I mentioned in my last post that Pioneer Industrial Railway (PIRY) also sent a petition to the Surface Transportation Board (STB). Here’s a copy of their filing (large PDF file). It’s a “petition for stay pending reconsideration or appeal.” It’s been filed not by the company attorney, but Washington, D.C., attorneys Baker & Miller, PLLC, who specialize in transportation matters, including proceedings before the Surface Transportation Board.

They present a compelling case. From reading their petition on behalf of PIRY, you can tell they’ve really done their homework. They’ve gone back and looked at every one of the cases the STB cited as precedent for their decision and, of course, drawn different conclusions than the STB.

Their strongest argument is the letter from Carver Lumber that “refutes the main factual premise which led the board to authorize discontinuance”; namely, that “[t]he shippers served by CIRY . . . do not object, and will continue to be served from the north or from the south . . . .” We now know that’s not true.

In fact, Carver isn’t being served at all. Carver Lumber’s letter makes clear that since the City’s carrier, CIRY, took over last year, not one shipment has been made to Carver Lumber. The one time it was attempted, it was with inadequate equipment, resulting in a runaway train (through several grade crossings at 30 mph, threatening public safety) and a derailment.

The filing also claims that a proper environmental impact study was not completed, and that Pioneer was unjustly refused the opportunity to purchase the Kellar Branch from the city. I think there’s a good chance the STB will grant the stay and hear the appeal for the sole reason of Carver Lumber’s concerns.

All this leaves me with several questions. Why is the city making it so difficult for Carver Lumber to do business? Do they not care about small, locally-owned Peoria businesses? What does this action say to potential businesses who might consider locating in Peoria? What does it say to potential businesses who might consider locating in or near Pioneer Park? What does sacrificing Carver Lumber’s business for the sake of the Park District’s trail extension say about the city’s priorities? And where are the Peoria Journal Star reporters on this story? Isn’t it news that the City of Peoria is directly responsible for over $25,000 in additional transportation costs for one of its local businesses? Isn’t that outrageous enough to warrant an editorial, or at least a front-page story in the local section? I sure think so.

This whole project has been outrageous from the beginning, and the City Council should put a stop to it. The filing by Pioneer concludes:

There is a way by which CIRY can be relieved of its operating obligation, the City compensated for the use of its tracks, the environmental impacts adequately studied, and service to shippers maintained. That way is by granting the stay, reconsidering the Board’s decision, and then allowing PIRY to file an OFA [“offer of financial assistance,” i.e., allowing Pioneer to purchase the Kellar Branch from the city]. Granting the stay provides an opportunity for the Board to reconsider its decisions in light of the new evidence submitted by Carver, and correct its decision. The public as [a] whole will benefit.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.