By 1808Delaware
Ohioans are speaking up about trains, and loud enough that it’s hard to ignore. In a 2024 survey by the Ohio Department of Transportation, nearly 80 percent of respondents said improving passenger rail service and transit was “important” or “very important.”
Still, the latest draft of Ohio’s State Rail Plan (2025) leans heavily toward freight. That’s not just noticed by policy analysts—it’s increasingly a political flashpoint. Our readers can access the draft plan here.
Advocates Call for Bold Action
John Esterly, Executive Director of All Aboard Ohio, lays it out plainly:
“All across Ohio, people are asking for better mobility options. They want passenger trains that connect communities and provide alternatives to driving. Yet the new State Rail Plan largely sidesteps this public demand. Instead of presenting a bold path forward, it positions passenger rail as a secondary consideration. That disconnect should concern Ohio leaders.” All Aboard Ohio
On WSYX, Mitch Radakovich, Board Chair of All Aboard Ohio, similarly voiced frustration over what he sees as vague promises without follow‐through:
“We were a bit disappointed that the passenger rail plans seemed to be kind of a second thought in the proposal. Definitely freight rail was the priority.” WSYX
Radakovich also stressed urgency, citing federal money that needs to be claimed now or risk being lost:
“Once that pot has been split up across different states, that money is gone … We think that everybody will benefit. … We can’t blow this opportunity again.”
Legislative Pushback and Budget Choices
Some of the resistance is coming from within the statehouse. In budget sessions, legislators have made choices that critics say pull away support from passenger rail initiatives. For example:
- The budget removed funding (about $25,000 a year) that would have allowed Ohio to rejoin the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission (MIPRC).
- It also eliminated a seat on the Ohio Rail Development Commission meant for passenger rail interests, replacing it with another member representing freight rail.
Senate President Rob McColley defended some of the changes:
“I wouldn’t say that we’re anti-passenger rail, necessarily, but we’re also not going to hand over state authority to a third party that we really are kind of unfamiliar with.” The Statehouse News Bureau
Others in the legislature have been more explicit about concerns around cost, competitiveness, and whether passenger rail can realistically deliver returns under current funding constraints. But many advocates argue that Ohio’s choices are being shaped more by budget politics than by what people want or what could be possible.
What’s at Stake
Advocates highlight multiple consequences:
- Economic: The 3C+D (Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati) corridor is estimated to bring more than 1,100 construction jobs and over $100 million in economic output. But those benefits depend on moving from study to implementation.
- Quality of life: Better passenger rail could mean more transportation options, less car traffic, and improved access for people who live in places underserved by transit.
- Federal competitiveness: States that show clear commitment to passenger rail are more likely to receive federal grants. Critics say Ohio’s draft plan and legislative posture weaken its case.
What Needs to Happen Next
Advocates are pushing for a few concrete steps:
- State leaders need to articulate specific passenger rail capital projects and timelines, not just studies and corridor identifications.
- Re‐establishing representation for passenger rail on state commissions, ensuring that their perspectives aren’t simply optional.
- Restoring or increasing funding to support ongoing and new passenger rail corridor projects, especially ones already in federal programs.
- More public engagement: letting citizens know when decisions are being made, inviting input, and making these plans more transparent.
A Turning Point, If Ohio Chooses It
Ohio’s draft rail plan is more than a document. It may define how, and whether, passenger rail becomes a viable transportation option in the state over the next decade. Advocates argue this is a moment when federal funding, public demand, and corridor planning all line up—but only if state policy catches up.
For now, the ORDC is set to vote publicly on the draft plan on September 18.
