The URL can be used to link to this page

Untitled (4) AGENDA Yelm-Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee Meeting Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:00-11:00 a.m. Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm WA 10:00 a.m. - Welcome & Introductions Confirm Committee membership 10:10 a.m. - Miles Sand & Gravel Company — request for approval (Action item) related to a grade crossing and construction of overpass to extract material from the west side of tracks. Jerry Trudeau, Miles Sand& Gravel — to give description of proposal. Shelly Badger, City of Yelm — Status of agreement and recommendation to Yelm City Council. 10:40 a.m. Next steps — Mayor Adam Rivas& Chair Joe Williams - Group discussion. 11:00 a.m. Adjourn AGENDA Yelm-Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee Meeting Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:00-11:00 a.m. Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm WA 10:00 a.m. - Welcome & Introductions Confirm Committee membership 10:10 a.m. - Miles Sand & Gravel Company — request for approval (Action item) related to a grade crossing and construction of overpass to extract material from the west side of tracks. Jerry Trudeau, Miles Sand & Gravel — to give description of proposal. Shelf Badger, City of Yelm — Status of agreement and recommendation to Yelm City Council. 10:40 a.m. Next steps — Mayor Adam Rivas & Chair Joe Williams - Group discussion. 11:00 a.m. Adjourn _ tM � Iv , vtiss I cam- u sP 9F Cv os� u�� I � � '� �,J r 3 , � �� i�� ill jll �� i � m � � �� rl � �, II �' � I ` �� i i i ' i it �I +� � Page 1 of 1 Shelly Badger From: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com> To: "Adam Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 12:17 PM Subject: RR agenda Adam, you will be receiving an agenda for Monday's meeting today from Dana Lou. I have enlisted her support to help with agenda distribution, meeting minutes, etc to our RAC. Cec provided this service in the past, but feel she will be fine with the change (I left her a message). You will see as the last item in the "1-hour" agenda, an item at the end after we deal with the Miles piece, entitled Next Steps with both your and Joe's name by it. Suggestions for topics for you to mention here are- 1 . re:1 . State that the Council has adopted the RR project as a goal and that a workplan will be developed between now and June to set out a plan for development of the RR. This workplan would be done in conjuction with guidance from the RAC. 2. That I am in receipt of the Freight Rail Assistance Application Packet for the 2003-2005 biennium. As per Ray Allred, there are no monies available at this time for the next biennium, but there may be on 7-1-03 IF the legislature appropriates $ to the WSDOT Rail Capital Budget. The application is due April 30, 2003. 1 do think we should apply so if funds become available we are in the "hopper", so the RAC should give guidance on what project we apply for. I will be prepared at this point to give an overview of the grant program and what may or may not be eligible. 3. Kevin Jeffers from the WS Rail Office will be coming out to Yelm in the near future and meet with Tim. He has expertise in bridge inspections and has volunteered to inspect the bridge over the river. This is very nice and came to us from a call from Joe (kudos to Joe) to Ray Allred. Joe will have suggested next steps also, but I wanted you to know about the above 3 items. I am sure you thought of this, but it might be nice at the RAC meeting to officially acknowledge Joe and his leadership and the fact that due to it, he is the winner of the Thurston County Distinguished Leader Award. Thanks, Shelly Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 shelly@yelmtel.com 1/31/2003 Page 1 of 1 Shelly Badger From: "Dana Spivey" <dspivey@ywave.com> To: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com>; "Ray Bourne" <roymayor@ywave.com>; "Glen &Jeannie Cunningham" <geeneecee@aol.com>; "Adam & Gail Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com>; "Dana Lou Spivey" <dspivey@ywave.com>; "Bill Steele" <wcs201 @yahoo.com>; "Jerry Trudeau" <jerryt@gravel pits.com>; "Joe Williams" <willgrpjsw@aol.com>; "Barrie Wilcox" <bwilcox@wilcoxfarms.com>; "Charlie Burnham" <CEB@DEAINC.COM>; "Don Miller' <drm iller@yelmtel.com> Cc: "John Thompson" <willgrpjgt@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 12:28 PM Attach: 2-3-03RACmtgminutes.doc Subject: REMINDER - RAC mtg. Friday, March 14th Hi All! Just a quick reminder - the RAC meeting is this Friday, March 14th, 10:00 a.m. at the Prairie Park Development offices (Conference Room) - [enter through the Prairie Hotel lobby.] Also - please find attached the minutes from the last meeting on Feb. 3rd. Thanks! Dana Dana Spivey Administrative Assistant City of Yelm 360-458-8816 dspivey@ywave.com 3/14/2003 Page IofI Shelly Badger From: "Dana Spivey" <dspivey@ywave.com> To: "Adam & Gail Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com>; "Joe Williams" <willgrpjsw@aol.com>; "Glen & Jeannie Cunningham" <geeneecee@aol.com>; "Bill Steele" <wcs201@yahoo.com>; "Ray Bourne" <roymayor@ywave.com>; 'Barrie Wilcox" <bwilcox@wilcoxfarms.com>; "Jerry Trudeau" <jerryt@gravelpits.com>; "Charlie Burnham" <CEB@DEAINC.COM>; <rernst@ci.tacoma.wa.us>; "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com>; "Don Miller" <drmiller@yelmtel.com> Cc: "John Thompson" <willgrpjgt@aol.com>; "Cecelia Jenkins" <info@yelmchamber.com>; "Dana Lou Spivey" <dspivey@ywave.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: RAC meeting Hi All! Sorry,but the meeting date has changed once more-but this is it!!! The Rail Advisory Committee (RAC)meeting will be Friday, March 14, 2003, 10:00 a.m. at the Prairie Park Conference Room (enter through Hotel Lobby). Due to the timeline of the WA State Freight Rail Assistance application(due 4-30-03)this meeting will be a"working meeting" to decide the specifics of the financing proposal and decide "who needs to do what,by when." We have asked Charlie Burnham, of David Evans &Associates and Ron Ernst, Marketing Director for Tacoma Rail to join us. Please read to the bottom of this message, as the following message includes a link to open the application so you can acquaint yourselves with the program criteria&questions we must answer. Thank you, Dana Dana Spivey Administrative Assistant to Shelly Badger, City Administrator City of Yelm 360-458-8816 dspivevnywave.com Hello Shelly, Joe Williams asked me to forward to the City of Yelm, a WashDOT Freight Rail Assistance application for potential rail projects the City of Yelm hopes to undertake during the 2003-2005 biennium. There are not any funds available at the present time, but new funds might become available on July 1, 2003; depending on what the Washington State legislature decides to appropriate for the WashDOT Freight Rail Capital Budget. If the City of Yelm decides to apply for WashDOT Freight Rail Assistance funding for the 03- 05 budget cycle,the first step in this process is to complete the freight rail assistance application(below). Just print a hard copy of the below file and answer the questions where applicable. If you have any questions,please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Ray Allred Rail Freight Expert Ph# 705-7903 >http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Rail/projects/freight=aM.pdf. 3/14/2003 Rail Advisory Committee—"Prairie Line" Mayor Adam Rivas Phone: 360-458-8401 Email: alrivas(a ywa-ave.com City of Yelm Fax:360458-4348 PO Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 Joe Williams,Committee Chair Phone: 360-458-8533 Email: willgipisw(ci;aol.com Prairie Park Development Fax:360458-8501 PO Box 5210 Yelm WA 98597 Glen Cunningham Phone:360-789-9771 Email: geeneecee(a;aol.com Cunningham Construction Fax: PO Box 2005 Yelm WA 98597 Bill Steele Phone: 360-701-3201 Email: wcs201 a..vahoo.com 9209 Mt.View Rd SE Fax: Yelm WA 98597 Mayor Ray Bourne Phone:253-843-1113 Email:roymayrL•ywave.com City of Roy Fax:253-843-0279 PO Box 700 Roy WA 98580 Barrie Wilcox Phone:360458-7774 Email: XWilcox Farms Fax: 360458-6950 bwilcca-(dwilcoxfarms.com 40400 Harts Lake Valley Rd Roy WA 98580 Jerry Trudeau,Vice-Pres./Gen.Mgr. Phone:253-833-3705,ext.429 Email:jenyta-.gray elpits.com Miles Sand&Gravel Company Fax:253-833-3746 1201 M St. SE/PO Box 130 Auburn WA - ar ie Burnham—Consultant Phone: 253-922-9780. Email:ceb(a-deainc.coni David Evans&Associates Fax:253-922-9781 3700 Pacific Hwy E,Ste.311 Tacoma WA 98466 Steve Day—Consultant Phone: 206-292-9988, Email:sday a b mlaw.com Betts,Patterson&Mines,PS 206-268-8646 One Convention Place Fax: 206-343-7053 701 Pike Street,Suite 1400 Seattle WA 98101-3927 Taro Kusunose Phone:206-292-9988, Email: Betts,Patterson&Mines,PS 206-268-8646 tkusunose(ii;:bpmlaw.com One Convention Place Fax:206-343-7053 701 Pike Street,Suite 1400 Shelly Badger,City Admin. Phone:360-458-8405 Email:shelly_(a;velmtel.com City of Yelm Fax: 3604584348 PO Box 479 Ye ana Spivey,Admin.Asst. Phone:360-458-8816 Email: ds iv ev�i: w_a�e_com City of Yelm Fax:3604584348 PO Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 Executive Committee: Mayor Bourne,Mayor Rivas,Joe Williams Budget Committee: Shelly Badger,Mayor Bourne,Mayor Rivas Standards Committee: Jerry Trudeau,Barrie Wilcox,Joe Williams THS p+Q� a,, �M ctyio Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Box 479 WASMINOTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 January 17, 2003 Glen Cunningham PO Box 2005 Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Glen, Happy New Year! As I am sure you are aware, it has been quite some time since the Rail Advisory Committee (RAC) last met. Currently, you are listed as a Yelm representative on the RAC. 2003 will be a year of planning and recommendations regarding the rail system. Because it has been a long time since the last meeting, I am checking with everyone on your continued interest in serving on the RAC. Please fill out the bottom portion of this letter and return to me by Monday, January 27, 2003. Thank you! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 360-458-8405, or email me at shelly(a-)yeimtel.com. Sincerely, Shelly B er Yelm City Administrator SB/ds Yes, I would like to continue to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. No, I am not able to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. NAME: JAN 2 7 2003 The City of Yelm is an Equal Opportunity Provider OF TMC jb a �- I City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Y E LsMoTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 January 17, 2003 Larry Schorno 18217 Hwy 507 SE Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Larry, Happy New Year! As I am sure you are aware, it has been quite some time since the Rail Advisory Committee (RAC) last met. Currently, you are listed as a Yelm representative on the RAC. 2003 will be a year of planning and recommendations regarding the rail system. Because it has been a long time since the last meeting, I am checking with everyone on your continued interest in serving on the RAC. Please fill out the bottom portion of this letter and return to me by Monday, January 27, 2003. Thank you! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 360-458-8405, or email me at shelly(cD_yelmtel.com. Sincerely, Shelly Ba er Yelm Cit Administrator SB/ds Yes, I would like to continue to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. No, I am not able to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee: f" a i NAME: JAN 2 7 2003 The City of Yelm is an Equal Opportunity Provider Ch�vo Yel m a M 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Box 479 WASHINOTpN Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 January 17, 2003 Bill Steele 9209 Mt. View Rd SE Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Bill, Happy New Year! As I am sure you are aware, it has been quite some time since the Rail Advisory Committee (RAC) last met. Currently, you are listed as a Yelm representative on the RAC. 2003 will be a year of planning and recommendations regarding the rail system. Because it has been a long time since the last meeting, I am checking with everyone on your continued interest in serving on the RAC. Please fill out the bottom portion of this letter and return to me by Monday, January 27, 2003. Thank you! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 360-458-8405, or email me at shells yelmtel.com. Sinc ely, Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator SB/ds Yes, I would like to continue to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. No, I am not able to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. NAME: \ The City of Yelm is an Equal Opportunity Provider i' �f January 17, 2003 (� n Glen Cunningham PO Box 2005 Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Glen, Happy New Year! As I am sure you are aware, it has been quite some time since the Rail Advisory Committee (RAC) last met. Currently, you are listed as a Yelm representative on the RAC. 2003 will be a year of planning and recommendations regarding the rail system. Because it has been a long time since the last meeting, I am checking with everyone on your continued interest in serving on the RAC. Please fill out the bottom portion of this letter and return to me by Monday, January 27, 2003. Thank you! If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 360-458-8405, or email me at shelly(a)-yelmtel.com. Sincerely, Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator SB/ds Yes, I would like to continue to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. No, I am not able to serve on the Rail Advisory Committee. NAME: RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE mailing list/labels JOE WILLIAMS, CHAIR KATHY WOLF, CO-CHAIR PO BOX 5210 YELM CITY HALL YELM WA 98597 MAYOR JOEL DEREFIELD GLEN CUNNINGHAM LARRY SCHORNO CITY OF ROY PO BOX 2005 18217 HWY 507 SE PO BOX 700 WA 98597--'' YELM WA 9 ROY WA 98580 BARRY WILCOX LIF- N X�, ` t ' �� CHARLIE BURNHAM WILCOX FARMS MID & GRAVEL DAVID EVANS & ASSOC. 40400 HARTS LAKE VLY RD P0------- 3700 PACIFIC HWY E STE. 311 ROY WA 98580 -AUBURN WA 98071 TACOMA WA 98466 STEVE DAY, BETTS PATTERSON & CECELIA JENKINS MINES 800 FINANCIAL CENTER YELM CHAMBER SHELLY BADGER 1215 FOURTH AVE PO BOX 444 YELM CITY HALL SEATTLE WA 98161-1090 YELM WA 98597 THERA BLACK JERRY TRUDEAU RAY ALLRED THURSTON REG PLANNING d --MILES SAND & GRAVEL WSDOT PUBLIC TRANS & RAIL DIV 2404 HERITAGE CT SW #6 PO BOX 130 PO BOX 47387 OLYMPIA WA 98502-6031 AUBURN OLYMPIA WA 98504-7387 COM—UN, I TY DE✓ DIRECTO �p se U �tcol �a 1^ tri -a4-1 42) rN /r ��ue u� �, aA6 le Ra>II A4o ittee — �Pralrle Line" w Joe Williams- ommittee C 'r• en Garmann-Ex icio Member 1(C� Pu ' Works Dir or 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J City o m Z P.O. Box 5210 P.O.Box Yelm,WA 98597 Yelm A 9857 Phone: (360)458-8533 P e: (360)458-8 Fax: (360)458-8501 . ax: __(-364}438-4348 MayorKathy Wo - o ittee Co- hair �, Charlie Burnham-Consultant City of Yelm ' P.O. Box 4 QQ 3700 Pacific Hwy E., Suite 311 Yelm, A 98597 1 1" Tacoma, WA 98466 P e: (360)458- 401 Phone: (253)922-9780 ax: (360)458-43 UV Fax: (253)922-9781 —-- --- Counc' len C ingham Steve Day-Consultant nningham Con ctio�= Betts,Patterson&Mines,PS ox 900 F Cclircr iiiJ rOUIir ��r.c Iia(hi CSC ! CSS Yelm, 98597 f( SeatFl A Ph e: (360)789-9771 r one: (206)292-9988e,ao ax: (360)458-4348 1 ax: (206)343-705 ry ch no U y ' C!440en a - i n 1 7 S r.O. Box e 98 Yelm,WA 98597 ( 60) 8-7 Phone: (360)' x: ( 60) 8-4 7 Fax: (360 458-8301 f � Exe tive Commi ee: Joe Williams City of Roy y t U P.O. Bo 00 /1� Mayor P�,u-kf r& Roy, A 98580 P ne: (253)843-1113 R 4A S �L ax: 843-0279 B get Co ittee: Ma or Wolf ayo ere Barrie Wilcox Larry Schorno Wilcox Farms yN*4 X400 Harts Lake Valley Road St dards Commi e: "l y, WA 98580 Barry Icox Phone: (360)458-7774 Fax: (360)458-695 Miles Sand& avel !1 ! P.O. Box 130 Auburn,WA 98071 Phone: (253)833-3705, Fax: (253)833-3746 o & _ -�� '� i �L rO�� 1 a�-ins" ss�e�r� � � w�� °-t3� IsY 7� -5xsxo 1ci_ ku,-r . r v�G�Q (in 2S3-�33 - 3�O.S- x �z3 �A -----�-o- 0- or 6c'o DID i � e_ ,.��. CO" �,.,•l�sxc c.J c1ceX�t�YNy�:CII� --__ RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE mailing list/labels JOE WILLIAMS, CHAIR KATHY WOLF, CO-CHAIR PO BOX 5210 YELM CITY HALL YELM WA 98597 MAYOR GLEN CUNNINGHAM LARRY SCHORNO CITY OF ROY PO BOX 2005 18217 HWY 507 SE PO BOX 700 YELM WA 98597 YELM WA 98597 ROY WA 98580 ��, I r Cc�l.!c,cr BARRY WILCOX LISA Y � r CHARLIE BURNHAM WILCOX FARMS MI ND & GRAVEL DAVID EVANS & ASSOC. 40400 HARTS LAKE VLY RD PO OX 1 - - 3700 PACIFIC HVVY E STE. 311 ROY WA 98580 BURN WA 98071 TACOMA WA 98466 STEVE DAY, BETTS PATTERSON & CECELIA JENKINS MINES 800 FINANCIAL CENTER YELM CHAMBER SHELLY BADGER 1215 FOURTH AVE PO BOX 444 YELM CITY HALL SEATTLE WA 98161-1090 YELM WA 98597 THERA BLACK JERRY TRUDEAU RAY ALLRED THURSTON REG PLANNING MILES SAND & GRAVEL WSDOT PUBLIC TRANS & RAIL DIV 2404 HERITAGE CT SW #,B PO BOX 130 PO BOX 47387 OLYMPIA WA 98502-6031 AUBURN WA 98071-0130 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7387 GATHtE�SON COMM _.NITY DEV DIRECTOR Page IofI Shelly Badger From: 'Taro Kusunose" <tkusunose@bpmlaw.com> To: "Shelly A. Badger(E-mail)" <shelly@yelmtel.com> Cc: "Charles E. Burnham (E-mail)" <oeb@deainc.com>; "Steve Day" <sday@bpmlaw.com> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 7:03 PM Attach: 167822v1.DOC Subject: Miles Crossing Notice: This is a confidential communication;it may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,please advise the sender at(206)268-8646 and then immediately delete this communication,including any attachments,without reading or disclosing its contents. Thank you. Shelly: Attached is the revised Miles crossing agreement. Charlie has reviewed the document, and we have incorporated his edits. There are a few blanks left in the agreement, however. The blanks for the "Fees" provisions (Section 3) should be filled in by the City based upon a business decision as to how much money it would like to receive. We might recommend $50 for each of 3.1 and 3.2, but again, this is entirely up to the City. We obviously are not as involved in relationship between the City and Miles as you are. Similarly, the blanks for the "Insurance" provisions (Section 13) must also be filled in. These, however, should be done based upon an assessment of the risk by the City Risk Manager, insurance broker, or equivalent individual. Should your risk guy need guidance, we can make recommendations. Obviously, Charlie can too. Finally, Charlie raised two important questions when he reviewed our previous draft. He wrote: 1) Should the Licensee carry Railroad Protective Liability Insurance during construction of the crossing? BNSF requires $2MM/6MM policy during construction. 2) Should insurance policies name the City as an additional insured. We have the following recommendations. As to 1): Yes. Perhaps $2MM-$5MM. 2): Yes, to avoid later subrogation against the City. These are recommendations, however, and ultimately, the City Risk Manager must make these decisions. Please let us know what you want for these sections, or if you have any other questions or concerns. At this point, we are now pretty much ready to hand the document off to Miles, if the City and Miles are already at that point. Taro Taro Kusunose Attorney Betts,Patterson&Mines,P.S. Seattle,Washington USA (206)268-8646[direct-dial) For additional information,please visit: Www.bpmlaW.com 10/21/2002 Yelm-Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee Meeting Monday, February 3, 2003, 10:00-11:00 a.m. Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Avenue W 10:00 a.m. - Welcome & Introductions Confirm Committee membership 10:10 a.m. - Miles Sand & Gravel Company — request for approval (Action item) related to a grade crossing and construction of overpass to extract material from the west side of tracks. Jerry Trudeau, Miles Sand & Gravel — to give description of proposal. Shelly Badger, City of Yelm — Status of agreement and recommendation to Yelm City Council. 10:40 a.m. Next steps — Mayor Adam Rivas& Chair Joe Williams - Group discussion. 11:00 a.m. Adjourn some news Yage 1 012 Subj: Some news Date: 1/31/03 4:29:08 PM Pacific Standard Time From: sday@bpmlaw.com (Steve Day) To: Willgrpjsw@aol.com (Joe Williams (E-mail)) This Jan. 31 Tacoma, Wash.,NEWS TRIBUNE article refers to the northerly 2.1 miles of the original 1873 "Prairie Line"main line of Northern Pacific down 2.2%South Tacoma Hill and across Pacific Avenue just north of Tacoma Union Station, into the Moon Yard where it connects with the present double-track Seattle-Portland main. Moon Yard is where NP reached tidewater and had its original terminal when the"Pacific Division"segment was completed from the Columbia River train ferry at Kalama, Wash.,as commemorated on a stone monument now at 21st &Pacific Avenue,which reads to the effect "Where Northern Pacific Rails Met Pacific Ocean Sails In Tacoma (Washington Territory)on December 16, 1873." BNSF would apparently serve Fort Lewis, McChord Field, Mobase(Mt. Rainier Ordnance Depot), Roy, Lakeview,and South Tacoma industries from the main track connection at Nisqually,24 miles south of Tacoma,backtracking up the 1.7%grade crossing and paralleling Interstate 5 between Nisqually and Fort Lewis. This NP/BNSF line segment which may be discontinued(between MP 0.6 Moon Yard Tacoma, and MP 2.7 on the South Tacoma Hill), has been the location of numerous famous photographs over the years,by Jim Fredrickson, Willard Wilkinson, Phillip Hastings, and others as NP and GN steam locomotives stormed upgrade across Pacific Avenue with two or three helper engines per train. This was once a very busy line with two or three switch crews and several through freight trains of NP and GN per day, as well as passenger trains, and had been used through the mid-1980's as a detour route when slides or derailments blocked the water-level Point Defiance Line primary route. The activity in recent years has diminished to one local train a day("the Mobase Local")to Fort Lewis and Roy, maybe a switch move or two to the few remaining rail-served industries at South Tacoma, and an occasional military equipment train to or from Fort Lewis. BNSF would presumably also regain access to the north end of the line, and regain use of the line as a detour route,after the completion in a few years, of the new Sound Transit commuter train through route connection. This route is to be constructed between about MP 2.7 of the BNSF Prairie Line,down Wakefield Drive(South Tacoma Way)and across Pacific Avenue near East 26th Street to connect with about 2 miles of the ex-MILW/Tacoma Eastern main track near C street,then passing the new Freighthouse Square station,returning to BNSF's double track main at Reservation interlocking at the north end of Tacoma. Stephen L Day Betts Patterson & Mines, P.S. http://www.bpmiaw.com/ One Convention Place, Suite 1400 701 Pike Street Seattle, WA 98101-3927 Phone (206) 292 - 9988 Fax (206) 343-7053 This is a privileged and confidential communication. If you are not the addressee, you may not read, copy or distribute this email. