Daily Archives: October 2, 2006

Kellar Branch

CIRY in breach of contract … again

11 Comments

Central Illinois Railroad Company (CIRY), the city’s contracted rail operator for the Kellar Branch and western spur, is no stranger to breaking its contract with the City of Peoria. It’s endangered the lives of Peorians with a runaway train and cost Carver Lumber over $60,000 in additional shipping fees, all with impunity. The city, despite its written promises to enforce service standards with CIRY, has stood quietly by and left Carver Lumber hung out to dry.

So now, CIRY is at it again. Why not? There haven’t been any consequences before, right? The following letter from Carver Lumber to the Surface Transportation Board (STB) was filed today. Keep in mind as you read it that the contract CIRY has with the city requires that they deliver railcars to Carver within 24 hours of those cars being placed on the western spur by Union Pacific:

Dear Mr. Williams [STB Secretary]:

We are, by this letter, respectfully requesting that the Board take immediate action to address the service failures of Central Illinois Railroad Company, and grant the Alternative Service Requestor Pioneer Industrial Railway Co. (“P1RY”).

As the Board knows, this matter has been pending for some time. Central Illinois Railroad Company (“CIRY”) is now taking retaliatory action against Carver Lumber Company for its support of PIRY’s Alternative Service Request, and its refusal to submit to becoming a captive shipper.

Specifically, we are informed and believe that Union Pacific Railroad delivered four cars to the CIRY interchange at Pioneer Junction on Monday, September 18 and/or Tuesday, September 19, 2006. Because the Carver employee who generally goes out to Pioneer Junction and checks for deliveries and informs CIRY that cars have been delivered was on vacation last week, we are informed and believe that nobody informed CIRY that cars were interchanged. Apparently, CIRY does not have the normal electronic data systems to inform it of interchanges, or such system is not being used.

In any event, Lee Miller phoned our shipper inquiring about the status of the cars, and was informed they were delivered to CIRY. Mr. Miller also received a highly offensive phone call on Friday, September 22, from “Ken,” a representative of Union Pacific. He told us to reject the cars or they would start charging demurrage. When Mr. Miller asked him if he had notified CtRY that the UP had dropped cars for us, he informed us that the UP has no obligation to contact CIRY when they drop cars. Mr. Miller then contacted CIRY’s engineer, Mike, who informed us that he had no knowledge of any cars for Carver and that CIRY was relying upon Carver to inform CIRY if there were cars at Pioneer Junction. This situation is ridiculous and needs immediate attention and resolution. Mr. Miller explained to Mike that we needed the cars immediately. He said he would have a crew out on Monday (today). Mr. Miller also placed a call to Ray Fuch’s that has not been returned.

As of the writing of this letter. 5:30 p.m. EDT, Monday, September 25, only two of the four cars have been delivered. We do not have a schedule for delivery of the other two cars. We have no idea why CIRY only delivered two cars. To make matters worse, the cars delivered were not the two cars we urgently need.

We also received an e-mail from another of our shippers (copy attached), claiming that “CIRY is a closed line and subject to further charges.” We are uncertain what this means, other than we will likely experience more trouble with our service.

Carver Lumber needed these cars last week. We reasonably believe that CIRY is either retaliating against us for bringing this matter to the Board’s attention or is grossly out of touch with their responsibilities as the common carrier railroad for our rail service, or both. We are also informed and believe that CIRY does not want to serve Pioneer Park, and desires to exit the property.

Carver Lumber Company desperately needs reliable rail service, and it is not getting such from CIRY. Carver respectfully urges the Board to act immediately to grant PIRY’s Alternative Service Request, and to act as expeditiously as possible to correct this situation permanently, by restoring PIRY’s authority over the Kellar Branch.

Sincerely,
Carver Lumber Company Board of Directors
Mark Booth, Debra Wolfe, Lee Miller

It’s bad enough that service over the western spur has been slower and more expensive already. This action (or, more precisely, inaction) only exacerbates the situation. If one were cynical, one would think the city was trying to run Carver Lumber out of town or out of business. That sure would make it easier for the city and park district to get their beloved hiking trail.

City of Peoria, Peoria Civic Center, Peoria Journal Star

Are corporate rates hurting Peoria hotels?

4 Comments

Former Peoria resident and mayor Bud Grieves put pen to paper again this week and wrote to the Journal Star, this time about the Civic Center expansion and new hotel feasibility study. What I found most interesting was a passing comment toward the end of his letter:

Finally, the business community has a responsibility to pay a fair price for a quality room with good service in our town. Hotels simply cannot afford the continuous investment required to keep properties up-to-date, let alone pay their staff a living wage, if area businesses think they can pay less than $100 a night for a room. Unfortunately, that has been the case for far too long in Peoria, and it must begin to change if we expect room quality to improve.

