Bill to create state fund for passenger‑rail work draws broad local support; advocates cite tourism and safety benefits

Representative Denise Baum opened a hearing on House Bill 848, a bill to establish a state special‑revenue Big Sky Rail account and an annual statutory appropriation (the sponsor proposed $2 million) to help the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority and local partners plan and match federal grants for passenger‑rail restoration and upgrades.

Big Sky Passenger Rail Chairman David Strohmeyer urged committee support, describing the authority as a multi‑county governmental entity that has expanded to 18 counties and made progress on the North Coast (southern) corridor, including a $15 million infrastructure grant on BNSF’s Milk River Subdivision to remove bottlenecks and improve safety. Dan Bucks, chair of the authority’s development committee, said properly built passenger rail can yield strong returns for rural communities because it supports tourism, commuter access to education and health care, and freight reliability.

Agency staff from the Department of Transportation (Rob Stapley) appeared as informational witnesses and were available for technical questions. DOT staff confirmed that entering Phase 2 of the FRA Corridor ID program — the service development plan that answers routing, station locations, infrastructure needs and cost estimates — will require a 10% non‑federal match and an estimated $10–$15 million in planning costs. Proponents said the bill’s appropriation is intended in part to help provide that non‑federal match and to fund programmatic support for communities with limited grant capacity.

Speakers emphasized that passenger and freight improvements are mutually reinforcing: upgrades needed to reliably run new passenger service will improve on‑time freight performance where the routes overlap. Witnesses noted the Empire Builder already delivers significant economic benefits but requires infrastructure investments to improve reliability and to support a potential new southern route. Proponents also pointed to workforce development grants and local partnerships that would prepare Montanans for rail‑sector jobs.

Questions from committee members focused on timing, funding sources, and whether Amtrak would operate service. Strohmeyer said Amtrak is the likely operator but the service development plan (Phase 2) will identify operator arrangements and the infrastructure investments needed. He and Bucks said capital and major ongoing operating costs for long‑distance intercity passenger service are generally federal responsibilities, but local and state investment is often required to secure federal funding and provide station upgrades or local matching funds. Sponsor Baum said she was open to other funding sources and to a sunset or guardrails in the statutory appropriation language.

The bill drew a long list of proponents from counties, chambers, tribes, tourism and conservation groups citing economic development, safety and connectivity benefits. DOT told the committee the agency is prepared to work with the authority and noted the planning process will take time; proponents estimated full restoration and implementation could take several years.