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return mail or call (206) 292-9988 so that we may correct our records. Monday, February 03, 2003 America Online: Willgrpjsw 't.s... .. ., _�. >. r„st•r' :_1'f:-'f•,�., , Siff: i dIN ib '-} �++i��:.f Y' nun WN 1::'- ,J9J:. �.:.�'J�,.'�• Fvar''. •fs+!p si etr r tt�..70k J'£,,:" ,4 x, ._,t Q •.-•tPjm IS•,3'S_. bay +N.A! 9 1m, and •-i;' + +n?. 0: ad" kwit{,T.::? ii J{!., .!. fl.i� tli4fr y��4.';t'i$JJ(00,1A q,f, r, W ...f i)l,t ...-.a,{r "e )f,\y`;�ti ';t(. e ,.;V$`'1 t.ft.i1 ,'!-.. ;%, ;1ti:• :'r 3 rh `{ 'J:I..,,,cF f,1' f, :l::r.x'sA t ,wi.. 61 .J «, if{ -Mt i?GEf+ i ,$!•':Jai L y,.l,W J}r5,-. • Q vanp W f,; •r,.� _ �. Vis+ . 't f")+• r .A' 117J11) UN a 04irtr'. '+t7tS'{G(f?tf.J• ?'. ':!! !t# apli!>?C) 1a- . jn e..A: JI M i`,.. 010- lr.M.` (C74 %'fir �..,�l.;'{aa :}'}' •s.r i S rf ,}+ �' "1 ,• .-.::r ', , ...As"+••,,,;�+}$ ,#, "3i ^,J{!7 •'!7. NO -h,!in_ ;i:;i fl. rli•; :.+, r;i :Cwui.rK I ymmosto O � ._!_ , to 4 0 44 wviii ti , ,. `}bm r.#.p`,+i.ijrr'1 ... fn`,% 't . . ' •f,: e' in, .. '; 'it)0" cmTri,,,. .-7 it on: V. ii:e', low" !U,!Jar on`£fiisg»3 1:+ , .+ g 1, - ; ��' r :9. '-$�( ,.. .,. . :t$ r. .. _. ..''j?. _p`S$;•a I7 ..5,6='1 .,11 n rA t, ..•.JVzt: `a+'L.,i i4jJ , - ,. -. r-..`... . i"J,: ;.,1, _t{:r•-j"� # : .f. .. ....,qtr' 'If, < <..''. ..i:.r pi«-t.� .. ., .... ..' 4_ -.. `V i. NOR `"•W Rrans"'1 r1 A � UMMA i . ''S,,'4_ �;�.' ,:"" F+�ri; :-�ia1 "{.":�il!{J�=JAI �t,J`f •`y}. l:.';eL'tt - i`t'?cif.. :1! 'Fr�CJ"3 RE.;.SRa ji;)("}Y":i. �I,..;!�1f,,tM ) ..,s+. 1}tti� \�.l ',tra. :.�--. 1. �.^_tfY ,�{1.f'.a�'i�:'{ ',J [.� iV} ?�,.-Ff�� 1�"i t�� .� •J. r .3+ -+� ..'7'. 4. .. . +Y 1'. WILLIAMS GROUP limited /iabi/ity comha1iy�` (AD HOC) RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Investing in The Future October 30, 2002 AGENDA 1:30 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS 1:35 WHERE WE ARE AND THE FUTURE 1:45 COMMON GROUND; WHERE IS IT? Open Discussion 2:15 NEXT STEPS 2:30 ADJOURN 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J • Post Office Box 5210 • Yelm, Washington 98597 Email: williamsgroupllcOaol.com • Telephone: 360-458-8533 • Fax: 360-458-8501 ry r' "• ''... ,y'.nir •r ,,t a �3 ii FAy' r Y ' ;,.,q'E ,�``.py`:. - '. ,.til, if:YS A-., `c"., r' . ;ts +6,� i 1,y, ic. } ,r rr.. r a it`� °',k 2 r-v ..`}x {�»,�,. 'Av .';.:i s. _`"., .�, se p„k ':.e ' ,+r x t " ya'3� a •� '1 y _:r 's -1i9r{r- : ✓1,SE i„r .�i ,n�5 '.1�r,�:ti"N'�,,aY Nai'.'r•-� : '°T q�'',d #,''f •..,;r. ,yu .,<..('•�.rs 'yF y •'�, ;r r ,f'e?"i•y*, 1. )< 2 :S tsr sr is sir' eil K .t. n v�dAP "g'ra� .> :.F F r tp ;,, ; t k, :wi rd t; C t' X i ., yY Y, ^fli+,. 'rift:?r 4,• ' � �R>•^a `"f .i. y d 1 N r6 . 3 ., `rpr -_lE' 43 '/ t. �.Y rod= _ y y`,.�?y'°tit 'P 81, +7. r , •y,�c, S r q- f 1t ,`rr��y,,EE rt ^ F ,J� r5 `, 'r tsF ,.. hr -low � s y ',' 2,,g.r;� '� iekjh.. jk» v r• -x' A -.Xt �Y {` fxg -. "1 -' i,,.. r -.y iJF. . .?, b,.h M <t :-� 4 '� �.� '.ti a - - - 'S.' f ,}'a ,-t 1F { :;.;ftr -i. Tl::` 1. ,, s crt"S r~ ' hi-�x: K �? r Sr'14;'' "`� first ,< r ,h L t -.::xS,y r +` ':e' y r ....-eA b.w. - € y r.' i •d�... 4. '4-�• C v o+ ,�t, trYt,} {�:.`L? , a'ir.'. r ae't'r�„#�, t w�r4, «._y?g• "sgf..,�` ,.i;r.�.. ys:w x, m,_ '.h !.h q,.. art ZY;. 4 .7' x - MISS •`r. .Fart ',T,�. •,.K ,a y`;o` �,: ALL. :} .{, ;it,W L_*{h»' y."�-ly,�,'w s,....- .� :��y,:i>; ;N H$4�r'�,b"�T'� '',� -ZAi MY .:) 4:: t r .' ar i 'A j•,('a i*. t' .s�;` .y.- <+?•r, t.t}.atr,�, i?.a{.p....,; £ "ijy'�r',r` 'ky'�yi; -4d'r't-4 fe• -,�N sre :'- `x.{ .'..;:: 3 �; 4 k� { ? .y` � 'x r 4 r p., i�€ i S y., r i�r� e '1 i ,ef oaf c 'S , z ` � � ..� ✓.pa l s W. °:; I. � N t r ,! z C at t � R 3 sy a l t 1y ' �7 s[ k } *c i yT;" ' itr 1 s s 1 n<'r �i v a v"t [,� '.r r,r {.f -:wt �:.. 1 ,,_�if�r x Ti A� �t�wry�rt t y'k.-:s r,,, v:yr*�ps. ' Z{'' +^"`; A t t „- {j,:,:-_- :1 { Y _S f r [ r< %f,... Yr. < .r r,lr�°t F tif..e .. s �'Y+ ;4 x ,�a �R' rr� `4 I r3gJ.tS�r�4'' ,:r r t5• ° •fi'�. '-_k YF 4`tx.v c r-'..C' { +-:..�,,`r :`.J,* irt..i't,,•-Yt .�9s �9�{i.,'zyi F'•-.''�„4t �1,�,�c'Ti'r•r t� - tr''�s�L �c-#+c tc;-�k.� ta', eY. E r_+M ,-;r,t r ,:.' «.}4 Cv Aa. es+tr 4si sib y✓ DPt i ..,.,r Ts,, �t�,id4'd't.i'{:.i•LS•SA`j�S�titjt i :.. S r. - - ''.`1�'_"�'.{46- 'k t ` `y..:.< xd. r'>°ya 4^��y ; « ti d"t`(2',' ' + "5.- d ro 1 .pi'� ' xc^. , y,, s+ S r y.�� a � t _9 L d�. "h ar `' h'' `",tl,-� v .: A " t' Y.'La h:.a: ,gi'�4Y;'Ati>* .ra':.sra•^ r M'' .n .,fr.. ar r'qR. ,t' SFr r 4.f t :,. Yn h v x`. 2 rp d" La. y s § 7 s �t t.,y a `. 2 a ', a ,q_''�:b �F. r;:{} f.- �'h t;r $ r r :.i y,f i '., i r ::i. - rfE� a - r� >,a t., r �,,,�,'ti., V�,. l r .r .,>: tec r-�a. x .SS.Y. �. sr tEr,•t.T a iPr . :r> ti s -..�1 Yom' 97. -.i •>F Y k. iF a✓t sn + la +, A.ra [.:t r Sx' rF eINv `F`j t r t ei .fit '�,k tit j'r r x -:if t"a: '» *.{t$r ,ra,r,H{' >.rr 'd' '.°'�.e t�``t4 3 Y a�'�r..+"",i'�x S.,u r r a1 jvr�}� e1._: ,, '� " .� ° r*`..('�1'G:fit.?,v L�'�sr'4,.g zJ``'lid:y"a 'ki a:C�tS xq'yf t°r Y'S�s. •tC't ' " rte' 'c ••y+, r,."i` ,� ,,, T , r R a ] i } i.:9 iry z r# < St' Ed,�i r*. rk5i tse1 +S�3.ti nj '>{�;. �r� .11r .a2�Sfx,Y`#`Or -^9'r �} *Q'�t; yh. ;.d K, a. m :7j. %K:. Fs:- " tar ° Z 'i ty .� t ,+t. cu a r r�F -:..• tea,. G'}.; fi Mit,rq.A+:'">Ja"T-;-,n t i_•r F..:- a.�.. <i:S r f�, -f a M(, a-F 7 y}�-.r+y -: s ::i r S+n..,k''R s:`5:r R r •d' f;- "�..{ gy,:.a. roa w '' 4 ,y t ,. t :.�r} :.,i r i -!F-i - t '' �t;A�wa K.pa fry ^C,,,''3'.t+•:V €".hi`:t,*.r .a a. �' ''' Ei BaJ.„y'7 h'{ a; �'<ti 4 "9P 1.4 yk••'�i� ��a i. '� -.c 7 g.:.r .....i .z ai atj '� 4r 7+P y.>' _ + .:}aFk K`i, °` � �•$rr 4f1 .: �i�s�, 4Y+�.i'�MaT+�i }r.ix+i rr F(t .< e V .i•L, r ., 1. i C,;,},,J4 }, 4 rt t t":r' s9✓✓ =ice '�,fr,{:5y l.x{1 .e , L 1 } X'h t C i C �' SCf 16 11 r t s i v9 v:p,.te } .�-, i F a s r r + a # '. i 'a -,�!' {.;; r- ..r t 1Frr� : "s !'"-'=°'pY '} .-� ^ ''',(F,,.<r,1 f,. •<t �"x*' .XF , f t r { -0 a P ra ti ys rxa t j p1� va w t r f n' ;y L 1 't rx.,r 4'! i^ F 2 4,.t� d r 1 r9' ` R,F stet, , r t.Y �' F. s t w%[ 4< ^'� F 11 Y..�1. �,;,r, i�:`Fastx { :# jrs- Lice 1 f R'^e�sx -.ik `Jys-t •:'J> y. s' ` r c ^sa ..�, ` r ..r ra; a } 7 ta,i, .. S .! �qo '-L'x` N F._:F rs,^ r br S 3 L,FXF A..Y .f{.. ,*.ltrry„s ;}n ' stri.j .Y? r'a' s' y r ,i fr w r �:Jb'Y..s`3v?i 4 I .,..,Y ?,c'�y Sa 70}r, k • ,'+'F p.d} ii .T-.%,rR ,s. �, i F { r_; .y,y"fr. r1y, '^ir„PSY'J .� '',t, Y,s1 Ta-+ y:rad 5`i:.� �. .y�igJ'L.., ,,'f R ro�S'�r q... .6_$,/ 5- d ::g ,,i. .y _ r Z. t,�` !"' ` n. 4.,i' L r 1'stiq �w rA �✓{' .,y. `, g ' r r }+t-iY rt s '" x a a .4 '�sr .t,{ -.sny "x`sfi '. r ,'r. <f ,c ! i -r'%`tW y` tt iZ ..r e,- ,x a i)r t ar -.c ,rrslr "rd ,s ^Y eq Wt 7 �`rn :}rtP�" s .. ., .."rtr•�:"-syr. {�i'{f' c.d r n:a, e _ r t(c�' n _r._. -G:, r �' i r: s �'# >+,p^Y .' , t I`;>rt r,�� t a :s, �ro �ZZ'2a rr .! -F .a°• t: 3 x 161 tt y j a,Ys k x r : t sr i YL.�.t"` t' o'eaVta`A} i. trt'K�4°r�''''y�4'�'r$C:i'T[� }+Y'�Vf";'' r�-ri-P-'k,FSL�✓ t{ Ksird � Lr x a«'t"--«, wr t - a+- :=vy','� s rf:;r'r !„£`rr 'e y. t^ ',-r:. �,,x,mw.v�ia'.s;-�.'r#ri 9." ��F, �ysvo '.afy'/ �j�s,x r cr<''r"r �wt tr: rrJ' r ti r , Y ii, J. ? s i�:dy r J ,. L.'j .. XT Y'ti;.:a,a r Y .,s, rlv-,�±,t-' ,`� w�', +it' �7." k L,. 0 q°`"�,is ' ws -_?-j t.. j:�L t - 4 . ;:air L - 14111< _ ' .'"r } :.,,`g''_R'{x r?gq 't` �rn"s,�'r,.PYt" -yg xi.'rser+- , , °9+51 Yt� L,yT+`':y,,";'.�...*-.4's.e�2it.A„� i .etT-x`:r ' 'p� }., ' o ” ! �,• .-7:rrzj'-i ' ,t z r�- c ;? { ,{fie' F t iw:^: 1. .' F•'` °'t, ybY ial$:."t»g�.V.�.'(µs°"tg3^re'' i 6 e,,t yj ,,. Ev; s...ti rt 1 �.f:-4d i'. x,..lF " '�_,ri' "' �., t ez.K'P l° ,.A %t � § rt _ L 'ry r,!,�4,c's; `' e� �.rY([4�',+ I J.CY 3 1,e f.,. t t?:v xr �r r„,. d"�:.rt:i "F.7 : A' ��', r �r' _'��+=r ; y "t e a a !'..F.{� .,,, srv'* C< :, a. �QC ", tt alb e.�. dYN' �'S cy :�E'C „ 5^ :r•.4. ti h r;'r x+ 3 trY' kbeti ••S* )r a r r;,i pv.� 4tx �.da s. E �,(aa.E.P e '' a�..:. w .;� :•.{ .i wL.. r,. " a ':`6t S, e"t..,>;w n.'F r� �avf.. r r e 7 kr W. ,_ try F r�r.. f J C„` , r „ r F -.y t �'"}'Y r '#1, 'X 4:a y T'`{r• ,%i�!,,�. � ..a.. " :' '�'t -. b . :.Kra Vit.,: i`..^, t'! j f'; ,M t .,{� '�,'•, a''"Z >�y;"ajv, r'ls :,uI' 'h,-...°y"d`T 113 a{-T°?Y•i !,_'r,�• — o '�':.t �,*F . f, a� '`,..,�E,,,a.4. .�,y e- 19 k .� �..n tf ti 4 rY' ,Y',9.r+Y ,,pYa y';,- D '*[p A.Z. "L, iii..... 4. 'y Y �°.. "7, r YG 1., ,r�,t d Sy d`k'h" r T' 'R. -..r: ). y,f'Am, fit•' .�`�G�.., h.. t n", ,.r 4 T * x d!(,r--..: ', a aa'irl ,"`(w.t�.�.',rJ', .i ;'i"seal`:..e*•rt,,Zr y3 x 6•-,1 '!+�jt'"'�''.fr'" s't 'r's{. ;Y..- �7 .a: tr #j '-.Y " _ .d`: <`+11'1,y :?' a { `X t re:. ' .`£„:, r f;r ,,,w Q ) r�Y � )",,.! K ri #`'Y +".i'T.,r, ,., �i i r: ;4"a i i r r: rr' .,4. 'a;-' ,f`_ -' x R '� `r fi.FF'"- ,r"r dF' (,'rr ,>.Y1ra{y.`+ e:yr'„rvvLL �t^silk _� '+ sr 'r x S " YY :d fa,Fr a_ f-::''� ••,r�s 1,},•>last, .Y.rt n, :,.. ,f�r, y.• r_{t a�°,r-# y + P,ef�t.;^'. .fi. } " r..�.,'�''te'P.:d*',.fi•.7'+ .,;e.C+.+F >C;wF .S..- k" ^rrt > ':rl`r r�9g."a r w t:n ..,J , S.� v4, ..,�,,��,� ,F 4w.. p 4 sY ,,: ,(.� {, ,S '"hf„ '„>:xyzr:..,R(rV o- y:.Sa- x L - r n. yD V gr. ``.: h :�:'& e p d<Y $, t -5.�s �'4Fi.: aT x "' L�„j, §Soya°,'I'x as:si" 'Y;. t % - rr .+� .r-, �5.'`''r ":'cv>gi 7::"t1°1 '1 '{ ;as,,,ri. Y! :: �r 7 r `l iy 'hz < ✓ i t , 't ,., t e� d'i -4� 'Tt %'. i:,.. 'I Y t r S•f'�r r red YfiBf r r y^, kr `i r s{�a�? x'.ti,,- ,�s ,': �y w.d at;a rYrHrhar2 yr t' x " � e 4 -�;... "f 4, ,.g S� r r'k . N.�� . Y t =i "�tir U+- t k'ixf x, a .r�; + 3 r si c,a:'' q Ls E i .x:; y(,�t» i. :{^'4 '_ ` `,l °r a::3 Si hd 4 :,'ysr ra •�,q.,i!.., Nr S_ .� !. n,v v ; ,. J. y - ✓ _'.# .r i;^c .g .. .i °s 14.W., 's, .9r,f.r ?Lit. e z S :. 3 „•,,.#' a 'aCv= - P 4 is ,3 r ''_z 4" +rr . t7 '- 1v i. ?= E s ,`i,i N tzti•tJ .:?.;I� M •4:;fiar is--r.'r T a�5'�"'r r'�" + 'F�:.r.: i�:'i'a J''3 F d ts'rt t -i1 V+, *, ..,,iron t _e s : it 4r.v,e". ,%, ,..•E;�, ' t I k :3 t C{�&}'•.,T t .- ':ry , ;tM1}' - r. -`\s •a' y t :;` i '+a"y,, k.{s_ ra. '6" �fi{-t `'r i. 5� F 'i'L �' L / s Yv t � .� 4,� '••w sa K C,� ,�� k y`4a - __4 sj ,_' t i a:" , , .r� t, „� �� %�rsl Y" +d, s v ,. J.'�`:. E t t t„'rr{F'q S_4 .fir, _i�„rt i� L,,l� .+r��at Yt".�,oY iiS.•u. �,,:..4�.,s.c{g3ix.I rL rr* r{t kl'.4�.`!Sek„L `^Y '��`�} ;x_.�7r .,�FR�., s+11 <.P1.i k: €. +s'e tE.'. r l� Ys"V' s n .ry.�.r vt.L.+,�' Y q �, ,r -•F d S�` FRasu:'-' }R'.t iJ 64i j#"�' ,� h.� �s,r. s -.r d ir5',F, r#a?t �' 3agR i,.:; s4 ;t � ru ,G }rr •a "Y' - -r,,w'T. ,+''�,-i. r Jy. r •1.`,...�"'” a7 "'J "�;♦; rif r...; :}C FS.r 'f�`-id .y R V " - , *a ,,_ r F S4 :!., 1-1'''r ' r:`q t ,d>.�'.,Ya 9- ".F.r?�+.nx '' .- `ti' .its_ : -a y =c < r ° a 4 ,�-. - $�i"ry,, ..- ,r. " a S11. y'-'.,fit', ai r {'<�. 1 ro} .:s"", �J,S: :.T tr,,,,Y r'.e�,.y'l"t'" _2, L;o"'u� aS k.) '4 �c y: t'1, s s;' a r.qy�.f w. .( r a - r; 3 1'.'. s g a x A RR ;✓ � rr JJ� .i'� z y },}y. v qfz S y �,i{ �rz g' ? j r t r p Y�4'>e .Yr;)T t, . r e� •,Y r '( F• '� 'F Na. 'fir J'4. � ( },, y.{ T �f ✓'iL. :, ',1 ., y y '.lt+r+,• s(/•".: ,-I L ,f, �C ' K >..^ ?: '� '�r' b,'. t'N o Yr L'.v':✓.{ + i. _`s;k a,r ,1^ ` '""':;t:r' Sy 'y�`i -A?aL a,. .7 �,q�,,e- rs"6a -.Y" T i r .` .k• 'Yce?.,r�' ,., : Y. __ -?ti z t."C sr. >5 .M' € r n. .. t ..d t. ¢is >< �• ,F +.:K fie +., .a F�s.'6' ,5:',-i v J >g;: w t- 1.1t k}-'. e'S. �:. "t--4't° F -to{�v� '� `lid s !':fi t: 's(r .Y `t s"t' ix 'obi :r`yF s w 3" u:- 7�j..r' h -. Y r.,t'.r s C A r -, v: g t ).✓ aT w., .n S gY..7 * '�. cry , ;,' .". ,t ..i, 7c: t7' A d F,X, t g;_ *k6' yf< _ r r p'css75, �� 'r y ;.,ar„ Y'' sr' r» 3 S:t,..'+.,{ .:;` r, Y. e -r _" ' .r a ri 'aa! qw T I y g.t'�rt as }4 :•tom y a->," -> 'if 'xe4 r` db r„;e Qk�.: Vis»` $ k4- - a1 `^-:r42 ti._.z$ `;,:�k ar ( t°•if •?.. a �.�. {,r }F .[. -"Y` P�,F L`' '�.s.Ye•4. = . y>xl+ .r ?da •yf... aJJi:".. ,i A '.� �. "'F�' )•' r 'f.'' A i,''� '.1'{• A I 1R, .a, ll Y•. 'T- r Y s.a ":;;- - v:J.t'+c -vG t t��: y°�tiQ` .::,d" M' 3 }� r E ,.aY. w7i?'{'+ •, Kt'1',4af.:;7jx+r vz a` k r�,..R;_,'r,a ''* X _v .<:w, k. ,,y.h.„ S i-:ya.r k'i"!ty a,-� .:t +-� n 'r `4"r" s �, •ii .ct T .�•.Ra, ...Y�✓ r�; �6'.w. �,. `."."e 3 ''' '',, i'"-xl.ip"r w' `L S ,. r 3 .� % :. ,.{. .^. t th (1 `F`1+ x i :,_: ..x J....tt`,*9_"v46..,r •fr ?'i ',�,.,:,� r6 ! Y'°grr d� 4 ,., r 8 ,aL 4 ti l}t' ? .- �y�4„�„+x `"�:;, 5f, x r ad gti�e.� Y'S4r�4 `s7ri ryi k�� a Rri�?S t ..w� 6 r i r } € ti t f t 32 M",>y(` N ,ti ,r{ !._ ,,e a r' .:'�;'!'„1 t{x.. Ca;; b .3 4 v #vii 1 S sY + r jfy;z Y+,}r'. t t _ s _., wool;b>r,:.h 4 1.,` ;, ��f jtk .s` : �' i,r '.DRi MON,,j;.7 'e 3M ':w*n A #:^:Y 0' Y t N y l t. %�L . ,yrs ” .e 3 �p x�( t ,,,, � T;Xr r' , �a t< *;; rH rr E;t r�g �^ o}' } . ':} .s' y -„r f. ..70 •b t�^-a. 'S-,::3A a s ; ,k' it y r rti .y'w .•�4 'rt R.., r- g•,,,.1 S u .t ' S .: tr. : ,,, r ... t xa a !`r ✓ 3r,,, „�. a_.,�sr� ,.y_j, 5 -.:aa' r`G2• '.i''i`1F'*s a'-."ti,Jp'- .;w.h 4".r_`K i_..rTi[4 i.,d''-f�`'.g'g, f�- 'fLy r-,F.. ".,t t r1' -i� y'. < -s Y -.;Y air�, .`,. r ,;R ,h :.b`\r y R Ss kE✓'h>"' arvv T_.3r'f Ytyiri,�+,.'✓1 ,.,P,tssK 6t': r ^';K-x,(,'--✓,1:"K' y f Tt J ti' r "!,` ice: ? `, r _ `✓.'Y4 Lrr.ai' �`Y 3- Y'w:(s\ ..E Y ; F ,.{ : d f_I7M,( )� Y i:'ril t :'i'li �, �T., ,.t _ j C 5, r ,r.. :r� �t'�1 ,y bj..,w at� .; j 3.i3,t .1 •:.s,ES.rS •P "`'F°`JE •-t''� 1g` J = , _, ",,,% 1�1f"l;'s .r}rz^:,,E".• ':YCY e. 'tel :Y 'R1 n-. r. 1y.f'`';�''rI .�s 4 P��+&. Y �.&� .�.xR r 7�� :�� f,u r��_-, Yy�sYF � � 'rv�ra.'"1k� z`r." .•tx" ,, e ;>, ,. N r �.r� 4^ ,#. t `'.-irr-N" r #! �;,.:4 t a {%t2 ,`<,:s A ,.r$a ,}y.;�,a si o P4 A."i`, 'rL d �Ys R r Z. t ,C p �. fkq ><;' -,1;f Fir r �.. Y >.. .Y,tl r i,T+ i1 ay, ,•N'�' 7sjux, A• c `c °fit•"rtt-::r 'Y c1= _r_r y - ?'i, �, 1..,,� �h a >+" _ 14�'' t S ,*F :A Vii',.r 1 Y..'f r< %� , t ,F .,meg i t c µ 'Y� b i A 6 A`:-f �°s�.P't:"f,g y y�., i�it , 3 i' F�,y'".�,"'. '� ?�.._ t� -� E:-•7 » ,. , : *, &1_::a r z k r -1 k r,, a " .:t t 'S "1 's'w '+s y `t�'s'� •y a �F,L x" .w�., r a l ,: s. �7. 3er tl .y.!' ct x ('4x +i.'1..4a qr- f '� 1h'r'v• Ir ns�+E "'t:`,d"gg+t'<3tyYT'' t4 a-+s =' •2 � f'eia` . "';4 r .d a !"ir �'� ti a+ *�..: Gv1`} i,xi�+. �';".4 1.4. „air `•,t' *y?'F ,, i.>�« a ',;iC" 5 ..t ag 'w:.r. a4' :1',? :t t:g Z,:x CSP! W iet A ff d i a > d .>- y 3 ra :�t :> i Fr ,, r �€ f �: f•, �.�r` fc'r 's�d+,Y , +�,. "+:, .sr^{Y} y $ -c 'M, g 4 f ,°P �h> ,, mc.,e �.5 y t `xz. s -s s' :r 1 r - :r'j,, r L Z. w•i t; ?, s.: h' .a• ➢ €• n.' - .d• >. t �1 * .,. y L9' ,•• ..a `4,^. �'r. ia>1.i a,w'.4t!;,;a.. ...'. t' 1.} Wi', 1'. i y i..r}. w y.y;�r f"�,h.`'•.4r .Aly;ti' yr3°-j'",4', s> ..:b r `'`, w A,.d :°` '*a�: r.?+cS'',' t 3i i,R Y'aE..:a..f Y�R,�rM`+-� }.rt,. x;.s r a,,,'iw;.r n114' ,Ya }..:. a ,* :.d:y, F I—r3/,ti�.f,, j. �'.. .'kt'a 9x &., �� -� r„ .t- vr�'f- �� r.,, .ei �'�A x „i, rG' .r”' t 5J ," �y �M.i , aV, zy 5., � :.. r t4 :st w Ls, ;A, t '��.�w�A�,t `,��S�,�i7�r -. �, 1. Y ' `w r r ,; S;- giy t , i y>k w" : Y s y r � e r F 4. a;�`. a r,, ,+F Yis( s, z7N. P , "w LJ 6 F, r t t s . , A 3.. }i *gYr#. a4yr I tk yre S t % p < Sf'°r '}54.. R h < i n a:' y Y t` >.;# rt. t s::#_.� 2,1 '' a ';: s s rx a'._d r R b.i a°' SZ fid' 'T _lX :' e`�,,7•Ea^`{. rz rsa.rf. .,, Er fri �, #,rt'::4i'p si' j r h:;�L{ �rl'+> `«i �.ra-ry {": "Et .i.' � 6' r.5t,i'r,..", .'F : x "a,t. 4,Fr- ti l�.,yt'�✓ t f.- -{tom.' Y: is y"4. dk..:� moi,.. .11 a :'="t. Y's,4 '.'C;l a. $., .st .ru'"i t eY ie-rS,..a z .r "+,yq+;� >�{, ,v :7., < Y .,;;f. is lj£'<` „' "'F.. _ 1,'�- h,, <S� } ,::, t .i. S Z , lv.y.(r }i. ,� i g '"S - i ' : ��'E:'i <-t5y( ) ,p--.11111-r.'W F Y �- y - y`W. '* � _', t. y 1 -, ?;.w Y a;`Y.s, * n pc, t;Y-E i 'E i�.{r:•\yrr `N` •+c 19 iy'- ` :r,3"i,r•-S•.. r 7 rr_:-,tr.?ii s a :' �_� 4 t v-:x i s . .§ �` yYY f a r ' a-s,. ..�.a'"a x- ::: .�,.�.^..aiK,, lr.. `..r's""i�+r,a ;a �fi µ?_:�'. r 4, �'. 'e ,gt sz rhv.' q kM ri "yu, ui+mri,{S, �s,Yf'. .i". . {. an ♦`+`']rrw'_t.'{"a" .n;7" +• .,., v.»h s'r` ,x pyx' °.9 lteg'r ..yr,Y,"+�,5,?.�;d's;t, 3 'q. l' a; a vr.1..+Y ,<u. a.A,Es 4`,y.t -iJ'zg' Lf'! ,..u+F "+ „ y '.0 xi. P , .t r�^` _:a:k `' '.r. :a r��:.p, w.+ ,y > "° `t Z3 <e. ii+e'` w* -'r• 'b"��'Ae�, k K .,i y rf+�:"',it-jsY'a:ti ..p:•' ,wt 1. .3 ..L'J'.+r z •He_+s rr. Y y :r: a::2ir� •�;t fi�s."Y'�+..,:r kaTa-+,,�aa�.c > �` r!, `,.,,,.`if,,7. 3;''y�%'"i •` ;rr's:' !, - & : .$ s,'!� e.:R a 1_:e'„t d .�3' r.:V,S,,, . ",' xr.<r'�'1:.': i°.1s f ;.Kr.{. d+„<tr e r't`atr�g�. sF.i ,a"E• :'i 3 y� � t i!$+1' •s`n ,.maw 'x ,+,t,,�..;a•S4 g "'i&'��'.> T`+e. z.:#T:d$�.j�-%4' , ' .aR.y,;tr.,7' KYi.• z"•s;�G ts..,�r ..�.� , .<' 'y {r:'�ri`c.�F r. Y 'i::x`}< r- `b:;r •c.1+ •. - ycs.::�r7�"yFL..,ii rr'.w¢ af'°' „"¢•'v'L ^i % .i'..'�.xjE�..'r•_4-:;l� :f` �``y��.'S:; ;a .y,�,, 't!'i 4 f i 't..` F.: `c 44 ,L.,..:fir sx�:rae, a 3;,�' s;.+.�••,4° a'�. •c _ f.. SWi C •-,9* r" .�.: ' "nb;r4r.' '} $, rs'u_�.•!' s»ee,q;ani «Y :Efi {'t',n;.�,.<•, n s:Y,' t.,;'`e "^• "K''.:�{i,.r.r E,�F' � ^'F h T,'R„�`_• t�.`C:";iyS' ,d :' {3, t::'� .F e' '" ts'r _4 t 1G'�3 }-� .1..tyl ��a[�,,r t •,r+ir .m, + :t.S ^i-�°•'.� ,' �'t �}.� #S� a�.f�• Y.;.g�� y s" . ,Safi, _ ar. L ,t A,,_ ��, ;'. '_F7 `,s�. '*+,.!`!' 4 �i"a-.7:xK �,`4'F.1 T1n�""�,'4 `J, ?''h,iXf�y2 ro •+?-- .p,sL ty�,`f tr: sa ``�'`'l;-r *'W �',e,- .�J• q 'Y_ 4 ^.. ;'t r kp}.? [.r'r, r3" s ♦ •S•v'�3sp-, .q >.... �?.p +:!.Gp yr•,F�r'`,5:�.,� k 'k _'i.r. ..,,'-i{4>L�``�,,r �y%':k.}'+4' ,"� "'';.:1•', .�'p '",. �j f y "5 <:r.} t 1:., s 'b•" :>C,s` ,'£+�.. a Y�4 r �r > #.�'S �+,,�,i 7; y r 'fY.s Y' M }nt Y zYs"?7 #3' y� T •a- ya t .1�,9x". hIi k Y.•, .+- qc ,,'§r.t t Rh it.Tie ka.^''a:Fs#-'1 '} ryC' ,t��'rt x m:',;: "'N .•r"}' .'^'46-};.'!,,°3et,� _ its„ „`.9S' 1",yv - =i:.1;TF�,r..i{, s.,:�.. .�'..: s..`':r r ,S't,f`dya K:.�is:� >Wt �Ms'r`.,, s r ,� '•,y: a, ,`ICY' .` ;'• .�Z'skr : '.�_e` �_ 11 ^'zr'.e "w' •a�'.a 4s `::.i ,. p a.. '`�, y € •w^xv, t>a-:.' .r ka( y 't 3F.::-« 5, .�,y.,� r.. } 111, .. ,'d .qa �- ..$,Y.yt=�;1i, ,1 ' i :_i 4 ac k'{t �'4 I' F.. +a`Sa�'"kY'fY'hy ,Wr'1ry,'�w..rr a� Y a's as'C-, J.'i4'<;tt vt •s:F-i y'w; _� a3.tt :� ,,'k .3,, •.at.i'., ,. '.,._ ,r� Y , ,t :.' }rr.,� ;3, yn,F.� n".•su' �:.�, _ :.' y ?^ . .7a ;rt- t£' A ;'� s ^•;t fi?,,. 'O k ,`�{rF'3,_.r%'' �a�� ,�:,:e,;,.( P. „',yr - ,F,.r„ �,ea. t� .+' '�`;,k ..i,. wr .ray,yF�.wh M, r� �>,iA�C. ..� `r irtr'�wL A _:h`iEn,, .,.?.: , ,,.'y(} T`k .} L,S,t?,=' :.I`i,Y''#,f .,;r F,<•-f'K.-' ,7, g x .it`' ;�', P`"�'{ a`�P�..,c ,'t ."�',,. 1'Y?1.°: "t t� a, a % t2 y, " n�`., x yg};`r• .,,.«.'I=tS'k :�',:1 � '�,y.}'L F,.. � «.' v I+fiY�; .S � ''"1`' . .�-1� S r�.�``,6�r.,,, i. ■rAr jt ;.Y.. , r '+:,-.n.,s, r•- -r•�>� y,.; ..-° 'fqe_:.;';`"bG' .•,tR,-b r+, `. m '�,rty•... F}$,,-:u:,P.. fay-.:.n, A y'4',�`s.:' .' .F-., )..p, r }* {' •;�., /t,sr6 `c� 'bs T::`,. .,�q�'^ 's. t �'r c�'` .rt t .`ys `:e vl .5 ter. � ,..;�qhr i :!yam.a q',C! r, •x,r ire ..,F Yr v. ,r ,#i=t+rt- s.�; yTig. Ddf:'t:P, -Lz'y_:`�3" if,;. �' '.` w kr f„W k'z` '.i 4..Y r r `� :r`F".{t :}t+ f is °.fst I', 7f .7. ,a�°' 's' ,{'� 9'�? y,} ,, 'Fv;ct 1?`J -t t -:ra:1't yr- _,, �. r" •rts"r x,1:•;3 zn ' T.xs��r#' gyrs' So--Rr` ^• � ,s ,,•a-ie' 1 <"''- Y r'" 's� .zi'-' i r" t aa�s': "°. «y:t }•-.a`' xk;:' l-, , y,'` ' ^' F,F: 1 a:..� '.-xr;.a �` vrer _'•,Xs - Jam,{,2 ." .5.. : 'Y.Ya. 'f: •a-•ih..`r "�i„�,"r., ?z-'i.�i,. fr;.. _. w3. `-X 'G ..x .0 ..,tt.. } }1 z 4 ' +j )ra 7ti i x at. .i ,{, aP`-aa ; A,' e,,� 1 a 6:. L' ,i°t'.L:_ r�,rY,f-< T x •s,n4r" fir Z- j ��rTlti : 5,j. {j .cty T +,�2i `4i= < lu'& a" Ly.,,a. t,y-r `r f1'd,'-,Ct'i y}j.. ay., 3 ..`^t J"` .i.�a°`-. 'F'..a..,',:,_kr' s- '`2 " �:'�,"+S.E �t$i pt, X+§?tom- .r ,<L Y..-"f't,'+v:yy��. st , :• !'h�`. r*a. r. ��:, t iv£ ( tt 3yi y• `t i., , a x•< °4«ri. ?s 3' T ' , ' r si q.. b.r r '�s± S E ,j 3 4s f a s. v t^`;e F-_res + asp,"',:, w,. . 1'"� ;; , c;s s r ! F"s;a y� �i. .c.- � ' se's .�,..;i• 'a *,i ; .' :; ': '} rhe ` a4;#°k i' 'Cru rlE �' ur r F's,.. Fi�'�'^Z. t gt a .,t '+,`: r+.:: r .;';•i�sr e .�r,. 'y `+'_tr,,,_,F ,e OM1: <k. :v fit s+rr^ '_�` i t'}" =n.t'ai}c'. '+..:4 WS7'TMg '- rcY r ,:k.: i :i tw z .k rr- `µ'; .i) t ^ y d ,i x R :+. P ie"�,� ty. f ,' ' A' e5F`,(+. �'' 3 Z. K -rA. 'e,{ ; _.{ t 'r rp{c k ., 4 :z^ej, a v>: wx' 8 Y T�Y,i 1•t i41{ t i t }'� -� r. r, 't _T`h t 'e''} ,,� ::s v A' "� r..aa. ++a , '�`: t .xa T s,'r., s e- :x'�r.F t$.J:7. �r,�{,,r.�`'`� ... - -'; '•S`;.��r x" >' � �,*"S�.,^v,••. ..DR,'.,,i "z,.e 14�i sc'�!:�. ar�� .K�'�;tis it1'.._,Z'4,' r 3.�� ha*•� 11 *y --vi-mil rir7' l^" 19F i ` 2jt Rr S M1 .4,.i 1"�A y C 9,,,�:rs: vt�-r.,at ty a,�rk <. ,'z• , �M .'' i?'�`'�tL'+, •: c`a� r,. "� r'a c a z.'„ r `ipg 3 a. M1 ha •�. Nr.F:,, `$Y xk r '•r..: tr'>c }' 'y. -,,�g :. 2 t , iY t ..Se x �y ,•y, '}# }"� .:'-� n"� }r ,5. ° ,+s- !F 7+ '7}.1�y.r't az! k anA"4 :.