Rail Runner 2008-09 Losses Top $19 Million, $37.6 Million Since Service Began.
Print This Post
The red ink lubricating the wheels of the Rail Runner is getting redder. Its operating deficit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2009, topped $19 million. It collected a mere $1.9 million in fares against $21 million in operating expenses. The losses are greater than we reported in August. Based on information provided us by the Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments, we reported then that the Rail Runner’s operating loss through May 31, 2009, exceeded $13.4 million. But data for the entire fiscal year, ending June 30, 2009, reveal a number almost 42% higher.
These new figures mean that the Rail Runner’s operating losses for its first three years of operation amount to $37.6 million. In addition to its $19.1 million loss for the past year, the Rail Runner lost $7.8 million in 2006 and $10.8 million in 2007.
The complete data for the 2008 FY of the Rail Runner’s operations was provided to us by Jim Crane, a New Mexico Watchdog reader and a retired journalist who has written for newspapers in Montana and Iowa. He was a reporter for The Missoulan for ten years, then moved to Iowa to become editor of The Ottumwa Courier. He moved back to Montana to be the publisher of The Helena Independent Record.
Mr. Crane obtained his information in an e-mail from Chris Blewitt, the MRCOG employee who directly manages the Rail Runner. He holds the title of Project Manager of the Rail Runner Express. The data for our August report, current through May 31, 2009, was also obtained by us from Mr. Blewitt.
Mr. Blewitt’s latest e-mail states that the Rail Runner’s ridership for the year ending June 30, 2009, was 1,083,003. As we reported in August “ridership” means each boarding, so that a roundtrip between Albuquerque and Santa Fe counts as two rides. If this number is converted to roundtrips it is halved to approximately 542,500. Over a year, the average daily number of roundtrip commuters would be only 1,370. We calculated just under 1,270 daily commuters in our August report.
The data obtained by Mr. Crane shows a higher per-rider taxpayer subsidy than we calculated in August. This is the subsidy for each ride (each boarding). Based on data provided to us then by MRCOG, we calculated that the taxpayer subsidy per ride was $16.89. The complete 2008 FY data shows that the taxpayer subsidy per ride comes to $17.64 per rider.
As we predicted in our August report, the Rail Runner’s operating deficits, and the corresponding taxpayer subsidies, are getting worse. The balance of the Rail Runner’s $21 million operating expenses, after collecting only $1.9 million in fares, was covered by $13.8 million from the federal government and $5.2 million from state and local governments.
Related Stories:
Rail Runner ABQ to SF R/T: $49?
Empty Cars on the Rail Runner
New Mexico Is Not Getting High-Speed Rail, At Least Not Soon (Errors of Enchantment)
Is Mass Transit Really Green? (Errors of Enchantment)
Get Real, Mr. Rael (Errors of Enchantment)
Is the Rail Runner a Success? (Errors of Enchantment)
Rail Runner vs. Utah Rail (Errors of Enchantment)
Rail Runner in Wikipedia
Posted under News.
Tags: Chris Blewitt, Jim Scarantino, MRCOG, Rail Runner
7 Comments For This Post So Far
Trackbacks
-
Errors of Enchantment » Rail Runner FY 2008 Losses Top $19 Million, $37.6 Million Since Service Began
[...] Watchdog updates its August report. The red ink lubricating the wheels of the Red Runner is getting redder. This pic from inside the Rail Runner during service between Santa Fe and Albuquerque speaks [...]
-
$2.5 Million Doesn’t Go Very Far on the Rail Runner: A Video Report on the Rail Runner’s Kewa “Station”
[...] Rail Runner Losses Top $19 Million, $37.6 Million Since Service Began [...]
-
Rail Runner Ridership Drops Almost 14%; Red Ink Keeps Rising
[...] It will take a few more quarters of declining ridership to drive that point home. We have two more quarters before the Legislature reconvenes in Santa Fe. They might pay attention to reports like this: Rail Runner 2008-09 losses top $19-million, $37-6-million since service began. [...]
12:17 pm on December 14th, 2009
This report doesn’t make sense. It assumes that transportation infrastructure is supposed to make money. By this standard, every highway is a failure and every street is a failure.
The Rail Runner is not a business venture. It is a transportation option to relieve congestion along the I-25 corridor, which it has done well. What would the alternative cost have been to transform I-25 to six lanes?
I would like to see a similar report done on how much maintenance the state spends annually on highway maintenance in comparison to the Rail Runner. I guessing the train is cheap in comparison.
1:08 pm on December 14th, 2009
It’s not that the report “doesn’t make sense,” it’s just that you may not like the significance of the reported facts. I think you’d find that for the $500 million spent on the Rail Runner, to move 1370 people a day, far, far more people would be moved through, say, an improved Big I or the I-25/Jefferson interchange. I think your challenge is a fair one, and would like to see the numbers side by side. You’d have to factor in the economic activity generated by the traffic through the Big-I, the gas taxes paid, etc. Same for the Rail Runner. It would be an interesting head-to-head comparison. I’d also include a comparison between what $500 million got for the Rail Runner and what $500 million would have purchased in the way of buses and expanded bus service. I think we’d be able to move those 1370 people up and down the Rio Grande Corridor on state-of-the-art SULEV buses and have a lot of change left over. Thanks for writing.
3:33 pm on December 14th, 2009
By any metric the rail runner is a failure. You could accomplish the same thing (moving people along a corridor from Belen to Santa Fe) for far less wih other methods. Buses for one would be much cheaper. You could have bought each of those 1,370 round trip riders a cheap car (low teens) and covered the costs of fuel and maintenance for about the same price, $21 million.
Fares cover approximately 9% of operating costs (the initial infrastructure will never be recouped)
Compare that to a bus system, I’m sure it’s a much higher percentage.
Or in the case of roads there are gas taxes and other fees that contribute to the ongoing operating expenses.
5:39 pm on December 16th, 2009
It would be interesting to learn how much property tax revenue has been lost by the counties touched by the Railrunner track as a result of the state buying the property from BNSF. My bet is that it’s in the millions and it’s money the remaining taxpayers have had to make up.