Update: Eisenbahn Trail remains a potential route for Amtrak

On Thursday, the Federal Government announced that they are granting the Wisconsin Department of Transportations request to fund a study for the viability of running an Amtrak line from Milwaukee to Green Bay.  

Since preserving the Eisenbahn trail is a priority for me, I immediately reached out to our legislative liaison, who contacted the State Department of Transportation to see if the Eisenbahn Trail was still a potential route.  

Initially, based on somewhat vague information published by several news media outlets, it looked like the study would focus on a route through Slinger and Allenton, using existing rail lines. Unfortunately, we received word back late Friday afternoon that the study would not exclude the Eisenbahn trail.  So the County will need to continue its efforts to preserve the Eisenbahn trail.  Here is the response from the D.O.T.

Key aspects of the planned rail route:

Proposed Route Basics

• It would take 2 hours and 50 minutes to traverse the route by rail.  this compares to 1 hour and 45 minutes by car, according to google maps.
• It is planned to make 3 round trips daily.
• Two likely routes between Milwaukee and Fond Du lac are the existing rail line through Slinger/Allenton and the Eisenbahn Trail.
• If the Eisenbahn Trail is selected as the route, it appears that it would be the only new section of rail needing construction, as the remainder of the route would likely use existing rail lines.
• Several interchanges north of Appleton might need signal upgrades.
• Amtrak currently runs a bus service between Green Bay and Milwaukee, called Amtrak Throughway Connection Service, 2 times per day and averages 38% occupancy.

Proposed Stops

• It would have stops in Fond Du lac, Oshkosh, and Appleton.
• No stop is currently planned for West Bend.
• A previous version of this plan included a map showing the potential for stops in West Bend, Grandville Station (Milwaukee's northwest side), and Kaukauna.
• American Family Field wants a railroad station, although that station would have the option to service one or more routes from a couple different potential or existing routes.
• Any additional stop will likely add 10-20 minutes to the total travel time (per additional stop) between Milwaukee and Green Bay).

Eisenbahn Trail

• The Eisenbahn trail follows a decommissioned rail corridor, as part of the "Rails to trails" program.
• The Eisenbahn Trail is about 25 miles long, with about 13 miles in Washington County.
• The Eisenbahn Trail officially opened in 2006.
• The Eisenbahn Trail has been a cornerstone for economic revitalization for West Bend, with several major developments built just footsteps from the trail, and will likely be central to Kewaskum's efforts to revitalize their downtown.

The Passenger Rail Study

• The feasibility study is 100% federally funded.
• After the study is complete, any construction would be funded by a federal grant and would likely require some state funding.

Other Relevant Information

• Passenger rail service from West Bend to Milwaukee was discontinued due to low ridership.
• In 2023, Commuter Bus service from West Bend to Milwaukee was discontinued due to low ridership.
• Once the study is complete, if tis project is approved by the legislature and Governor, it would take 6-10 years to implement the proposed rail service.

It should also be noted that passenger rail line proposals that have been built have generally failed to come close to meeting ridership projections.

*Note-As I think of key details related to this issue, I am adding them to this post.

Re-election Campaign Announcement

I am proud to announce my intent to be re-elected to the Washington County Board of Supervisors, representing District 4 in West Bend. I have served on the County Board for 8 years, and chaired the Public Safety Committee for the last 4 years.  I have always strived to lead the discussion in ensuring a fiscally responsible and sustainable County Government for our residents.

During this last term, I was a leader in the efforts to preserve the Samaritan health center, which provides skilled nursing care for our impoverished senior and disabled community, by working to identify ways to make Samaritan a financially self-sustaining operation.  Samaritan is a vital part of our community.

I plan to be a leader in the effort to preserve the Eisenbahn Trail, which has become a cornerstone of our community and a key component for revitalizing our downtown.  Later this month, the federal government will announce its decision to approve or deny a request by the Wisconsin D.O.T. to fund a study of a possible Amtrak line from Milwaukee to Green Bay, and the Eisenbahn Trail is a possible route.  Passenger rail service from West Bend was discontinued due to low ridership, and this year the County discontinued our commuter bus route to Milwaukee due to low ridership.  Preserving the Eisenbahn Trail must be the priority.

I am also proud that the County will be sharing $3 million in sales tax revenue with the City of West Bend over the next 3 years, via a grant to replace lead lateral lines.  This will ensure that residents have safe drinking water. As part of this project, the roads in those same neighborhoods will need to be dug up and repaired, making this program a double-win for residents in these neighborhoods and support for the city’s road repair efforts.  West Bend has roughly 850 homes that have lead laterals, and a majority of them are in my district, so this issue is especially important to me. 

