Amtrak's Board of Directors fired their president David Gunn today. For those who care, this is probably another "nail in the coffin" for Amtrak.Mike

Here is the link to Amtrak's press release that carries the date of November 11, 2005:Amtrak Board Releases Gunn

It would be interesting to know who is on the Amtrak board and how they got there. Perhaps someone can elaborate. It certainly does look like part of the plan to destroy Amtrak.

Amtrak Board of DirectorsFlyod Hall (retired KMart chairman)David M. Laney, Chairman (Dallas attorney and former chairman of the Texas Transportation Commission)Norman Mineta, Secretary of TransportationEnrique Sosa (retired oil industry executive) All are presidential appointees.

I have read reports that Norman Mineta has yet to actually attend a single board meeting since his appointment, sending an administrative assistant in his stead.Ross Rowland (who is himself a former member of the Amtrak BOD) has some comments posted at TrainOrders in their Amtrak forum:http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,1035347

Let's get the story straight. The Senate just passed a huge bill that would essentially keep Amtrak around. What happens? The board (made up of political cronies and donors ala Katrina nightmare "Heckuva job, Brownie" Brown) reacts by tossing the CEO. Why? Liquidation is what the White House has wanted all along. How does the looming break-up of Amtrak impact historic preservation? Let us count the ways... beginning with access, interoperability, private car charters...Saving Amtrak IS a preservation priority, IMHO.Rob

This could not be more true. How many 261 trips operated in the last 2 years have not fallen under the flag of amtrak?

There's no question that Mr. Gunn was terminated because he was an obstacle to the Administrations intention to truncate Amtrak to a 2or 3 corridor operation and finally kill what little is left of long distance service. From my observation David Gunn did a remarkable job,particularly when you consider the negative BOD he had to work with. When I served on the BOD('82-'86) there were only 3 of us out of 9 directors(Graham Claytor, Charlie Luna and myself) who knew anything (or cared) about railroading. Todays board is even worse-all the Directors are strictly Bush henchmen-there to do the Administrations bidding. It's probably as close as Amtrak has come since its founding of being terminated as we know it. It's of course possible that as in the past the strong bipartican support Amtrak has in the Congress will again prevail and keep it together despite the White Houses wishes. If Amtrak(outside of the 2/3 corridors) is killed it will auger poorly for any future mainline excursions(steam or diesel) as the Class 1's have made it crystal clear that they do not want the liability exposure, not to mention it will spell the end of any PV movements. All of us who care about railroad preservation should be doing what we can to let our Senators and Congressmen know how we feel! Ross Rowland

http://www.kumquatcomputer.com/karlanews.htmFrom all I've read of Mr. Gunn, he was a manager who stood up for what was right, which is a rarity in the RR industry, and like others who have done so, was sadly fired.

Obviously, I have never voted for him:http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ny20_sweeney/PR110905Amtrak.htmlLife has been good to me here in NY State, but I miss my Congressional delegation from Vermont, all of whom had a good fire in their belly and were all good supporters of rail transportation and its workers.Rest assured, I have communicated my thoughts to Congressman Sweeney..

I emailed my Senator. If/when I hear back I will let you all know. Delaware, being a small state, we tend to get quick replies.In case any wants it here is Joe Biden's email : http://biden.senate.gov/contact/emailjoe.cfm

Supposedly, one of the big reasons Mr Gunn was terminated was his resistance to selling off the Northeast Corridor section. Although not familiar with Mr Gunn, I am aware of many favorable references to him in trade journals. It seems that Amtrak will forever be a "neglected child", particularly, as one poster noted, it is continually being managed or watched over by many with no real railroad background or history. It's laughable in itself that many of our elected officials continue to use some formula equative of "financial success" to this agency, while allowing hosts of others within our government to run financially amok. And I too, look for some interesting responses from our elected officials over this newest controversy.

