Category Archives: Kellar Branch

Kellar Branch, Peoria Park District

Yes, I agree, build the trail now!

71 Comments

Pro-Trail-SignWhile I was at the park district offices recently, I noticed they had green signs there that stated “Build the Trail NOW” and gave a web address for more information. I asked if the Park District made up the signs, and they said no, someone else did. Then they asked me if I wanted one, which gave me the biggest laugh of my day.

Today, I’ve been told by a couple of people that these signs are all up and down University street between Glen and Northmoor, along the Race for the Cure route.

The funny thing is, I agree with the simple message, “Build the Trail Now.” In fact, I believe that the trail could have been built years ago. The people who made the signs no doubt think that Pioneer Railcorp, Carver Lumber, and/or the Surface Transportation Board are holding things up. But the truth is the only organization holding things up is the Park District.

The Park District can build that trail any time they want by putting it next to the rail line or next to the streets that parallel the rail line. Nothing is stopping them except their own stubborn desire to see the Kellar Branch rail line removed.

The Park District has proven that money is not an issue: they’ve been able to get Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) grants to build portions of the trail that they had originally planned to build with federal funds that carry more restrictions.

The Park District has proven that a Class I trail is not absolutely necessary: they’ve built a Class III trail south of War Memorial Drive with those IDNR grants I referred to earlier. Apparently they just want the Class I trail north of War Memorial — seems a bit arbitrary, don’t you think?

The Park District has proven that even a Class I trail can be nothing more than a glorified sidewalk: the portion of the trail they’ve built at Pioneer Park and Sommer is nothing more than a sidewalk that parallels the roadway, while still being separate. Their plans call for the same thing in Peoria Heights. If they can do that there, why couldn’t they do it along, say, Harvard Ave.? Why do they have-to have-to have-to replace the Kellar Branch rail line?

So, I’ll jump on that bandwagon. I say to the Peoria Park District: Build the Trail, NOW! And stop wasting taxpayer money trying to eliminate rails from the city.

Kellar Branch

All quiet on the STB front

3 Comments

Way back in January, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) agreed to reopen the case of whether Pioneer Industrial Railway should be replaced as the operator of the Kellar Branch rail line with Central Illinois Railroad. They said they wanted to hear from both sides of the issue, consider any new evidence each side would like to provide, and then decide whether to uphold their original ruling or overturn it. Said they, “We will require this evidence on an expedited basis so as to resolve these issues as quickly as possible.”

All the evidence was in by the middle of last month. One wonders what “as quickly as possible” means to the STB. They do seem to move at a snail’s pace. Regardless of which side of the issue you’re on, it is frustrating to have these long periods of time in limbo, waiting for a ruling.

The longer they wait, the more work they make for themselves. Since the deadline for evidence passed, further filings have come in — from the Friends of the Rock Island Trail, from the City, from Peoria Heights, and a motion from Pioneer to strike all those untimely filings. So now the STB has to decide what evidence they’re going to allow first (a separate ruling), then decide the core issue.

Meanwhile, Carver Lumber is without competitive rail service, the tracks are lying unused by anyone and deteriorating, and impatience is mounting. Hopefully “as soon as possible” will mean “before Memorial Day” at least.

Kellar Branch

Legal sparring continues before STB

9 Comments

Kellar Branch RailroadIn the never-ending Kellar Branch saga, there’s a legal battle going on before the Surface Transportation Board (STB).

When the STB reopened the adverse discontinuance proceeding (this is the one on whether Pioneer should be kicked off the Kellar Branch in favor of CIRY), it asked for further evidence from the City of Peoria, the Village of Peoria Heights, and Central Illinois Railroad Company (CIRY) by February 12, and a reply from Pioneer Industrial Railway (PIRY) and Carver Lumber by March 5. The City asked for an extension of time which the STB granted, moving the deadlines back to February 22 for the Cities/CIRY and March 15 for PIRY/Carver.

Well, everyone played by the rules and got their legal arguments in by the required dates. But since March 15, there have been all kinds of extra filings. Friends of the Rock Island Trail sent a pro-trail filing that was so erroneous and riddled with mistakes that it was comical, and Peoria Heights sent a letter stating the results of their consensus to continue supporting the trail (which I know they did conscientiously, but technically is against the rules).

