Category Archives: Kellar Branch

Kellar Branch

City and Journal Star continue smear campaign against Pioneer

In the Journal Star’s editorial today, they continue to insinuate wrongdoing on the part of Pioneer Industrial Railcorp:

In its filing with the [Surface Transportation Board], Pioneer suggests that customers will be “irreparably harmed” if they can’t be served on the Kellar [Branch]. It neglects to mention that it quit running trains on the track last week, leaving box cars intended for its last remaining customer sitting in the rail yard.

And the Journal Star neglects to mention that the reason Pioneer left is because of this letter from the City of Peoria’s attorney Thomas McFarland:

Letter from City to Pioneer

Read it for yourself. It’s dated August 15 and says, “This is to advise correspondingly that Pioneer Industrial Railway Co. (PIRY) should cease rail operations and vacate the Kellar Branch at Peoria-Peoria Heights, IL, no later than 11:59 p.m., Sunday, August 21, 2005.” (emphasis mine)

On August 18, the Journal Star reported under the headline “Railroad pulls out early“:

After fighting for more than a year to keep providing rail service on the Kellar Branch, Pioneer Railcorp abandoned the line and one of its customers without aiding in the transition to a new provider, as promised.

Public Works Director Steve Van Winkle said Wednesday that Pioneer Railcorp chairman Guy Brenkman had told the city’s attorney in the STB case that his company would assist for as long as 30 days in the transition period to the new short-line operator.

Instead, Pioneer Railcorp immediately stopped providing any service, leaving Carver Lumber without access to the track and forcing Granville-based Central Illinois Railway to expedite its takeover.

“(Pioneer Railcorp) did no days transition,” Van Winkle said.

So, Van Winkle is upset that Pioneer didn’t provide 30 days service in transition, yet the city gave Pioneer only six days to vacate the tracks. So who really left Carver Lumber in the lurch? Answer: the city.

Other questions:

(1) Is communication between city departments so bad that the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing? Or is the city deliberately trying to vilify Pioneer?

(2) Did the Journal Star not read the STB filing on which they reported? Did they not notice the letter from McFarland? Or are they deliberately ignoring it and continuing to publish false information about Pioneer in an effort to discredit them?

Kellar Branch

Kellar Branch: The Saga Continues

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!

Kellar Branch

Pioneer appeals STB decision

Pioneer Industrial Railway (PIRY) has requested the Surface Transportation Board (STB) reopen/reconsider their recent ruling in the adverse discontinuance case that removed the short-line operator from the Kellar Branch line.  I doubt this will amount to much, as it seems unlikely to me that the STB would ever reconsider it, let alone reverse their decision.  But it does show that PIRY hasn’t given up on trying to keep rail service on the Kellar Branch line.
 
The text of their request was unavailable over the weekend, but will probably be posted on the STB site Monday.  Expect the Journal Star to have some article tomorrow or Tuesday saying that Pioneer broke its promise not to fight the STB’s decision.

Kellar Branch

STB yet to give final say on Kellar Branch service

The Journal Star is giddy this morning about the Surface Transportation Board ruling. But, as usual, they assume facts not in evidence. For instance:

Wednesday the Surface Transportation Board, the federal agency that settles railroad disputes, ruled that Pioneer Railcorp must get off the Kellar Branch so the cities that own it can turn it into a hiking and biking trail.

While the STB did in fact rule that Pioneer (PIRY) must get off the Kellar Branch, it wasn’t so the cities that own it can turn it into a hiking and biking trail. It was so that the cities’ replacement carrier, Central Illinois Railway (CIRY), could provide the same service that PIRY was providing. All this ruling did was replace PIRY with CIRY. This is crucial to understanding the ruling.

And the STB hasn’t had its final say on turning the branch into a trail yet: “Moreover, the Cities’ contract with CIRY and the need for CIRY to seek our authority before service on this line can cease assures that granting the Cities’ application will not result in a diminution of service that has a serious adverse impact on shippers or the community.” (emphasis added)

That means that, even though “the park district says it could start pulling up the tracks this fall,” there’s another STB ruling to be made before that can happen — CIRY has to get STB approval to cease servicing the Kellar Branch.

