The Surface Transportation Board has finally issued their ruling: The city cannot kick Pioneer Railcorp (PIRY) off the Kellar Branch. Pioneer may start serving Carver Lumber via the Kellar immediately. The STB explains their reasoning this way:
Often, a line owner seeking an adverse discontinuance wishes to dispossess a tenant because the tenant has breached an obligation to the line owner, has failed to provide adequate service to the public, or both. None of those types of circumstances has been demonstrated to exist here. The issue of whether PIRY’s contract with the Cities has expired remains pending in state court, which is the proper forum to adjudicate that claim. The only existing shipper that would be affected by the proposed discontinuance, Carver Lumber, has repeatedly complained about CIRY’s [Central Illinois Railroad Company’s] service and wants PIRY’s rail service on the Kellar Branch to be restored. PIRY states that it is willing and able to provide that service, and the record suggests that there may be new potential shippers.
…
Based on the record now before us, we find that the Cities have failed to meet their burden of establishing that the PC&N [public convenience and necessity] requires or permits the adverse discontinuance of PIRY’s operations. The City has not shown that the benefits of removing our primary jurisdiction would outweigh the harm to Carver Lumber, PIRY, and interstate commerce in general. [emphasis mine] The adverse discontinuance application will therefore be denied.
This ruling essentially says that the Kellar Branch is more important for interstate commerce than as a hiking trail. I’m sure the Journal Star editorial writers will be pulling an all-nighter to write a scathing rebuke of the STB for tomorrow’s paper.
I’ll have more to say later, but wanted to get this breaking news up on my blog as soon as possible.
UPDATE 1: Here’s reaction to the ruling from City Manager Randy Oliver:
The Surface Transportation Board has denied the City of Peoria’s motion for adverse discontinuance of Pioneer Rail. The immediate effect is that there are now two railroads authorized to operate on the City’ rail line. This will require a joint operating agreement between the two railroads with authority from the STB. It is unclear which railroad will initiate the negotiations, however, that is best determined by the two railroads involved.
UPDATE 2: At-large city councilman Gary Sandberg had this reaction to today’s ruling:
I think it is wonderful and consistent with what I have been saying for 7 years. Pioneer has proven itself as the best rail service provider. Hopefully Carver and additional users can now begin serious planning for reliable, affordable rail service along the Kellar. Additionally, I trust [Pioneer] will work in a positive fashion to share the ROW for trail purposes where it will not interfere with a working rail line.
UPDATE 3: Peoria Park Board President Tim Cassidy had this to say in response to my request for the Park District’s reaction to the ruling:
Thanks for a copy of the decision. I was not aware a decision had been issued. At this point there is on official PPD reaction, because we as a board have not met to discuss it. Personally, I am not that familiar with federal rail law to comment. It does seem the law on the books is somewhat archaic, but the administrative agency is obligated to apply the law. I do not know if it did given there is a dissent, which to me got it right.
I hadn’t noticed before, but there was a Surface Transportation Board member who dissented from this decision. Here’s what he had to say:
VICE CHAIRMAN BUTTREY, dissenting:
The majority is undoing the Board’s August 2005 decision granting adverse discontinuance of PIRY’s service over the Kellar Branch because Carver Lumber is unhappy with CIRY’s rates and service over the Western Connection. But CIRY states on the record that it stands ready, willing and able to provide adequate service to Carver Lumber (CIRY Supplemental Evidence and Comments filed February 22, 2007, at pages 7-9). Carver Lumber has a reasonable transportation alternative and is clearly not captive under Board precedent, since it has been transloading and trucking its inbound lumber shipments. And Carver Lumber has not brought its rate and service complaints to the Board under our processes for addressing rate and service issues.
The City spent approximately $2 million to provide the Western Connection to allow Carver Lumber to be served from the west (Verified Statement of City Public Works Director Stephen Van Winkle at page 5, part of the City’s Statement filed February 22, 2007). The City of Peoria has been subsidizing continuation of rail service over the Kellar Branch for many years (id. at pages 1-2). The Board knew when it authorized construction of the Western Connection in 2004 that this expensive project was part of a larger plan by the City to reconfigure and provide service to Carver Lumber through this new route in order to free up the underutilized Kellar Branch and turn it into a pedestrian trail through downtown Peoria. I see no reason on this record to disturb the Board’s earlier determination.
