Canadian National Railway challenges ...

Canadian National Railway challenges federal regulators over tr...

There are 152 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Feb 23, 2009, titled Canadian National Railway challenges federal regulators over tr.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The Canadian National Railway challenged the authority of federal regulators to make the railroad pay an estimated $70 million for two overpasses, in Aurora and in Lynwood.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last
beagle

Canada

#141 Mar 15, 2009
JBChitown wrote:
Funny that no one has commented on this:
"It is gravely unfortunate that this project will impact the communities around Chicago to the extent it will, and I am a proponent of the enhanced mitigations we are ordering here. Indeed, I would have preferred that the Board require additional and more stringent mitigations. Specifically, I would have preferred an approach that closely tied the increasing levels of mitigation at applicants' expense to increasing levels of rail traffic, above the projections used in our analysis of this case. I will carefully scrutinize any divergence from applicants' projections - both on rail and vehicular traffic - in future oversight proceedings".
-- STB Vice Chairman Mulvey
Rather interesting comments, no?
What's to comment? Aurora, Barrington, Naperville (and the other TRAC communities) chose to try and block the merger rather than negotiate mitigation. Aurora, in spite of being awarded mitigation for an overpass on Ogden Rd decided to continue the legal challenge by appealing to the federal court.

And, from my scoping of the EJ&E track--it doesn't even run through Aurora.

Convince me that the Mayor of Aurora (and co-Chairman of TRAC) is not using this "crusade" for some undisclosed agenda.

beagle
JBChitown

Lake Zurich, IL

#142 Mar 15, 2009
beagle wrote:
<quoted text>
What's to comment? Aurora, Barrington, Naperville (and the other TRAC communities) chose to try and block the merger rather than negotiate mitigation. Aurora, in spite of being awarded mitigation for an overpass on Ogden Rd decided to continue the legal challenge by appealing to the federal court.
And, from my scoping of the EJ&E track--it doesn't even run through Aurora.
Convince me that the Mayor of Aurora (and co-Chairman of TRAC) is not using this "crusade" for some undisclosed agenda.
beagle
What's to comment? Even the board knows they failed in their analysis. Had the board done it's job properly TRAC wouldn't have to continue fighting.
beagle

Canada

#143 Mar 15, 2009
JBChitown wrote:
<quoted text>
What's to comment? Even the board knows they failed in their analysis. Had the board done it's job properly TRAC wouldn't have to continue fighting.
Well, if the STB failed in its analysis, you can rest easy, because it will be overturned by the appeals court. I haven't been able to discover any transgressions, and your naive attempt to infer any degree of relevance to the post approval, discensions/musings of Vice-Chairman Mulvey, who voted for the CN/EJ&E merger, are as enforceable as the failed HR 6707.

Whine, complain, whatever, your local elected officials were pursuing their own agenda.

beagle

czar of logic

Aurora, IL

#144 Mar 15, 2009
beagle wrote:
<quoted text>
What's to comment? Aurora, Barrington, Naperville (and the other TRAC communities) chose to try and block the merger rather than negotiate mitigation. Aurora, in spite of being awarded mitigation for an overpass on Ogden Rd decided to continue the legal challenge by appealing to the federal court.
And, from my scoping of the EJ&E track--it doesn't even run through Aurora.
Convince me that the Mayor of Aurora (and co-Chairman of TRAC) is not using this "crusade" for some undisclosed agenda.
beagle
It's Mayoral election time in Aurora.
Ken in Aurora

Montgomery, IL

#145 Mar 15, 2009
JBChitown wrote:
Funny that no one has commented on this:
"It is gravely unfortunate that this project will impact the communities around Chicago to the extent it will, and I am a proponent of the enhanced mitigations we are ordering here. Indeed, I would have preferred that the Board require additional and more stringent mitigations. Specifically, I would have preferred an approach that closely tied the increasing levels of mitigation at applicants' expense to increasing levels of rail traffic, above the projections used in our analysis of this case. I will carefully scrutinize any divergence from applicants' projections - both on rail and vehicular traffic - in future oversight proceedings".
-- STB Vice Chairman Mulvey
Rather interesting comments, no?
Sounds like a dissenting opinion from a single member, not a majority opinion.
Bill-Elgin

Geneva, IL

#146 Mar 16, 2009
czar of logic wrote:
<quoted text>
It's Mayoral election time in Aurora.
Maybe the Mayor wanted to get peoples minds off of other problems that Aurora is having. Drugs, gangs, gunfire at night, etc, etc, etc.
Not a Railroader