Kellar Branch

City shows their ignorance again

 

Bill Dennis has a copy of the City of Peoria’s press release on his website.  It says, in part:
The long awaited decision clears the way for service to Pioneer Park from the West, and railbanking of the portion between O’Brien Steel and Pioneer Parkway. This railbanking would enable the Park District to proceed with the planning recreational trail.
This press release reveals a profound ignorance of the definition of “railbanking” and of the recent STB ruling itself.
First of all, let’s talk about railbanking.  Railbanking was established under the 1983 revision of the National Trails System Act as an alternative to abandonment.  “Abandonment” means “the discontinuance of service on a rail line segment, with no intention of resuming that service.”  When a line is abandoned, it ceases to be a part of the national transportation system and ownership of the right-of-way reverts to the adjacent landholders.  If rail service were ever needed again, it would be difficult to re-acquire that land.  Railbanking preserves the right-of-way (treats the corridor as if it had not been abandoned), but allows the corridor to be used for a recreational trail or other public use.
The Surface Transportation Board ruled today, in part, that the Kellar Branch was abandoned in 1980 after the liquidation of the bankrupt Chicago, Rock Island, & Pacific Railway Company — and never reactivated.  Even though trains have been running on the line, it has been on a landlord/tenant basis (the city was the landlord, P&PU and later Pioneer were tenants), not on a “common carrier” basis.  In short, since the Kellar Branch has already been abandoned, it cannot be railbanked.  Quoting directly from the STB’s decision today:
…rail banking requests under the Trails Act, and public use requests under 49 U.S.C. 10905 are not appropriate and will not be entertained.
Secondly, the press release from the city erroneously links the STB ruling with the city’s ability to provide rail service from the west, over the new UP rail spur.  The two are separate issues.  The city was always authorized to provide rail service from the west, regardless of the STB ruling. 
Now the question is, what is the next step for rail advocates?  Is there still hope to block this ridiculous trail?  I’m guessing we haven’t seen the end of the fight.

 

Kellar Branch

Trail: 1, Jobs: 0

I have it on good authority that the STB ruled in favor of the city’s adverse discontinuance request this morning.

That means unless there’s a change of heart on the part of the council, Pioneer will have to vacate the tracks and the Kellar Branch will be turned into a trail.

Oh, and any hope of attracting businesses to Pioneer Park has been dashed. In fact, I predict Carver Lumber won’t be there many more years either.

But congratulations, trail advocates. Jobs are overrated anyway. The trail will bring Peoria more prosperity.

Kellar Branch

Homeless, Schmomeless — We Want Our Trail NOW!

 

At the city council meeting tonight, during “citizen requests to address the council,” a man named John Oliver led off speaking on behalf of the homeless in Peoria.  He said there were so many homeless that it was hard to even find temporary housing at places like the Peoria Rescue Mission for more than 30 days.  He’s a veteran, a father, and has a job that pays low wages.  He spoke of how a lot of people have lost their jobs lately, which is true since companies like L.R. Nelson are outsourcing to China or otherwise cutting back on personnel expenses.
Wouldn’t it be great if we could attract new businesses to Peoria?  Maybe some light industry to, oh, I don’t know, the Pioneer Park area? 
One problem:  businesses/industry like that requires competitive rail service.  It’s just not cost-effective for them to get their raw materials via trucking.  That’s why cities like Davenport, Iowa, are building rail parks to lure new businesses to their cities – they’ve learned the hard way what it means to not have rail service.  The Quad City Times reports:
Among the lost opportunities was a $21 million distribution center for Ferguson Enterprises, a plumbing and heating supply distributor, that had the Davenport industrial park on its final list. But the project went to Waterloo, Iowa, last year because the Eastern Iowa Industrial Park did not have rail service.
Did you catch that?  They lost a $21 million distribution center because they didn’t have rail service.  For all those who think rail service is antiquated or a nuisance, reflect on that number for a while.
But back to John Oliver.  After he finished pleading for help for the homeless, three of the dozen or so trail supporters in attendance spoke of a much more “important” matter:  converting the Kellar Branch to a hiking and biking trail.  Flanked by signs that read, “We want the trail,” “No more delays,” and “Hiking/Biking Trail NOW,” these three concerned citizens expressed their contempt for Pioneer Industrial Railway, their undying support for trail conversion (which would sever Pioneer Park’s neutral access to eight major rail lines), and fretted over the loss of $4 million in taxpayer-funded grants to build the trail.
Four million dollars sounds like a lot until you consider one new business in Growth Cell Two could bring $21 million to town.  And there’s room for lots of light industry in Pioneer Park. 
“But,” trail advocates say, “they’ll still have rail access out there if they can just get that spur connected!”  Yes, they’ll have rail access — just not competitive rail access.  And competitive rates are kinda important to businesses.  You’re not going to attract many (any) companies when they find out they have a choice of Union Pacific or, well, Union Pacific. 
But go ahead, rip out the rail line.  The John Olivers of Peoria will thank you all for the opportunity to walk on a beautiful trail through the heart of town.  Too bad they’ll have to sleep there, too.