I respectfully dissent.
It should be noted that even if the STB had made the “right” decision according to Mr. Cassidy (i.e., removed Pioneer as a carrier on the Kellar Branch), it wouldn’t have discontinued service on the line; it would have simply made CIRY the sole operator of the line, and there’s no evidence that they plan to petition for discontinuance on any part of the Kellar Branch.
UPDATE 4: I talked to Peoria Heights Mayor Mark Allen tonight. His village, often forgotten in the rail/trail issue, is perhaps the most affected, since the bulk of the proposed conversion to a trail would take place within the village limits. He said he was “disappointed” with the ruling, but didn’t feel that it would “scare off” proposed development of the former Cohen’s Furniture warehouse area. He wishes the STB would have made their ruling provisional on new rail shippers coming on line within the next one, two, or five years. If new users and accompanying jobs didn’t materialize, then the rail could be converted to a trail. He still feels the trail would be “the best economic engine to the village,” because there’s currently no freight delivery in the Heights, and he doesn’t believe there’s much chance of manufacturing returning within village limits. Freight rail cars simply passing through the village don’t contribute to the village’s economy.
I asked him what he thought of the possibility of running the trail next to the rail line. He felt that would be problematic for a couple of reasons. He doesn’t think the right-of-way is wide enough south of Prospect, for one. Secondly, the right-of-way north of Prospect, while wide enough, would not provide enough buffer between the trail and residents’ back yards if the trail had to be on the edge, rather than the middle, of the right-of-way. He didn’t rule out the possibility of shared use, but said these two things are obstacles that would have to be overcome for that solution to happen.
He would still be interested in a transit solution — running a trolley on the rail line — but only if other governmental bodies were to jump on board with the idea. So far, all governmental bodies (except the STB) have favored a trail rather than anything rail-oriented.
UPDATE 5 (11/20): I asked Sharon Deckard, president of the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation and the proponent of trolley service along the Kellar Branch line, what she thought of the ruling and if IPRRF still planned to pursue trolley service. She had this to say:
At this point in time we are pleased to see that STB has finally made a ruling and that Pioneer Railcorp has offered an olive branch to the trail proponents. With all parties working together we can have the best for everyone in the community.
As far as the trolley is concerned we would hope that some time in the future, possibly when Amtrak arrives in Peoria, we will then realize the need for commuter light rail (trolley) to run on the Kellar Branch.
In the meantime we wish the rail and trail proponents the very best in their endeavors.
I noticed at the Bradley game yesterday that Pioneer has an “ad” on one of the light boards over the opening into/out of the arena
Everything we warned the City about (western connection failure, CIRY, Pioneer’s offer is best, etc.,) has come to pass.
Now, Pioneer is not obligated to help with a side-by-side trail. The City and trail proponents should have made a deal with Pioneer back in February when they had the chance.
True, they’re not obligated. But I think it would be a nice gesture.
I agree it would be a nice gesture. After all, if a trail actually existed side-by-side (where possible), trail proponents would have little incentive to get the line removed.
I’m sure the JSEB will make demands on the operator(s) to, “bring jobs or else!” They will also reluctantly support a side-by-side trail. One exception may be an attempt to get Sens. Durbin and Obama involved, but I think they know it’s too late for that.
Am I correct in my understanding that PIRY will be servicing Carver Lumber over the line that CIRY rehabbed on their own dime?
PI — Yes. Although, I would say “is rehabbing” rather than “rehabbed.” To my knowledge, they’re not done yet. It will be interesting to see how this ruling affects efforts to fix up the line.
PI, CIRY’s rehab was minimal and doesn’t appear complete, and since they can still operate the line, their investment isn’t wasted.
I’m going out on a limb here, but it wouldn’t surprise me if CIRY suddenly left, leaving Pioneer as sole operator of the line.
Septboy, there is actually 2 light board signs for Pioneer. I thought it was kind of interesting ad campaign to run; it sure does get their name out.
DPJ, until you mentioned that I wouldn’t have thought about CIRY leaving. It would make for some interesting operations having both operators on such a short line.
