|
|
Featured News
DM&E to tell its side at public meeting on Wednesday
Rochester Post Bulletin
By Kevin Schieffer
Published March 11, 2002
DM&E is committed to the responsible development of our rail improvement project in Rochester. We have failed in our efforts to negotiate an agreement with Mayo Clinic and the Rochester city council. They recently rejected our offer to renew discussions to pursue a negotiated agreement.
DM&E’s offers and position on this matter have not been accurately presented to the public. We hope to change that in the coming weeks.
On Wednesday, at 6:30 p.m. we are hosting a public meeting in Ballroom West of the Mayo Civic Center. Its purpose is to present our side of this story. We publicly invite Mayo’s chief executive and the mayor to participate and present their position on these issues. The decisions they make will have a profound effect on Rochester citizens. We think the public deserves to understand why, and we need to be accountable. At that public meeting we plan to present:
- A new mitigation proposal to Rochester to address what we believe to be the primary impact issues.
- A detailed description of our past offers, which were rejected by Mayo and the city council.
- Our interpretation of the mitigation contained in the final STB ruling, and its implications for Rochester.
- Our perspective on the facts and fictions concerning real vs. exaggerated impacts of our project.
- Our assessment of, philosophy regarding, and response to the lawsuits filed by Mayo and the city council.
- An outline for the future prospects for a bypass.
We have no ill-will toward our opponents. These are tough issues. We respect Mayo's extraordinary political and economic power and recognize its world-renowned reputation. The city council and its staff are trying hard to prevent a perceived harm.
In particular, we have no argument with the citizens of Rochester. I have been heartened by the many calls and letters of encouragement. We recognize many citizens would prefer that more trains not come through town, but want to work something out in the event they do. That is why we decided to make one more try for an agreement. And we want a clear record of public accountability in the event we fail.
Mayo and the city council recently announced coordinated lawsuits to reverse the STB decision approving our rail rebuilding project. In doing so they made certain characterizations about the STB decision and DM&E’s position in past negotiations. We believe they have misrepresented the facts. Additionally, we feel they have exaggerated the impacts of this project. Mayo built on its current location because long ago they wanted to be next to the railroad. We recognize that their preference has changed, but farmers and businesses and other customers, communities, and consumers throughout Minnesota still have a need for our services. We are committed to serve them.
Exaggerated vs. real impacts
Mayo and the city council have spent a lot of money on advertising and mailings to convince Rochester residents that rebuilding the railroad will end civilized life. The hyperbole lacks factual support. That is the simple reason Mayo and the city officials lost on each of these points at the STB. And that is why I expect they will lose in court.
Serious impact issues include noise and right-of-way access. These can be effectively mitigated if we work together. The following summary was done to invite scrutiny and encourage rational dialogue at the meeting. The first building block to a solution is reaching consensus about what the problem is. We welcome questions and comments from Mayo and the city at the meeting.
Coal dust claims are fictional. The Twin Cities experience many more coal trains every day than even the wildest forecasts for Rochester. Who has seen clouds of coal dust hovering over Minneapolis or coal soot residue on cars and houses there? Most people do not notice a difference between trains that haul coal and those that haul grain.
Auto traffic congestion and emergency vehicle access problems are overblown. I am hopeful the city or Mayo will speak to this issue. Objective governmental analysis demonstrates that, on a daily basis, traffic congestion in Rochester will be lessened by this project -- largely as a result of the quicker trains. This does not mean we should not work together to find ways to minimize this even further.
According to both DM&E- and Mayo-funded traffic studies, 37 trains per day will never go through Rochester. Throughout this case, we have explained how significant amounts of traffic will exit our line at Mankato, Owatonna, and elsewhere. We expect less than half of any Powder River Basin Project traffic originated by DM&E will ever pass through Rochester. Ultimately, the marketplace will determine traffic levels. But every shred of evidence produced by both DM&E and Mayo suggest that only a fraction of the famous "37 trains per day" will ever go as far east as Rochester.
The hazardous spill scare tactics are irresponsible. The hazardous material we currently haul through Rochester will move much more safely on a new track than it does today on the brittle rails that cause derailments.
Claims of increased exposure to terrorist attacks on Mayo are equally irresponsible. If Mayo is a potential target, it is much more vulnerable on today’s railroad, which has no positive train traffic control or other security devices that the new line would have.
There is no credible evidence to support claims of vibration problems for sensitive medical equipment. It is inconceivable to think that any responsible manufacturer or hospital would install such sensitive equipment next to a railroad. Mayo has continued its own aggressive construction efforts throughout the five years we have debated this project. Those actions speak volumes.
Real impacts we do need to worry about:
- Train whistle. Train whistle noise is the No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3 issue in every community with substantial train traffic today. This is the single biggest train-related problem identified by cities that experience significant rail traffic. Study after study confirms this. This is the toughest issue to resolve. It can be safely eliminated, but only by working together. Whistle free zones require an extensive partnership commitment, constant communication, and ongoing trust between the community and the railroad. No responsible railroad would attempt to implement whistle free zones without those critical ingredients. They do not exist in Rochester today. But we can build them.
- Saving the bike path and pedestrian access. This is an important quality of life issue. Safety and operating problems associated with having the bike path in the vicinity of a fenced railroad right of way must be fixed or it likely will need to be closed. There are solutions, but they require city involvement.
- Safety. This project will improve safety through unilateral DM&E commitments. But that does not prevent the parties from working together to make a good thing even better. On balance, this project will be developed to create a safer environment than exists today. Safety will not be compromised, and we welcome any challenges on that issue from Mayo or city officials for public debate. More importantly, we respectfully ask them to work with us to make it even safer.
STB decision vs. DM&E offer
The Mayo and city council "spin" on the STB decision is astounding. No objective comparison of the STB decision vs. past DM&E offers could lead rational people to believe Rochester fared better with the STB decision.
Normally, what Mayo and elected city officials say locally to justify their expenditures does not concern us. But when they drag our name into their claims, it does. We will no longer allow them to recklessly undermine DM&E’s good name with other communities, or use DM&E as their scapegoat locally, without responding.
We do not pretend that there will be no impact as a result of more traffic on our rail line. There are always unavoidable impacts, just as is the case with Mayo’s massive downtown construction projects. We cannot fix all of them. The impacts of our project have been ridiculously exaggerated in Rochester. We cannot make the trains invisible, but we can fix many problems. And we can increase the benefits. We are open to additional suggestions. We do not pretend to fully understand the impacts to Mayo any more than they understand our business. We need to educate each other to maximize effectiveness.
Most importantly, Mayo’s and city officials’ steadfast refusal to entertain a serious, accountable dialogue on this issue will likely lead to a destructive self-fulfilling prophecy for Rochester. When that happens, at the very least we intend to establish a clear public record of what was rejected in the past, what we are prepared to offer today, and what our intentions are for the future. We will respect whatever decision Mayo and the city council make on behalf of the citizens of Rochester, but we will not be blamed for it.
Schieffer is president and chief executive officer of the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad.
|