Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Passenger Rail topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State advisers say starter Front Range passenger rail is financially feasible with existing fees; local funding gap remains
Summary
State advisers told the Broomfield City Council that a “joint service” starter passenger rail between Denver and Longmont could begin service in 2029 using existing state fees and RTD contributions, but local leaders would need to decide whether to fill a remaining funding gap for operations and debt service.
Brandon Schafer, a special adviser for passenger rail and transit, and Barrick Abramson, a consultant on the joint study, told the Broomfield City Council that a starter Front Range passenger rail "starter service" — three round trips a day from Denver Union Station to Longmont — could be put into operation in 2029 using currently authorized funding streams and interagency agreements.
The presenters said the joint approach would use one operator, a single access agreement with BNSF and a single route that largely follows RTD’s Bee Line, and would be governed initially by an intergovernmental agreement administered by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). "By having one operator … we reduce inefficiencies, make it easier for all of the parties involved to coordinate, and ensure that this service is frequent and reliable," Schafer said.
Abramson and Schafer presented cost estimates and funding assumptions. They summarized the capital estimate at about $885 million (including a 30% contingency at study stage) and an annual revenue requirement for three daily round trips at approximately $83 million in the first year, which they described as $32 million in operations and maintenance and $51 million in debt service. Abramson said two recently passed state bills — commonly cited in the presentation as SB 184 (a daily rental car fee directed to congestion/transportation uses) and SB 230 (an oil-and-gas production fee with a rail set-aside) — are modeled to contribute roughly $42 million annually combined under working assumptions. That leaves an approximate $41 million shortfall the presenters said could be covered by RTD in cash or in-kind contributions (for example, access to the Bee Line). "If the state contributes the $42 million annually, there's that $41 million gap to be filled by RTD," Abramson said.
Advisers emphasized the joint plan is a "starter" service designed to be compatible with a later Front Range Passenger Rail (FRPR) buildout. They told council members the joint service would create infrastructure and operational investments that would be repurposable by FRPR if and when a voter‑backed authority secures additional funding. Schafer said the March 1 report required by the Legislature asked whether unallocated and available resources exist to bring starter service online and concluded that, legally and technically, such resources do exist today if the parties choose to appropriate them.
Council members pressed presenters on schedule details and ridership assumptions. Council member John Ward (Ward 3) asked whether three daily round trips would be a usable level of service; Abramson said the study modeled three and five round trips and that the project team would evaluate schedules and station-level details in the next phase. "We're looking at bidirectional trains," Brandon said, describing the approach as not a peak-only commuter shuttle.
Multiple council members raised political and equity concerns: whether Broomfield — which has paid into RTD FastTracks for years — would be served adequately and whether the proposal could weaken RTD’s obligation to restore promised peak service. Abramson and Schafer said this joint service is intended to address municipalities that would otherwise be skipped in other plans and to provide a proof of delivery to voters, increasing trust for any subsequent ballot measure proposed by FRPR.
Council members asked for further details on: who would sign access agreements with BNSF, how stations would be selected, and the potential impacts on RTD’s reserves and service commitments. The presenters said RTD’s available reserves and state fee forecasts were analyzed, but they repeatedly noted final decisions — including RTD board commitments and interagency operating agreements — remain to be negotiated.
Ending: The presentation was informational; no binding commitments were made by the council. Council members asked the presenters to return with additional detail on schedules, station designs, ridership modeling and the steps required to secure RTD participation. Several members urged clearer public timelines and assurances that Broomfield would receive station-level service if a regional buildout goes to the voters.