{,. et:+•r.y qy r' r'" 'E' }d S '1,.`- 'T, `'` •a m F:`:fir •J' - � : : � k �� '�..:` ��i `�� ' ^r� ^�,.. •d� f'f.'�yt�'tt•,' $ ,,..v�,,cb'i r r" 4, a! X � �, .�,r K,}a 7 a.:.•,', rt t.3: � 't '+:,�w1 s .r.'). .i y+.,Y 5 t� `�a�' ?�� _way"� �?M � -_�,�-�, rt."�,.- f*}��'��sa�1�'S $R ,-� a� 3 t t i'ts t-- st Y.11..t r.. i._ - a " ,1. z .. q' -d',y y�ti 1v, � 3' g"' i t s 4 -r ra i r�., x L,.r'• Y ,t .� +t .~rc�, _.z�„fir'� :'��J ?ri'�*trx�?t; � si:` L 2;..r .,y, '�'rt''t )' :..:7 a * �4r;:;�,j,.;"^ •. S,,,y, t"'S lrat € :�a ry,kk��:.:a �r -hr Fi'w'r+-; ��7,s'�:= '.z}Ft�_x� 1 :.'ri r i'a, •'� ':; ' - Y.:,y�.`" r.�`y � it too 146' rj INA .3A 04 Lo i j f � I ( I �� i I i I i II I ; I � ' � �; � � 'v It lu, U-1 TOPIC: DATE: FILE UNDER: PAGE: r WXGAM �� I qL l r� Tb-- �..e cJr" �GJL'/ 544-i�NXo Page 1 of 1 Shelly Badger From: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com> To: "Adam Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com>; "Ray Bourne" <roymayor@ywave.com>; "Joe Williams" <willgrpjsw@aol.com>; "John Thompson" <willgrpjgt@aol.com>; "Steve Day" <sday@bpmlaw.com>; "Charlie Burnham" <cebc@deainc.com>; "Dick Roush" <dickroush@aol.com>; "Jerry Trudeau" <jerryt@gravelpits.com>; "Barrie Wilcox" <bwilcox@wilcoxfarms.com> Cc: "Allred, Ray" <AllredR@WSDOT.WA.GOV> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:14 PM Subject: Update-phone call to Ray Allred Hello, I spoke with Ray Allred, WSDOT Rail Office this morning and 1 share the following information: 1. As we discussed yesterday, he is very supportive of the success of the current Yelm-Roy Prairie Line and its connection to Tacoma Eastern. 2. He is also supportive of acquisition of the Roy-Lakeview piece and the opportunities that may open up for many agencies, businesses and even a future Sound Transit connection. 3. He will let us know if he hears anything at the State level about BNSF making a decision (or even talking about it) to abandon/scrap that portion of line. 4. He agreed that we all need to keep in contact with each other, let all the appropriate people know we are interested and that in time, "good things will happen". S. If R-51 passes next Tuesday, the Rail Office does get a chunk of $. The 500K funding for the Tacoma-Eastern connection at Miles would be restored. He emphasized that we would of course need to provide a sound business plan showing we would have traffic to justify the State's expenditure. 6. Also, if R-51 passes, there will be "discretionary" $ available (via a competitive process) that we could apply for the purchase of the Roy-Lakeview piece. 7. If R-51 is not successful, it will be critical for us to work with the State Rail Office as they present their budget to the Legislature in January. Also to connect with our local Senators and Reps. 8. Charlie, I decided to have you call Ray directly to talk with him about obtaining the car count and rates for the users of the Roy-Lakeview line. I told Ray that you would be calling him to talk about how best to obtain this info. Thanks and Happy Halloween! Shelly 10/31/2002 - PRAIRIE - - PARK - HOLDINGS, PRAIRIE• PARK - HOLDINGS, LLC FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET ro FROM: COMPANY: DATE: i OP FAX NUMB'.R: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 7 PI IONS NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NU MBLR. \Iau-L To ❑ URGL?N'r P-OR REVIEW ❑PLEASE COMMENT ❑PLEASE RLPLY ❑PLEASE RGCYCLF 701 PRAIRIE PARK LANE # J P. O . BOX 5210 YELM. WA 98597 T 360.458.7503 F 360.458.7090 T 'd TOS8-8Sb-096 s9u'PIDH ,lied aiuieud eS0 :60 20 SZ 400 BNSI, ragC 1 OL G Subj-. BNSF Date: 10/23102 5:34:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: sday@bpmiaw.com(Steve Day) To: KQ1grpjsw@ao1.com(Joe Williams(E-mail)) Joe, 1 had a very long conversation with Rich Batie this afternoon. He confirmed that although Matt Rose, the BNSF President, has publicly stated that BNSF will sell off about 1,000 miles of track per year over the next few years,that has not happened. The company culture has changed from one where the shortline development people were in charge,to one where 4 departments and Matt Rose must approve each deal. The Financial people are becoming more involved,and each department can veto a deal_ The result is that each deal they have tried to do this last year took way too much time and effort internally and there is a growing mufti-department resistance to line sales. I think Rich is saying that he can no longer wheel and deal, he needs to sell a deal internally more than In the past. The BSNF line sale process starts with Shortline internal development people looking at a line's profitability and doing initial research. When an internal decision is reached to go forward,the BNSF prepares a"white paper"internally and shares it with the affected unions. The union agreement is to give them 60 days to comment on the proposal(which almost always eliminates jobs, since shortlines do not have to offer job protection). He assured me that-confidentially-there was no white paper on the line we are interested in pursuing. He said they are all very aware of the Yelm group's interests In the line. He suggested that if they spin the line off, that they would do so all the way to Tacoma, and that the freight on the line would include some from the Lakewood industrial Park and on further towards Tacoma. He did not think BNSF would want to hang onto the military traffic, if they decided to spin It off, they would let the operator deal with it. They would still get the line-haul which is the largest portion of the revenue. He also said that BNSF does not view Miles as potential lucrative traffic sine it is aggregates over a short haul-very costly to do and poor revenue for BNSF with their cost structure. He was more concerned about the value of the Wilcox traffic but noted that they had cut their car loadings nearly in half over the period he was reviewing. From this discussion I assume two things: 1)they think the line is of borderline profitability and are considering turning this over to an operator, and 2)Rich is doing a cost study on the line currently, or he wouldn't be aware of the Wilcox loadings or Miles potential, and other details. He asked who specifically would be interested In the line because they would not want to work with a group of unaffiliated businesses-not true, but he said It. I assured him the City of Yelm is interested in owning the line and would engage an operator to carry the BNSF traffic into and off of the line. He was pleased with this because a good shortline operator would be interested if they did not have to cavy the full capital load of acquiring the ROW. We also talked about the long term passenger opportunities as the Puget Sound population shifts further south. BNSF is currently in long term planing negotiations with Sounder for Nisqually access. They do not see passenger as a business they want to get back into. (They do some in Chicago,though). I invited Rich or Johnson to come out and meet with us as a preliminary to further discussions-he didn't say no, but he didn't say yes. I suspect he has to go through the process. In summary, I think he was letting me know, between the lines,that they are thinking about this piece of property, but nothing formal yet, and that doing a deal internally has gotten a lot harder. I assume he means flexible deals are not too popular right now. I assured him we were serious players, know the economics and the internal politics we would face and are quite willing to discuss this further. He promised to*stay in touch"with me and appreciated the offer to talk further. Friday, October 25, 2002 America Online: W1Hgrpjsw � 'd TOSS-ost -09C s2uTP10H ',iJed a' J'eud eso :60 ao se 400 Office of Human Environment Washington DC 20590 7 December 2001 Dear Colleague: The U.S. Department of Transportation(USDOT) strives to enhance access, accommodations, safety,and security for people and freight in all modes of transportation. The Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Highway Administration,National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and Federal Transit Administration have contracted to develop a Rails-with-Trails report to promote information exchange aimed at enhancing safety and security for railroads and for people using trails near or adjacent to railroad rights-of-way. The first draft report,Rails-with-Trails:Lessons Learned—Literature Review, Current Practice, Conclusions, is ready for comments. Shared use paths and trails are part of the solution to enhancing pedestrian and bicyclist access. In the past several years, several paths and trails have been proposed or constructed near or within railroad and transit rights-of-way. While these Rails-with-Trails(RWT) may enhance accommodations for pedestrians and bicyclists,they raise safety and security concerns for the railroads, transit providers, and the USDOT. The USDOT recognizes that some RWTs will be built, often on rights-of-way adjacent to railroads which the railroads do not control. The USDOT intends to provide information to make sure RWTs accommodate access safely and securely both for trail users and for railroad and transit providers and their customers. The prime consultant for this effort,Alta Transportation Consulting has completed the first draft report: Rails-with-Trails:Lessons Learned—Literature Review, Current Practices, Conclusions. This report details current RWT practices, examines several existing and proposed RWTs, and provides an analysis of various RWT current practices. This report suggests best practices for consideration where trails may be located within or near railroad and transit rights-of-way. It covers planning,design, liability, operations, and maintenance. We are seeking comments on this report from concerned stakeholders. It is available for review on the Internet at www.altaplanning.com. Please provide comments by January 30, 2002,to Mia Birk, Principal, Alta Transportation Consulting, 122 NE 28h Ave, Portland OR 97232;phone 503-230-9862; fax 503-230- 9864; email: miabirk@altaplanning.com;website:www.altaplanning.com. We encourage you to send comments by email. Any comments received after January 31,2002, cannot be considered for this draft. We look forward to developing a quality document which will promote safe and secure accommodations and access within our transportation system. If you have other comments or questions about this project,please contact Christopher Douwes, Federal Highway Administration, at 202-366-5013, email: Christopher.douwes@fhwa.dot.gov, or Pamela Foggin, Federal Railroad Administration, at 202-493-6291, email:pamela.caldwell.foggin@fra.dot.gov. Sincerely, Christopher B Douwes Pamela Caldwell Foggin Community Planner Crossing Safety&Trespass Prevention Contracting Officer's Technical Representative Contracting Officer's Technical Representative Federal Highway Administration Federal Railroad Administration I Betts Patterson Mines A T T O R N E Y S !:.10 1 3 2002 Stephen L. Day Wail: sday@bpmlaw.com November 11, 2002 Ms. Shelley Badger City Administrator City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 Re: City of Yelm—Purchase of BNSF Branch Dear Ms. Badger: Enclosed for your review is our invoice for costs and services rendered in the above-referenced matter. If it is satisfactory, we ask that you kindly place the invoice for payment in the ordinary course. Thank you for allowing Betts,Patterson &Mines to assist City of Yelm in this matter. ely, Stephen L. Day SLD:sm Enclosure One Convention Place Suite 1400.701 Pike Street Seattle WA.98101-3927 A Professional Service Corporation www.bpmlaw.com.206.292.9988-fax 206 343,7053 171888/111102 1419/57820001 (206)292-9988 91-1155124 LAW OFFICES BETTS, PATTERSON & MINES, P.S. ONE CONVENTION PLACE,SUITE 1400 701 PIKE STREET SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101-3927 Ms. Shelley Badger November 11,2002 City Administrator Client/Matter No. 5782.0001 City of Yelm Statement No.448356 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 RE: City of Yelm- Purchase of BNSF Branch STATEMENT SUMMARY THROUGH OCTOBER 31,2002 Services Rendered $1,527.50 Costs Advanced 0.00 CURRENT STATEMENT $ 1,527.50 Previous Balance 56.00 Less Payments Received Since Last Statement 56.00 TOTAL BALANCE DUE Aper, ved for Payment: $ 1,527.50 ./I— Date: Project: /Yl BARS #. ' ---_--_—% BARS # REMITTANCE COPY Please return this page with your payment a (206)292-9988 91-1155124 LAW OFFICES BETTS, PATTERSON & MINES, P . S . ONE CONVENTION PLACE, SUITE 1400 701 PIKE STREET SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101-3927 Ms.Shelley Badger November 11,2002 City Administrator Client/Matter No.5782.0001 City of Yelm Statement No.448356 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O.Box 479 Yelm WA 98597 RE: City of Yelm-Purchase of BNSF Branch For PROFESSIONAL SERVICES rendered through October 31,2002: TIME DATE KEEPER HOURS DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 10/18/02 SLD 0.60 Telephone call with J.William regarding possible BNSF 141.00 sale of the Roy to Lakewood branch.Telephone calls to R. Batie,BNSF and R.Allred,WSDOT. Receive voice mail message from R. BAtie 10/23/02 SLD 1.40 Telephone call with R.Batie,BNSF about Lakewood to 329.00 Roy line. Email to J.Williams on discussion. 10/30/02 SLD 4.50 Attend meeting on possible further BNSF purchase(Roy 1,057.50 to Lakeview). PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: $ 1,527.50 SERVICES SUMMARY TIME KEEPER NAME RATE HOURS AMOUNT SLD Stephen Day 235.00 6.50 1,527.50 TOTAL FOR SERVICES 6.50 $1,527.50 STATEMENT TOTAL: $ 1,527.50 MISC. RAIL INFO. TACOMA RAIL PORT OF OLYMPIA MAILING LIST/LABELS RON ERNST, MARKETING DIR. NICK HANDY, DIRECTOR 2601 SR 509, N. FRONTAGE RD 915 WASHINGTON ST NE TACOMA WA 98421 OLYMPIA WA 98501-6931 THURSTON REG PLANNING THURSTON REG PLANNING ECONOMIC DEV COUNCIL JUDE WILLCHER THERA BLACK MIKE WILLIAMS 2404 HERITAGE CT SW 43 2404 HERITAGE CT SW 43 721 COLUMBIA SW OLYMPIA WA 98502-6031 OLYMPIA WA 98502-6031 OLYMPIA WA 98501 ECONOMIC DEV COUNCIL RAY ALLRED WSDOT, OLYMPIC REGION DENNIS MATSON WSDOT PUBLIC TRANS & RAIL DIV BRIAN MOOREHEAD 721 COLUMBIA SW PO BOX 47387 PO BOX 47440 OLYMPIA WA 98501 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7387 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7440 KEN GARMANN PO BOX 1242 YELM WA 98597 to 1, ,P City of Yelm Press Release 105 Yelm Ave. W., P.O. Box 479 360-458-3244 Yelm, WA 98597 FAX 360-458-4348 Email: shell ii.velmteixom For Immediate Release November 21, 2000 For Further Information Shelly Badger, Yelm City Administrator, 360-458-8405 City of Yelm Acquires Yelm to Roy Section of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Rail Line As of 12:01 AM,November 17, 2000, the City of Yelm acquired the 4.55 mile portion of Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line from Yelm to Roy. The acquisition concludes discussions and negotiations with BNSF that began in the fall of 1998, when the City of Yelm learned that the section of rail was being considered for abandonment. Since that time, the City formed a Rail Advisory Committee to recommend policy and aid in negotiations with BNSF. The transaction included both a purchase of property for$300,000, and a donation of additional property by BNSF. Funding for the acquisition was obtained from a grant of federal TEA-21 dollars approved by the Thurston Regional Planning Council; a grant from the Washington State Department of Transportation Essential Rail Assistance Account, funding from the Port of Olympia and other local private contributors. "Without the support of funding from all agencies from the federal, state and local levels, this acquisition would not have been possible. The City is very appreciative of the broad support this project has received", said Yelm Mayor Kathy Wolf. A temporary embargo will be placed on the line with the Association of American Railroads until such time as the City contracts with a short-line operator. The Rail Advisory Committee will meet in December to outline the next steps, including how to move forward on the hiring of an operator. "The successful acquisition of the Yelm to Roy rail line represents a unique opportunity to preserve and enhance a vital transportation link. The continued availability of freight rail service to the Yelm and Roy areas is vital to business retention and development," said Mayor Kathy Wolf. ��OF THF AQ� co of Yelm a n+ 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Y E LM Yelm, Washington 98597 WASHINGTON (360) 458-3244 January 15, 2003 Joe Williams P.O. Box 5210 Yelm, WA 98597 RE: Rail Advisory Committee appointment Dear Joe: This letter serves to document your appointment to the Rail Advisory Committee effective immediately. You will also serve as Chairman of the Committee. I look forward to a productive year with regards to planning for the future of the rail system! Sincerely: � v da ivas May6r, City of Yelm The City of Yelm is an Equal Opportunity Provider 4 M City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Boz 479 WA/NINOTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 August 7, 2001 Bill Steele 9209 Mt. View Rd SE Yelm WA 98597 Dear Mr. Steele: Please consider this letter as an official appointment to the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee (RAC). Created in 1998, the committee was established to asllst and advise the City of Yelm,Washington, in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, now known as'The Yelm Roy Prairie Line." Appointed RAC members serve at the pleasure of the Mayor responsible for their appointment. The committee meets periodically, at the call of either of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designee, or the Mayor of Roy or designee. I am confident that you will be a welcome and beneficial addition to the committee. Yopr d cat on and support of the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line is appreciated. Sin em am Rivas Mayor, City of Yelm AR/ds cc: Joe Williams, RAC Chair Yelm-Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee Q�IC , �I D AUG - 3 X01 City of Yelm P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 The Honorable Mayor Adam Rivas, I am interested in serving on our Yelm Roy Prairie Line rail advisory committee. As a long time resident of Yelm and having a life-long railroad hobby interest, I feel I can be an asset to the committee. In the late 1970's I worked part time for Weyerhaeuser Timber Company in the security division. One of my duties was patrol and incident investigations of the Companies' Chehalis Western rail lines and security of Company equipment on other lines, including the line between Yelm and Tacoma. Over the course of my work with Weyerhaeuser, I have been on most of the Yelm Roy Prairie Line. In my employment with the Department of Natural Resources, I investigated many railroad related fires and accidents. I am currently assisting a Fire District in SE Washington as an investigation resource for a railroad caused fire. As Fire Chief of Yelm Fire District my interest is in safety of crossings, and fire issues related to railroad operations. As a dedicated volunteer of the City of Yelm for many years, I feel qualified to serve on this committee. Thank you for your consideration of this letter of interest. �JI-" Bill Steele 9209 Mt. View Rd SE Yelm, WA 98597 Phone Numbers 458-3290 home 458-2799 Fire Station 701-3201 cel/pager fox • i • r a I i i 2—�Iv OF T H F AQ a M Cityo Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West Y E L M P.O. Box 479 WASHINGTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 "YELM ROY PRAIRIE LINE" RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE VACANCY The City of Yelm is soliciting applications from area residents to fill one vacancy on the"Yelm Roy Prairie Line"Rail Advisory Committee(RAC). Created in 1998,the committee was established to assist and advise the City of Yelm, Washington, in acquiring,operating and developing the acquired rail property, now known as the"Yelm Roy Prairie Line." The committee meets periodically, at the call of either of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designee or the Mayor of Roy or designee. Please submit a letter of interest to Mayor Adam Rivas, Yelm City Hall, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597, by 5:00 p.m.- Friday,August 3,2001. For additional information,please contact Shelly Badger, Yelm City Administrator, 360-458-8405. THE PRAIRIE LINE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE VACANCY The City of Yelm is soliciting applications from area residents to fill one vacancy on the Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee(RAC). Created in 1998,the committee was established to assist and advise the City of Yelm, Washington, in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property �jw,42 of as"The Yelm Roy Prairie Line." The com tee meets periodically, at the call of 42of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designe Mayor of Roy or designee,ori Please submit a letter of interest along with related applicable background to Mayor Adam Rivas,Yelm City Hall, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597, by 5:00 p.m.