Omaha, NE

#147 Mar 16, 2009
JBChitown wrote:
Funny that no one has commented on this:
"It is gravely unfortunate that this project will impact the communities around Chicago to the extent it will, and I am a proponent of the enhanced mitigations we are ordering here. Indeed, I would have preferred that the Board require additional and more stringent mitigations. Specifically, I would have preferred an approach that closely tied the increasing levels of mitigation at applicants' expense to increasing levels of rail traffic, above the projections used in our analysis of this case. I will carefully scrutinize any divergence from applicants' projections - both on rail and vehicular traffic - in future oversight proceedings".
-- STB Vice Chairman Mulvey
Rather interesting comments, no?
JBChitown,
I'll take a nibble. One of the things I noticed was His statement, "I would have preferred an approach that closely tied the increasing levels of mitigation at applicants' expense to increasing levels of rail traffic, ABOVE THE PROJECTIONS USED in our analysis of this case." [emphasis added]
A simple reading of Vice Chairman Mulvey's statement would seem to be that he was not saying that the mitigation ordered was insufficient, rather that he would have liked to see a trigger mechanism that would require additional mitigation if the traffic levels exceed what was projected by CN.
If he had opposed the merger would he not have gone on record by voting against the merger? Yet he did not. He is going to be looking for divergence from the figures given in the EIS, but if they do not vary from that, what will he do?
If this is your great hope to get the STB decision overturned in court you are in for a serious disappointment. This statement does not show that the EIS was flawed.
My GGGeneration

Schaumburg, IL

#148 Mar 16, 2009
Bill-Elgin wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe the Mayor wanted to get peoples minds off of other problems that Aurora is having. Drugs, gangs, gunfire at night, etc, etc, etc.
IMO, one of the single largest problems Aurora is facing right now was caused directly by Dick Durbin and Melissa Bean. When they worked so hard for the nanny smoking ban, it killed a huge chunk of change Aurora depended on for pet projects because the Hollywood casino immediately felt the loss. I believe the old term is "trickle down economics".

That they were more concerned with a no smoking bill than a railroad merger probably rubbed the mayor the wrong way.
czar of logic

Aurora, IL

#149 Mar 16, 2009
Bill-Elgin wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe the Mayor wanted to get peoples minds off of other problems that Aurora is having. Drugs, gangs, gunfire at night, etc, etc, etc.
That and he resembles Drew Peterson!
Bill-Elgin

Geneva, IL

#150 Mar 16, 2009
My GGGeneration wrote:
<quoted text>
IMO, one of the single largest problems Aurora is facing right now was caused directly by Dick Durbin and Melissa Bean. When they worked so hard for the nanny smoking ban, it killed a huge chunk of change Aurora depended on for pet projects because the Hollywood casino immediately felt the loss. I believe the old term is "trickle down economics".
That they were more concerned with a no smoking bill than a railroad merger probably rubbed the mayor the wrong way.
That lost riverboat revenue could have paid for quite a few police as well as the local share of overpasses! Durbin and Bean ended up kind of giving all the towns with boats a big "negative earmark".
Bill-Elgin

Geneva, IL

#151 Mar 16, 2009
czar of logic wrote:
<quoted text>
That and he resembles Drew Peterson!
LOL!
My GGGeneration

Schaumburg, IL

#152 Mar 16, 2009
Bill-Elgin wrote:
<quoted text>That lost riverboat revenue could have paid for quite a few police as well as the local share of overpasses! Durbin and Bean ended up kind of giving all the towns with boats a big "negative earmark".
Agree with you 100%. And now tax increases are most likely coming. Those two... Durbin and Bean... should NEVER be re-elected whether you support the CN/EJ&E merger or not.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Canadian National Railway Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
E. Hunter Harrison Earns $29,281 PER DAY !!! (C... (Feb '07) Jan 6 hunter is a p o s 165
Diversity is White Genocide Nov '16 68870hkmun 1
News Canadian National suspends former CEO Hunter Ha... (Jan '12) Oct '16 Anonamous 8
News Canadian native groups cancel CN Rail blockade (Jun '06) May '16 Indians Built First 881
Let's hear from CN Employees (Mar '09) May '16 Kev 17
News All benefit from rail traffic -- Elections, Mic... (May '08) Mar '16 Equality 131
News Canadian National Railway (CNI) Position Cut by... (Feb '16) Feb '16 CNR 1
More from around the web