Some interesting developments in the Pioneer Industrial Railway v. City of Peoria department today. You may recall that, over the weekend, Pioneer (PIRY) filed a petition with the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to reopen the adverse discontinuance case. Today, the STB published the documentation that goes with that petition, and it’s very interesting!
It looks like Pioneer has secured another attorney and is taking further legal action. The last STB ruling found (among other things) that the City of Peoria is the landlord, so to speak, and Pioneer is the tenant, and that any disputes between owner and tenant are not for the STB to decide, but whatever court has jurisdiction over such matters. So, Pioneer is filing suit against DOT Rail and the City of Peoria in circuit court. Pioneer maintains that the agreement between the city and Pioneer (as successor to Peoria & Pekin Union Railway) did not specify an expiration date, and thus the original agreement is still in effect. If that’s true, then Pioneer can continue operating on the line as long as they’re providing adequate service to shippers. PIRY wants the STB to clarify that the city cannot remove any track on the Kellar Branch unless (a) this court case is decided in favor of the city and (b) CIRY receives authority from the STB to discontinue service on the line. In order for the STB to make such a clarification, it would technically need to “reopen” the case/decision. Thus the petition to reopen/reconsider.
Sound confusing? Legal maneuvers usually are. I think Pioneer makes a good case, though. Their position is that, if the court case is decided in Pioneer’s favor, but the city has already ripped up the rail line, they will have done irreparable damage to Pioneer’s ability to reestablish shipping. Thus, the line should stay in place until the court case is decided. They threw in the second condition because the city keeps talking as if they can rip out the track once the spur is completed without going back to the STB for discontinuance approval. Pioneer wants to remind the city that they can’t legally do that.
The upshot is that this dispute could take months or years to wind its way through the courts, and if the city has to keep the tracks in place until it’s finally resolved, the park district may lose its funding for converting the Kellar Branch into an extension of the Rock Island Trail. So, it will be interesting to see how the STB responds (if it responds at all).
Oh, one other interesting thing — you know how the Journal Star castigated Pioneer for supposedly pulling out early when they had promised to help with the transition? PIRY’s STB filing includes a letter from city attorney Thomas McFarland that ordered PIRY to vacate the tracks by 11:59 p.m. August 21. So Pioneer was just following orders. I wonder if the Journal Star will report that news. Not!