From environmental concerns to cost considerations, high-speed and intercity passenger rail service often face inaccurate and unfounded criticisms. The June 15 Closing General Session of the APTA Rail Conference in Boston, “Calling Out the Rail Critics: Facts Are on Our Side,” offered strategies for responding to and, in some cases, preempting criticism, an approach that moderator Kristina Egan, South Coast Rail manager for massDOT, called “proactive inoculation.”

Eric Peterson, a rail consultant and former deputy administrator with DOT’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration, shared themes that emerged in his study of critical comments about rail over the past several years. “There are really not that many critics, but they are very determined, very dedicated, and very persistent,” he said. “Criticism tends to be recirculated among critics.”

Among the criticisms he cited included charges of elitism or social engineering; concerns that high-speed rail is old technology and won’t work in the U.S.; accusations that high-speed and intercity passenger rail is expensive and will require taxpayer subsidies; and statements that benefits of the mode are overstated.

“The challenge we face is the debate often focuses on only a subset [of benefits],” said Todd Alexander Litman, founder and president of Canada’s Victoria Transport Policy Institute. “Individually, those benefits may not justify the project, but when you add up the sum of the benefits, that’s when you can justify very large investments and policies that favor high-quality public transportation.”

Litman urged attendees to “communicate not the costs but the benefits,” especially when speaking to families and individual riders. “Describe how this transit project will save your family or your future self traffic congestion delays, accident risks, financial costs,” he added.

Building on the importance of emphasizing the benefits of rail, Morgan Lyons, director of media relations for Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), suggested making messages memorable, shareable, and relevant to individuals. “Transit is an incredibly personal experience,” he explained. “It is about how I get from A to B and the experience that I have during that trip. Our communication has to be on that personal level.”

For instance, he said, “in Plano, TX, what is it about using DART rail that helps you?” He continued: “You might be able to drive more quickly—but what you can’t do safely is respond to e-mail.”

Patricia Quinn, executive director for the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority in Portland, ME, continued the discussion with examples from her experiences fielding potential critics of her agency’s intercity rail service, the Downeaster. When a new governor and legislature took office in Maine, Quinn said she and her colleagues “developed a number of handouts that addressed some of the possible questions and criticisms before they became a criticism by telling stories about how the Downeaster helps to support the economy and jobs.”

For example, she said, while voters may not remember statistics, they will remember a compelling story or a photo illustrating how rail creates jobs.

In addition to communicating visually, Quinn recommended harnessing the credibility of others to advocate on behalf of rail transit. “People expect me to say good stuff,” she said. “Engage the users of the station and other businesses who benefit.”

That effort could include developers of transit adjacent builders or other groups. “We have local [food and beverage] products that we serve on our trains,” Quinn noted, “and that’s an important way for us to get into a new market and develop a new group of stakeholders.”

When Egan opened the floor to questions, attendees shared concerns that low ridership numbers from other public transportation operations might impact future rail projects. Litman allayed these concerns, saying: “The latest rail projects have exceeded their rider projections within a few years.”

However, Litman noted the challenges of a lack of reliable, easily accessible data on projected versus actual ridership. “One of the things we need to do as an industry,” he said, “is organize our information in a way that we can stand behind on the ridership impacts, the cost efficiencies, the land use value increases, and economic development increases in a way that anybody in any community can get that information and tailor it to their use.”

At the end of the session, presenters left attendees with positive messages and solid arguments in favor of rail. As Quinn said: “Make it about the people and not about the politics.”

The Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Company sponsored the session.

Panelists at the Closing General Session include, from left, Morgan Lyons, Patricia Quinn, Eric Peterson, moderator Kristina Egan, and Todd Alexander Litman.