- date . For additional information, please contact Shelly Badger,Yelm City Administrator, 360-458-8405. -AU04: kt- em C iy DO N PUBLISH B THIS LINE Publ' ed in the Nisqually Vall News, day, date ted in public areas: Wedn day date Yelm Roy Prairie Line (YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) Meeting Tuesday, August 7, 2001, 2:00 p.m. Prairie Hotel Conference Room Called to Order Chairman Joe Williams called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Present Shelly Badger, City Administrator, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8405; Fax: 360-458-4348; Email: shelly((a,yelmiel.com Glen Cunningham, Councilman, City of Yelm President-elect, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce PO Box 2005, Yelm WA 98597 Cell: 360-789-9771; Home: 360-458-8744 Lisa Kittilsby, Miles Sand & Gravel PO Box 130, Auburn WA 98071 Adam Rivas, Mayor, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8401; Fax: 360-458-4348 Dana Spivey, Admin. Asst., City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 L Bill Steele, Fire Chief, Yelm Fire District PO Box 777, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-2799; Home: 360-458-3290 John Gibbs Thompson, Williams Group, C.O.O. Yelm City Councilman 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: AjII�rpiLci.aoI.com ; Office: 360-458-0834; Fax: 360-458-8501 Barry Wilcox, Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Road, Roy WA 98580 Joe Williams, President/CEO, Williams Group Chairman Yelm Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: will(_YMjsw(daol.com ; Office: 360-458-8533; Fax: 360-458-8501 Page 2 —Yelm Roy Prairie Line (YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) Meeting, Tuesday, August 7, 2001 Empty Board Seat Mayor Adam Rivas stated that an article was run in the Nisqually Valley News, requesting applications from area residents to fill a vacancy on the RAC, the cut-off date was Friday, August 3, 2001. One letter was received, on August 3rd from Bill Steele. An official appointment letter will be sent to Mr. Steele, but upon learning of the upcoming appointment, Chairman Williams did invite Mr. Steele to the meeting today. State Grant$ Chairman Williams reviewed the notes from the"phone call with Ray Allred"(DOT Rail Office) e-mail message. Mr. Allred was successful in putting Yelm before the state legislature, and the state did allocate $500,000 for the inter-connection of the Yelm Roy Prairie Line to the Tacoma Rail Line. The money needs to be spent this biennium,before June 30, 2003 —and before the state will actually hand over the money for the project, we must have a valid plan in place. Various options will be researched in the coming months. Update since last meeting Chairman Williams reviewed activities which have occurred since the last meeting on March 20, 2001. • Locomotive Due Diligence - in April, Mayor Rivas, Councilman Cunningham, Chairman Williams, Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail and two mechanics from Coast Engine & Equip. Co., traveled to Eastern Washington to look at some older locomotives. (Digital photos enclosed in today's packet.) The condition of the locomotives were not conducive to acquisition. • Meeting with short line operator—in May, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Tom Foster of Puget Sound Railroad, and hi-railed the Yelm Roy Prairie Line. Mr. Foster is interested in possibly submitting a proposal if the City seeks requests for proposals from private short line operators. • $500,000 grant for connection—(Copy of 7/3/01 email attached in today's packet.) • Meeting with Railroad Industries, Inc., Gary Hunter—on July 27th; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Mr. Hunter. (Brochure info. attached in today's packet.) There was discussion about possibly having Mr. Hunter work towards an agreement with BNSF to transport aggregate. Lisa Kittilsby said she knows someone who she could call to check more references on Mr. Hunter. Shelly Badger said she will call Mr. Hunter again, as well as a BNSF marketing person. • Meeting with Tacoma Rail —on July 19th; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Dennis Dean & Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail. • Light Rail Car Information—July 26, 2001 —(Photos enclosed in today's packet.) • Meeting at Miles Sand & Gravel—on August 2"d; Jerry Trudeau of Miles Sand & Gravel, Washington State Dept. of Transportation Representatives, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, John Thompson & Joe Williams met. (Minutes attached in today's packet.) Page 3 —Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee (RAC) Meeting, Tuesday, August 7, 2001 There was discussion. Bill Steele asked Chairman Williams if LASCO is a rail customer? Chairman Williams said no, but Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail has visited with LASCO and they are considering the possibilities. Review E-mail from Tacoma Rail Everyone reviewed the e-mail from Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, regarding an agreement, with Tacoma Rail as Yelm's service provider/operator. Mr. Steele asked if it would be considered a "franchise"? Chairman Williams said no, it would be an"Inter- Governmental Agreement." John Thompson stated that the inter-governmental agreement between Tacoma and Yelm would be simple, approximately 1-2 pages long— pretty straightforward. Discussion followed. Ms. Badger noted that we need to ensure in the inter-governmental agreement that BNSF has track-rights onto our line if Tacoma is V our operator. Everyone agreed that it is crucial that we hire a service provider/operator as soon as possible. Recommendations to City Council Everyone reviewed the memorandum with the recommendation for the RAC to begin negotiations with Tacoma to have Tacoma Rail serve as our service provider/operator. There was discussion. It was the consensus of the RAC to begin negotiations with Tacoma. Chairman Williams asked for a motion. Barry Wilcox made a motion, Glen Cunningham seconded the motion, to recommend that the Yelm City Council authorize the YRPL Rail Advisory Committee to begin negotiations with Tacoma for Tacoma Rail to be our service provider/operator. Motion carried. It was decided that since Chairman Williams will be out of town on August 8th, Councilman Cunningham will present the RAC's recommendation and update the city council along with Shelly Badger and Mayor Rivas. Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 2:55 p.m. Dana Spivey, for Committee Se Cecelia Jenkins O�n� bWv ��Y,z 1� ��b✓1'�Cl io �lt�' b� v . U v i Agenda 2:00—Welcome 2:05 —Empty Board Seef 2:10—Update since last meeting 2:35 —Review Memo of Understanding 2:50 -Review Email from Tacoma Rail 3:05 —Recommendations to City Council 3:25 —New Business 3:45 -Adjourn Yelm Roy Prairie Line (YRPL) Ad Hoc--Advisory Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Prairie Hotel Conference Room Called to Order President Joe Williams called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Present Ray Allred,Rail Freight Expert, Rail Office, WA State Department of Transportation Public Transportation and Rail Division 310 Maple Park Avenue SE, PO Box 47387, Olympia WA 98504-7387 Office: 360-705-7903; Fax: 360-705-6821; Pager: 360-455-2228 Shelly Badger, City Administrator, City of Yel n 105 Yelm Ave. W.,PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8405; Fax: 360-458-4348; Email: Shellyayelmtel.com Glen Cunningham, Councilman, City of Yelm President-elect, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce PO Box 2005, Yelm WA 98597 Home: 360458-8744; Cell: 360-789-9771 Dennis Dean,Deputy Director, Tacoma Rail/Tacoma Public Utilities 2601 SR 509 North Frontage Road, Tacoma WA 98421 Office: 253-502-8891; Pager: 253-405-0765; Fax: 253-922-9088 Ron Ernst, Marketing Director, Tacoma Rail/Tacoma Public Utilities Office: 253-502-8897; Cell: 425-785-8796; Fax: 253-922-9088 Cecelia Jenkins, Yelm Roy Prairie Line Advisory Committee, Secretary Executive Director, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite F, PO Box 444, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-6608; Fax: 360-458-6383; Email: infb@yrlmchamber.com Adam Rivas,Mayor,City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave. W.,PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8401; Fax: 360-458-4348 John Gibbs Thompson, Williams Group, C.O.O. Yelm City Councilman 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: willmiz aolsom; Office: 360-458-0834; Fax: 360-458-8501 D { p9my) oftij 7.0 .x► ' (In' t ggnb=tm`"x"Attlim f:er` `a1I<::: t?il:r :��?i{T�.1;J 7: C{ { `;,'aS ' ;V'�� .`• F' .) ff .Z1 X S i:1?'i iiK`l{ . 1'' 4 s-t*R �2�izi•�=� tum ��c�a=i�t7.��Gr��:�'�,i.;�l<; lYr,rri,-��et�G :t'"►�t��f ,i t�C:f3+ S.i'`••ti�� :�..ni� S��i31"�f��fJ� .-.:i�i:i yy� f•:`Yl!)Y o U?i,l �T'=lfii i �Jtiiil, r'piw� =�c t so !tt A`rst' .'Cj:)Y xOR Oli C, .OVA.ml i' l'i c,lcR4'AW c i°a'f ,?N)S saki (N ct`.lb�itt-•�°.�'t"�ro .v�.�� ,�rjlf;,�`) ,—i'�n ..��i j��'%..t't r �,r� .".'Jtlt�� ac,"i. Xxr!:An, ": S'i5"+i.j j. 2 �rfl7«siP3 �:'7f1 f;4 i I.. 3ffn92ti Of lit; Vit~>'�` t'':`rr3 t"CX3`.°'f �, '. <c}<: tigr •3 <�Si ."3ITFs ) 1l' Ja't`yn33i]�} fry rt •r :..a;�r :?�3 ;�;7 ?s .ls 'f3 :$�) 1 its"" +�t �: ',, t ...�� OOON 30 ��':AQ" , Vhf' .8st1� k t `t' :1 tr�' �? rr �' ;�}irl +► i f3 1� ,L ?it: ; ;r •_ :{es` � i{s < TUi'?. —f�3c" : �1 � •aft?-��r�_t?r}I: : <t?zl. 0 Page 2 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc -- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Jerry Trudeau, General Manager,Miles Sand& Gravel 1201 M. Street SE,PO Box 130, Auburn WA 98071 Office: 253-922-0327, Ext. 429; Fax: 253-833-3746 Joe Williams, President/CEO, Williams Group Chairman Yelm Roy Prairie Line Advisory Committee 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J,PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: wj11Qroisw(c aol.com. Office: 360-458-8533; Fax: 360-458-8501 Rail Development- Discussion Chairman Joe Williams outlined the purpose of the meeting and immediate areas of concern that required action: • Rail Service-Miles Sand& Gravel • Rail service to Yelm's Industrial Area • Light rail services in the future ... will evolve into: - Yelm to SeaTac Services - Yelm to Frederickson Area Services • Partnering- Inter-government Partnerships - City of Yelm - WA State DOT - Miles Sand&Gravel - City of Tacoma/Tacoma Rail Mountain Division • State/Grants vs. Private/Loans Immediate Needs Discussed Miles Sand & Gravel needs to establish service from the Roy plant to Auburn and Lakewood. Miles goal was highlighted: 25 full cars shipped daily and 25 empty cars back to Roy plant daily. Advantages/Discussion: • Reduce number of trucks operating on highways • State mitigation fees for reduction of trucks. • State wants to reduce number of trucks on highway • 507 crossing ... safety • Miles largest producer of gravel on a daily basis • RFQ Process requirements vs. Intergovernmental Agreement - Intergovernmental Agreement(don't have to go out for RFQ) - Port of Tacoma(currently) --Direct negotiations --Approval of all governmental agencies involved required. a �z, ,�' -��}i.�. 5+ G"►�� i;c)tti�,laii;,<►ftl�f'S"� :iris i?�r^.ii�,r''r�{} i&;+�i3::,r j ' �< l � �j1z#.r;�. +,.f;;,i,,...tf• ij:�; �::'.F,:��J,•.1J >Es u.91jt.. to L-.,gncc uru, `�.pI.�s .�L:ic� r+,s lIc s► �T=C1;?,� !7I`rtl3}k':i `.i�,wj�[.d','!f.i�i�11�+�t�7C;ii�i t-'«! .'i ,('. ..'..;? ''�.4.s�., I.xf."+,I �'S`•�3.l�EYa31dr"iSf.Ft.�r ' lo COTI 1.1; .3� k�,' e ';;:i3� EjS11�'` �� ;'�t+i�i: ;�� M•y� :�iat'J ?;,t°ri.' �E ;{� t ( ctSt f .� s #p�r7 G IGt xw:t?rttl #fX 'p"?,:r{; biX? Inc,%'2 14V •x C ! +p i�Itiii i,7�.i�' , jt) �;.•aC'at4�I1�'�8 sji- i�;iS � f°t• r I..SF� r.'Il!.f(:gx sTi`c�:s lE�t�f�� '' ;':If i 6:k:faf fi.", if1;-�, �SiiifvirltG'�40 {;,ta5? inti°ytPcTt` i +j/�r..:£t M I rte' C i s«.stsrzi :h�s� �srtat �y fw t}ifi bn�.ix�� Ot rim wcc, �:i' }':�k" i«.i(�E...c�ny� �� + >:i�i. �+CV��0�+6G�y�f IC�'r'•, ��V��t��4SV� J' G 1 i !Y, 4 1.��jc;•:�:n�� a30' Ar:;1v '�'J'8,{�•:t'3j�S3►.t9�` ��'�j58€"i+,f•,:cC.i•�� f;J2>y�.'I'JI11t ("i1:C1A� ; •c SS`t131�' Ext IS; : : d ;3 F.s v{'TtylluN11620. "�b��;� 34' �-:.i:e,E��i$:, �.i�`.�2 �r'i';'!.�'f�� i>C.s•�� l c�+�; �_ �r�nr:�in.,��Iu�a2�s��t"�a��' a.,z+�"�-::�:�, �r•��;.�;;� :tib�� ;s��a�' Page 3 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc-- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Currently Tacoma Rail has agreement with Burlington Northern S.F. & United Pacific ... accesses to both transcontinental servers. A discussion was held regarding BNSF agreement with the City of Yelm. It was noted they may have first refusal rights in the contractual documents. (will be reviewed) The Roy Pocket Gophers and the Murray Creek (stream) that are located on the Miles property were discussed. Service currently provided for the Wilcox Farms station located in Roy was discussed. It was reported that currently 5 to 7 cars per month are shipped from the site. The planned shipment of fertilizer was discussed. The connection problems regarding reaching the Miles' Auburn plant were discussed. The Tacoma Rail Mountain Division currently does not have an agreement in place, which would provide for service to Auburn. The possibility of heading cars to BNSF for movement to Auburn was discussed. It was reported the Port of Tacoma is the main exchange site for the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division line, and they would not have a problem getting the empty cars back to the Miles facility on a daily basis. Making the turn would probably require a swing shift. The connection would take an estimated 100 trucks per day off the highway. The Frederickson site was discussed. Shipments could be connected with Puget Sound Pacific Railroad to the Grays Harbor area if looking for barge service. Questions -What does Miles want to do? • Interested in determining what it is going to take to make it work? • First interest is getting aggregate to Auburn. The group discussed the empty Shotwell Plant (176 ' & Canyon) as a possible loading site. Deadline-July I"Grant Application Items required to be in place to help support the grant application, which has a July 1g` deadline, were discussed: • Miles property deeded to City of Yelm. • Agreement in place for service. • Need plan for maintenance on line — help required. • Study needs to take place ... option on Miles property; connection portion; environmental issues (tender loving care for gophers and Murray Creek/stream) (jauq:L pia?a CS14 cat f<? ��}Cz'. �ju�l#a 11�/iat/CX C:1i �Tp{r{ k9YLTi di il`JL; l+ilS. lf3w�fi�(4tiL;cjE o ;qi'm .bwil r ra grcgcq to C4a i!q R 4su L r`tr�cy+ ;c� t ;Ia ;m r c b �f1bC?tit.� sirs %�t tlda�rt E 'Ou- j,:pscl: p s j'��:�:L„tee'.{C;.� !S:t�js.,y=at11t1f5 eV,eJf�{ II. i2 $:?li]%7 IiCl+I+�.•� >C7 :ZS`.T�.'f: '� l:,t?i.�;,� tt wig' +TFf;331Eii(<' +a },i1 41 C1Jii1 0!7CIii�. 1 t+t` e:iitij:Sf:(4G' ?r'Gtlj`i or'p—W o()jwep bc;L f1;i?•,tlF.�s61G BALs;{iSjytu�.+ 1ti'`Li:oP?.ldSa-2t1�311$ 7L:tj`s 4;? 'afaiY4F►c � �'1a111�}, C?t i Gr' �:i3 is343 kF l�i:'L ;?3e:1 � , t;i? �7 � pit j. :ie: j�•{ 0.1 I-V CitC l aC t:yt�u t'JX WC .. 3(;C)g U rrft�f?fFtY;�Jt1; D11.►Mll 10lt>' vripil .} .ms✓ q f.Clr2* 'r`' sirtr•t s 'Ll' :: F• t; t+ '7 +_ r yq ♦y }�(�y y t yam. /� ,` •�yp.` p' i.er. Rrybouc�'Tj I; .�� ,y.. s,T>j*` ..litr �.'i}�tiC,;3::1.5 + � iILVi' i .�,�,�i. �.Si,.Y`,. V 1ft #r.4?✓ 1J'.7 .4'�) ]id}12.�JT V�1�Y�'fy1L,T l: ,. �:..'i�,J 'tt:i11I'�:u U- ,s 0, io Cy ?iii j x �.N .,;G' E;j i r.,. •, U-14510,14 cl Zd (`•(i11.Ci x, t1C tTj' �,.,.".. a� a}:., :.'�i`.ii;C•:: ti�.2:�'1.Y*iS,�C i�.S�C�:�1"t!'?'wC�" /�� .i 1a)i,44q {.I •t�agru qtz it) �� Irene jX.i. Rar?�11.1�.��i .:S Lt� ,��1•..LiFnn� �.i.�i3.�.,iS�;. 11i- j u,Y. v-wi :-Al CiA3t�t:L� C11 to ' ,{ '.lIf i.1 ' L1i1a �{`.ij. ou jor.,lir:' !I? j�sd} , t/,:`. ti "t st+;.2 4 .L}�r; �•i,,,i, �,'�Gik'� t�t)`i�Jfi1t `,;J;� ��iC ±�`,(!t'Ll,�i� �LC�;L ar�:�:;zLyt+ phi;"aj �i.£ sC}f;`,t,C;� d'•„ L�a'a y�,�b��z 3 iu i:al:1•::s.ft :,�1if i�.`+"� r,' ?Sr1 ti} t1;J �; /.�. ri 1t;�Ctg i-iG.t, tt1'7}. aAC tlLn Lw.4Si`C�ij r sbcru=42 'Q C# (attt.l;r lea ; t, c,ni:rs;'�fff i,l v(;o'uju 1ti 7i j i!`.;7 s3 �r,1iJ`°;Iii IAiS ' :s"ft�E E i} ti i.=?: Ji(l'It�JU3 'fir' ! =a 4;q bac..iI x. ' ^u lirt�;+ t�Z";uy` `i+1,Af7� t Page 4 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc -- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Studv Possible agencies for the study/survey project were discussed: • David Evans & Associate • Harris Group • HDR- Bellevue (Wayne Short) • Strategies &Associates(Ron Ernst) • Companies from California trying to break into Washington market. The importance of working with a group that understands the importance of the environmental concerns as well as railroad needs. Next Steps • Ron Ernst will get names to Jerry Trudeau • Ray Allred will get grant application to Joe Williams & Shelly Badger. • Target concerns: switch our line to Tacoma Rail Mountain Division; switching equipment replacement/repairs; crossing of 507/DOT. • Waiting: Legislators funding allocation for Freight Rail System. Funds needed estimates: $300,000 -bring railroad up to grade & sidings; $200,000 railroad crossing at 507; $600,0004700,000 grant required. 20% match needed ... land donation counts as match • Miles appeal to Pierce Co. for land use ... getting all the trucks off road key. • Interagency Agreement ... first need to address maintenance component and benefits/costs to City of Tacoma...why agreement with Yelm? Meeting with Tacoma's Public Works Director important. • Visionary ... important that all involved see what can be! • It was noted if the train service is available,the business will follow. • It is extremely important the Miles Sand & Gravel has a site that the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division can serve. • The fact that the City of Tacoma operates a not-for-profit rail line. Their rates are some of the lowest in the country. • In the long term the City of Yelm would like to see some profits come back to the City. • Tacoma Rail Tidelands Division/City of Tacoma receives 8% off top from the line. $800,000 generated to the fund off established line. • No funds received off Tacoma Rail Mountain division yet ...fledgling at this time. Potential there but has not been realized yet. • Generate rail traffic ... will generate $ ... rail asset draws business. • Mountain line operates as part of general fund ... Tidelands as utility. • Important City does not micro-manage, but oversees ... receives reports etc. 70,000 switches -Tidelands • Started rates to get volume ... 180 to 16,000 switches ... flexibility. • BN Representative - Jerry Johnson signed originally for BN & Rich Batie is whom the City of Yelm worked with during contract negotiations. j4: . _ (•.axisfl 3 �`�+'�If..��.�$� �r''.�.�SS�'�:3�X �` �f �.. rr.y{ f ,,i �1 f i __ p /��y .ryry� h yy' }}}�{la uy:� .�tr��L•..`. :. 6. ,'Ti1M; .vL tj;..�j( j ..,aa n b 1sft*�i mo:"� \.i i�":�li:•'1 .°fi.W4 h t ,.. •.4 Ul iftr.?ft mfivIrm)_3 w , odl .h4. 1 q—wrta a 6w jivi- ow I*: ; ►' zin!x!.a.t ;;•l�'ra��..�.;+�;:r;..air c�.�IS'rf�'!�'�:T• +� �r �r t�:`t e3=:�yl �. .3"1 fiFl.Y ,yit�� zz� ;t2o1litw. 1ol("j .ff.. 1.3 'rAF,y4t 1of id oojif9 i.�..=a 7. t t„ t tt`��5 7 S • T! 'r r} •fT+ -,�.. - ft:ii T41) i•'.+I ,jot t.+ol�#r +Fi€.`se`?(S1 !`liw:l . i{ {,i }lct. tcwtl$�•r7. ; i y'{1.k; 2 i'�% `i`zf7•:s."s il`�tt J:.1» :r�.lti4t : T..:+ .i €. ti�,*f a: 4 ctt�p�, .�°♦♦}}4 Yrt _".i i '^ti .e '•r! 4hT � . r^ [ 4 r, AR ...y ,...sJ;.i.:,11. WL...=r . t�y.,+"} +[,r( a"-i1 it'•. ... .vti _.#1 �'i t �'_Y�} i,f�tl f'l r`.•r 4ll.�f � ?}f. tni imlN r % -:x; :i" +M ,.j -• sf ,r',: Vii: ##�! �;a�.� �'• 3 s :�sf, � f s tfe ;,aft, -aT I OW-IJOW j—bOV sfl-INf ie.vroili'i�if.1w ktfj 50t.*Idaf iay.�91 t*,M.Z;P."ItU06111%.'),U)n nw 11 0 ;3tr, ez=iii -i t!z'Y ,vtt:t TISv! lath-1,ril-Yf}ti fi an.j.-t lo, ultI ,!• io '?V.,f `.�� lad nlii t �1`#'ftE#.x3 rts3 �ti i'?3�i G+ •3f ti,`�y#"fc�,>. � '•' {'! iZ:C� [ll'?7 +7>3i Q1+[? `s';itl ov f}t `s3, it MIIaw e"#" r ca vii ;rfi1 n??.i asluf 5dy ri y . .:7($� ul�� it#�Z; �•�'�h b�4.� r�"tl� •:tT 3ify'TE).St^..C ��;1 '-`!�.�� r. s !: t '} ` ��v3 Y bmft A t)i .9f' n ?i.lr 9L' # 1i ? ... j9'� ff ccti itis i). tiC#L+tik'r #his kYiiJ:�4; 2 ea fx.� •;: .ti=:, 1'° l°i r+ a4.r t!)\1 aid tud e'?'.+1 €!rY#i a iri+,�i'�('.. .Y. < P 1yP'L }��f.'`ii.. ...t., �• � S .i:"l� ti `E Lf7�,..Cf l- .11+,.J�C _F�! 7i�I;fSt:lJtt�� * ... +.T :1#:7<'• mac! ?;.ry i:J;37 _ . P.:s fs'::IJt:D t d?1 =�x,sY .•`._ ^' z TI7r IC:q P.-I tb 'r r!lo M 0 ♦,�}�, "q y�,,{ ,,,{' {7f�� tq '� y �'4" { .F!` i i,.tY �•'!: �1 �i e` ra�1S�`4`t �"+,a �i7:Fi.'x` f7�..'rid ..0 .11�. :f.ti �t}�. :'�f (.t..j t . � +. rr � t•7) .41 .s w� ./i�.t �, %'J} 1.r„sJ ' :,i.. `,.� 3`t,i�is r$314`•` .:'.+10e,i 31 13 Page 5 -Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc --Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 • Tacoma Rail will make the contact with BN. • Shelly will have Steve Day review the contractual agreement between BN & City of Yelm for interchange agreement as part of the sale. Any requirements need to be identified. • Shelly Badger will forward copy of the agreement to Dennis Dean. • The Roy area being withheld from the agreement was discussed ... Wilcox and Fort Lewis shipping. Chairman Joe Williams ad'ourned the meeting at 10:15 a.m. Cecelia Jenkins, ommittee Secretary *{'Y...: �; .' s �.�;;..;zn. -� ,�;•<c'.4�5 �.i;,�`�ty�';�. Y eras .��'�� •� T9 ,;�"R _ 4t, JOY- At �let;T:o,7(, ) e�,41 ,t�i�l°.F1-thoa max• .�f� .ul ;.T. t $?Y's:?ffwl(ml wt ..H1iE' + k.),�1fi"� ��1 f .ftX''/�'i i:# 1fti �3+.. t r d ;J ,•• rp #Fl 8#IY fi tit� ' :`3. 4k+Y, 1 �JITf :' • 4 ('1+7"stt z.7r t it e't «ri`i i t' �w� ?1 T°`3~.X�t 1�,J�1"t:�'Qb 1 S�>"•.{f,vri»^'+,4d'.�a t'ri'�.fW�.I.}� •y'v4 . 42 vt lk y r x x � ' - _-„ '> ,}<: �,:x Gp 7` a to �•, R a a � - t(M' '� �' � ,�+4�yr', �'E�r,v m t.+t iy,• ,,gyp �} 'T'yee4 t .�`u"t � - �' � .. a �� r € 1�•� y >a- :::1 _ P - ''� - moi' fiA 'x•^''b'cva t 4�.x-4., E ice. _ .' - � 3`�• )y, '�! � � E :�� _ _ •.�,� � +��,�w .