Then, on April 4, the Cities/CIRY filed a reply to Pioneer’s reply. This is rarely allowed in STB proceedings, and requires that permission be granted by the STB for such a reply to be included in the record. The Cities/CIRY didn’t wait for permission. They filed their request for permission and their reply to PIRY/Carver’s reply on the same day.

The Cities/CIRY claim that “[b]ecause the responses filed by PIRY and Carver, respectively, contain numerous half truths and factual distortions, the Joint Parties are compelled to seek the Board’s leave to submit this Joint Reply.” PIRY/Carver countered that this filing:

…is nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt by the Joint Parties [Cities/CIRY] to submit argument and evidence that was previously available to them but was not submitted in their February 22nd comments and is only now being introduced in order to further delay this proceeding and compensate for the paltry and one-dimensional filings that they have previously offered in this proceeding.

Pioneer goes on to accuse the Cities of deliberately delaying the proceeding in hopes that Carver Lumber will lose enough money that they have to close their Peoria facility, which would remove the “obstacle” to the Cities’ plans to turn the Kellar Branch into a walking path. They ask the Board to simply deny the request to add to the record now that all the deadlines are past.

If the Board decides to allow the “reply to a reply,” Pioneer asks for 20 days to offer their response to the accusations made by the Cities/CIRY. That seems reasonable, since it was clearly the STB’s intent to provide equal time for both sides.

I just find it ironic that Pioneer is always painted as the villain that doesn’t follow the rules and obstructs things, and yet through this proceeding, they’ve managed to meet all their deadlines and it’s the Cities and other trail proponents that continue to flaunt the STB’s procedures. I suppose that’s to be expected, since they have no respect for the STB or the importance of interstate rail service in general.

Kellar Branch, Village of Peoria Heights

Heights bows to public pressure

29 Comments

Kellar Branch Railroad“Results of two public hearings showed overwhelming support for a recreational trail, Mayor Mark Allen said Tuesday,” according to a report in today’s Journal Star. Thus, the Heights will be sending a letter expressing their renewed support for the Park District’s push to eliminate rail service to Carver Lumber and future rail-served businesses in Pioneer Park.

While disappointing, this comes as no surprise. It would be very hard for a small municipal body like the Heights to go against the Park District/RTA (Recreational Trail Advocates) machine. The Kellar Branch topic has become so politically charged and the court of public opinion so tainted by disinformation from the Park District, RTA, and Journal Star that it’s practically impossible to get a fair hearing on it anymore.

That’s why there exists a federal agency called the Surface Transportation Board (STB).

It’s the policy of the U. S. Government, among other things, “to ensure the development and continuation of a sound rail transportation system with effective competition among rail carriers and with other modes, to meet the needs of the public….” So, they want to see shippers continue to be rail served, and they want them to get competitive shipping rates. Rail conserves energy, reduces the number of trucks on the streets (which saves money in highway maintenance), and is better for the environment. The government wants to encourage that.

In this case, Peoria and Peoria Heights are the owners of the railroad, and they want to replace their current carrier (Pioneer), which up until August 2005 had been providing good service at reasonable rates by all accounts, with a new carrier (Central Illinois Railroad), which has proven to provide inadequate service — if any — at exorbitant rates. The service and rates are so bad that it’s actually more economical for Carver to transload their material and truck it to their facility in Pioneer Park.

Why would the Cities want such an inferior rail carrier? Because they’re not interested in providing rail service. They want to rip out the railroad and put in a recreational trail. That flies in the face of the nation’s transportation policy.

It is true that the federal government also supports the creation of recreational trails on abandoned railroad beds. But that’s only if the rail line is not being used, and its primary purpose in many cases is to preserve the rail corridor for possible future use. In other words, it’s the government’s second choice. Its first choice is that rail service continue.

In city council and village board meetings, the fate of railroad service may be decided on the basis of a popularity contest. But it doesn’t work that way on the Surface Transportation Board. They conduct a more objective balancing test to protect shippers from arbitrary and capricious cuts in service by railroad owners.

Kellar Branch, Sierra Club

Apparently HOI Group Sierra Club is out of the mainstream

12 Comments

Joyce Blumenshine is the chairwoman of the Heart of Illinois Group Sierra Club. She has long been a proponent of removing freight rail access on the Kellar Branch and converting the corridor to a hiking/biking trail. On February 6 of this year, she wrote a letter to the Journal Star again opposing train service on the branch, plus scoffing at the idea of a trolley being run on the line:

The rehash of the mystical trolley line is a bait and switch – another attempt to derail the trail for the benefit of Pioneer Railcorp at great cost to our community….