What Grieves is referring to here is the common practice of large businesses in Peoria (e.g., Caterpillar) negotiating a “corporate rate” for hotel rooms for their clients. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with this in theory — one expects to get a better price when one buys in bulk. In this case, large employers who bring in a lot of lodging business want to buy hotel rooms in bulk, as it were, and whatever hotel has the best rate gets the business.

The problem is, what if the only rate they will accept is one so low that it doesn’t allow the hotel to make enough money to pay for capital improvements? This puts Peoria hotels in a bit of a bind. They can reject the low corporate rate and lose so much business they risk going out of business themselves, or they can accept a rate that’s enough to keep them afloat but not enough to make substantial improvements to the property, thus perpetuating a downward spiral in rates.

Is Grieves right? Are the rates demanded by the business community in Peoria unrealistically low? If so, what can be done about it? And what would the implications of this practice be for a new hotel induced to locate here by tax breaks and other incentives?

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools

Letter to District 150 School Board and Peoria Park Board

I received the following as a comment to my blog and as an e-mail, and feel it’s worthy of its own post. If you agree with this letter, I encourage you to send it to school board and park board members as suggested:

This is a letter compiled by some East Bluff residents regarding the placement of the new school into the Park. If you still respect our position; are still willing to back us, please copy and send this letter to all Park/School board members listed below before Monday night’s School Board meeting. The School and Park Board state that they have not received e-mails from constituants disagreeing with their position. Wouldn’t you think that public comment during school and park board meetings would be enough…apparantly not.

Please include your name at the bottom of this letter….thank you for your help regarding this issue.

tcassidy@cassidymueller.com
rpallen4@insightbb.com
sbudzinski@aol.com
robertjohnsonsr@sbcglobal.net
petty7@aol.com
pcwrt2004@yahoo.com
david.gorenz@psd150.org
martha.ross@psd150.org
alicia.butler@psd150.org
sean.matheson@psd150.org
mary.spangler@psd150.org
jim.stowell@psd150.org
debbie.wolfmeyer@psd150.org

The City of Peoria adopted the Heart of Peoria Plan, which states on page 13 that a school should be in the center of the community which it services. The way the Glen Oak School situation was handled from Day One, there has not been a full study done examining the cost of renovating and adding to the existing school site, compared to building a new school. Based solely on a preliminary study and letter of intent between the two boards, over $800,000.00 has already been spent acquiring adjacent properties, prior to either board having a signed legal agreement. Additional funds have already been spent with architectural firms designing a facility with only consideration of new construction at the new location, not revitalizing or new construction at the existing location. Neither board approached the citizens within the area covered, requesting input on the location of the new school. Both the City and the citizens have presented several workable footprint alternatives at the existing location. It is our contention, that thus far, the elected officials of both the District 150 School Board and the Peoria Park District Board, have no consideration for the position taken by its constituents on this matter. All direction has come from subordinate appointed staff members. The following have stated, both written and verbally, the dissatisfaction of placing this school within the boundaries of Glen Oak Park: Illinois State Senator George Shadid, U.S. Congressman Ray LaHood, City of Peoria (both Mayor and most Council), Peoria Fire Department, Peoria Police Department, Neighborhood Alliance, East Bluff United Neighborhood Association, Glen Oak Neighborhood Association, East Bluff Serenity Neighborhood Association, Gift Avenue Neighborhood Association, and East Bluff Housing Services. We, the citizens within the District 150 and Park District boundaries, request this situation be terminated by both District 150 School Board and Peoria Park District Board. Although there are many individual reasons not to put the new school at the park location, we feel the main concerns of ALL citizens is the protection of the children who will attend this school. Due to the busy Prospect, Frye, and Abingdon intersection, additional crossing guards will be required. The park location will continue to require additional costs exemplified by the busing of additional students. The busing will require additional buses, drivers, fuel, maintenance, and bus monitors. The City Police Department will need to provide additional protection due to the access to the bordering park area. Known sex offenders will be able to go into the adjacent park, zoo, and amphitheater. Should the school be required to have a major lock-down, the zoo, Children’s Museum and play area will also be required to go down to lock-down status. The continued loss of assets — Sunken Garden, Palm House, Log Cabin, Train, etc — is also a concern. This proposed school will further limit and cause public usage to diminish. Although the School District has suggested that there will be no loss of property by the park district, we have been told that only the parking lot will be utilized by both facilities. Where do you propose to put all the vehicles of the employees of both facilities? Nothing has been said regarding the requirements of movement of the park maintenance facility. The park belongs to ALL the Peoria tax paying citizens. If the proposed school is constructed, the bus and other traffic will increase. Will the East Street be relocated on park land, further reducing already limited park space? With the planned zoo expansion, along with the Children’s Museum, open free green-space will be unavailable to the public. Your consideration on this very important and sensitive matter will be greatly appreciated.

Respectfully,
The Concerned Citizens of Peoria