��.APv §Y,�•l�,P-}��t'.w� a �` �"a �a � ;�' � ri ate. ' . f �. • .... _rim. .,._ .._.. ,.. .. a �...,x ,e--'f�a•r� ��a., .. ... „�S+ _ ,' ,....._ ...r.,. ... .. .. . ... _s.,, r:�:$Y'ea'�'n�ls:r_�P�� Activities since last RAC meeting inutes Locomotive Due Diligence-April 2001; Mayor Rivas, Councilman Cunningham, Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail, Two mechanics from Coast Engine &Equipment Co. &Joe Williams Meeting with short line operator- May 2001; Shelly Badger for the City Yelm; Tom Foster Puget Sound Rail Road&Joe Williams e'l0 S aD�Obo c'viU�eZTaI() Ge/sY ofE r l�i L A7-r�+ec{c Meeting witht-July 2001; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams �� f�fwt'( Gir" Meeting with Tacoma Rail-July 19, 2001; Dennis Dean and Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail, Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams (1,'0 4r"4d-"-) Light Rail Car4 -July 26, 2001; pkaf-cg- _�e,Meeting at Miles Sand& Gravel with Washington State Department of Transportation- August 2, 2001; See attached minutes Activities since last RAC meeting, 3/20/01 • Locomotive Due Diligence — in April; Mayor Rivas, Councilman Cunningham, Joe Williams, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, and two mechanics from Coast Engine & Equipment Co., traveled to Eastern Washington to look at some older locomotives/cars. • Meeting with short line operator— in May; Shelly Badger & Joe Williams met with Tom Foster of Puget Sound Railroad. • $500,000 grant for connection; (email message attached.) • Meeting with Railroad Industries, Inc., Gary Hunter— on July 27`h; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger & Joe Williams met with Mr. Hunter. • Meeting with Tacoma Rail — on July 19`h; Dennis Dean & Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met. • Light Rail Car Information — July 26, 2001; (photos available for review.) • Meeting at Miles Sand & Gravel — on August 2nd; Jerry Trudeau of Miles Sand & Gravel, WSDOT Representatives, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, John Thompson & Joe Williams all met for the meeting; (minutes from meeting attached.) Subj: Phone call with Ray Allred Date: 7/3/2001 2:01:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: shelly@yelmtel.com (Shelly Badger) Reply-to: she lly@y_e_I_mtel_com (Shelly Badger) To: willgrpjsw@aol.com (Joe Williams), AGRivas@ywave.com (Adam Rivas), wiligrpjgt@aol.com (John Thompson) Hi, I just spoke with Ray Allred, DOT, regarding the message he had left that the Legislature allocated$500,000 for the Yelm/Tacoma connection. I will share with you all the highlights: *YEAHHH, the $ is there allocated for the project, and not in the capacity where we have to compete with a bunch of other jurisdictions for it, it is there for the spending with certain conditions. *However, before the state is willing to part with it, WE must have a valid plan in place that if the connection is made, that it will be used by either Miles or another business in the Yelm Industrial Area. '"That plan could consist of a quit-claim deed from Miles for the land for the connection (WSDOT cannot spend the $unless it is on publicly-owned land, either by the City or Tacoma) and a commitment from them that they would use the line. *We also would need an agreement with either a short-line operator or the City of Tacoma that our line will be operated. *Miles will need to find a batch plant in Tacoma to make their plan work to use the Tacoma Mountain Line (I am a little fuzzy on this, I need one of you to explain this again). *$ needs to be spent this biennium before 6-30-03. *Either City of Yelm or Tacoma would be the lead on the construction project. As soon as I hear back from Adam, I will confirm the 4 of us getting together next Thursday, July 12 at 9:15 (Adam-change from 9:00 as I said in my voice mail) at City Hall to discuss next steps. "Rollin, rollin, rollin, keep those trains a'rollin...........See ya, Happy 4th of July, Shelly --------------Headers----------------------- Return-Path: <shelly@yelmtel.com> Received: from rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (rly-yc03.mail.aol,com [172.18.149.35]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v78_r3.8) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:01:38 -0400 Received: from inetl.ywave.com (inetl.yelmtel.com [65.161.32.36]) by rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (v79.20)with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYC36-0703170124; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:01:24 -0400 Received: from SUPERVISOR (ds13209.ywave.com [209.166.91.209]) by inetl.ywave.com (Postfix)with SMTP id D8F5A2CA23; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:01:22 -0700(PDT) Message-ID: <000901c10401$a9322a00$6c01a8c0@SUPERVISOR> Reply-To: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com> From: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yeimtel.com> To: "Joe Williams" <willgrpjsw@aol.com>, "Adam Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com>, "John Thompson" <willgrpjgt@aol.com> Subject: Phone call with Ray Allred Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:49:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/altemative; boundary="---=—NextPart-000-0006-01 C103C6.FC4569E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Tuesday, July 03, 2001 America Online: Willgrpjgt 7T7 "�`..�. - •# se'I� h,.r,wr�r p j "o".; .. • �,'-=;7 � lx�r�/t i?' �,�.7 � r., rbc-1�`�`^ j�., �jt ,•..,.♦ s� tV�� 7 i ,l �i r J dyy.�� xr.�,�.1�yE�A i:{Y j StAl f ov e 2. ?1q* olsa;86 fk';#'i'W",1 w.r! )PO 9i11 qn?,j..-r4 ; (XJ .batPA.Or1'. .?_;4feljZ S H u4 ,':'r�r•f! k��ifC �li�\r t 3celt # i Hw t --:1.vArt ow 6',-lYW a-f''tt Jon t!*1 i ,S'7 prj � <fYt5o�1�?1`-t,:•::Ti,..:.i!:3;!!1��IV:�tli�Jf1+�;�s;��'t S7-`f$`3'ks��2i li .f�lC., .. t�;? i..:.9">!i tit'jTtY.�#5 �M. ±'ir,f,xf!i 4'1:. st 2i t�:{} '!?( r+*3 3 1 5'•rtitfi�c,3f±}_;!!' 'i liPi!t1 �► ik��hi$1� �i9 SM ), li f if tlt°fl Hle' 7 >� 3r'3 ,j:ce li.; 'iu > t ,t#�# 'SU.E S '' 't: {:� 113r..r ts:�Sif r : _. . .St tr k1sineva$( *eh i01M 10i 391A4 mil etb "? q P?x' iTZ1{look ,iliTimoln ;; koei Yl_:if ` ,y+jK)eft �d "Itis 1sjf.) of :3'fSLk'Jt t !G ykD 4't;.10 2'!-*.,-i t)'4ri{#=f1?:fiz 6 T319tobr 1 liw 9f4EirrmiW It,1%.. -,n t!ak:';r oR.ia rvp. rf".catnu(%M!imob T Kiril wo 0 iixns flab, )Asir aT S#moOsTnl.tr 1-,,,rjo)el$i w'11:t'?)bse j ;F;s/E:aMft .ff�SGt�i5r.'f''i�t��>ff :�Ui,f� c�:3't�#^ar%:•% ; ,e:'tS f•;rs ��:;.�T�t:Ji' . ;.• } `''�Ge-;i-f "lri�e��{vN11�v e7�# �)t'�i f+(`S a-'.��tf��'w''iYf�;.e�� etc r,:...ts�_*,, ,if�i t�"fE,?�r tf" ,4am, Ak 4v."! Tr V,mwo.l€1sl f;v~ � is 1l�li *��,'.fir:1".r r 771" 9;1C1$.1i1'fT' tt#1 rn .i' t.i t. n ,?-kt7 �f�3Y1 ti3 44 SMV A OOF.�F'.tat �a� �frsa T�r�:lei 4f�tn�,+mw t�,1�y+`jJter1! r•�cM �u��; t3 • r�.,.;t�lY 1 s�{;t, L!!,"PC)�4.ijT .;,4.Z4��f3'�t}KOYtt�{�pJ 3}#� ¢ FG`sJwi T^t ajl 4�r� x s cITM.?;t#i�At(3tttJaollt � alfa (� ti ,'# > '� Y11 "• 4(YlUCt1+ :'fi� lctiV!Sra�`• `?F1't ^S� '' f Q 'J e ftrtirii ��l+� 4ltto ml tlo "xi "�»o✓ t��_;' 3�#t�.�i; #�y Memorandum To: Yelm City Council CC: Tacoma Rail,Miles Sand and Gravel,City of Roy From: Rail Advisory Committee Date: 8/6/01 Re: Yelm,Roy Prairie Line It is the hope of the Yelm Rail Advisory Committee,henceforth referred to as the RAC that this Memorandum of Understanding will frame the component issues and initiatives necessary to execute to a successful conclusion the strategic vision enunciated here in part by the RAC for the City of Yelm. It has been a stated goal of the RAC,City of Yelm, City of Roy and Miles Sand and Gravel,to create a viable rail line,which would preserve the existing rail corridor,and expand the existing rail corridor by attempting a connection to the Tacoma Rail Line through property owned by Miles Sand and Gravel. It is understood and NOT taken for granted that the success of the interconnect project occurs only by the participation of Miles Sand and Gravel. In the past Miles has demonstrated a willingness to consider allowing the interconnect to Tacoma Rail through their property south of Roy. Likewise they have a demonstrated interest in shipping aggregate by rail. We appreciate the complexities, which this initiative presents, and we understand the evolutionary nature of business and the market forces,which effect profitability on a daily basis. For this inter-connect initiative to succeed we understand that the following milestones must be successfully addressed: 1. A rail line operator must be secured which gives Miles such terms that Miles can ship aggregate by rail. 2. Miles must locate a re-load site,which facilitates economical movement of aggregates. 3. Miles and Yelm must come to an agreement in regards to Miles dedicating the rail right-of-way on their property to the City of Yelm,or Tacoma Rail. To facilitate item 41 above, it is the recommendation of the RAC that the City of Yelm enter into negotiations with the Tacoma Rail Line to be THE Service Provider for the Yelm to Roy Short Line. The RAC understands that Tacoma Rail has limited resources to apply to a currently unproductive line,and,recommends to the City of Yelm that we negotiate a subordinated fee for maintenance structure with both time and dollar limits. 1 ii i lso ni-J!t)i3Y -OT 'YlRa'i 7ti'itt~j j1:Fi*t-Ii.J rtTti('1!�k6° illiF:-„ l7if'{E?�1ti •� -va '�.'71{{1�t'l�i..F�l'F:Jrltlfl/F: �;ft�i .efi23t� 560 41i'Sif>>Vq kit^Y 1on asarts sect!'?l: 'Ini y G9}j m—Li 6.1 firdloa Ftiinrwi th f ta$ ttdbY tAtio*{oc idf.4 4j of P:V'4lisaifS bor, ju !i 1)Ji r�TSeUl 1t3'Iff`Hft i�+fit f” flF#o J)J)!j +I itt ltlffi1f3t4t`1 .� 3? i ,)' rtll'i .��Y4J If3' ��. .'!: J.3 . 4"i'��_daXiS:'r+klC'e.'+?SiSci f tg5r s3;.:if i Ri}S21i;�iJ(:3 tti�t"?%liO�CPd Si rr1' Ar":', !Jl t)f,;tFi twf;;,;Y tRJ W id'•'tfA IQ, ✓#!'),CIlWt(,t!�f`? roa}� `J`, �()tfi�t331i.r:e�.t, rthr`1t:A-%d-4. i)�?Silcin;f7;itl l,r:iy`!*aT3+a"CCe� .f)i;s (1t),'�'iifi7SC!St4r];'w':S{?`,t+7 .,'ftrr?kltt.tii(�k✓.)iE)ifti3tMdE1dF.E1 X?tFS3'�??Fii°- a� l� •t��J')r£JdeJ�;;:';�+()?,� Fi4?„r}iit%,�'ft.;li.i:i� ii!C7+7`lff�"]Ff�C5i �pl'i!#:#3tlltSf.M F StC1j1!C7'I�Y�F.' ,.,.� �-, s, 'f.`3'vti+�)e�Jrk7r,iw:l!�IyCt�':.:9SillYi;iT�ltzi:ri�:t i�i;'s.'-i+�'3t:i;it{�3t:?ij.�i`'iSFt1�'t,'..�'N•1'.�jyj,�iu�� IJI?f.+�M,1�'r"k.}�['Er^i !`! � '` ad 3+. ft '.;,vl 31 >,/+ `ii tMi)tj(3A 3 _ .i.,::Jili.i t, %•:Ti .J,..:�i ;il'.:t%ti;'� ,:'3r�t ii``5.+ :�i�;!i$3� /iiil9i?E� t �.:'335”kid`?+3�i'S';:1�,�1!i�f{Jt�1S��1:.. ,.. r, t'i.i'r nt :r$I t#.,%`.=`,fF:?iJ,i#)�iF'1i'•{;iC`F;1'%JS:�'1`r•:+9!31 t3CiSYe's~;ii>SFIt�}JtPP., .t'1579:'' 9ft3- i n t ? I+Cj- IFlt'1.tlS 2ri'�.tl�..1)'3rC S3t�31S!'rSF'E{I!'t,Jl`,rlJSi+7'i�`};tlleilb v, { c!<' ., Eit3i '2k3' lf9r �:1�:'>it( G `>:f li3'Fl.F"�'t�))1 tl'.t�.i:'?7�i:lo LitJlt� ."`t:'>:•1'i 3%:-`itli$,ax!'fjc+'9I4>ii f�tyir!+�f�31 irt1 ;`dire+r�t�iitif!:+r'Jli+w' ,, inlim'1Fi+.i1'-mr t d-N3,m,1444_mvirt rFMr?�al aYas+3x R ir)ttti5lra�wsm ls'.:mtatk;r�^iStidsai;!#Pit " tie l`T *64 u��1r.1:'rF a�3i;E� {t;tt-Ft) �'3 >i Jt7td!GiliJF1J )?9�i�3 (s1?.Sa:tS'd'i±fTi il+r :76 ftli+D.t JP!R37 pig"ttY 311tH Silt` L 'Aid., rmjo:ml -tto'MSY IQ �)K)wil ; tiwrft IF) { Wo,-r..I!tto inNYW 00 odd 1sdl'All isr,- t J�srtirnFir»:srEt tr�i ,avGtlta I�4"bii` fmmp taps. r.,;osti..i t.F:tl i:ftu>�bs7' It s::litr�tr�tsltist 9YJl31l Sono ti ftm*nu P it ail .n*Ik,owto ftswiltt 'n'd iia 2," +`4*1 't�biFi3:� ItKST:J:SiTTiTt+`K3!!J9� {Y�Ifllletj fXlft�h "7lit�#lFT:Dii 9`i.+ I�+f31 ITS19'f' tlt3 '101t)u bag-Ai vb,as6d ri!iw a Memorandum To: Yelm City Council CC: Tacoma Rail,Miles Sand and Gravel,City of Roy From: Rail Advisory Committee Date: 8/6/01 Re: Yelm,Roy Prairie Line It is the hope of the Yelm Rail Advisory Committee,henceforth referred to as the RAC that this Memorandum of Understanding will frame the component issues and initiatives necessary to execute to a successful conclusion the strategic vision enunciated here in part by the RAC for the City of Yelm. It has been a stated goal of the RAC, City of Yelm, City of Roy and Miles Sand and Gravel,to create a viable rail line,which would preserve the existing rail corridor,and expand the existing rail corridor by attempting a connection to the Tacoma Rail Line through property owned by Miles Sand and Gravel. It is understood and NOT taken for granted that the success of the interconnect project occurs only by the participation of Miles Sand and Gravel. In the past Miles has demonstrated a willingness to consider allowing the interconnect to Tacoma Rail through their property south of Roy. Likewise they have a demonstrated interest in shipping aggregate by rail. We appreciate the complexities, which this initiative presents,and we understand the evolutionary nature of business and the market forces,which effect profitability on a daily basis. For this inter-connect initiative to succeed we understand that the following milestones must be successfully addressed: 1. A rail line operator must be secured which gives Miles such terms that Miles can ship aggregate by rail. ' 2. Miles must locate a re-load site,which facilitates economical movement of aggregates. 3. Miles and Yelm must come to an agreement in regards to Miles dedicating the rail right-of-way on their property to the City of Yelm,or Tacoma Rail. To facilitate item#1 above, it is the recommendation of the RAC that the City of Yelm enter into negotiations with the Tacoma Rail Line to be THE Service Provider for the Yelm to Roy Short Line. The RAC understands that Tacoma Rail has limited resources to apply to a currently unproductive line,and,recommends to the City of Yelm that we negotiate a subordinated fee for maintenance structure with both time and dollar limits. 1 fax'ei'ifEi iitIF, :(neit;f Z:i:1i iAA"33m, ..r..a.JA: , 'rr? . r a:...) ai i m'y cam( af,_i :i:(E'J '?+i -!: era 41, .i t;:.,, .:i?i'_'•Ulir a +' +1`i}tf ''>;aa.}z.r 1r;1 .';r Vit! MN .d.`". .� ,.1 ;i. l _ , _ .. .:< la.-.. ',IP'.1_, las :`y:➢ter. hap vs, W 106 nQ rr.. 'I' m. . ,. W E On 1QUO. & 0 e7j who '{tI,dy,,,n ;";}#?f;, . .,r. - E .7,,t�f',yr•; e'.e,ily'IQ Y� 'rals.•n "�`- E: - .. .. ... .tr,.. s: ''t fi i..l i_. `y Won o S imit'}..S..ir'. not .'1 r 7 A:lcQm .: is S.v' Or W .. . . . 'i .. .1..`f: • u. -r:r. ,a 0 son". O.,;1Cf1W „ .ifT ,. :;�iw {J . , XL.,". 'Who As ivd; .% t_:i{5i ;..'wv} v '?{ ✓, Yf AT, not Q .1C. 00126vi r...k f d'N =0 &- . Q; IsTowny4 too !i r ? aarot•.mr 0 t'' . .,..f7.'-•:, wn'3 ':ia"'�"`'`Yc:Cs sli� r�,. .:a,r .�i { .E:i P:` :�:•f`;•:..�i�l��... �1 J,..., iJ1!S� .. '�?l.fi'ff'al a�t!'il}tt..f�..{{�'n: F ,'r:'3�:iVia.��_ !•�;'J'+�`,''fG i7i ii,..r.. .J: ..,�f,- .. .__ ii/a El.�• .�. ,.y3�'rj'y k.�rt•�k+�.�{,lr!4 :1�r{ .r if MIA<.':t i . W .r. E c ;AGI d vmvS Un 0411 111;.MA i..': iiS1 J„.a:; �ti. r, ) ..�.. 9S t,:: r.E E,fPr•..�� sv i+ '!�, , :. � y '- :« - t :.r1' r•:(;'.r+_E �;ri; :,r S, �,Fr 11 r.,fr; .'3ad:� 1F2`r';.f ,f :tt,. ..''�1,jPt7! a, ... ... . . _ .:3 rai. .... .1 +?{p: f 14 T.>;;a`•i .�t(j::F iY'9' .`,at. ; �-t„y,et,✓�, � !r P ��r 1.. ..,� 'i:'iii. ..!'p .�... >;i { ..r .. :? !tf.«`f r. rf ,� 3' r .):#.f`:`?1 ... ` ''c.. ,.� #.:,.i1:. ,. ldi:., . 'r1111t: �.,�}'( . , ,.' .1 '! . r;�t1'iiei";rs.�;i:f.i!•:.. _�Si MILES SAND AND GRAVEL MEETING In attendance was Jerry Trudeau from Miles Sand and Gravel, Ray Allred, Finn P. Posner, Stephen M. Anderson, Richard S. Taylor from the Washington State Department of Transportation, Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail, Joe Williams and John Thompson from The Williams Group, LLC. On 08/02/01 at 0930, the above individuals met at the office of the Miles Sand and Gravel Pit in Roy. The meeting was called by Ray Allred and hosted by Jerry Trudeau. Jerry opened the meeting by stating that 20 years ago when Frank Miles acquired the Roy property, it was always a goal to ship aggregates to their Auburn facility via rail. It has never been economically feasible. In the last three months working with Tacoma Rail as intermediary, BNSF was again approached to see if a deal could be rendered. The BNSF marketing rep quoted a per car price of $15,000.00. Miles Sand & Gravel is currently searching for a suitable trans-ship/load site in Lakewood, Tacoma or Fredrickson. Stephen Anderson charged his engineers to assist Miles in locating a suitable route between Tacoma Rail and Yelm to Roy Short Line. J. Williams expressed Yelm's desire for a Y connection to our line to facilitate "smooth transition" of rail service between Yelm and Tacoma. Anderson unconditionally supported this project and thought it was very doable. Williams provided copies of a draft memo to gain input for this document prior to issuance. The only suggested change was item 3 "If Miles' right-of-way is involved." Ray Allred stated that the potential mitigation fees for removing Miles Trucks from 507 would be $30/truck, which is roughly 300k/year for 10 years (33 tons/truck). I ,� �yi^ � _� ` ,�,:. 1�\ >♦�.� .`�,�♦ :��I �� a��a. ' *.t�ti,'j�'3 T� ,, t,�a'1 � I : .�..a�" p. �+ril+A` - IIID' \ �`� „,.� l a ..`a��1a t � e 1•. �5, r p _ S�"AIFIM N, y+ 1�_r_ #2 t 'Il ,1\ '1y 1 l� } ti.. t �� iF � I ♦ t', il■ hr1 � ..r �� • 111rrr � 1 � tY f{ f � � �•�,�"• i �•„ 'v. � �,, '♦ r'.� t �t i i � 5,, *. �v I t.a i ,ta �.. — • ti t WQ ( f ,* 1� T 8 F 4 # fJ { s 3 c yS � � k� it w4t � 1 4 x L• �' w f 1"2x a a Y'S �_. �" �$ .•` �.�,:y� ��h YN �s fl':", '•[P.. "T y� Y*"'1'" �. �y 'ri �, .r �q a {n, v Y - y ii»T � .�s 'r'x .y', •�'�� :tr �"��GF.Mf _ !�Y r�ry � Y � r IM kgR Of ,..,,fib :- ,.. �4r ::�'d .�, "•d'v�'• ,e�-...k �A � .r, .Oey •r _ t, s r: [Spv'. '�' '} �-�' ° < #t•t A rye _ N x� - � .•d'Y �':' Yn All r _ .. xtt `v;�'1v �"s6l +i�r.: �.t'�, rr- �� `� - MOdc 1}x<9'&T ,� v;• ,' ' � • .1 ro �.,. e, 'a1l�Fyr^-..;Car•.a. �'��"Sk •a Ri tv� - � �� Ti,' �i fi3�t, .'�Y` � '+[Y,�l"'iR'a w y�f�b��'.•, .. �°° x �� '�,e v� T,4 k' :' W4 � rI ,�'` ,d -�'�: '� ., tY I^ 74, a 1, mrer'r.t 5-7 41 r XI +F ,�� ? �o 1 � 1( 1 4 , Fes+ „ y�,�� , a.' a 1. Ne .. ._ '• .t. , $FiA 1 411 ;, Y' <�' �',�". .. ^ �� ,x4�` r�'`�.t,.�'�}-° - y.� ,� k'�t' '3" a �s. ��'z.,,�� a�• . ...�� n s✓S .� n 3;, '-af` h- d & m Y t•� a 'gyp y � ct,.. p.d' 's t ,t 4R�� i.�:r o �sr'�'�+• 'tc. �a ¢ � � � � X t � i m v tv° a a t �c 140, " }.yam 4 r� N r t 1 ' r lM v r �I Sr Y a. —Ilk.,' v r s. d:. r y.• ... i "w �,y`',,'^1 a ,y# r+ •N t J i".... Je '6{�1'• bR ,� �� T :ti�`.r�' � ::5` i�}! J� �. �y '�1 rr t , 1'�t �. �:,,� J A t-` � y y 3 ��,` �_ s rysL S"+ x •.�1 '� '*�'�"F �. � X t ..ti1 k�f. 41 - ty 1 .y} �•ty -#. . ayy A Q AtIl tl ,! � 'L y �fk�.iy�"'•q.!F-`. ^' 1 401 71, Iv t j1 1 a y . "�', �b '. �. r so}: �j.�. j.,'ad as � :f t _.. •. �F�.is s _ �:Ik k' f+' �. q• ' �'K Ff�§ .��.�� - �t �� „� �` .�� Y'' 6 rr ,ah ��S � +�heT- y�F'"+1F 'T'� d b r� �� ,. �a• }„*S.+ s. k � EAf 44. 40 AT OM 01 � :i� �P >• � i 0.�'fx Sjtt} d�� 'TT 4 �.1 p� � F �A`Vf f .�� al� ,.4,$.• ; �e +%�. t•', it ».�• .. .. k RIPp Al .Yk��r +� t Y t ti .L 4 55 4 � ,.,. .. .......,. .. L a +'♦ ttt � r .. . s ^P4 R ter_ ... • _ .. Y r �p i M 4 - .. - ISNi[ �•f ed PC 41 v 4 ! TA T r y, t ` : a gg M 4�; •: i., i f , I q�. i nF �J�y41yTCC ' by a 4 is �i 1 ! � v�' ;- r �, g; 3� r � -. /� f F� .,._ E �ti ^ x» , �-y` ` �, � :K � .� t�� ; ',�iri, a i wr. �.��t� i �� O�J q�F _�F � -- r� � '�, -C�i ,—� .i ��' /4 1,�'� � j� i �,_ g .M� 1... � �% E "3 J t T ¢ � ;� -�� y qq -.: v �.-'. SSSS �. , r r � �� i � � qi'. {� 3 �Y.K lhf rI T 5r r �p•k A a � All Jk 45- # y� e*!y i � t.•D!a�.�e `". .`k,3W+' t �f'Y x.. n S. a .'.. 4 b �r.�:�js ,� _ Y� �;Y`4 AF �+� VS � � t:t � w� .'..fit e` t^r'c•.'�Sy S �. 'fit �_ '� r � � �� z< }( ,.' �y� � 7,e �'fy 9' � � ;�c �'• ' � i T is - � .�f`:1." � 1 �• � �, �ry+ "'-.S �y� e .�F. ;.,,.d P >aaa ;$ v .'•„bt, -r� �« x " �"� � 2 r r •'_''�� a � 40. j 46 VI r . it a r � }a 7 * - ' ;r �n s g , G..-,ccsi y - ,f vg ''?Y qv uAd Air WIT K '' L x 1. WAN r da' � '�-• z?� ;,, S �• � ��,^ � r7"�'F��"r? �,# �P a F, � 3� �l r�� SY AV M "JurT At Ira r r{. t; fwd' r.-� �* ��,�i � 'i. ti n � ti.y �• K,.,_ �t � e of A APP owl '3 F RAILROAD INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED Gary V.Hunter Chairman oftho Board R CEO 6423 Meadow Country Drive Reno,Nevada 89509 775-825-6570 phone 775-825.6578 fax Railroad Industries is an Past Projects include: accomplished transportation • Startup of Railroads in Texas, consulting firm providing a Indiana, California, Colorado, RAILROAD cost-effective means for companies Carolinas, Oregon,Minnesota to improve their profitability and + and Canada INDUSTRIES reduce costs. INCORPORATED • Customer Surveys Conducted Railroad Industries' experience and in over 15 States and Canada knowledge in the transportation Specifically Designed to industry allows the firm to work in Increase On-fine Carloads and all areas including: Develop New Business Opportunities • Operations • Finance • Development of Acquisition • Marketing i Proposals &Business Plans • Equipment Planning for Railroads in United States, • Strategic Planning Canada,and South America • Competitive Analysis Studies for Aggregates, Gypsum Wallboard, Steel Products, Grain, and other Commodities Railroad Industries' client base • Rate Analysis&Contract Providing Cost Effective Consulting includes: ti Negotiation to Short Line Railroads, Shippers, For more information please contact. • Industrial Companies 6423 MeaV.Hunter and States for over 16 years. Meadow Country Drive • Short Line Railroads Reno,Nevada 89509 • Port Authorities 775-825-6570 • Investment Groups • Individual Investors Leslie D.H.Riehl •.