 

Kellar Branch

More deception from Journal Star on Kellar Branch dispute

If you’re a casual reader of the Journal Star and skimmed their story on the Kellar Branch today (“Parked locomotive may derail trail“), you would have to get the impression that Pioneer is holding things up. Check out the first three paragraphs:

The deadline for Pioneer Railcorp to remove train cars from a section of Kellar Branch track has passed, again delaying the embattled Rock Island Trail extension.

The city, however, appears poised to take legal action early next week if the project does not progress by Friday.

A Pioneer Industrial locomotive sat on the track Tuesday near where a new industrial rail spur is to tie into the existing track, preventing city contractor Metroplex Corp. from completing the job.

Antagonist: Pioneer. Who is the antecedent for “delaying” and “preventing”? Against whom are you led to believe the city will take legal action? Answer to all three questions: Pioneer.

Ah, but not so fast. Buried in the middle of the article is this important piece of info:

Last month, the city appeared to have reached an agreement with Pioneer Railcorp chairman Guy Brenkman in which the train cars and engines that had blocked construction since December would be moved by Monday.

But part of the deal required Metroplex to sign a liability waiver with Pioneer Railcorp before the short-line operator would budge and allow construction to proceed. That term of the agreement has not yet been resolved.

So, Pioneer had agreed to move the locomotive if a liability waiver were signed. Metroplex didn’t sign the waiver, so Pioneer didn’t move the locomotive. I think any rational person would conclude that Metroplex is holding up the job, but the Journal Star doesn’t let the facts get in the way. They’ll just keep putting all the blame on Pioneer, hence the headline.

And the city does the same:

City Manager Randy Oliver said Tuesday the city would file legal action against one or both companies next week if the problem is not resolved by 5 p.m. Friday.

Asked which company would most likely face a lawsuit, Oliver said, “History tells me one thing, but I don’t know yet.”

What is that supposed to mean, Mr. Oliver? What case do you have against Pioneer in this matter? Why grounds do you have for filing suit against Pioneer when it was Metroplex which didn’t fulfill its obligation?

All this vilification of Pioneer makes me believe that, at heart, this is a personal vendetta against Guy Brenkman on the part of the city and the newspaper. It’s understandable that people may not like him. I’ve never met the man, but he sounds like a guy that isn’t very likeable. But that shouldn’t get in the way of the merits of the dispute. The Journal Star has an obligation to the citizens to report accurately and fairly what’s going on and they’re not doing it.

Kellar Branch

I knew it was only a matter of time…

 

The Journal Star finally cobbled together another pro-trail editorial. Apparently they wanted to save it for Sunday for maximum readership.  You can read it here, but there’s not much new.
One revelation was that Congressman LaHood got Noble, Ardis, and Brenkman in the same room and basically told Brenkman that he was in favor of rails-to-trails, and Ardis agreed.  That was a big disappointment.  I thought Republicans were supposed to be pro-business. 
The editorial also shed some light on the negotiations that are taking place between the city and Pioneer.  Brenkman asked LaHood to “try to persuade the Union Pacific Railroad to him run his trains on its tracks” — this is apparently how Brenkman was hoping to continue to provide neutral access to multiple rail lines.  However, LaHood and Public Works Director Van Winkle both said that UP would be unlikely to approve such an arrangement. 
The city tries to make Brenkman the only bad guy.  There’s no doubt he’s an obstructionist, but the city got into this mess by promising what they couldn’t deliver.  They told the Park District it could turn the Kellar Branch into a park before they got clearance to do so from the Surface Transportation Board.  Thus the Park District started applying for grants, and now they’re in a situation where they may lose their funding, all because the city jumped the gun.
But once again, I just want to point out the Journal Star’s empty and ridiculous defense for turning the Kellar Branch into an extension of the Rock Island Trail:

