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.
CIRY is doing exactly as the city desires; operate either end of the Kellar Branch and not oppose abandonment of the remainder so trail construction can commence. And who cares about a contract? Rail service and economic development was never the agenda anyway 🙂
“cynical” no, I think not. Try “realistic” or perhaps just “honest”
“…one would think the city was trying to run Carver Lumber out of town…”
If indeed the city is trying to force the issue that way, wouldn’t that be a RICO charge?
RICO, good idea Vonster. But likely damn hard to prove. If only.
It’s starting to smell like racketeering….
If the City were trying to run Carver out of business, why would they have sold to them the land and building that area adjacent to the Carvery Lumber site? Carver needed this land to expand it’s operations and the City sold it to them even though it was currently being used to house the City’s radio shop.
As I recall, the price was about fair market value so the City didn’t in any way make a killing on the sale and did for the right reason, to assist a local company in expanding and securing their place in Peoria’s business environment.
Having said all that, I am a strong proponent of the bike trail in that I believe that it adds a great quality of life to a community (look at the bike trail in Madison/St. Clair Counties – they are one of the premier bike trail networks in the state and most of them were built originally on no longer needed/used railbeds).
Low crime, good streets and sidewalks, low taxes…THAT’S quality of life. Bike trails are things we should build when all the other problems are fixed. And we should NOT build them by extorting out of business a working rail line.
Vonster,
I’m not sure it’s worth even trying. PeoProud has a shallow view of “quality of life” and like all trail proponents fails to see that the trail is a WANT and not a NEED. Trail users have been working for 15 years to get their Rock Island Trail extended through town and despite their lack of success (which judging by their ignorant comments, is beyond their understanding) they are still alive and healthy. Carver Lumber, on the other hand, may be forced out of business, and its 50 employees out of a job. They NEED economical rail service returned. Pronto.
But shallowness prevails because the most important thing to them is to be able to ride their bicycle from Toulon to Morton.
As for the sale of city property next to Carver Lumber, it’s irrelevant. The issue is whether it is better to construct a hiking-and-biking trail for some $4-6 million, which will have no value as a development tool (can’t transport goods on a bicycle), or use a rail line to lure new employers to within the City’s boundaries (which numerous communities have done for decades nationwide), resulting in jobs, increased tax revenue into the city’s coffers and allowing the average citizen the chance of getting a job that can support a family.
Long ago, the City foolishly chose the the former, thinking an “alternative rail service” would also bring the latter. Despite numerous warnings to the contrary, they went ahead with their plan anyway and rail supporters have been blessed with an incredible amount of ammunition.
What I am missing in all of these articles of the pro-rail and pro-trail is the fact that these can run together. The pro-trail group keeps citing areas where this trail or that trail is doing so well in another city well we can cite areas where trails and rails are running along side one another and benefitting both areas of the community. This can be done on the Kellar. Where there is one side of the track that is too narrow switch to the other at an intersection. Where it is too narrow for a short distance reroute the trail for a block or two. If everyone on both sides would sit down in a nice quiet atmosphere and really look at the situation both sides could benefit and therefore a whole lot more of this community would be served.
I don’t believe that there is an intentional effort to force Carver Lumber out of business or to move to another locale. But the Peoria Park District would hold a party if it happened and city hall wouldn’t shed too many tears, since after all, companies such as Carver don’t fit into the narrow med-tech field.
The problem is the trail proponents’ indifference to Carver’s plight. They say the city spent $2 million for them and they have no right to complain. They say that the city sold them property recently for expansion, so they have no right to complain. They say that they have alternative rail service, so they have no right to complain. All of these assertions are false or irrelevant, but who cares, if we can have our trail 🙂
Also, a joint rail-and-trail corridor is falsely deemed too costly and also “unsafe” by trail proponents and they would never agree to such a thing unless the STB rules in Carver Lumber’s favor.
There’s nothing unsafe about a joint rail-and-trail corridor and many examples exist, some without any fence protecting dumb people from getting run over by 10mph trains. Local examples are the walk along Water St. which parallels the four to six-train-a-day Tazewell & Peoria RR mainline along the downtown riverfront and the mile or so of the Rock Island Trail which parallels the Kellar Branch north of Pioneer Parkway. In Bloomington, the Constitution Trail parallels the Norfolk Southern mainline through town. Amazingly, a trail parallels the busy Iowa, Chicago & Eastern RR mainline between Davenport and Bettendorf. There is no fence or ditch between the track and trail, though train movements seem to be restricted to about 10mph.
Of course, if it’s too costly to build a trail alongside the Kellar Branch, then we should forget the trail. It’s an “opportunity” that can pass with no harm done to our community.