She signed her letter, “Joyce Blumenshine, Heart of Illinois Group Sierra Club.” So, she’s speaking for the Sierra Club.

The funny thing is, if you look at the Sierra Club’s website, you’ll find that Blumenshine is all alone in her criticism of trains and trolleys. The Sierra Club actually likes them. A lot. In fact, they have quite a bit of information on rail transportation, the quality of life and economic development it brings, and its positive effect on the environment.

In their 2004 Report on Sprawl (ironically titled, “Missing the Train”), the Sierra Club said, “Public transportation, particularly rail, spurs ‘transit-oriented development’ that helps create a vibrant environment where people can live, work, shop, and use public transportation with ease” (emphasis mine). Isn’t that interesting? And what’s the effect on the surrounding neighborhoods and businesses?

In the Washington, DC area, the public transportation system (Metro) has generated nearly $15 billion in surrounding private development. Between 1980 and 1990, 40 percent of the region’s retail and office space was built within walking distance of a Metro station.17 This has led to lively corridors with plentiful restaurants, shops, offices and residences in places like Alexandria, Clarendon and Arlington, Virginia; Bethesda and Silver Spring, Maryland; and the heart of Washington, DC.

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) notes that demand for these transit-oriented neighborhoods far outpaces the supply, and cites studies showing that 30 percent of housing demand is for such communities while less than 2 percent of new housing is put in these areas. APTA states, “Real estate experts and demographers have … concluded the supply of TOD-style living environments, focused on high-quality public transportation, lags far behind demand.”18 APTA also calculates that the retail market benefits, because for every $10 million invested in public transit, they gauge that local business sales increase by $30 million.

“But that’s a full-fledged public transit, light-rail system,” you say. Granted. But consider a situation in Santa Cruz, California, that has some similarities to our situation here. There, like here, there is a scenic rail line that snakes through their county, and local Sierra Club members want to turn it into a hiking/biking trail. And there, like here, there is controversy surrounding it. Not the same controversy, but controversy.

The disagreement begins when discussing the best way for the county to purchase the corridor from Union Pacific. There are two options for buying the corridor. The first involves accepting $11 million of State Prop. 116 money…and matching it with transportation funds already allocated by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)….

In the first option, the State will provide the $11 million only if the county moves forward with some form of passenger rail service such as the proposed recreational Trolley [emphasis mine]. For many, this is a fair trade off. In fact, many people like trains and think the idea of moving around Santa Cruz by rail attractive.

There, the Sierra Club is in favor of the trolley with a trail alongside, within the corridor, but there are some residents who live along the train track that are against the trolley. The Ventana Chapter Sierra Club dryly muses, “It isn’t clear why people who don’t like trains purchased homes next to the railroad tracks.” Some are wondering the same thing here, especially about a certain Journal Star editor who lives near the train tracks but doesn’t want to see or hear trains on them.

The report concludes by saying, “The Sierra Club favors transportation that is energy and land conserving and is the least polluting. The Trolley project and the use of the rail corridor for bicycle travel has enormous potential to reduce automobile trips in Santa Cruz County.” Isn’t that exactly what the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation is trying to do in Peoria?

So the question that needs to be asked is, why is the Heart of Illinois Group Sierra Club against it? Why would the Heart of Illinois Sierra Club be anti-rail and, thus, pro-oil? Why would they rather take lumber off of environmentally-friendly and fuel-efficient train consists and instead put it on multiple oil-burning trucks that tear up our roadways and pollute our air? Why would they work against attempts to lessen automobile dependence? Why would they want to kill any hope of establishing a light rail system through the heart of the city?

The Sierra Club has published Conservation Policies that I would assume would apply to all chapters. Here’s what they say about trains/public transportation:

  • “Rail systems are most effective in stimulating compact development patterns, increasing public transit patronage and reducing motor vehicle use.”
  • “Station access should be provided by foot, bicycle and public transit, with minimal, but full-priced, public parking.”
  • “Freight railroads, especially electrified, are preferred over highway or air freight to save energy and land, and cut noise and pollutant emissions.”
  • “Land use patterns should be designed to improve pedestrian access, encourage shorter trips, increase public transit use, enhance the economic viability of public transit and decrease private motor vehicle use (auto mobility).”