I am also a big supporter of shared services.  When governments share services, we reduce duplication, and can use the savings to increase the value taxpayers receive for their tax dollars.  Hartford and Germantown have each started the process of combining 911 dispatching with the county, allowing those communities to reprioritize those funds in a way that better meets taxpayer needs. I hope over the next 2 years to find ways in which we can partner with the City of West Bend to share services, which will free up financial resources so that the City can increase their road repair budget or fund an additional firehouse.

I ask for you support in my re-election campaign. 

Why do I Hate Trains?

I have been accused by a few people of hating trains, and one person even asked me "Why do you hate trains so much?"

I actually don't hate rail, not at all.  I just recognize that, as a form of transportation for passengers, rail is clearly in its descendency.  The only exception to this seems to be commuter rail options for America's largest metropolitan cities like New York, Boston, Chicago, and D.C.

In it ascendency, in the 1800s, railroads built America.  Abraham Lincoln fought to bring a railroad to Springfield, Illinois, because he saw how rail would spur economic development.  Railroads contributed to the north winning the civil war, which brought freedom to America's slaves (since the south had an inferior railroad system).  Railroads provided an alternative for people to settle the west without making an arduous, months-long journey in a Conestoga wagon.  In the 1800s, everywhere they were built, railroads spurred economic development and growth, and this continued into the first half of the twentieth century.

But then transportation advanced beyond rail.  In the 1950s, our country built a system of national highways and freeways.  Now, people had more freedom to go where they wanted, and not just where the tracks led them.  At the same time, air travel began its ascendency, replacing rail for long-distance journeys.  Rail trips that took days now took hours by airplane.  The descendency of rail had begun.

Short-distance trips

Let's break this down.  If I lived in downtown Milwaukee, right by the train station, and wanted to get to Columbus, Wisconsin, Mapquest lists it as a 1 hour and 17 minute trip by car, and I can make that trip anytime I want to.  If I have a 2:00 appointment, I can leave at noon and be there with 45 minutes to spare, traffic permitting.  On the other hand, by train it is 1 hour and 10 minutes, 7 minutes faster, with no stops in between Milwaukee and Columbus.  So why isn't the train a better option, where's the problem?

• I looked it up, and the train leaves Milwaukee once per day, at 3:52 p.m. every day, and arrives at 5:02 p.m.  That means that for my 2:00 appointment, I have to leave the day before and get a hotel in Columbus for the night.  In fact, their is no way I can schedule an appointment during the workday and arrive earlier that day, since the only train arrives at 5:02 p.m. when the workday is already done.
• I have the same issue coming back.  The eastbound train leaves Columbus at 12:57 p.m. and returns to downtown Milwaukee at 2:07 p.m.  So once my 2:00 appointment is done, I have to stay another night in Columbus and catch the next day's train back to Milwaukee.  This is now a 2 day trip to get to an appointment that's about 80 miles away.  In fairness, if I can get my appointment changed to 9 a.m., I can make the 12:57 train and the whole trip is only a 1 night say in Columbus.  If however the appointment has to be at 2:00, it is unavoidably a 2 day venture.
• Most people don't live right next to the train station in downtown Milwaukee.  So from their home, they have to get to the train station to take the train to Columbus.  And if they drive to the train station, they have to find overnight parking.  Add in time to check in at the train station, and time to board, and that 7 minute savings is now long gone.  Clearly all of this extra time makes driving the faster option.
• What if, instead of going to Columbus, I want to go to Rio?  That's an extra 10 minutes by car, an easy adjustment.  On the other hand, by train, I have to get off at Columbus, since that is where the train station is.  I then have to find some other transportation to Rio, or walk that 10 miles alongside the highway.

All of these same issues hold true for the other four Amtrak destinations along that route in Wisconsin, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, and La Crosse.  They all leave Milwaukee at 3:52 p.m. every day, and on the return trip arrive back at 2:07 p.m.

And why did I pick Columbus as an example?  Because the train only goes to a few communities in Wisconsin, and Columbus is the closest of them.  I couldn't pick Madison, or Beloit, of Platteville, because the train doesn't go there.

Long-distance trips

When we look at long term trips, the difference is even worse.  If I want to go to Seattle, by train I still can only leave Milwaukee at 3:52 p.m., but I then spend a full 2 days on that train going to Seattle.  Coming back is another 2 days.  In contrast, by air, I have plenty of options.  Delta is my favorite airline, and they offer at least a dozen options for traveling to Seattle on any given day.  Each of those options gets me there in about 6-8 hours, including a layover.

Convenience and customizability

Mark Belling once made this point about rail.  Millennials want everything in the most convenient way possible and customized to them.  Rail is the least convenient form of transportation, and it is totally uncustomizable.  Uber will pick you up at your doorstep, at the exact time you want, and take you exactly where you want to go by the shortest route.  By contrast, rail only goes where the tracks go, and adheres to its own strict schedule.

