a corridor is dependant on its location and adjacent use. Therefore, the $82,000/acre (or $110,000/acre) is an average for the entire corridor. The actual value in downtown Orlando is much different from the value in Deland or in Kissimmee, as there is a big difference between residential and commercial uses in Winter Park and acreage and residential uses in Volusia County.
Now there is the additional $491 million to the $150 million in the purchase and sale agreement. I can not speak to how these are allocated as part of the purchase. It is not uncommon for additional non-cash considerations to be included as part of a rail transaction. Some of these may be just that, while some of these may be common state-railroad projects which occur throughout the country that are not tied to any transaction.
Just a few comments about the various other projects included in the $641 million:
Winter Haven Yard - Yes it benefits CSX, but it also benefits the region, other businesses and communities. It provides a node where commodities, which Central Florida is in great demand, can move from train to truck and vice-versa. Yes there can be negative affects, but thats what the various government studies are meant to measure, and weigh the benefit vs detriment.
S-line Improvements - Increasing capacity on a rail line serves to decrease congestion not only on highways (I-75 and I-4), but also helps decrease congestion on the railroad, which would help prevent such things as stalled trains in Lakeland.
Rail Overpasses - These benefit the communities that will use them.
It seems like most if not all of this money is being kept in improvements within the State. Many of these if not all not only benefit CSX, but also benefit the State and communities in which it serves. It helps make sure that a flow of commodoties that Central Florida relies on continues and allows for increase, but also helps ease congestion on two of Florida's main arteries.
Something that I find interesting is that communities are often the first to fight an increase in traffic by a railroad, and they are also the first to fight when a railroad wants to cut back service.
I think it is a good idea for alternative routes to be considered for places like Lakeland, but those are costly.
I am not here to argue for these other projects, I am just stating my opinion of them.
One last comment.
The Rail Sales Comparison 1976 - 2008 document you link to is VERY misleading. It seems that many details of those transactions are not considered. For instance some of those transactions are of entire railroads, which include rolling stock (rail cars), locomotives, real estate, other improvements, etc..., while some are net liquidation sales due to potential abandonment. These are not equatable to the 61.5 corridor. In addition rail corridors can not be compared in a per mile basis. They are going to vary based on their location. A corridor through Orlando is not going to be equal to a corridor in rural Oklahoma, or in New York City, or on the outskirts of Chicago. That is why corridors are not valued using a direct corridor sales approach. It is near impossible to find a truly comparable corridor sale. Many of these transactions include other non-cash considerations, which is common in rail corridor transactions.
I hope this may provide some food for thought. I have found this to be an interesting topic and have had fun reading all the documents from both sides and trying to analyze what is taking place. As a railfan with some knowledge of rail corridor transactions I have tried to be impartial and fair in my comments.
#21 first blog post
#22 ugg boots sale
#23 Snow Boots
#24 ugg sale
#25 ugg boots UK
#26 Cheap UGGs For Sale
UGG Mayfaire ugg mayfaire black ugg mayfaire chestnut ugg mayfaire chocolate ugg mayfaire sand UGG Bailey Button Triplet
Post new comment