From the NY Times: Amtrak fires Gunn in dispute over future WASHINGTON -- Amtrak's board fired the company's president on Wednesday morning (Nov. 9), widening a divide between the Bush administration and Congress over the future of the railroad, according to this report by Matthew L. Wald published by The New York Times. The board chairman, David M. Laney, said that the president, David Gunn, helped develop a strategic plan that would have injected more competition into passenger operations, but that Mr. Gunn's "enthusiasm and commitment seems to have drained away." Mr. Laney said Mr. Gunn had failed to move forward on simpler initiatives, like outsourcing maintenance and catering in a way that would cut expenses. But in a letter to the board dated Nov. 9, Mr. Gunn said, "I can assure you that we have already begun to work on those initiatives that are wholly within our control." In a telephone interview Wednesday he said some changes would require action by Congress. Mr. Gunn, who is credited with turning around New York City's subway system in the 1980's and came out of retirement three years ago to steer Amtrak successfully during a financial crisis, described the reason for his dismissal as "ideological." "Obviously, what their goal is -- and it's been their goal from the beginning -- is to liquidate the company," Mr. Gunn said in the interview. The Bush administration has proposed putting the railroad tracks of the Boston-to-Washington Northeast Corridor, which are Amtrak's major asset, in the hands of a federal-state consortium, an idea Mr. Gunn has vehemently opposed. The board has voted for now to put the corridor in a separate subsidiary. Mr. Gunn said he did not oppose injecting some competition into the system if it was done carefully. He pointed out that the administration had discussed bankrupting the railroad, which would mean breaking it up, as a way to reorganize. "They want at least one transportation mode that is totally free market," Mr. Gunn said. But highways, airports and ports are all federally subsidized, he said, decrying "all this angst over an operating deficit of 500 million bucks for the whole country, and the bulk of money going into capital or infrastructure." The action Wednesday was a sharp turnaround for the board. Asked in September about Mr. Gunn's performance, Mr. Laney told a Senate subcommittee, "Mr. Gunn has done, as far as I am concerned, a splendid job." He said Mr. Gunn had "righted a ship that was listing and about to spill over." Mr. Gunn is known as a rail-turnaround artist. He was brought in to fix the New York City subway system in the 1980's, and provided leadership in the construction of the subway system in Washington. Amtrak's supporters in Congress reacted swiftly and bitterly to Mr. Gunn's removal. Democrats sought to contrast what they said were his successes, including cutting expenses, increasing ridership and improving the railroad's physical condition, with the recent failures of the Federal Emergency Management Agency after Hurricane Katrina. "We have learned recently that there is room for cronies in this administration," said Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, "and we've learned the cost of cronyism. And now we've learned today there is not room for straight shooters." Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, questioned the board's legal ability to fire Mr. Gunn. Only one board member, Mr. Laney, has been appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, Mr. Schumer pointed out. The secretary of transportation is, by statute, a member, and two other members are recess appointments, whose terms will expire when Congress goes home in a few weeks. There are three vacancies. "Gunn is more legitimate than the board is," Mr. Schumer said. He asserted that Mr. Gunn was fired over policy, saying: "The policy difference is that the board wants to kill Amtrak and Gunn wants it to prosper. It's that simple." The railroad announced Wednesday morning that Mr. Gunn had been "released" from his job, then notified Mr. Gunn. He replied with a memorandum to the board: "For your information, I did not resign. I was removed. It's been fun. Good luck." Mr. Gunn, 68, was paid $275,000 a year. An Amtrak spokesman, Clifford Black, said he did not know if there was a severance package. On Sept. 30, the railroad ended the fiscal year with $120 million in cash as operating capital, a strong performance, Mr. Gunn said, especially considering that the Acela express train was out of service for most of the summer because of a brake problem. The Senate just voted 93 to 6 to authorize $11.6 billion for Amtrak over the next six years, although the vote did not actually appropriate any money. That measure, which will probably go to a conference committee to work out differences with a House version, would make the Amtrak president a member of the board. Both the House and Senate have supported aid packages for the current fiscal year that are far more generous that the White House has proposed. But the Government Accountability Office said last week that while progress had been made at the railroad, Amtrak needed "fundamental improvements." Mr. Gunn is widely credited with improving the railroad's management, cutting costs, imposing better financial controls and improving the state of repair of Amtrak's locomotives and passenger cars, which are old, and its tracks, signals and electrical systems, which are truly antique. But while ridership has recently risen to record levels, government auditors predicted that Amtrak's budget deficit would grow sharply in the next few years. The administration has said it is determined to end the perennial subsidies to the railroad, which was created 30 years ago to take over passenger service as the commercial railroads abandoned that business as unprofitable. (The preceding report by Matthew L. Wald was published by The New York Times on Thursday, Nov. 10, 2005.)

Taken from http://www.friendsfoamtrak.comWHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?Amtrak supporters are rallying to reverse this decision. Our bestchances lie with Congress in both the House and Senate where David Gunn is highly admired. I strongly urge you to contact yourrepresentatives in both chambers as soon as you can and let them knowthat you want David Gunn reinstated.The Congressional Switchboard number is: 1- 202-224-3121. Call and askto speak to your representatives in the House and Senate.I had the privilage of meeting Mr. Gunn onboard the Capitol Limited which I take to and from Chicago and Fort Wayne (read: Waterloo) regularly...This situation requires a much needed outcry from we, the people. This nonsense is intolerable.

Jason's observation concerning FO 261's partnership with Amtrak is absolutely correct. The deadhead move to Kansas City in September of this year is the only non-Amtrak move of any magnitude over the last two years or so. Insurance and accessibility are the two major reasons that the partnership has worked well for FO 261.But it has not been limited to just #261. #3751's NRHS Grand Canyon trip, the final year or two of the #1522's operation and this year's NRHS convention with the #700/4449 have all been operated with the help of Amtrak. Only the UP and CPR operate true "mainline" steam without the assistance of Amtrak as they control their own railroad. As nice as the Ohio Central and PM #1225's regional operations have been, they are not 60-70 mph mainline trips. #2719 has disappeared from the rails with the assimilation of the WC into the CN and #1003 has been relegated to photo freights on the WSOR. The "Montana Daylight" may have been the last "mainline", non-Amtrak, privately-owned steam that we will see for awhile (or maybe forever). Sure, the MRL is a regional but it acts and looks like a true Class 1. And, no, I haven't forgotten SP #745's recent romp on the BNSF, UP, KCS and IC/CN but, like #261's trip to Kansas City, the general public could not purchase a ticket to ride behind the locomotive. So let's face it, towing a P42 behind the canteen tenders and having to build an Amtrak-compatible train are relatively small prices to pay for we die-hards who still get a thrill out of "going fast." With the present Administration's vision for Amtrak, this final door may also close for those of us who have worked hard to explore any and every avenue to stay on a Class 1 mainlines. This fight is concerns much more than half a dozen steam trips a year. I don't want to make it sound like Amtrak needs to be saved so we can get our "jollies" with our toys once or twice a year. Don C.