Why this matters to Washington County

Why is this an issue?  Right now Amtrak is in the initial stages of planning a passenger route from Milwaukee to Green Bay.  The route currently goes through Slinger, with no stops in Washington County.  It seems unlikely that this would change.

However, I have heard a few comments about a potential desire to have a stop in Washington County.  Every other County along the route will have a stop, and businesses want a way to get workers who don't have cars up to Washington County (which by train is stupid).  If Washington County is going to have a stop, West Bend makes far more sense than Slinger.  That means the railroad would repossess the Eisenbahn Trail so it can be converted back to tracks.

The Eisenbahn trail has brought a ton of development to West Bend, far more than any train could ever bring.  We need to protect the Eisenbahn, even if that means not having a stop in Washington County.

Bringing Workers to Washington County

I mentioned that the idea of bringing workers to West Bend by train is stupid.  Those workers, whether they live on 60th and National or 76th and Silver Spring, would have to get to downtown Milwaukee (probably by bus) to take the train to West Bend.  Once in West Bend, they would have to arrange some other transportation to get to their worksite.  There are only a few major factories in close walking distance to Downtown West Bend, so any other worksite involves some other type of ground transportation once they reach West Bend. What worker is going to use three modes of transportation, each way, to get to and from work in Slinger, Hartford, Kewaskum, or Jackson?  On top of that, would these trains even come at times that make sense for workers from Milwaukee?

There is a need to help workers who don't own cars to get from Milwaukee up to Washington County.  We have some great, high-paying, entry level jobs that struggle to find good workers.  We especially need ways to get those workers to high-growth communities like Hartford and Jackson.  If we want to get workers up to communities like Hartford and Jackson, buses and shuttle vans offer a far more practical, cost-effective, and customizable solution than a train to West Bend would.

Conclusion

The train Lobbyists are good at selling a pipe dream, that passenger rail is for some mysterious reason making a resurgence.  It's all smoke and mirrors.  For all the reasons mentioned above, passenger rail will never make a resurgence.

If Amtrak wants to use the existing tracks to run a train to Green Bay, I could care less.  If it actually succeeds (which I find unlikely), that's great for Amtrak.  I suspect it will fail, and after 10-20 years the service will be shut down due to a lack of riders, just like the passenger rail service from West Bend to Milwaukee was shut down decades ago due to a lack of ridership.

As for the possibility of bringing that passenger train to West Bend, it seems improbable, but I want to do everything I can to make sure it never happens.

Redistricting Update---Set of Maps Chosen

Just a quick update on redistricting, the County Board's Executive Committee met tonight and chose a set of maps.  We were given 3 options.  When I first saw the three options, I wasn't too thrilled with them.  However, after reviewing them closely and after hearing the explanation of our Data and GIS Manager explain why each set of maps were set up that way, one set of maps really stood out as a very good option for the next 10 years.

All three sets of maps focused on the following 5 priorities:

• Equal Population
• Compact districts
• Follow municipal lines
• City, Village and Town representation
• Minimize ballot styles

We chose draft 3.  What made this set of maps good?

• It gave the village of Jackson its own district, something that was lacking in the district maps used for the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections and something that many on the board, myself included, wanted.  The Village of Jackson has the population to support having their own district, and the current district boundaries split the Village of Jackson into two.
• It gave a fair representation to the towns.  Statistically, the towns have not grown as fast as the cities or villages.  With the 2020 population data, the villages should have 8 districts, the two cities should have 7, and the towns should have 6.  The population increases no longer supported the equal 7/7/7 breakout between the towns, cities, and villages.  Keeping the towns with 6 representatives was important.
• The design stuck closely to municipal boundary lines, reducing the number of different ballot combinations that will be needed for the county's April elections and making it easier for municipalities to draw up their districts and wards.
• It was the only map that kept the City of West Bend as 5 districts, where the other two had West Bend over 6 districts with some area of the towns in their district.

In general, almost everyone seemed to recognize the value of the district maps we chose.

Most importantly, two years ago we voted to reduce the County Board from 26 to 21 Supervisors.  This was something that many Supervisors, including myself, had promised to do for our constituents, and it was good to fulfill this promise.  

Redistricting & Consolidating (At the County Level)

It is redistricting time!!!

On a state level, this means that legislative districts are being redrawn, and arguing will ensue about how to most fairly apportion the districts between Republicans and Democrats.  The side that feels that they "lost" in the redistricting process will make claims of gerrymandering, while the side that "won" will point to gerrymandering attempts the losing side made.

