Cities tout costly plans for trains on route already served by commuter buses
A costly proposed commuter rail system between Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee is back on the radar of municipal leaders, even as frequent service on high-end buses already serves commuters on the same route.
That has some independent transportation experts questioning the necessity of the plans.
“I’m not really sure what the demand is there,” said the Reason Foundation’s Baruch Feigenbaum. “There seem to be some other options. I’m just skeptical of the need in this corridor.”
The Milwaukee Area-Racine-Kenosha (MARK) Rail Study is a project to explore the possibility of a commuter rail line connecting Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha, which itself is the north end of a longstanding commuter train to Chicago.
It was kickstarted in late 2025 after the City of Racine obtained $5 million through the Federal Railroad Administration to rekindle plans for a regional commuter train killed by the state Legislature about 15 years ago. The new effort is organized by some cities along the line and the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, rather than the state.
Project organizers are already forecasting a substantial amount of work would be needed: Existing tracks will require upgrades to allow trains to move at higher speeds. Six bridges would have to be replaced, including one over the Kinnickinnic River, and another 22 would need repair. New signals, new road crossings and new station platforms would be needed, too.
While cost estimates for such upgrades won’t be available until completion of the study, the Federal Transit Administration in 2022 cited a cost of $460 million for similar start-up work on an earlier version of the rail proposal.
A brochure promoting the project claims a rail line would save 250,000 hours of travel and prevent more than 600 car crashes per year. The brochure, dated June 2026, also touted expected tax base growth in the communities surrounding rail stations and claimed a projected ridership of “nearly 2.5 million estimated annual riders.”
But commuters between Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha already are served by a transit route, one that uses motorcoaches — commuter buses, as distinct from city transit buses — to run seven round trips per day at a Milwaukee-to-Kenosha fare of $4.50. The route, operated by Racine’s municipal transit system, carried 29,400 passengers in 2024, the most recent figures, according to federal data. It travels to each city’s downtown, including to train stations in Milwaukee and Kenosha.
MARK organizers also say the Milwaukee-to-Kenosha trains would offer a “one-seat ride” from Milwaukee to Chicago by serving as an extension of existing Chicago-area commuter service. But such service already is offered by Amtrak’s “Hiawatha” service on a rail line running just west of Racine and Kenosha, with a stop in Sturtevant. That line, with about six round trips a day, carries just under 700,000 riders a year, data shows.
Big claims
Despite this, presentation notes from a March MARK meeting show organizers believe “the existing transportation system in Southeastern Wisconsin does not adequately connect Racine, Kenosha, and other lakeshore communities to the larger Chicago-Milwaukee economic region.”
Trevor Jung, Racine’s transit and mobility director, wrote via LinkedIn in January that the project “has the potential to deliver … stronger economic ties, expanded workforce access, improved regional mobility, and more competitive transportation options.”
What isn’t clear is how Racine authorities concluded a train that duplicates existing transit service with 29,400 riders a year would bring about such benefits, nor how existing ridership numbers would expand to more than 2 million annually. Commuter rail ridership in the Twin Cities fell so far short of estimates, the line was closed, and ridership has been well below pre-pandemic levels on Chicago’s system.
Neither Jung, who now is running for a state legislative seat, nor Racine Mayor Cory Mason responded to multiple requests for comment from Badger Institute.
Urban planner Larry Witzling, retired from teaching planning at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, wrote in an essay published this month that the commuter line “will be the heart of an urban-centric district that turbocharges real improvement” around Milwaukee’s train station.
He touted it as a start: “Train platforms alone are not enough. To grow Milwaukee’s heart, we also need the social and economic lifeblood flowing from a complete passenger rail system and robust station district. This district begins with the MARK engineering forecast of 2.3 million annual riders for Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee.”
Witzling did not respond to a request for comment from Badger Institute.
Dubious development
Feigenbaum, senior managing director of transportation policy at Reason, told the Badger Institute he doubts commuters’ demand for a train, given the current proliferation of other quick and affordable options.
“The question in their mind is, ‘Are people going to switch from bus to rail?’” he said. “I think it is unlikely, given the different types of riders. I think that bus riders tend to be more cost-sensitive and I think they’re taking the bus because it’s a cheap ride.”
He also questioned claims by project organizers running a commuter train would lower the rate of highway collisions. “They really can’t make that claim; it’s just too broad,” he said. “There’s just too many factors that go into it.”
Feigenbaum’s questions echo those he asked when the proposed rail line came up before, especially those about ridership. Until project organizers can show clear public interest for the rail line, Feignbaum said he remains unconvinced of its usefulness.
“The thing they haven’t shown is where all these magical riders are going to come from,” he said. “I still am skeptical that would be enough to make the train viable.”
Jackson Walker is a native Wisconsinite and a Michigan-based journalist.
Any use or reproduction of Badger Institute articles or photographs requires prior written permission. To request permission to post articles on a website or print copies for distribution, contact Badger Institute Marketing Director Matt Erdman at matt@badgerinstitute.org.