Why is the Heart of Illinois Group Sierra Club opposing club policy in regards to the Kellar Branch? Are their leaders letting their personal feelings get in the way of their mission?

Kellar Branch

Clang, clang, clang went the trolley

17 Comments

Kellar Branch RailroadThere are two articles in the Journal Star this morning regarding Peoria Heights’ desire to look at the feasibility of putting a trolley on the Kellar Branch rail line (Trolley enters Kellar line talks and Towns seeing boost from trolley systems). Both are well written and factual — a benefit of having replaced retired editorialist reporter Elaine Hopkins with Dave Haney on that beat.

There are just a couple of things I’d like to add to Haney’s stories that I think are pertinent. First, he made a lot of references to these trolley lines being taxpayer-supported in other communities. What’s being proposed in Peoria Heights, however, would not be tax-supported. The Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation, in cooperation with Pioneer Railcorp, believes it can offer trolley service without receiving any taxpayer assistance, instead relying on economic development grants and ad revenue.

Also, while most trolleys are powered by overhead electric lines connected by a catenary on top of the trolley, the trolley being envisioned for Peoria Heights would run on battery technology — maybe even batteries created by Firefly Energy as a way of cross-marketing. That would lower the start-up costs of a Heights trolley.

The costs of putting in a trolley would actually be a lot less than the other communities that have them because we have something they didn’t: the rail line. The Kellar Branch rail line is already there, and the rail line is the most expensive part of putting in a trolley system. I’m glad to see the Heights taking this proposal seriously.

Now if we can just get Peoria, the Park District, and the RTA aboard….

Kellar Branch

Kellar Branch Update: Filings complete; parties await STB decision

5 Comments

Kellar CrossbuckAs Yogi Berra would say, it’s deja vu all over again.

Back in 2005, the City of Peoria got Pioneer Industrial Railway removed from the Kellar Branch and replaced with Central Illinois Railroad Company (CIRY) through a legal process known as an “adverse discontinuance request” they filed with the Surface Transportation Board (STB). But since that time, the City and CIRY have never fulfilled their promises to provide comparable service (or any service for a six-month period) via the Kellar Branch or the Western Connection. Carver Lumber, which initially did not object to the replacement carrier, has petitioned the STB to have Pioneer restored as the carrier. Thus, the proceeding has been reopened, taking us all back to where we were in 2005. That means the STB’s decision could be reversed and Pioneer could be restored as the carrier on the line.

The reason the city wants CIRY is because they want a carrier that will cooperate with their plans to turn the Kellar Branch into a recreational trail. While Pioneer is willing to cooperate with the building of a trail, they wouldn’t agree to removing the rail line because it would cheat Carver Lumber out of competitive rail service. Neither CIRY nor the city have any reservations about screwing Carver Lumber, despite Carver’s 60-year history of local ownership in Peoria.

The STB ordered all parties “to supplement the existing record by submitting additional evidence to the Board regarding the relative benefits and burdens that continuation of [Pioneer’s] service on the Kellar Branch, on the one hand, and the cessation of [Pioneer’s] service on the other, would have on the involved carrier [Pioneer], on the owner-lessor of the line [Peoria and Peoria Heights], and on the public [Carver Lumber, interstate commerce, local residents, etc.].”

The City of Peoria, the Village of Peoria Heights, and CIRY all filed their comments on February 22 and 23. Carver Lumber and Pioneer filed their comments on March 15. Here’s a quick summary of what they had to say:

|inline

Kellar Branch, Peoria Journal Star, Village of Peoria Heights

Heights hears about trolley; also, I meet a JS editor

14 Comments

Trolley in MemphisThere was a special meeting of Peoria Heights’ Board of Trustees tonight. The topic? The Kellar Branch. They wanted to hear from Pioneer Railcorp and the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation (IPRRF) about the possibility of running a trolley on the embattled line.

Mike Carr, CEO of Pioneer, gave the main presentation to the board and Sharon Deckard, President of IPRRF, gave some additional info at the end. Then they both answered questions from the board and the audience. You can see a PDF copy (2MB file) of their PowerPoint presentation* by clicking here.