Bill,
The reason I mentioned it is that Pioneer has essentially won its case after years of filings and counter filings before the STB, and I’m not sure CIRY wants to deal with them. Pioneer could offer adequate compensation for CIRY’s investment thus far in regards to track work and brush clearing. I don’t know the legality of this but I assume it is a possiblity.
Pioneer officials probably knew of the ruling in advance and the light board ads may have been a clue.
CJ — excellent coverage of this issue.
Now is the time for all parties, PIRY, CIRY, PPD, RTA, City of Peoria, Village of Peoria Heights, and all others concerned to come together and put their assets together and have it all for everyone. Rail, and trail and all the jobs and amenities that both can afford to this community. If this decision is received in the proper form we have all won and everyone benefits. Let’s stop the bickering and use that effort to make this work.
CJ – Nice article.
Now, maybe Globe Energy and Firefly (via G&D) and others will realize the potential savings of using cheap rail over trucks and get Pioneer Park back into full industrial mode which will help to produce more jobs and taxes.
What about Khazzam’s reaction to this. He said this would pretty much put an end to his proposed condos.
Khazzam will adjust.
Peoriaillinosian, the dime you refer to is simply CIRY returning the Kellar Branch to the condition they received it in from PIRY when CIRY took over. CIRY let it go to pot the past two years and now they are having to pay to fix it. So its their dime that they owe to PIRY.
There’s been a ton of activity in Pioneer Park all day yesterday and again this morning. I’m totally guessing that they’re moving around the freight cars that have been held in storage, but I can’t recall ever hearing the horn blow so many times…
It sounded like they were doing a celebratory dance!
Councilman Nichting is way out of line — so what use are laws when those at the top are willing to take an anything goes attitude to stuff another wrong project down the Peoria taxpayers’ throats?
http://www.pjstar.com/php/index.php?/news/peoria_nichting_suggests_meigs_field_operation_to_make_way_for_keller_trail/
I remember that council meeting where both sides spoke to the issue, he gave some speech about businesses need to go out of business if they couldn’t compete, blah blah blah. He came across really unhinged that night, crazy eyes, flared nostrils etc. Guess he hasn’t mellowed any.
Reasoning with Councilman Nichting is like reasoning with a two-year-old.
CJ, is there any legal way to remove a councilman from office? If so, responsible people in this City need to act immediately to remove Nichting from office. He is a disgrace. Can you imagine a city councilman suggesting that the City disregard a federal law and the order of a federal agency and take the law into its own hands? No wonder people are cynical. What kind of credibility does he have to vote on laws other people are supposed to abide by.
The answer is NONE. He should have the decency to resign.
The sad part of this is that Carver Lumber is in Nichting’s district.
David: Unfortunately, Carver Lumber is receiving the same type of representation in the 5th district that some 1st District consistuents receive from their councilman, think 801 NE Perry debacle….
Mouse: Consider the odds that he would resign …. not likely.
May I suggest to all those concerned about the suggestion of breaking Federal Laws that you come to City Council meeting next Tuesday and during the consideration of the “Resolution for a recreational trail” that your position be heard and use the theory of the poisioned apple to stop the resolution. I do NOT intend on supporting the resolution, but unless there is sufficient opposition by you, the public, don’t be surprised or upset when it passes 10-1.
So what good is a “resolution for a recreational trail”?Does it have the effect of an ordinance or law? Isn’t it just a feel good thing to pacify some people? So what if it passes 10-1, what next?
Gary, I probably won’t make it Tuesday, but hopefully others can.
I see in today’s paper (Thursday), that Wild Eyed Nick(ting) wants to encourage the unilateral vandalization of the rail. The paper goes on to compare it to Mayor Daly’s tearing up of Meig’s Field. The thing is there is little comparison but that didn’t stop the paper from making it.
http://www.pjstar.com/php/index.php?/news/peoria_nichting_suggests_meigs_field_operation_to_make_way_for_keller_trail/
RomanII, While I generally agree with your premise that resolutions are a waste of time in as much as they are NOT laws, statutes, or ordinances and carry no weight of law, I value my time and don’t want to waste it on “feel good” actions. Resolutions raise expectations in lieu of closing issues as is needed with respect to the conversion from a working rail line to a single purpose multi-recreational trail.