Losing this trail would be a public outrage. By conservative estimates, the Kellar Branch would attract at least 2,500 hikes, bikers, runners and walkers a week. Completion of the six-mile section would close a gap in a 45-mile recreational trail from Toulon to Morton. A linear park through the city would make Peoria a more attractive place to live and to visit. The city would no longer be liable for the tracks. And the one customer – one customer – that Pioneer serves over them could be served over the new spur.
I’ve said this all before, but these are not compelling reasons to shut down an operating rail line with the advantages and potential of the Kellar Branch.  First of all, I’m not even going to address the spurious usage numbers they quote except to remind everyone that the Park District and Journal Star grossly overestimated how many people would use the RiverPlex when it was proposed.
Secondly, the idea that a linear park is going to “make Peoria a more attractive place to live and visit” is the most ludicrous thing I think I’ve ever seen anyone write about Peoria.  Gee, all this time I thought crime and underperforming schools were the main factors in people moving to surrounding communities like Dunlap and Germantown Hills.  Little did I know that the real culprit was the lack of a linear park!  Why, if we could get that, people would be begging to live in Peoria.  Can’t you just see the testimonials on television now?  Young soccer-mom:  “I was concerned about Peoria’s homicide and prostitution rates, several schools being on the state watch list, and recent shootings at one of Peoria’s high schools [black and white pictures of Larry Bright and other indicted felons flash on the screen while ominous music plays in the background]; [cut to lush orchestral music] but then I found out about Peoria’s beautiful linear park and I knew this was where I wanted to live and raise my family [color video of children laughing and running down a lilly-lined path].”  Voice-over guy:  “Peoria.  Come for our linear park.  Stay for our sewage problems and high taxes.”
Thirdly, if liability for the tracks were really a concern, the city could easily free themselves from it — by selling them to Guy Brenkman and using that money to do something that would really make Peoria more attractive, like hiring more cops or eliminating blight.
Finally, perhaps the saddest part of the Journal Star quote above is the last sentence, “And the one customer – one customer – that Pioneer serves over them could be served over the new spur.”  This just shows their short-sightedness and lack of concern for existing businesses.  Carver Lumber is the “one customer” the Park District, Journal Star Editorial Board, Ray LaHood, and the City of Peoria apparently couldn’t care less about.  They talk about it as if it’s insignificant and not worth getting in the way of their precious linear park.  (You can even hear them saying, “one measly old business,” in the tone of their editorial.)  Have they all forgotten that Carver Lumber was only in favor of converting the Kellar Branch if the city could guarantee comparable rail prices and service from the west?  Without neutral access or cooperation from UP, they won’t get that.  Keep treating businesses like that and they’ll get the message that they’re not wanted in Peoria.
Funny thing is, the Pioneer Park area, the site of the old Pabst Brewery in the Heights, and several other locations as one gets closer to downtown would be attractive places to draw new manufacturing businesses to the Peoria area, if anyone were interested.  But apparently jobs and tax revenue are not as important as a linear park to our congressman and mayor.  And that’s the real public outrage.

 

Kellar Branch

Settlement in the works on Kellar Branch conversion

 

Pioneer Industrial Railway (PIRY) has filed a status report with the Surface Transportation Board that is very interesting.  The report (filed by Daniel LaKemper, general counsel for PIRY) starts by telling the STB what we already know:
This is to advise the Board that on July 14, 2005 Pioneer Industrial Railway Co. and the City of Peoria reached an agreement regarding the track work that the City desired to do on the Kellar Branch, thus eliminating the City’s immediate concerns as to the timely completion of their grant work.
This was reported in the paper and discussed in a previous post.  But, it then goes on to say this:
PIRY and the City are also exploring settlement options that would allow Pioneer Park shippers to retain the connections they currently have to the line-haul railroads coming into Peoria. We will keep the Board apprised of this matter.
Connections to “line-haul railroads” is what I talked about in my last post — the fact that Pioneer Park shippers currently have access to eight major shippers, and the new connection to the west gives them access to only one.  I believe this is the main obstacle for STB approval of the city’s adverse discontinuance request. 
It appears that Pioneer and the city are now trying to work out a way to solve that problem, presumably in such a way that the Kellar Branch can still be turned into an extension of the Rock Island Trail.  I’m not sure how this would be possible, but a railfan friend of mine has some ideas.  He explains it in a lot of technical jargon, but basically it could involve the city’s shipper (Central Illinois Railroad Co., or CIRY, which is owned by DOT Rail out of LaSalle) entering into some sort of haulage agreement with Union Pacific – that is, CIRY using tracks owned by UP to make deliveries to Pioneer Park via the western spur.
I’m skeptical that this would be cost effective in the long run — I would expect UP to keep raising rates for use of their tracks, thus making rail shipping progressively more expensive for anyone out in Pioneer Park.  But we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of settlement Pioneer and the city cook up.  Stay tuned!

Â