Heights Mayor Mark Allen explained that this was an informational meeting meant to help the Village Board make an informed decision about the future of the Kellar Branch. In two weeks, on March 28, there will be another special meeting where the Park District and trail advocates will be allowed to present their plan for a trail only going through the corridor and why they think that will be best for the Heights.

Carr and Deckard explained how trolleys had been successful in large and small cities and had in all cases led to economic development along the trolley rail’s corridor. In addition to the benefits of a tourist trolley, it was also emphasized that increased congestion, city expansion, and rising gas prices would lead to the demand for more public transportation options in the future, and having a rail corridor through town is an asset to preserve for future commuter use.

Judging from the reaction of the audience, which was heavily stacked with trail supporters, not many people believed the presentation. But hey, they all laughed at Christopher Columbus when he said the world was round, as Gershwin would say. Mayor Allen explained that a feasibility study would have to be done before a final decision was made. But now’s the time to do it — before the tracks are torn up — because once they’re gone, they’re gone forever.

Well, technically, the land lease with the Park District allows the proposed trail to be reconverted back to rail use at any point in the future, but the costs of relaying the tracks and reimbursing the Park District for construction of the trail would be so astronomical as to make that option completely unfeasible.

After the meeting, I went to Peoria Pizza Works with Sharon Deckard, Gary Sandberg, David Jordan, a couple other railfans, and — are you ready for this? — Christine Smith of the Journal Star Editorial Board and her date. It was actually quite fun to get to talk to her, since I regularly lambaste the editorial page of Peoria’s newspaper of record.

You know what? I like her. Even though we don’t agree, and probably never will, about the Kellar Branch, she was very personable and likes to play devil’s advocate, which is one of my favorite pasttimes. I found out that she and Bailey (the senior editor of the PJS) both read my blog, which was flattering, although one could make the argument that they just do that as part of their job. Fair enough. It’s still nice to be read. 🙂

Since Shelley Epstein retired, there have been only two editors — Smith and Bailey. I joked that if one more editor left, we’d all know who was writing the unsigned editorials. I found out that Bailey edits Smith’s editorials, so that’s why they all sound like Bailey’s voice to some degree. I also found out that Smith wrote the “Bradley is not the bogeyman” editorial. We talked a little about that… but I digress.

Smith thinks the trolley idea is completely crazy. She doesn’t think it will get any ridership — that no one is going to be interested in riding a trolley… at least, not enough people to make it profitable. But she did admit that it’s worth doing a feasibility study on it; she just thinks it will vindicate her belief that it’s totally nuts. I say, bring it on.

*Full disclosure: I created the slides for the PowerPoint presentation. And yes, Pioneer will be paying me for my work in creating those slides. This is the first time I’ve done any work for them or received any payment of monetary or non-monetary value.

Kellar Branch, Village of Peoria Heights

What’s best for the Heights?

40 Comments

This will be my 94th post in the “Kellar Branch” category, and in all those previous posts I don’t believe I’ve ever once looked at the situation from the viewpoint of Peoria Heights. I suppose that makes me a typical Peorian. Back in the ’60s, right after Peoria’s successful vote to annex Richwoods township, the city tried to annex Peoria Heights, too. That failed. They’re a resilient and independent community, and they have their own unique needs. It would be good for Peorians (including me) to remember that once in a while.

Peoria Heights AdWhen I talked to Peoria Heights Mayor Mark Allen on Thursday, he explained to me how he sees the Kellar Branch issue. Unlike Peoria, he said, the Heights is completely landlocked. They can’t just annex land to the north or west of their community to grow. They can’t build a regional mall along the fringes of town like Peoria can. All they have for economic development is what’s available to them right now within their village.

And the Kellar Branch corridor is one of their assets. They own the portion of the Kellar Branch that lies within their village. So they have to ask themselves, what’s the best use of that corridor for the Heights? A rail line or a recreational trail? In Mayor Allen’s opinion, the answer is definitely a rail line. And he believes a majority of the Village Board feels the same way.

With a rail line, there’s always the potential to carry freight, of course, and that can be used to lure a rail-served business to the Heights. But it also can provide another tourist attraction to complement the Heights Tower and shopping district: a tourist trolley. As Thursday’s Journal Star pointed out:

…according to a report from Gomaco Trolley Co., more than 40 U.S. cities are looking at running street cars. Tampa, Fla., spent about $55 million on its system and has reaped about $1 billion in development; Little Rock, Ark., spent $20 million on its line, which has returned about $200 million; and Kenosha, Wis., built a system for $5.2 million that has brought in about $150 million.