While I prefer not to waste my time let me remind you of U.N. General Assembly, 105. U.N. Resolution 687,93,97 which lead us into the Invasion of Iraq and the loss of over 3,700 American soldiers and tens of thousands with life altering injuries plus the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths/injuries after “Mission Acoumplished” and House Resolution 21 of the 110th Congress on 21 June 2007 or the Kly, Lieberman, Colman Senate Resolution amendment number 301 passed this last September which when American soldiers invade and die or are injured in Iran, it all started with a resolution.
Some Resolutions waste more than time………………….
Mayor Ardis doesn’t need to worry about the condition of the rail. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will inspect it and approve it for use when it deems it appropriate no matter who uses it. This is the department that oversees safety on the rails. As for running the trail beside the rail all you have to do is go on the internet and look up Rails with Trails or (RWT) and see that it is being done in 30 states across the country and poised for at least ten more. It is a complimentary situation for both groups. $6 million dollars will not cover the cost of the trail and the bridge that needs to go over Knoxville Ave., no matter what the PPD says. The city and the village can continue to spend money fighting this issue or put that money and effort into a collaborative work to run rails and trails side by side. It can be done. Also the upkeep of a trail is considered to be $4,200 per mile, per year. Who is going to pay for that? You and me as taxpayers for the rest of our lives. Since there is no fee to use the trail we pay it. Since they think that side by side cannot be done how about hiring an unbiased engineer to go out and produce a report that shows what it will take and what the exact cost will be to do a side by side. That would be a lot cheaper than lawyers to continue to fight this.
I’ve noticed that at least one defect (a chipped railhead just west of Knoxville) has been fixed. The railroad(s) will do what is necessary to get the line back in operation. It won’t take much now that the brush has been cleared from most of the line.
SD – I may have missed it from an earlier post but where do you come up with the $4,200 per mile to maintain the trail. In my experience, that figure is completely out of line.
Peo Proud, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/rwt/index.htm
check out this site and I think it is section VI that shows maintenance. This is the most complete and comprehensive RWT report I have ever read. Everyone on both sides of this issue needs to read this word for word.
Side by side rail and trail. What about the homeowners?Not once has any one came to us at our homes adjacent to the tracks and asked how we felt.Instead We were forced to stand on the tracks against a clearing crew with heavy eguipment and chain saws who were about to cut down the fences and trees on our property.I was threatened with my life.The PPD came and helped keep it from getting out of hand.I called the Mayor and my councilman 494-care anyone I could call, so this is no secret to any of them.Not one person in the city of peoria could tell me who gave CIRL the right to try and steal 25ft of our land and to even be on TAXPAYER OWNED property.CIRL did not just come out of the blue they were told to cut a 50ft path on each side of the tracks and to expect trouble from the homeowners.We live in the northend, averyville to some,there is a nice path thru the beautiful Springdale cemetary going past the old caretakers house onto a trail which goes past the lower Glen Oak Park past Woodruff high to the Illinois River.WHY not use the trail already built that no-one except deer pouchers use huh?CIRL’S representative did come out and worked with the homeowners and cut just what was needed for the railroads,but who gave them the go ahead and told them what to cut.My life was threatened and my property was about to be stolen,I do not believe at this time I could support a trail of any kind.The city has lied repeatedly telling us THERE WILL BE NO TRAIL HERE.The taxpayers own these tracks not a special interest group.The people this effects most have been left out of the whole thing.The trail might bring people,people bring garbage,noise,confrontation,crime, all the stuff you don’t want to deal with once you get home.The trail would be in the backyard of my home.The railroad brings stuff.That is my point of view. If anyone knows who authorised the cutting that was done last summer please let me know,thank you. Sorry CJ I didn’t mean to ramble on.
CW — As far as I can tell, CIRY took it upon themselves to cut the vegetation on either side of the rail line. Most of the Kellar Branch, there is a 50-ft. easement on either side of the tracks, so perhaps an assumption was made by CIRY workers/officers instead of carefully checking property records. According to the Park District’s plans as I understand them, they are not planning to take out the rails in the area you mentioned as they will be needed to service businesses at the southern end of the line. The rails they want to take out are north of War Memorial Drive. The trail south of War Memorial goes through Springdale Cemetery.