On a County level, redistricting fairly means something different.  We don't have blue districts and red districts, but instead have districts in various shades of red.  So for our county, the focus is on fairly representing the Cities, Villages, and Towns of Washington County.  In our county, the population as of the 2010 census was split up pretty evenly, with a third the population living in either the city of West Bend and Hartford, a third the population living in one of the 7 villages, and a third the population living in one of the 13 townships.

As well, our County Board is consolidating, and going from 26 Supervisors to 21.  As a side note, this fulfills a campaign promise I made when I ran in 2018.  I ran on that promise, and am thrilled to fulfill it.

So what will the new maps look like?  We don't know yet, but we can make some guesses before some options are shown to the Executive Committee at our upcoming August 24th meeting.

• One easy guess, since the cities will likely have 7 Supervisors between them, West Bend will go from 6 Supervisory districts to 5, and Hartford will go from 3 to 2.  I can't imagine either of these not happening.
• Another easy guess, the Village of Kewaskum has never been big enough to be its own district, and has no nearby village to connect with, so it will likely be paired up with the township of Kewaskum, as it traditionally has been. 

Beyond those easy guesses, I don't know what to expect in these options.  I do think it is important to try to equally represent the towns and villages with 7 Supervisors each, though that may not be perfectly possible.

Over the course of the next few months, the County Board will chose a set of maps that will be used for the 2022 County Board Elections. I will endeavor to try to support maps that closely balance out representation between the cities, villages, and towns.

Compromise on Highway Project

 

I had called on County Executive Josh Schoemann to veto the ammended Resolution 11 & Highway S.  On May 25th, he decided to Partially veto Highway S.

At last week's County Board meeting, I was one of the leaders in calling for a compromise, which 22 other Supervisors agreed to.  With this compromise, we voted not to overturn the County Executive's partial veto, and instead allow the Highway Department to create a new and fully-engineered solution that would focus on truly improving safety for the intersection of Highway S and 175.  By a vote of 3-23, the County Board voted not to override Josh's veto, and to instead agree with this compromise.

Here is Josh Schoemann's statement on his partial veto:

All along I have felt the CTH W extension project as proposed came down to weighing the safety of drivers at various intersections throughout the area with the necessity of using eminent domain to purchase active farmland.  In that regard I think the County Board made a reasonable public policy decision, as people’s personal property rights are of the utmost importance and shouldn’t be taken lightly,” said County Executive Josh Schoemann. 

“After consultation with the farming families and various Supervisors, I’ve decided to partially veto the adopted resolution, allocating $100,000 versus $500,000 for the realignment of these highways. This action will allow sufficient funds and time for the experts, not just County Board members, to re-evaluate the design, come back with a viable plan, and consult with the people who live there. With this action, the proposed CTHW extension is off the table, and as long as I am County Executive no such extension will be proposed by my administration.

Here is my statement regarding the partial veto:  

I applaud our County Executive’s decision to veto (partially) an unworkable plan.  As he acknowledged in his statement, the plan passed by the County Board simply isn’t viable.  This approach will allow us to start over and develop a more effective plan for safe and efficient travel in the town of Addison. 

The plan the County Board developed as a compromise was simply unworkable.  It used a road segment designed for 200 cars per day for a traffic volume that would see between 1,700 and 2,600 cars per day.  That plan is not feasible, it puts lives in danger, and it would have been irresponsible to put that plan into action. 

Starting over, with a safe plan focused on Highway S, is the best way to go at this point.  County Executive Schoemann did the right thing, and now the County Board needs to follow his lead.  Together, we can build a properly-engineered travel route on highway S.  It will hopefully be one that our County Highway Commissioner and Traffic Safety Commission will endorse, and one that will be safer and more efficient.

Thank you Josh!

 

Christopher Bossert

County Board Supervisor, District 3

Report to Constituents - Request to Veto Resolution 11 (Highway S Modifications)

Today I am requesting that our County Executive veto resolution 11, as amended.

This is no longer about Highway W, that plan was defeated.  This is about a new plan, hatched by the County Board. 

The new plan uses designs for an intersection designed for 200 cars per day, despite the fact that the intersection will now see more than 2,000 cars per day.  The plan will most likely need a significant redesign, and will see a significant cost increase, in order to be safe and effective for this higher traffic volume.  Our Highway Commissioner admitted as much at Wednesday's County Board meeting, and the board admitted as much when they sent Resolution 12 back to committee.

This plan also had no public notice or public hearings.  The neighbors near this intersection might love this plan, or they might hate this plan.  Without having public hearings, so that they can learn about the plan and express their thoughts, we don't know what they think about this plan.

A veto at this point would not be a way to build highway W, but instead would be a way to stop a plan that is ill-conceived and lacks public notice.