Those numbers are compelling. It would be crazy for the Heights to not consider the potential of a trolley for the development of their village. If the Park District gets their way and tears out the tracks, they’re gone forever. The Village is wise to give this idea due consideration before any permanent action is taken.

In contrast, a recreational trail can’t begin to measure up to those numbers. Trails are not conducive to shopping. Consider the average trail user: they’re exercising, they’re hot and sweaty, and they’ve packed light. They’re not going to buy clothes or jewelry or anything that they’re going to have to carry on foot or by bicycle 4-6 miles back to their car. They’re most likely to buy something to drink, and maybe something to eat, depending on how far they’ve come.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that — but the Village has an obligation to its citizens to make the best decision for the future of the Heights. Right now they’re gathering information, but it looks like they could be in a position to start making some decisions as early as April of this year.

Allen expressed his desire to work with Peoria on this project — he has no interest in being adversarial about it. He thinks this could be a mutually-beneficial partnership for the two municipalities. I’m inclined to agree.

We have a lot of unique, local attractions that are all tied together by that rail line: Downtown (including the Riverfront, Civic Center, future Museum, etc.), Peoria Heights (including Tower Park and their unique shops), Junction City (including Vonachen’s Old Place where you can eat on a vintage train car, plus more unique shops), and yes, even the Rock Island Trail at the other end of the line. Why not band together to provide a true tourist package to Peoria Area visitors?

Wouldn’t it be a great story if the Village that fought annexation forty years ago ended up being the impetus that drew our communities closer together?

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch, Village of Peoria Heights

Peoria misrepresents Peoria Heights to Surface Transportation Board

24 Comments

Today is the deadline for the City to file information with the Surface Transportation Board in the pending adverse discontinuance proceeding. The City filed their information this morning, basically just reiterating what was said at the last council meeting and informing the STB of the 9-2 vote in favor of CIRY as the carrier.

However, most curious was this statement (emphasis mine):

The Village of Peoria Heights concurs in the action voted by the City of Peoria. The Cities continue to support reconfiguration of rail service over the Branch whereby:

(1) Carver and any other shipper located near the north end of the Branch would be served from the west via CIRY’s connection with Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) at Pioneer Junction;

(2) O’Brien Steel Service Co, (O’Brien Steel) and any other shipper located near the south end of the Branch would be served from the east via CIRY’s connection with Tazewell & Peoria Railroad, Inc. (T&P); and

(3) the segment of the Branch between the facilities of those shippers, on which there is no traffic, would be converted to recreational trail use.

That’s kind of funny, because I just read in the paper that the Village wants to put a trolley on that line, not a trail. Also, no Village representative certified the filing with their signature, and the Village wasn’t even served with a copy of the filing!

So I called Peoria Heights and talked to Administrator Tom Horstmann. I read him the STB filing and he said that it is not accurate, the Village does not concur with Peoria’s action, and he advised me to send a copy of the filing to Mayor Allen, which I did. I have a feeling the City will be getting an unhappy phone call.

To claim the Village’s concurrency in a legal document to the STB without the Village’s consent is an unconscionable oversight at best. It’s pretty apparent that there is no communication between the City and the Village on this issue, which is surprising considering how much is riding on the Village’s commitment to this project. Most of the section that the City wants to turn into a trail is not located in the City, but in the Village. Furthermore, the Village owns the trackage that is within their municipal boundaries. If the Village isn’t on board with the City’s plans, the City better start considering Plan B.

In the meantime, the City obviously needs to retract their erroneous statement to the STB. And since the City has demonstrated a lack of interest in communicating with the Heights, the Village probably should start communicating their intentions regarding the Kellar Branch directly with the STB.

UPDATE: City of Peoria attorney Randy Ray says, “Our STB filing is being amended to reflect that Peoria Heights does not agree with the City’s position. They wish to take no position on the matter before the STB.”

When I talked to Mayor Allen earlier tonight, he explained that since Peoria Heights doesn’t receive any freight, they didn’t feel the need to take a position on which carrier would be used on the line at this time. Also, as I stated in the comments section, Allen believes this was just an honest mistake.