MILT THOMAS

In response to the InsideVero April 19, 2015 story, “Chamber expresses opposition to state handling of public hearing on All Aboard Florida,” (See earlier story) we received the following email from Lynn Martenstein of All Aboard Florida:

“We haven’t met yet—I’m the new VP of Communications at All Aboard Florida—but I wanted to reach out to you about the letter  you included in yesterday’s online edition from Penny Chandler.  Given what she expressed in her letter, I thought you might find an earlier communication that she signed  interesting. I’ve attached a 2009 resolution of support for a $268 million federal ARRA stimulus package for the Amtrak/FEC Corridor Project. Apparently,  Amtrak and the FDOT applied for stimulus funding to restore inter-city passenger service affecting 326 miles of Florida’s east coast on the FEC Corridor from Jacksonville to Miami. The FDOT project was Florida’s only ARRA transit application in partnership with a national entity.

I look forward to working with you on future stories.

Lynn”

Much has been made of the Chamber and government bodies endorsing the Amtrak/FEC Corridor Project of 2009, but as is common knowledge today, that was an entirely different proposal. We asked Penny Chandler how the Chamber felt the two proposals differed and here are excerpts from her response to Ms. Martenstein:

“Dear Ms. Martenstein:

I must guess this is your personal notion that because the Chamber favored the 2009 Amtrak passenger rail project but do not favor the current proposed AAF project you feel the two projects are somehow equal and that our support of the former Amtrak project should now be considered ‘interesting?’

Not at all Lynn! While you may be new at your job as Communications VP, I have been here 20 years and recall the Amtrak proposal.”

“Amtrak: Each community along the proposed Amtrak route was asked to consider where a station might be located in their community. In fact, in Indian River County the historic train station on 14th Avenue in Vero Beach had been selected as a potential designated stop…Numerous community meetings were held, train rides provided for interested parties and a financial analysis and other information about the proposed Amtrak project was provided to the public.

Not so with AAF….Early on the AAF rep was asked about the possibility of a Vero Beach station. He responded that there was not a station planned for any of the communities along the Treasure Coast. More stations would only slow down the trains…While the AAF financial analysis was requested many times by many groups it was never forthcoming.”

“Amtrak: Amtrak’s proposal included budgeted track signal control upgrades at existing highway and pedestrian crossings to enhance safety; grade crossing modifications and grade crossing closures including here in Vero Beach. Amtrak’s proposal included a budget for stations in all eight communities that included bike and pedestrian access, parking lots and landscaping.

Not so with AAF. AAF’s early communications to the Vero Beach High Speed Rail Commission included asking the city to let AAF know what upgrades the city wanted to pay for themselves.”

“Amtrak: Amtrak was proposing options of 14, 42 or 34 trips per week.

Not so with AAF. AAF projects 32 passenger trains per day…in addition to the 32 passenger trains each day, 22 freight trains will run daily. Total trains per day = 54!”

“Amtrak: Yes, we proudly sent in a resolution of support for the 2009 Amtrak proposal.

Not so with AAF. Along with others on the Treasure Coast we do not support the proposed AAF project.”

“While I could go on, I don’t see the point. The 2009 proposed Amtrak project was considerably different than the existing proposed AAF project.“