Preface - If the NGDF Baord finds this too long, or too political, and wishes to have it withdrawn, let me know, and I'll take it elsewhere with no hard feelings.
There have been a lot of posts on various boards about how to make the C&TS a success. Unfortunately, I don't see any simple answers, any easy answers, or any fast answers. To begin with, the proposition is enormous.
The National Park Service (NPS) explored the idea of acquiring some of the D&RGW narrow gauge in the late 1960's. The federal government concluded that this was not something they wanted to do, This was, I understand, because of the great expense that would be involved. I don't see any realistic prospect of the NPS changing its mind. Federal money may be available to someone else in the form of grants, but I doubt the federal government will be willing to assume the C&TS. Any such project would take a long time, and a lot of political lobbying.
The states of Colorado and New Mexico bought the C&TS in 1970. This was a political process then and today the railroad is a political creature, something which many of us enthusiasts have a hard time understanding. There was something of a grass roots effort to collect signatures on petitions to the state legislatures to ask them to appropriate funds to purchse the property. That took time, and effort by a lot of people. Once the states had bought the property, the legalities of administering and operating a jointly owned railroad ahd to be taken care of. The states tried to create an arrangement which would let the railroad operator do most of the work, apparently with the hope that the railroad would cover most of its operating expenses as well as its maintenance costs. The operator reports to a bi-state commission. The 30 year history of the C&TS as a tourist railroad suggest that the states badly under-estimated the capital support that the C&TS requires. Fortunately for the C&TS, it had one operator with the financial ability and the sentimental love of steam railroads which allowed it to put more money into the property than it took out of it. That was Kyle Railways.
The problem is, most operators are not either able or willing to do what Kyle did. Obtaining state funidng and outside financial support, or a combination of the two will be necessary.
The Commission which oversees the railroad is like many state commissions. The commissioners serve without pay, and they generally have jobs or careers that occupy 40 hours a week, more or less. For the commission to run the railroad, it will probably need a full time manager, who is paid, plus whatever employees the commission needs to do the work. This will require the states to put regular funding sufficient to meet those needs into the state budgets. Operation of the C&TS as a state park, or a joint state park would be much the same, requiring the states to fund the railroad at an annual rate sufficient to maintain the property and operate the railroad. Right now that does not look too likely. as I noted earlier, New Mexico is one of four states not looking at a budget deficit, and all the western states are facing increased demands for survices, along with demands for tax reduction from their citizens.
The Cass Scenic RR is a West Virginia state park, which has been offered as a model for what the C&TS could be as a state park or under Commission operation. This is certainly possible, but not on short notice. If the Commission, or a state park were to operate the C&TS it would need to be put into the state budget as a regular appropriation for maintenance and operation. while there is a lot ot recommend this, I doubt that this could be done soon. In the meantime, what would be done to keep the C&TS operating?
The states have other issues to worry about, too. The radio reports Governor Richardson is apparently concerned with the Korean situation right now. In the larger context of world affairs, the C&TS is taking a back seat to nuclear proliferation. In the legislatures, there are many interests demanding more money, while taxpayers demand a tax cut. a well organized campaign to make the Commission the operator is possible, but the railroad will be looking to get a larger slice of a shrinking state pie. That's going to take some time, and some good political work, including presenting a united group of constituents. Interested groups who ought to be seen working together include the citizens of the Antonito and Chama areas; the railroad's employees, and the various railroad preservation interests who want to preserve the railroad. If there is an operator, then the operator has to be part of the group of interests in the larger group lobbying the legislatures.
I honestly do not see all this coming together fast enough to be effective, and get the railroad open under a new ogranizational schem by May 2003. As I posted earlier, demolition is speedy, construction is slow. Building a new bridge to replace an older one without disrupting train traffic was and is a challenge. Changing the C&TS operational structure probably needs to be approached the same way. Jeff Stebbins is right, shutting up shop and re-organizing is probably a poor idea. People decide the railroad is closed, and then you have to start all over, just as in the early 1970's.
The challenge seems to be stabilizing the railroad and an operator, and planning for the finanacial and organizational long-term good health of the C&TS. Unfortuntely, I see no simple solutions for the C&TS. I dont' see any evidence of a private savior like Bill Gates materializing. I don't see any interest from the NPS. The states have pressing financial problems, and they are willing to put SOME more money into the property, but probably not enough to make the changes that many of us would like to see happen fast.
Reading the four proposals submitted to the Commission was very interesting. One thing I took away from it - to do any major changes fast is probably impossible with the funding available.
Was the previous operator an ideal situation? No. Would the previous operator be the worst possible choice for a new operator? No. The worst choice, in my book, is to keep fighting over things that are past. As I see it, the state and federal governments will come up with some money, but not enough to do all the things which need to be done. I think any of the four propsed operators could succeed, with a lot of help from all of us. Any of the proposed operators or the Commission, or a state park could also fail, especially if they have to spend their time, dollars and effort dealing with infighting, instead of rebuilding the C&TS.
We need to understand that we all have to put aside our pride and work to support the surviabl of the C&TS. Buy train tickets you won't use, buy a season pass, send a contribution. If you don't like all the decisions, don't worry. It won't matter WHO runs the railroad, tht organization will make decsions that someone won't like. Can we work together? We are going to have to to keep the trains running. I can live with someone else getting the credit for my rather platry monitary contribution as long as the trains keep running, the merchants keep ringing up sales, and the employees keep getting paid. Isn't that what we are all trying to accomplish?
Thanks for reading.
Charlie Mutschler
