News & Reviews News Wire Amtrak suing SEPTA in rent dispute NEWSWIRE

Amtrak suing SEPTA in rent dispute NEWSWIRE

By Angela Cotey | June 27, 2019

| Last updated on November 3, 2020

Get a weekly roundup of the industry news you need.

Email Newsletter

Get the newest photos, videos, stories, and more from Trains.com brands. Sign-up for email today!

Amtrak2
SEPTA

PHILADELPHIA — Amtrak is suing the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority in federal court, as it seeks a dramatic increase in rent in a dispute over land SEPTA leases along the Northeast Corridor.

Since 1987, SEPTA has paid $1 a year for land along the corridor it uses for stations and parking lots; the transit agency maintains the sites and estimates it has spent $228 million on capital improvements over the last 15 years, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports.

But SEPTA’s 30-year lease on the land has expired and the two sides have been unable reach a new agreement. Amtrak now wants to charge the full market rate for the land, which would be $1.5 million a year plus an annual 2% increase. In its lawsuit, Amtrak is asking that the court making it clear the land belongs to Amtrak and that SEPTA is not free to use it without a lease agreement; the passenger railroad says it could evict SEPTA and develop or sell the land. SEPTA says Amtrak doesn’t have that right, citing federal laws and an operation plan predating Amtrak’s ownership of the land, which it acquired from Conrail in 1982.

The suit, and potential rent increase, does not affect SEPTA’s actual rail operations on the Northeast Corridor; it pays Amtrak an annual operating fee of $50.

SEPTA filed a motion this month asking U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden to dismiss the case. No court date has been set for arguments on that motion.

13 thoughts on “Amtrak suing SEPTA in rent dispute NEWSWIRE

  1. The above post is incorrect. Click on the link to the original article and you will find that SEPTA pays an operating fee of $50 million not $50.

    But the post does show that these back room deals that the government and its agencies make are bad. Boston’s MBTA had one too where it didn’t pay rent to run their trains but instead maintained the signal equipment. Well the MBTA can’t maintain anything so when things started to break and trains were delayed there was hell to pay over whose fault it was. Best to make the deal straightforward and above board. This is another back room deal that needs to be terminated. (I can’t believe there are people out there who think that the government can handle our health care better than the private sector.)

  2. The economics of the NEC are unravelling. This is popcorn entertaining for people in places like Wisconsin but a growing tragedy for people in places like Pennsylvania.

  3. Anna, sounds like these folks could use your services and perspective (a lawyer who is also a railfan).

  4. Perhaps it’s time to transfer the NEC – track, property, etc – to a Northeast Corridor Railway Development Corporation (NECRDC), a railroad version of the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. Then Amtrak would be a tenant, just like and SEPTA.

  5. Another example how PRIIA benefits the NE corridor and the states along it. Meanwhile other states with corridor service are effectively overpaying Amtrak and subsidizing the NE corridor.

  6. Considering the figures cited, Amtrak has a good point. If correct, it seems outrageous. Yes, some of the land in question along the corridor could be developed and in some places it already is…but then Amtrak would need to get in the commuter business since most of the development assumes rail transportation to downtown areas where the real estate is expensive and people can’t afford to live. Examples abound between New York and Trenton.. Is Amtrak willing to get into the commuter business? I doubt it. So there is room for lots of negotiation. Stay tuned for further developments.

  7. A buck a year for the land and $50 a year for operating rights? Is this operating rights number accurate?

    And I’ll get the beer chilling and the popcorn started…

  8. May I watch?

    The above comments are general in nature and do not form the basis for an attorney/client relationship. They do not constitute legal advice. I am not your attorney. Find your own damn lawyer.

  9. I wonder why they are not similarly busting NJ Transit’s butt? Could it be that it’s Coscia’s home state, and he and his close buddy Schumer don’t feel as great a need??

  10. I’m trying to send some popcorn to the commentator from Philly.
    May Mr Anderson crash and burn very publicly.

You must login to submit a comment