� • States 190 Pacific Way Muir Beach,CA 94965 1r 415-381-8764 moi►_ i � f :t k. ` a 'Y R. "mow: r. d 3 a ry ° w Pagel of 2 Subj: City Agreement Date: 8/3/2001 1:43:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: RERNST@ci.tacoma.wa.us To: willgrpjsw@aol.com,jsw@wwwood.net CC: ddean@ci.tacoma.wa.us Drats! Seems like everyone is out of office or on vacation so I can't send you anything formal on the City agreement. Here is the challenge as I see it; 1)we both want to develop customers for your line 2)we both know we have to beat truck rates 3) it is not clear how the ROW will work out for Miles 4) neither of us have large $ to investment 5)other than Miles we don't have any immediate customers Assuming the connection gets made: Tacoma Rail responsibilities, 1) Offer common carrier service to industries on the line 2) Register a SPLC code for the Yelm line locations 3) Involve City of Yelm or Rail Group in marketing of rail services 4) Prepare marketing materials and make industry calls 5) Perform track inspections to FRA standards -at no cost to City of Yelm 6) Offer minor repair and maintenance services to City of Yelm at cost 7) Negotiate a per-car fee for each rail customer to be paid to City of Yelm based on track usage (initially this would probably be low due to need to attract customers with low freight rates 8) Ownership and maintenance of the switch connecting the two City lines 9) Hold City of Yelm harmless from acts of negligence by Tacoma Rail City of Yelm responsibilities, 1) Maintain track/bridges to agreed Federal standards 2)Assist in marketing of common carrier services 3)Assist in attracting new industries that would use rail services 4) Recognize that the value to the City of Yelm in the long term is new jobs, new taxes, new local spending The basic concept is a partnership attempting to build business by offering great service at prices based on cost-of-service rather than simply what the market will pay (although if a customer wants to pay a lot we should be willing to take the money). Give me a call if you think of something else that needs to be added. ---------------Headers -------------------- Return-Path: <RERNST@ci.tacoma.wa.us> Received: from rly-xd04.mx.aol.com (rly-xd04.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.169]) by air-xd03.mail.aoi.com (v79.27) with ESMTP id MAI LINXD37-0803164355; Fri, 03 Aug 2001 16:43:55-0400 Friday, August 03, 2001 America Online: Willgrpjsw Memorandum To: Yelm City Council tl CC: Tacoma Rail,Miles Sand and Gravel,City of Roy U � LLLrrr uuu From: Rail Advisory Committee Date: 7/24/01 Re: Yelm,Roy Prairie Line It is the hope of the Yelm Rail Advisory Committee,henceforth referred to as the RAC that this Memorandum of Understanding will frame the component issues and initiatives necessary to execute to a successful conclusion the strategic vision enunciated here in part by the RAC for the City of Yelm. It has been a stated goal of the RAC,City of Yelm,City of Roy and Miles Sand and Gravel,to create a viable rail line,which would preserve the existing rail corridor,and expand the existing rail corridor by attempting a connection to the Tacoma Rail Line through property owned by Miles Sand and Gravel. It is understood and NOT taken for granted that the success of the interconnect project occurs only by the participation of Miles Sand and Gravel. In the past Miles has demonstrated a willingness to consider allowing the interconnect to Tacoma Rail through their property south of Roy. Likewise they have a demonstrated interest in shipping aggregate by rail. We appreciate the complexities, which this initiative presents,and we understand the evolutionary nature of business and the market forces,which effect profitability on a daily basis. For this inter-connect initiative to succeed we understand that the following milestones must be successfully addressed: 1. A rail tine operator must be secured which gives Miles such terns that Miles can ship aggreea by rail. 2. Miles must locate a re-load site,which facilitates economical movement of aggregates. 3. Miles and Yelm must come to an agreement in regards to Miles dedicating the rail right-of-way on their property to the City of Yelm. To facilitate item#1 above, it is the recommendation of the RAC that the City of Yelm enter into negotiations with the Tacoma Rail Line to be THE Service Provider for the Yehn to Roy Short Line. The RAC understands that Tacoma Rail has limited resources to apply to a currently unproductive line,and,recommends to the City of Yelm that we negotiate a subordinated fee for maintenance structure with both time and dollar limits. 1 Z 'Cl T OSBBSt'09C sa i uedwo� '>{ued m u t e Jd dLZ : T 0 TO iva ul 24 01 01 : 27p Prairie Park Companies 3604588501 p. 1 � r 02_. ?' 610ADO4!O"Oid 0 AA%0800M 0 0"0*0 AD VwWA 13 MU8+Id M"Od Xpa r f1 • IN3Wd • ` LQ58"89Y(OW)XH3 KsL-9Sb(0W) L6S%dM Wl3A'OlM X09 Od 77�1 1-2zll �.` v .'rN L VI) .................... Page 1 of 1 From: Shelly Badger<shelly@yelmtel.com> To: Joe Williams <willgrpjsw@aol.com>; Adam Rivas <AGRivas@ywave.com>; John Thompson <willgrpjgt@aol.com> Date: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: Phone call with Ray Allred Hi, I just spoke with Ray Allred, DOT, regarding the message he had left that the Legislature allocated $500,000 for the Yelm/Tacoma connection. I will share with you all the highlights: *YEAHHH, the$ is there allocated for the project, and not in the capacity where we have to compete with a bunch of other jurisdictions for it, it is there for the spending with certain conditions. I�r'�`, I� *However, before the state is willing to part with it, WE must have a valid plan in place that if the connection iso, L made, that it will be used by either Miles or another business in the Yelm Industrial Area. �� *That plan could consist of a quit-claim deed from Miles for the land for the connection(WSDOT cannot spend theY� $ unless it is on publicly-owned land, either by the City or Tacoma)and a commitment from them that they would use the line. *We also would need an agreement with either a short-line operator or the City of Tacoma that our line will be operated. *Miles will need to find a batch plant in Tacoma to make their plan work to use the Tacoma Mountain Line(I am a little fuzzy on this, I need one of you to explain this again). *$ needs to be spent this biennium before 6-30-03. *Either City of Yelm or Tacoma would be the lead on the construction project. As soon as I hear back from Adam, I will confirm the 4 of us getting together next Thursday, July 12 at 9:15 (Adam-change from 9:00 as I said in my voice mail)at City Hall to discuss next steps. "Rollin, rollin, rollin, keep those trains a'rollin...........See ya, Happy 4th of July, Shelly O'L �Vjk�jty k 675 'f-M 0- e J(2 6T �M 69a� r 07/03/2001 �� ?HF p�Q� A. 9�_ Cityo Yel m 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Box 479 WA6HINOTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 Date: December 12, 2000 To: Rail Advisory Committee Members cc: Thera Black, TRPC, Ray Allred, taLie Carlson, City of Yelm From: Shelly Badger, City AdministratorRe: Walking tour of Yelm-Roy Prairie Li ) At the December 5, 2000 meeting of the RAC, it was determined that it is time to update the Track and Structures Condition Report on the line. Several of us were interested in"walking the line" along with Charlie Burnham, David Evans& Associates, so we have scheduled a time to do so. If any of you would like to walk the 4.55 stretch of rail line, now known as the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line (YRPL),please meet (with walking shoes in hand and possibly an umbrella!) at Yelm City Hall on Thursday, January 4, 2001, at 9:30 AM. Here's to a safe and happy holiday season!!! ti l . r TH a City of Yelm a M 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Box 479 WASFIINOTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 To: Rail Advisory Committee Member From: Shelly Badger, City Administrator Subject: Tuesday, December 5, 2000, 1:00 PM Meeting, Yelm City Hall Council Chambers, 105 Yelm Ave. W Date: November 28,2000 AGENDA- RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING 1. INTRODUCTIONS 2. DISCUSSION OF NEXT STEPS(PLEASE NOTE ENCLOSED MEMO FROM CHARLIE B URNHAM) 3. DEVELOPMENTOFPRESS RELEASE 4. OTHER 5. SET NEXT MEETING? 6. ADJOURN qw CX-�) � 1� Co rfi��1 • u,��p J/ �4 F (42- l v�M DM O�,tnc�-kcvAe�e c,Vr LI' Ll V-- -r-b vot dole 777 =T7,Ef "T W,r '" .A r - }..l J•F * _ �" 3�",':. mac . ��, � -'.�' # -�� v.. .:e � ,_ ;, _•ti ;�'c�. q`� -_ ffi _ r - 4 p P `,... :.:�, yc� ' �� +^ r' "�ykz�"� � ."� .Q� C 1- "�✓-,,.�ev y �� -�., �'�t.- -_.,*ts` _'. IN +Myr _e M ,y '�'y, jF. K # IN WN VIII ,*,''�°', ., p: # �y.x,`a_�r.Y fMR'�.^i-'" war''";` t '.✓.a -'3`nY ,,."4 w. ` 'R. a. thy, *1041 .- fT it .i �.q � }t' '^i•-r .Y. Y,�`' ." '' .{ i^ * pi_.sl.it :�F S�'�V - /"k- y - 6'� � y y 3 T',—h 'R 2 A iF' i yr,+".�S � ,r ` ri'+.k �.� • -_ _ 29-41 L Or AI r � � .4 't+•+ 1 t��<� 'C 9�7. r>. ,.� '�i, °�^�1x'i'r '.t' � ii.� -r ,." �4 nw AWIV— .. .- .. 1 n - , J A' 4 b olndil.�G� U7n YVILl e., 416 CA 'S C)CA CGO ayvl �Gc�u,� � S �Ul Q 8 to� v're DO Qr'l L Aq r,1C1 �1q ao 4opr J r'lM jql --/Vv W( 40 d�-M'Yls S 4V6 S-Y"Q 1,�l V21d/(Vl 1 Y2)1 P-�/Ol Sn � l � Rail Committee Meeting May 11, 1999 4:00— 5:00 PM Office of Joe Williams, Yelm Prairie Development Co. AGENDA C - ,-44)01— Call to Order—First meeting—Joe House Keeping/Committee Assignments/ Schedule next meetings—Joenft-P--*—' 4:10 to 4:30 Negotiations Update—Ken 4:30 to 4:45 Roundtable/Introduction of Dennis Dean, Tacoma R.R. —Ken 4:45 to 4:55 New Businesses 4:56 Adjourn C— L.Ls'7 —A-v> F FjWS'r C;,4w J5-t='z, u1c <L '113 �iL� Rail Advisory Committee — "The Prairie Line" Joe Williams—Committee Chair Ken Garmann—Ex Officio Member Williams Broadcasting,Inc. Public Works Director 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J City of Yelm P.O.Box 5210 P.O.Box 479 Yelm,WA 98597 Yelm,WA 98579 Phone: (360)458-8533 Phone: (360)458-8499 Fax: (360)458-8501 Fax: (360)458-4348 Mayor Kathy Wolf—Committee Co-Chair Charlie Burnham-Consultant City of Yelm David Evans&Associates P.O.Box 479 3700 Pacific Hwy E., Suite 311 Yelm,WA 98597 Tacoma,WA 98466 Phone: (360)458-8401 Phone: (253)922-9780 Fax: (360)458-4348 Fax: (253)922-9781 Councilman Glen Cunningham Steve Day-Consultant Cunningham Construction Betts,Patterson&Mines,PS P.O.Box 2005 800 Financial Center, 1215 Fourth Ave. Yelm,WA 98597Seattle,WA 98161-1090 Phone: (360)789-9771 Phone: (206)292-9988 Fax: (360)4584348 Fax: (206)343-7053 Larry Schorno Cecelia Jenkins—Committee Secretary Retired Businessman Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce 18217 Hwy 507 SE P.O.Box 444 Yelm,WA 98597 Yelm,WA 98597 Phone: (360)458-7863 Phone: (360)458-6608 Fax: (360)4584307 Fax: (360)458-8301 Mayor Joel Derefield Executive Committee: Joe Williams City of Roy Mayor Wolf P.O.Box 700 Mayor Derefield Roy,WA 98580 Phone: (253)843-1113 Fax: (253)843-0279 Budget�ommittee: Mayor Wolf /AU�r }'r" Mayor Derefield Barrie Wilcox Larry Schorno Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Road Standards Committee Lisa Kittilsby Roy,WA 98580 Barry Wilcox Phone: (360)458-7774 Glen Cunningham Fax: (360)458-6950 Lisa Kittilsby Miles Sand&Gravel P.O.Box 130 Auburn,WA 98071 Phone: (253)833-3705, Eat.408 Fax: I-(253)833-3746 . RAC MEETING MAY 11, 1999 1. CITY OF LACEY 2. RICH BATIE A) DO NOT GET IN HURRY; THE BNSF IS IN A HOLDING MODE ON SHORT LINE SALES. B) BNSF MANAGEMENT HAS LOST ITS ZEAL FOR SHORT LINE SALES. C) BNSF IS NOT INTERESTED IN PARTING WITH THE ROY TO LAKEVIEW SEGMENT. D) BNSF WILL ABANDON THE YELM TO ROY SEGMENT AND DEAL WITH THE "PRAIRIE LINE". E) BNSF IS HAVING LABOR ISSUES WITH ITS UNIONS AND WILL NOT GRANT INTERCHANGE RIGHTS UNTIL THEIR ISSUES ARE RESOLVED. 3. SENATOR GORTONS ASSISTANCE A) HE CAN HAVE SOME INFLUENCE AS CONGRESS IS WORKING ON THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD. B) HE CAN DEAL WITH PEOPLE ABOVE JERRY JOHNSON, I.E. DOUG BABB. 4. MR. DENNIS DEAN - TACOMA RAIL A) INTERCONNECT AT ROY TO THE TACOMA RAIL "MOUNTAIN DIVISION" B) BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITIES OF ROY & YELM C) COMMUTE RAIL The Olympian Dated May 7, 1999 Roundabouts again considered in Lacey "We figure we're at least a year out in dealing with the railroad," said Ritter, adding that he's frustrated because Burlington Northern management is slow to respond to his correspondence and phone calls. Rail Committee Meeting March 30, 1999 2:00—3:00 PM Yelm Prairie Hotel Conference Room AGENDA I. Where we've been—Joe Williams I1. Where we are. —Ken Garmann a.) Actions taken to date -Ken b.) Future direction of negotiations—Ken, Charlie, Steve c.) Funds recieved and dispersed- Ken 111. Where we're going—All, round table discussion a.) Political pressure?—All b.) Political contributions? - Joe IV. RAC—April meeting—Mayor Wolf a.) Members—Mayor Wolf,Mayor Derefield b.) By-laws—Joe Williams V. Conclusions and Wrap-up • CITY OF YELM RESOLUTION NO. 379 A RESOLUTION To state the guiding principles for the acquisition and use and operational oversight of the railroad branch line,the Yelm Branch Line, currently owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company;to create a Rail Advisory Committee to advise the city on the use, operation and development of the acquired property; and to provide guidance to the Director of Public Works on how to proceed; and WHEREAS, The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway(BNSF)currently operates over a railroad corridor called the Yelm Branch Line which extends from Milepost 8.55 near Lakeview on the north to mile post 25.55 in the City of Yelm on the south and has indicated its interest in discontinuing rail service over at least a part of that branch line; and WHEREAS, The City of Yelm has indicated its interest in acquiring all property interests now held by the BNSF in its Yelm Branch Line for general public welfare, economic development and investment purposes; and WHEREAS,The City of Roy has expressed its interest in participating with the City of Yelm in setting public policy for the use and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch, insofar as such use operation and development affects the City of Roy;and WHEREAS,The Yelm Chamber of Commerce has actively been supporting the public acquisition of the Yelm branch; and BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM,THE MAYOR . CONCURRING: Section 1. The Council endorses the following guiding principles in acquisition, operation and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch Line(formerly known as the Northern Pacific's Prairie Line): All BNSF property interests its Yelm Branch Line,should be acquired by the City of Yelm and after such acquisition the line of railroad shall be referred to as "The Prairie Line." The preservation and vitality of businesses located along the BNSF's Yelm Branch Line should be preserved, and additional businesses should be encouraged to locate along the line. The exploration and development of commuter rail and other passenger uses in conjunction with development of the acquired property should be encouraged. The interests of the City of Roy and its citizens will be considered in any use or development of the BNSF's Yelm Branch line, and appropriate interlocal agreements or contracts may be entered into by the two Cities to achieve and carry out mutual interests and apportion ownership, as necessary. RESOLUTI/RES.98.RES379.DOC (e) Develop an Operating Agreement which the City may use to engage the services of a competent rail operator, or operators, ensuring that such agreement will provide an operator or operators who will meet the reasonable service requests of businesses who desire common carrier rail service, that the City will remain in overall control of the properties, and that such operators will be able to bear the full expense and risk attendant with such rail operations. (f) Develop a program of active oversight of future rail operations and other property uses in the Prairie Line to ensure all such uses are in compliance with contract, safety and public use requirements. (g) Prepare and file on behalf of the City any documents necessary to carry out the acquisition and operation of The Prairie Line with the Surface Transportation Board,the Federal Railroad Administration,the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission,the Washington Department of Transportation,the Association of American Railroads, or any similar agencies or organizations. Section 5. The Council supports all progressive and safe uses of the acquired property which will benefit the general public and directs the Mayor to explore all reasonable opportunities for The Prairie Line to yield a return on the City's investment;Provided,however,that such uses must be consistent, and not interfere,with the general acquisition purpose of providing freight and passenger rail service, so long as there is a reasonable demand or potential need for such services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Yelm,that RESOLUTION 379 is hereby approved and adopted. ADOPTED this�ZI day of November 1998. z 24 9�& KA M. WOLF,MAY ATTEST: "62 AC04ES P. BENNICK, CITY CLERK RES0LUTI/RES.98/RES379.D0C 3 THE PRAIRIE LINE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY-LAWS ARTICLE 1 NAME AND PURPOSE Section 1 . NAME. This organization shall be known as The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee. ["RAC"] Section 2. PURPOSE. The RAC is established to assist and advise the City of Yelm, Washington, in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, to be known as "Thorairie Line." a l w,- Q01 Section 3. AUTHORIZATION. The RAC was established by Resolution No. 1, of the City Council of the City of Yelm, Washington, on q0 V 2y- , 1998. ARTICLE 11 MEMBERSHIP AND FUNDING Section 1 . MEMBERS. The RAC shall consist of five members as follows: - the Mayor of Yelm, Washington or his/her designee - the Mayor of Roy, Washington or his/her designee �j - two members appointed by the Mayor of Yelm !-- one member appointed by the Mayor of Roy Section 2. TERM OF SERVICE. The Mayors or their designees serve so long as the Mayor remains In elected office. The appointed members serve at the pleasure of the Mayor responsible for their appointment or his/her successor. ARTICLE III FINANCES Section 1 . FUNDING. The RAC shall be funded by an amount of up to one-half of one percent (0.5%) of any rents, profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Prairie Line. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page l Section 2. ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS. Funding shall be budgeted annually as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works of the City of Yelm. This funding, called the Administrative Fund, and its use shall be subject to review and audit. Section 3. EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT. The RAC may by majority vote reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of its members out of the Administrative Fund. The RAC members may not receive any additional compensation. ARTICLE IV DUTIES OF THE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Section 1 . GENERAL. The RAC shall consult with the Director of Public Works of the City of Yelm ["Director"] a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property In the acquired branch line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for The Prairie Line. Said rail policy shall be submitted to the City Council of Yelm for approval. Section 2. BUDGETING. The RAC shall assist the Director in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other uses of the Administrative Fund created in Article III., Section 1 . The Director shall include the RAC's proposed budget In the budget for the Department of Public Works budget for approval by the City Council of Yelm. ARTICLE V MEETINGS AND LEADERSHIP Section 1 . MEETINGS. The RAC shall meet at the call of any one of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designee; the Mayor of Roy or designee, or the Director of Public Works of Yelm. Section 2. LEADERSHIP. At its first meeting, the RAC shall designate a convener who will preside at each of the meetings and set the agenda. Section 3. NOTICE OF MEETINGS. Meetings may be called upon at least three days' notice to all Members by written communication. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 2 Section 4. COMMITTEES. The RAC may appoint committees to serve its purposes. All committees shall be answerable to the RAC. Committee members need not be members of the RAC and shall serve at its pleasure. Section 5. QUORUM. A majority of the members of the RAC shall constitute a quorum. ARTICLE VI MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 1 . CONFLICT OF INTEREST. No RAC member should take any position where a conflict of interest or bias might reasonably be thought to exist, unless the fact of such possible conflict has been fully disclosed. All activities should be conducted in a way which will give due recognition to competing points of view. Section 2. AMENDMENTS. These Bylaws may be amended at any meeting of the RAC by a vote of at least three members, provided that such proposed amendment shall first have been sent to each member at least seven days in advance of the meeting. Dated this day of 1998. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 3 TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 10/25/2002 11:14 DATE DIME 10/25 11:12 FAX N0./NAME 2538430279 DURATION 00:02:35 PAGE(S) 05 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM Pages' 7671 patelli?., it®Fax Note Ftp Im Post- � YxuvN r,0. �O t, Dphone# Co. ` ax � C F ?none# pL4 c a ` �� 44 t FRANK J.OWENS ARTHUR L.DAVIES Q W E N S DAVIES MACKIE P.S. JOHN V.LYMAN ALEXANDER W.MACKIE' A Professional Services Corporation RICHARD G.PHILLIPS.JR. BRIAN L.BUDSBERG Attorneys at Law Street address MICHAEL W.MAYBERRY 926-24th Way S.W. KIRK M.VEIS ROBERT F HAUTH Olympia,Washington 98502 MATTHEW B.EDWARDS Mailing address BURTON R.JOHNSON(1970) RFC=FIVER P.O.BOX 187 ERIK D.PRICE NOV 10 1998 Olympia,Washington 98507-0187 DAVID B.MERCHANT Phone (360)943-8320 •ALSO ADMITTED IN WASHINGTON.D.0 Facsimile (360)943-6150 BY: November 9, 1998 VIA TELEFAX 206-343-7053 Stephen L. Day Betts Patterson & Mines, P.S. 800 Financial Center 1215 Fourth Avenue Seattle, WA 98161-1090 RE: City of Yelm Dear Steve: I am enclosing some changes on your resolution. The Rail Advisory Committee is not an operating entity per se, but rather an advisory committee to the City of Yelm. As such, it would not have its own budget. Rather, I have included a marketing fund which the Rail Advisory Committee would recommend for use, but which would be included in the Public Works Director's overall budget. Thus, all funds would be budgeted, administered, and accounted for by the City. The Advisory Committee would have no corporate standing in terms of contracting or expenditures (and thus no significant risk or liability as a corporate entity). My changes are shown in redline in the attached. Very truly yours, OWENS DAVIES MACKIE, P.S. 4��v Alexander W. Mackie AWM/kr Enclosure cc: Ken Garmann w/enc Shelly Badger w/enc CA53\Ye1m\DayLt.Wpd . � f SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSED RESOLUTION ... [starting with Section 2] Section 2. A Rail Advisory Committee. A Rail Advisory Committee is established to assist acrd advise the City of Yelm in acquiring, operating and developing the Yelm Branch line. (a) The Committee shall be composed of the Mayor of Yelm,the Mayor of Roy,or their designees, and two persons appointed by the City of Yelm and one person appointed by the City of Roy, to serve at the pleasure of the respective appointing Mayor: (b) The Committee members will receive no additional compensation, except that the CitCitmay reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of the appointees out of the administrative fund established herein under the guidelines established by the City. (e) Administrative ftmd. A Section 3. Rail Marketing Fund. The Rail Advisory Committee shall advise the Public Works Director on an annual marketing budget as determined by the City of Yelm of up to '/z of 1%of any rents,profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Yelm Branch. This fund to be created annual as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works, and its use shall be subject to review and audit. The fund shall be used to promote the use of the rail line. Section 4. 3- The Director of Public Works shall: (a) Negotiate the acquisition of the Yelm Branch Line and appurtenant property with the appropriate BNSF officials and submit to the council a proposal for such acquisition. (b) Develop in consultation with the Rail Advisory Committee created herein,and submit to the Council for approval, a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property in the acquired Branch Line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for the acquired property. (c) Assist the Rail Advisory Committee in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other such uses of the Marketinl?Administrative Fund created in Section 3 , and, as part of the Public Works' normal budgeting process. the Direetar " ;;elttde the Rail Advisory Gommittee propesed budget in the Ptiblie Works bttdget for Gott approval. (d) Create a proposed bid ... [no changes to remainder of proposed resolution] CA53\Ye1m\Rai1Changes.wpd YELM CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING The Yelm City Council has scheduled a Special Study Session for Monday, November 9, 1998, at 7:00 pm, at Roy Community Center, 122 Third Street, Roy, Washington. The subject of the study session will be a presentation to the Yelm and Roy Councils concerning the possible acquisition of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Short Line between Yelm and Lakewood. For additional information, please contact Ken Garmann, Yelm Public Works Director at (360) 458-8499. If you need special accommodations to attend or participate in this meeting, please contact Betty Garrison, Roy Town Clerk, at (253) 843-1113. - Distribution: Council Packet Mailing October 22, 1998 Mayor: Kathryn M. Wolf Councilmembers: Don Miller Martha Parsons Velma Curry Glen Cunningham Adam Rivas City Administrator: Shelly A. Badger Attorney: Alexander Mackie Stephen L. Day Staff/Public Newspaper of Record: Nisqually Valley News Posted: Yelm City Hall Yelm-Timberland Library Railroad Committee Meeting Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 444, Yelm WA 98597 (360) 458-6608 Yelm/Roy Economic Development Rail Advisory Committee - `The Prairie Line ' Rail Advisory Committee Meeting November 9, 1998 Roy City Hall/Library 7:55 p.m. Present: Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 444 Yelm WA 98597 360-458-6608 Joe Williams, President Jim Arthur, Economic Development Committee Chair Cecelia Jenkins, Executive Director Miles Sand & Gravel P.O. Box 130 Auburn WA 98071 253-833-3700 Brad Barton, Operations/Maintenance Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Rd Roy WA 98580 360-458-7774 Barrie Wilcox, Owner Yelm Prairie Development Company, P.O. Box 661 Yelm WA 98597, 360-458-0834 John Thompson, Office Management City of Yeln P.O. box 479 Yelm WA 98597, 360-458-8499 Ken Garmann, Public Works Director Shelly Badger, City Administrator Glen Cunningham, Don Miller, Martha Parsons—City Council Members David Evans& Association 3700 Pacific Hwy E Ste 3 1 L Tacoma WA 98466 253- 922-9780 Charlie Burnham, Engineer(railroad engineer/planning) Betts Patterson&Mines PS 800 Financial Center, 1215 Fourth Ave Seattle WA 98161- 1090 206-292-9988 Steve Day, Attorney(specialist—railroad law) Locomotives Northwest LTD Locomotive LeasingL& Sales) PO Box 1486, Shelton. WA 98584 (360) 490-0330 Pete Replinger r Page 2 -Rail Advisory Committee Meeting, November 9, 1998 Chairman Joe Williams called the Rail Advisory Committee's meeting to order at 7:55 p.m., following the Roy City Council Study Session(Shortline Railroad—Burlington Northern/Santa Fe—Yelm City Council) held 7:00—7:50 p.m. Name of Line— 'The Prairie Line' It was noted for the record the rail line's historical name is `The Prairie Line.' Name of Committee— 'Rail Advisory Committee' The committee's name was officially established. The `Rail Advisory Committee' ... RAC. Minutes Amended The minutes of the October 16, 1998 Railroad Committee meeting were amended. [Page 4, ... some income stream for the City of Yelm.] Resolution—Draft The draft Resolution was distributed for review. Members were asked to review the resolution and contact Ken Garmann immediately with any feedback. The Resolution will be submitted to the Cities of Roy and Yelm for approval. It was reported the attorneys from both cities have spoken several times on the railroad matter. Railroad Corridor Charlie Burnham discussed the importance of the railroad corridor. It was noted that the areas that would allow for operation and expansion should not be sold. The committee discussed future expansion and development of the line. Grant Applications The current successful grants received by the City of Yelm were highlighted. The potential of Pierce County's HUD funds being applied for by the City of Roy and Thurston County funds by the City of Yelm were discussed. Draft Letters Ken Garmann will have the draft letters to be sent to the railroad regarding the acquisition of the rail line prepared by the end of next week for review. The Yelm City Council will review the draft letter and resolution at their meeting on Tuesday, November 24th. Neat Rail Advisory Committee Meetins A RAC meeting was scheduled for Friday,November 20, 1998, 2:00 p.m., Yelm Prairie Hotel's conference room. w Page 3 -Rail Advisory Committee Meeting,November 9, 1998 Tacoma Link Light Rail Transit Jim Arthur highlighted the `Tacoma Link Light Rail Transit' materials he had gathered at a recent meeting. The data was given to Cecelia Jenkins to keep on file at the Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce's office for committee review. Pete Replinger, owner of Locomotives Northwest, LTD. (Locomotive Leasing & Sales), located in Shelton was introduced. It was announced that Jim Arthur and Cecelia Jenkins had attended a meeting called by Mayor Derefield to discuss the planning for the downtown area of Roy. Barrie Wilcox discussed the prime industrial area in the downtown Roy area, and stressed the importance of protecting the water tower. The committee discussed the pending media coverage. It was agreed to make copies of any news coverage and fax copies to the other committee members. It was requested that a copy be sent to Ken Garmann immediately. Cecelia Jenkins and Ken Garmann will be working together to develop news releases for the media. The committee agreed not to answer lease questions at this time. It is important to have all the facts before promises or decisions are made. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Cecelia Jenkins, Executive Director Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce U AGENDA � i 5.00 - 5:15 Welcome, Introductions, History - J.S. Williams 5.15 - 5:30 Constructive Comments & Call to Action (Fill Out Handout) A.) City of Yelm - Mayor Wolf B.) Economic Development Council - Dennis Risdon C.) Port of Olympia - Nick HandyI V-1 3414 5:30 - 5:45 Comments from Property Owners, Consensus 5:45 - 6:00 Where we go from here - Wrap up Addresses of interest: rv"f Robert Krebs President/CEO Burlington Northern/Sante Fe Railroad u-2 2650 Lou Menk Dr. ra<") , Ft. Worth, TX 76131 Surface Transportation Board � t6 rtv� �l U.S. Department of Transportation 0 h� 1925 K St. NW Washington, D.C. 20423 James Slakey Director of Public Transportation Rail Division P.O.Box 4387 Olympia, WA 98504-7387 �/ OF THF A•Q� • a '�r C iof 'elm a M 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 YELMGTON Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 December 24, 1997 U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board 12th & Consti-tution Ave. N.W. Washington D.C. 20423 RE: BN/SFRR - Roy to Yelm Short Line Dear Board Members, Over the past several years, the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe Railroad has been in the process of discontinuing and/or abandoning the Roy to Yelm Short Line, a segment of rail 4 . 5(�miles in length. Historically, this line provided a link between the local communities of Roy, Yelm, Rainier, Tenino to the north/south mainline network. Over the years, the Yelm to Tenino segment has been abandoned to the "Rail to Trails" program, leaving only the Yelm to Roy segment to link with current mainline networks near Tacoma, Washington. The City Of Yelm' s 1995 Transportation Comprehensive Plan has identified rail transport as a key component to multi-modal freight traffic in order to reduce current highway congestion. In order to meet the goals of our plan it is imperative to keep the Roy to Yelm Short Line functional . The City in conjunction with local business and area agencies has formed a task force to develop a plan to re-establish rail service to Yelm and to promote economic development associated with such service. We have notified BN/SFRR via letter (see attached) regarding our interest in securing the inventory and operating rights to this section of rail . page 1 of 2 R--Akd pape- page 2 of 2 The City and business community feel it is imperative that an operational rail link be preserved between Yelm and Roy, on to Lakewood to enable the development of alternative multi-modal freight transport as a regional link to larger markets . If your department has any questions or comments feel free to contact my office at (360) 458-8499 . Sincerely, l Ken Garmann Public Works Director CC : Kathy Wolf , Mayor Shelly Badger, City Administrator Joe Williams, Williams Broadcasting Company Gary Beck, Yelm Chamber of Commerce Dennis Mattson, Thurston County Economic Development Council Nick Handy, Port of Olympia Ray Allred, WSDOT-Rail Shuming Yan, Thurston Regional Planning Council Memorandum Date: January 16, 1998 To: Yelm Industrial Land Owners From:Margaret Clapp Re: Area development idea Everyone seems to agree that getting more development in our industrial area would be a good thing. The jobs that would come with new tenants would help stabilize our economy and keep us from becoming just a bedroom community. As I understand it we could make our area more appealing to an outside company by: •collectively marketing the features and benefits of our industrial area •maintain those benefits ie. the rail spur •make it easier for a company to locate here A company looking to site in Yelm may have to deal with several land owners to make a deal that works for them. This could and (I would guess) has made us less attractive. We don't own any land in the industrial area at this time so I offer my idea as an outsider. Here is my suggestion: •get as many contiguous owners as possible •contribute land to a collective entity (LLC , development corp, other) •agree on contributions value or get appraisal •each land contributor gets prorated share of new entity •do a master site plan join with EDC or City or combo for a marketing effort •build some additional infrastructure To jump start activity you could even contribute a pad and build a spec building, maybe with third party developer Benefits to existing owners: •easier to sell regardless of existing property lines. •a predictable 'and realistic view of the market •all parties participate in the last "biggest" sale •a professional approach, someone else could do the work Benefits to buyer •deal with one entity to site business •some idea of adjacent development and neighbors *sophisticated companies want an easily transacted deal Comment Sheet Name: Address: Phone: Your Position On This Issue.- (supporting ssue:(supporting or non supporting) Ideas, General Comments & How You Are Willing to Participate: Chamber ol'Co�� fHPO Box 444 Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-6608 24 September, 1998 Rail Spur Committee Participants Re: Notice of Meeting Dear Participant: Thank you so much for your past participation. It is time to meet and answer all our questions in regard to the Rail Spur issue. Toward that end I have provided you with a agenda for the next Rail Spur meeting. Also enclosed is a brief biog. of our legal advisor who has been retained by the City of Yelm. Steve will be with us on the 29th to assist with any questions you might have. I look forward to seeing each of you on Tuesday,September 29, 5:45 PM, at the Prairie Hotel conference room. This looks to be a very important meeting, please mark your calendar. Sincerely, 7J.S. Williams President Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce Rail Spur Agenda Tuesday, September 29, 1998 Prairie Hotel Conference Room 5:45 PM 5:45 — Welcome, Call to order, Introductions 5:50 — Project background & Synopsis of July & 7th meeting 6:00 — Synopsis of Dialogue to B.N. 6:45 — Q&A by Charlie Burnham of Davis Evans and Associates, Inc. along with Stephen L. Day" of Betts, Patterson & Mines, P.S. 6:45— Wrap Up IN I-is MAP I I'Ar IERSON Stephen L. Day �atrvls.i sday@bpmlaw com Attorney Profiles Praci �c� f1�sc.rihtien Practice areas: Transportation and Logistics. Cnsns Stephen L. Day joined Betts, Patterson&Mines as a director and as head of the firm's Transportation and Logistics Law Mnmberships Practice Group in 1995. Educntion & !Admissions f x p e r i n ii r,� Puhlicotions He was formerly regional counsel for the Interstate Commerce Commission and directed its litigation and enforcement programs throughout 13 western states. He personally litigated both civil and criminal cases and directed a staff of litigation attorneys. Mr. Day's responsibilities included rail abandonment litigation, enforcement of trucking insurance requirements, administration of freight loss and damage claim litigation, and general oversight of the truck and rail transportation industry. During his ICC career, Mr. Day served as an attorney advisor and railroad trial attorney in Washington, DC, as a trial attorney in Atlanta, and senior trial attorney in Seattle, as regional director in San Francisco, and as regional counsel for the ICC's Western Region. "(Full Biography on Stephen Day can be obtained @ www.bpmlaw.com) 't (&/)0?cdl- /I ol 041- a (60dMIll 146 w Wd V63- &e Ct�- )'o U Dl ot" Ah P40VId, fracibv xw cwliG C/&uthpy _ C 61 (14 .a p0 0,4 um Poo d� LomJcA Pi Will 4, da� t ale 4) C,IS0 �/P1'?� GL �o►M�lvt� oC ;�►-. - o-t-� �� Dai uf aac �' , �v� rave - S r✓�- v�c�-� � � , � &Tt THS City of Yelm 4 M 105 Yelm Avenue West YELM P.O. Boz 479 W"HINmnN Yelm, Washington 98597 (360) 458-3244 September 3, 1998 Thurston Regional Planning Council 2404 Heritage Court SW Suite B Olympia,WA 98502 RE: Meritorious Grant Application-Yelm to Lakeview Burlington Northern Santa Fe Branch Line Acquisition The City of Yelm is applying for$340,000 of grant funding. The grant funds will be utilized for the acquisition, maintenance, and operation of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) branch line running from Lakeview (Lakewood) to Yelm, Washington. The approximately 15-mile long line currently carries freight traffic as far south as Roy. The portion of the line from Roy to Yelm is currently out of service due to a lack of traffic in recent years. In mid 1997, the City became aware of BNSF's desire to divest itself of the Roy-Yelm segment, either by sale or abandonment. A committee was formed to attempt to preserve rail service to Yelm and to explore utilization of the rail corridor for additional uses besides freight rail traffic. The committee has met regularly, and demonstrated community support to preserve the rail line and to .plan for its future use. A strong partnership between the City of Yelm, the Port of Olympia, the Economic Development Council of Thurston County, the Yelm Chamber of Commerce, and a number of local businesses is actively discussing acquisition with BNSF. Since the beginning of 1998,the group has commissioned an inspection and condition analysis of the line, met with officials of the BNSF, confirmed the need to preserve the line, and formed a nucleus of community members who are committing both their time and financial resources to the project. The group has come together to preserve and improve this transportation asset. The condition of the rail line is generally good along its entire length with a recommended track speed of 25 MPH. There are currently two major shippers on the line. Fort Lewis ships approximately 1000 cars per year to various destinations from their Logistics Center. Wilcox Farms receives roughly 500 cars per year at their facility in Roy. There is good potential for developing additional traffic from industrial users between Roy and Yelm. R-yckd pap- Besides the freight traffic, the line is an excellent candidate for a commuter rail operation from Yelm into Lakeview. Sound Transit has recently selected a site located immediately adjacent to the junction of the branch line with the BNSF line which will carry commuter rail into Tacoma and on to Seattle. This is an opportunity to tap into an important passenger transportation system for very modest costs. The acquisition, maintenance, and operation costs for a freight rail operation on the line have been estimated and are tabulated below. The costs for maintenance and operations represent anticipated costs for the first year of shoreline operation. Acquisition Costs $ 150,000 Maintenance of Track and Structures 150,000 Operations 100,000 Total Costs $400,000 As an indication of the level of commitment in the community, the City of Yelm has enlisted financial'support for the project from.a number of sources to provide matching funds for the grant. These committed funds are approximately 15% of the grant request amount and are well in excess of the minimum required by the program. This substantial assistance from the public and private sectors demonstrates the importance of this rail line to the communities and businesses which it serves. The matching funds for the grant are being contributed as follows. City of Yelm $ 20,000 Port of Olympia 20,000 WSDOT-Rail Program 11,500 Private Businesses Miles Sand&Gravel 2,500 Wilcox Farms 21500 Prairie Development 3500 Total Matching Funds $ 60,000 In closing, this project represents a unique opportunity to preserve and enhance a vital transportation link in Thurston County. The continued availability of freight rail service to the Yelm and Roy areas is vital to business retention and development. It can provide a multi-modal freight option. One of the existing businesses has the potential for removing 200 truck trips per day off the road network. Rail served industrial properties in the region are at a premium. Many new businesses will not even look at sites which do not have the capacity to be served by rail. Beyond the freight rail operations, this line provides the ability to connect to the commuter rail system being developed by Sound Transit. This is a unique opportunity to provide passenger rail options to an area which is experiencing fast-paced growth with its associated traffic congestion. We believe that this project is one which must be undertaken. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions,please contact my office at 360-458-8499. Sincerely, City of Yelm Ken Public Works Director CITY OF YELM RESOLUTION NO. 379 A RESOLUTION To state the guiding principles for the acquisition and use and operational oversight of the railroad branch line,the Yelm Branch Line, currently owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company; to create a Rail Advisory Committee to advise the city on the use, operation and development of the acquired property; and to provide guidance to the Director of Public Works on how to proceed; and WHEREAS,The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway(BNSF)currently operates over a railroad corridor called the Yelm Branch Line which extends from Milepost 8.55 near Lakeview on the north to mile post 25.55 in the City of Yelm on the south and has indicated its interest in discontinuing rail service over at least a part of that branch line; and WHEREAS, The City of Yelm has indicated its interest in acquiring all property interests now held by the BNSF in its Yelm Branch Line for general public welfare, economic development and investment purposes; and WHEREAS,The City of Roy has expressed its interest in participating with the City of Yelm in setting public policy for the use and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch, insofar as such use operation and development affects the City of Roy; and WHEREAS,The Yelm Chamber of Commerce has actively been supporting the public acquisition of the Yelm branch; and BE I F RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM,THE MAYOR _ CONCURRING: Section 1. The Council endorses the following guiding principles in acquisition,operation and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch Line(formerly known as the Northern Pacific's Prairie Line): All BNSF property interests its Yelm Branch Line, should be acquired by the City of Yehn and after such acquisition the line of railroad shall be referred to as "The Prairie Line." The preservation and vitality of businesses located along the BNSF's Yelm Branch Line should be preserved, and additional businesses should be encouraged to locate along the line. The exploration and development of commuter rail and other passenger uses in conjunction with development of the acquired property should be encouraged. The interests of the City of Roy and its citizens will be considered in any use or development of the BNSF's Yelm Branch line, and appropriate interlocal agreements or contracts may be entered into by the two Cities to achieve and carry out mutual interests and apportion ownership, as necessary. RESOLUTI/RES.98.RES379.DOC (e) Develop an Operating Agreement which the City may use to engage the services of a competent rail operator,or operators, ensuring that such agreement will provide an operator or operators who will meet the reasonable service requests of businesses who desire common carrier rail service, that the City will remain in overall control of the properties, and that such operators will be able to bear the full expense and risk attendant with such rail operations. (f) Develop a program of active oversight of future rail operations and other property uses in the Prairie Line to ensure all such uses are in compliance with contract, safety and public use requirements. (g) Prepare and file on behalf of the City any documents necessary to carry out the acquisition and operation of The Prairie Line with the Surface Transportation Board,the Federal Railroad Administration,the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission,the Washington Department of Transportation,the Association of American Railroads,or any similar agencies or organizations. Section 5. The Council supports all progressive and safe uses of the acquired property which will benefit the general public and directs the Mayor to explore all reasonable opportunities for The Prairie Line to yield a return on the City's investment;Provided,however,that such uses must be consistent,and not interfere,with the general acquisition purpose of providing freight and passenger rail service, so long as there is a reasonable demand or potential need for such services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Yelm,that ' RESOLUTION 379 is hereby approved and adopted. ADOPTED this .2 -d day of November 1998. KA M. WOLF, MAYCFR ATTEST: AGAES P. BENNICK, CITY CLERK RES0LUT1/RES.98/RES379.D0C 3 THE PRAIRIE LINE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY-LAWS ARTICLE NAME AND PURPOSE Section 1 . NAME. This organization shall be known as The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee. ["RAC"] Section 2. PURPOSE. The RAC is established to assist and advise the City of Yelm, Washington, in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, to be known asu The.Prairle Line. upl vin- Q01 Section 3. AUTHbRIZATION. The RAC was established by Resolution No. of the City Council of the City of Yelm, Washington, on �\10y 2y- , 1998. ARTICLE 11 MEMBERSHIP AND FUNDING Section 1 . MEMBERS. The RAC shall consist of five members as follows: - the Mayor of Yelm, Washington or his/her designee - the Mayor of Roy, Washington or his/her designee j - two members appointed by the Mayor of Yelm !L- one member appointed by the Mayor of Roy Section 2. TERM OF SERVICE. The Mayors or their designees serve so long as the Mayor remains in elected office. The appointed members serve at the pleasure of the Mayor responsible for their appointment or his/her successor. ARTICLE III FINANCES Section 1 . FUNDING. The RAC shall be funded by an amount of up to one-half of one percent (0.5%) of any rents, profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Prairie Line. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 1 Section 2. ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS. Funding shall be budgeted annually as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works of the City of Yelm. This funding, called the Administrative Fund, and its use shall be subject to review and audit. Section 3. EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT. The RAC may by majority vote reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of its members out of the Administrative Fund. The RAC members may not receive any additional compensation. ARTICLE IV DUTIES OF THE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Section 1 . GENERAL. The RAC shall consult with the Director of Public Works of the City of Yelm ["Director"] a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property in the acquired branch line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for The Prairie Line. Said rail policy shall be submitted to the City Council of Yelm for approval. Section 2. BUDGETING. The RAC shall assist the Director in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other uses of the Administrative Fund created in Article Ill., Section 1 . The Director shall include the RAC's proposed budget in the budget for the Department of Public Works budget for approval by the City Council of Yelm. ARTICLE V MEETINGS AND LEADERSHIP Section 1 . MEETINGS. The RAC shall meet at the call of any one of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designee; the Mayor of Roy or designee, or the Director of Public Works of Yelm. Section 2. LEADERSHIP. At its first meeting, the RAC shall designate a convener who will preside at each of the meetings and set the agenda. Section 3. NOTICE OF MEETINGS. Meetings may be called upon at least three days' notice to all Members by written communication. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 2 Section 4. COMMITTEES. The RAC may appoint committees to serve its purposes. All committees shall be answerable to the RAC. Committee members need not be members of the RAC and shall serve at its pleasure. Section 5. QUORUM. A majority of the members of the RAC shall constitute a quorum. ARTICLE VI MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 1 . CONFLICT OF INTEREST. No RAC member should take any position where a conflict of interest or bias might reasonably be thought to exist, unless the fact of such possible conflict has been fully disclosed. All activities should be conducted in a way which will give due recognition to competing points of view. Section 2. AMENDMENTS. These Bylaws may be amended at any meeting of the RAC by a vote of at least three members, provided that such proposed amendment shall first have been sent to each member at least seven days in advance of the meeting. Datcd this day of 1998. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 3 pf TiiE p4$ Q �^ FAx TRANSMISSION CITY OF YELM PO BOX 479 - 105 YELM AVE W YELM YELM WA 96597 W ASN.NG TON 360-456-3244 FAX: 360-456-4348 To:TD �v� Date: Fax it: ) pr � v( Pages: including this cover sheet- From-A Subject: COMMENTS: S izt, Ka-y &N me - )y o/b,( a � 7eW raisa� A3Wf *' If you do not receive all copies or any copy is not legible, please call (360)458-3244 as soon as possible- dti/c��(Iic:cU��mtiVax ) TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 10/25/2002 11:25 DATEJIME 10125 11:23 FAX NO./NAME 4588501 DURATION 00:02:32 PAGE(S) 08 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM V-) C OL : f rAct e-" c l' G G 1` trr. VYGD C - Oct-,t S - r, vi Lc� ;Lr r 1 01 v 1 rn ( e cc—fkL4IY1 crc i y,24 114 14, A 1 „ � (_ C-1012- t a v✓- I Vl � O m'c7) 01993 Franklin Quest Co. Printed in USA CL 13148 ©1993 Franklin Quest Co. Printed in USA CL 13148 AGENDA nU/J .\ V 5:30 - 5:40 Welcome, Introductions - Joe Williams 5:40 - 5:55 Report on the status of the rail line - Charlie Burnham (David Evans and Associates, Inc.) 5:55 - 6:10 Questions and Answers - Charlie Burnham 6:10 - 6:25 Future direction - Joe Williams 6:25 - 6:30 Set next meeting, adjourn LOS� T � � 1 �� .� o ,� JEFFREY R.MORELAND Bw ingtoe Northern Sarna Fe BNSF Senior Vire President corporadon Law and Cbief of Sraf f PO Box 961052 Fort Worth TX 76161-0052 2650 Lou Menk Drive 2nd Floor Fort WorthTX X 76161-2830 817-352-1350 817-352-7111 Fax March 16, 1998 Mr. Bob Jones President Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 444 Yelm, WA 98579 Dear Mr. Jones: Thank you for your recent letter regarding Burlington Northern Santa Fe's line between Roy and Yelm, Washington. We certainly understand and appreciate your interest in this matter. We are currently examining previous commitments made concerning that line to determine what avenues are legally, financially and administratively feasible. In addition, we are working with the Washington Department of Transportation to determine whether it is able to facilitate a local rail service project. Although no determinations have been made yet, I wanted to respond to your letter and advise you that we are giving the community's proposals for acquisition of the line serious consideration. Sincerely, i JRM/kf AGENDA Yelm Rail Spur Meeting Tuesday, March 3, 1998 5:30 - 5:40 Welcome & Introductions - Joe Williams 5:40 - 5:45 Brief recap of previous meetings - Joe Williams 5:45 - 6-20 Round table discussion 6-20 - 6:25 Summation & future direction - Joe Williams 6-25 - 6-30 Set next meeting date & adjourn �,r✓'�- 11 \Q I I t& �� f L� ri)Pic c �, dam, U 1�4 4h" � c S Cit �Sl r kL i��= �r�l� 9cU�� ? s c �� cif OACW JJ 4L '0 JS&IJ �'�L��_ �f�7�z� i�'_ no -f-a � � l a'Sq-Wt_og5 ,LC)W6 lf�rl�u`la� ot3g-q)Od, Bal'np a'^'c7'/rD�awD�60L v'JS°lei�uo�8�?ysv� �u�r9+91SD�D0��sruatllf(� -W,fowwwr "159 `�ploouis wd 0£:9 le 866 `£ yoJeW uo woos aouaJaluoa IaloH aiaieJd ay} }e pjag aq ipm goigm 6uilaaw lxau aql }e noA 6uiaas of pjennio} iooj am a�gissod se uoos se sn aslnpe aseald 'suoissiwo jo sjoija jueliodwi Aue aoijou nog( lj -spiooai jnoA jo} hags ui-ubis eqj }o Adoo e se Ilam se 6uilaaw jegj to salnuiw aye pasol3u3 8661 `LZ kenuer uo 08on w1a k aqj le 6uilaaw Inds IieJ ;sed aql 01 6Ulwoo aol auoAlana 01 s�uegl JNIISUMUOUG SWHIIIIfTI U"F I T i' '.{ t o,y �. � v t v I I ./ ° r v f ! J~ �} r * - '� ,�y.: Yr' \ 4: t t j w1. \ .`Jr 7 / r ' I A �\' z I .` ,'ft , S /�k TM� .' .X .x'- Jr rf \ f f/ '.( / I. 1 tI. ! \ - ter 1 -, ' ` '� t f t. , (j..- / 11' ^Yh '' ✓ 1 ;( / I _ �, 1/; / / fit,; 4 , / ry �� r , r ,. \ Fx t � �_ ` "-. v, { r I\tea . . F' A (' �(( fes\ kF z, } J I. . `tit r / �l' ' s.Y i / i + ,_ ' 1. �\ :� ri lc j r r r j ' I '' /t +..� _7 r 'y I E�/ "tS i y \ "'ri Jou <r ' \ 1 \' -'\ \�i 8 f 4's _' t It ,'',/, 1 t H t . �f i / ! / �. 11 \.\ ,I C )✓` :1 \ I, " / ,II � � % d /� `,1/ � � ` \_ ° v�� )'ems s IS �y f �" �'-11'\ I� '& E`-)/ 5r. /' \_ . �� 'I� r ) ! ��`IT ! }. r ?�E ) , 1 r ,' .0 40k' �/ �`' /i e \ -I.,. .� l } , ,,ti1 I ){ +�y i\C j U'1. I.�r r _`r 1 -.. ::+' ,' � �� 4 E�,I F ^' ) '�, -- - — `? �: '�. .ate\ `.� _ r (, _ ';. a } '_ l i -h .+ \ t `!, 9- �, y- , - r' 'rte I f G.,, r,, / ! i. l\: / '� .� ; Ft r�. -\. ?T4 4r i 14. Vii'\ !' i / \ E �1 '(l JC ;\ { r .(. \, V. i t \ r.\ t F ,,�f f; J t 1'd I 1:. 1 t I 1': 11 I �y f i i I �a I J I 1 'r fir! I / f F1. \.� , \t ,d .-l tYL'-"/� , / t .. J,6 ,, .� \ ' js V r,", (:,, �,j Jar\ t 't f h E( '':j 1 J' ,, ' A recap of rail spur meeting on January 21, 1998 at the Yelm UCBO: The following people were in attendance: Glen Cunningham, Yelm City Councilman; Liz Williams, Yelm Prairie Development; Dennis Risdon, Thurston County EDC; Gary Beck, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce; Margaret Clapp, Prairie Hotel; Steve Pottle, The Port of Olympia; Nick Handy, The Port of Olympia; Roberta Longmire, Property Owner; Bob Jones, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce; Ken Garmann, Yelm Public Works Director; John Huddleston, JCH Development; Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator; Holly Long, Adam Smith's Office; Ron Smith, Property Owner; Kathy Wolf, Mayor of Yelm; Jim Arthur, First Community Bank; Bob Wolf, Wolf Properties; Ray Allred, Washington State Department of Transportation; John Thompson, Williams Broadcasting, Inc.,- Joe nc.;Joe Williams, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce and Host. - Mayor Wolf stated that she and the City supported the attempt to save the rail service. She shared some past history on the Burlington Northern and the efforts to keep the spur that comes into Yelm. - Risdon stated that Yelm has a good infrastructure and that rail service is Yelm's largest competitive advantage in attracting new business to the area. Risdon stated that in the last twelve months he has shown the Yelm industrial site to twelve or fifteen prospective buyers all of whom were attracted by the rail service feature. - Handy stated that there is a resurgence of rail and that the Port's facilities in Olympia regularly lose potential customers because of their lack of rail service. It is critical to keep the rail link because of the marketing advantage. - Huddleston stated he's been waiting a long time to see the Port develop a project outside of the core Olympia area. Maybe now is the time for the Port to step forward and assist in purchasing the short line. - Handy stated the Port would play a role but couldn't promise money. - Huddleston stated he has talked to Boeing and learned they are having supply problems with some of their contractors. The tracks can connect to the Frederickson plant. He likes Yelm's possibilities for attracting suppliers to the industrial district. - Garmann stated the short line needs 200 cars per year to keep it open. Line has not yet been officially abandoned by Berlington Northern. Maybe letters from area politicians might have weight with BN. -Allred confirmed that before Burlington Northern could abandon the line they would have to file a notice with the Port of Bellingham. - Long (the Adam Smith Rep.) Said that with or without notice, Burlington Northern will do what's in their own best interest (i.e. could sell - and don't have to abandon to do that). - Badger asked about the condition of the line and inquired if the Port has appraisers. - Pottle stated they used a consultant at a cost per mile. (Charlie Burnham of David Evans & Assoc.) - It was felt that a survey needed to be conducted on the short line to determine if the maintenance issues were such as to render the possible acquisition of the line implausible. - Clapp stated Risdon and others concurred, that the owners of the commercial sites in the industrial park needed to get together so that a potential buyer did not have to contact so many different owners if a large parcel was required. - Arthur stated that perhaps a limited liability company or some other structure could be formed to purchase the rail. Maybe raise money by selling plaques for designated rail ties. If we purchase the Yelm rail spur our future interests would be protected. - Handy stated that there may be less expensive options than buying. All possibilities should be exhausted before getting out the check book. - It was agreed at the end of the meeting to proceed with the following items.- 1, tems:1. Attempt to facilitate a meeting between more of the property owners. 2. Have all interested parties write letters to Burlington Northern and other individuals and organizations as soon as possible. The letters will be sent to Ken Garmann at Yelm City Hall and then posted together when possible. The Chamber of Commerce will also be a point of contact. 3. Try to engage someone to conduct a survey of the rail spur regarding the maintenance issues. 4. Investigate the feasibility of forming a corporation to purchase the rail spur as a last resort. The Next Meeting of the railspur group will be held at 5:30 pm on March 3`d at the Prairie Motel conference room. PLEASE SIGN IN Name (PRINT) Address Contact # ;7'("'x- VC-IJ-\ `156 7 C 37 2- (S�� f L 25,-3 —'D M e� a- 5 . 143SC' ripA t-"N 063 3 i L k k\1 a F 9IS tv/ism w C-r6-,I, V, 041 sz gc,�a Y07 yse- W I 4 ' 174)�AlAN&J w ,X 471 zztu ; P ffe-a 1 z Y W I LL I RMS BRORDCRSTI NG January 6, 1998 Dear Property Owner, If you are in receipt of this letter, the records we have indicate that you own one or more parcels in the Yelm Industrial District. Please review the attached flyer and make every effort to join us for an important meeting on Wednesday, January 21 st , UCBO meeting room, located at 624 Crystal Springs Rd NW, Yelm, WA. We will be discussing issues that may have a direct impact on your property values. Hope to see you there. Sincerely, A Joseph S. Williams --� JAN 2198 q)illlams 9roadcaslmg 9nc. c0m5hinglon&541aska 701%ohie'Park ane,Ouile� 'PO.fox 5210 Telm,W-06597,360-45(5-65a3 >j �i,t. ,.Yl F\ a r J ;� fl`r t/1 Y J /� �2e Y .Y 1 � �, (- 4it .t� ,Y r. i ( V. ( ,: ' l K f4 ti, Pl y ' ). i ( � t ) �/S ,, t �� ti ).fat 1 �, / /' .rr / C� ), �\ r II ;. `` l � L J/ J f r is � � �. f ( ( '.r f ,F, �i ','� ` i. , 1 *',/. I�� SE' S 1 /S..( ` `, .. 1 1 �.� f` L J i��I \/ / / r) �r l+ I,�[f 1 ~ C y\' i, I.( f.. ':. r>., 1, ,f i` , {/ /"t ,\ l.F \ .\ S �f � f l / l ( � J !., �/ � r : \:. -� - to / �\ /` r J F 1 ;, 1 ��{ r �. 1l ,�I 1 k� ��w,{ � y ) �� 1 a r h 11 r \l 'Y� 51 1. '1. \L`\1 f 41l \ I" S " 4 , \ 7'.., `) \ / /� , j 1l - \ f& TC r I '" fX� i Y �,'S:(�� .moi✓ - .`li l f /> 11 - 'tt {� ( s� j`� V i,/i-. . \:.__ ,,�✓;. { �,` - ." r �; f ? J I1. ( _? - trt �,,. ).S_P�� tl� f l+y�I ` y '. �4 f e.•!gig �'(r r ,�¢:rv,r�' ',4.t F f�l p,` C� �."� ,' 7.. , p " 1 I. "r+ l�'-IL� n `r __ 1 �'- -�( Y.. I. `, y, �� .t �: :fy3 s�. },. : �t r�� r c :{n�+.; r 7 J ..Y ) ' t) d k �`� 4 (� ",# ,*u 1 S�1M + t/ tia` t y C $ S I6fat +y x1`y�(, }��err lz ) J ", 9• 1. rI 'f}__1,_� ....,_ L� lt.. j x`d ,,. #��" 'J:;- -, 'J- .y Y'4'1. -+�,,,�� .,L.l-,— .c111. g,4-1+;V' \ t �.4 �j- � - q `• 1. I \ , f t k " n)` r. " \ } �r ; ` 1 I 1 r� -t I� ( a 1 _ S r /'_ �( s ? ��#\i l l# 1 \ �� + >4 ?lam. + j G �i+ >� t` 7 i�y yhy id ti'p l� Fn ,�1� : r ( 3 ,_, r r , ,.1. ' , , ' I � IT, {1 x .tf i \: ,- I / 1 Ot; !, l , I l� ) �_ t� " - ,.J t l / y� yf p l ,� � ,� Grp k r ,>. l" /� �`' � f \r \ , .,t /J',. ,L„^ ^"� aJ �:_, ) € I C �1.� ��•, 1.�"J.q4 / t (-f` :'� (, 1` Icy �/ r,6.� t )\ \ �k 1 �, C , 'd �( / ,fl \ T ri A' { r 1 � ,� r , f \ a lv C I I1 xh (.� } a yz y 7 a _ 1 1 r. I ' "� t� yA I , It �. , l'. r� - J } �( ,� ) /,. �. k (� y � :; q:. 1, 1 �. w. r-f \ s ( 11 i J i1 t ( .,' i tl. a �� ( \ 1)I I�1 `{�- 7 ` Y 1 i �l '1 (sl 1tiA. tai ti` _), �� ,.j t. °+"r' ' q+�./ I,�: b ';:,< < � t h�K i ` { �4 1 C,�. \- . F a l \ 11��f �- ( f'. ; 'J '' t i s i; JM, - J�// -('-� �fI.. `'v ^I _ '1!� r I J� �� l of 4 F �,5 , 7 y �� l I \ Y", v �_y >'`- y(� j i J / � - ' .:r'J 1��.1 I, ':t+ ) .��y Iu , �� C :�, 4 � ,t .q, � / 1r y i -I, 4 ) j r r v � ( r /r � f ` ) t v t y, ti ,t F I r / , / l L - 1 �. .) ( \ , I 1 9 d I '.�4 f, J 1` f t o �( / ' /( a , S y�,� � �� r{l.., 'a d'.'X [ - A t,+ -L. ,, I 1 i 6 r ,;4 ti 1 �� t �'�j ' =) �\ y' .,�.1"r l' r !. '3 c 1;" / It { y��,- / .� Y 1 �� fit. ,, t f '( ,,w, �_, J- 11, '� � i � \ . .�� -y _ 7~ ,)_r �• �- 1.� r)�J- 1 t ' luz. �t` C�� w , _ 11 3 �a�l t Fly ” *�� ;I �� , 1.; , " :� -�T �� 7[ I . 1 ,� y _t �� r � ,,: 1 /. 1 .z 1 �� Jl I . J �,4 1. "I , , ",".--\. n: 1, ..d,. 4" � ^. _ . . — - .,.Y �. l.. f X7:...4}t.t,..I,';1 /� ',,. r f-. .� .,-(,y 1. �. .,,t—`". * Did you know Burlington Northern was selling the rail spur into Yelm? * Did you know that there was a sale pending to a scrap dealer but it fell through? * Did you know that once we loose the rail spur into the industrial park we will not get it back? * Please join us in a discussion & brain storming session. We need your ideas! Who's All property owners in the Industrial Area, The City of Yelm, Invited: The Port of Olympia, The Economic Development Council, The U.S. Forestry Service, The Department of Transportation,The Yelm School District, Prairie Lumber, Mountain Lumber, Pay Less, Harding's, Wilcox Farms, Cenex, Ferrellgas, Amtech, Lasco, Elected Officials & Others. What: A brain storming session. Why: To determine the future of the rail spur and the Industrial Park. Where: The UCBO meeting room at 624 Crystal Springs Road, Yelm, WA. When: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 ca) 5:00 P.M. Please RSVP via Fax @ 458-8501 or Voice Mail @ 458-0834 (so we will know approximately how many people to expect). This meeting could have an economic impact on you and your property values! t .�..;r. 1 r�E K �E♦ _e r -- i4°.a �..f'� r..( �-�. .11L -� % J.�'' 4�. « -,A ' �'7' ` > } ._:i='r " 3 �h tits✓ ^!F'.L` •, Ott , ..'1 Z--.,: ( ,Z' h ✓J. l`h 5� i' ,k '� l� �(♦ L IC �7 Y .7' - I -� 4 "� ,� .r 77 l"IV /�� I', Ilo," l.' s ` r ". ,9.I } .•x \( r,'� / f + I -t �1 I.1� \ �' f l l / b� ,� r�� 1. C I �� Irl r, �/ !) A,.' I r: /+ �P', f � j \ a v '4 � \ r ter.\ �: P t �t\(/i / 1. r t If i -,� 4 t \ / l .i. �, jf '":�/ SSW\ +` S 4 �".lI t'..�t r'_.r L" ' �''�j�.. �' .�t '' it• t�,� ` /rl r -',r , L J -/ �;� .-,... { -: ;., .r - r M l _ �'7 I� .• ,I. t / ` I I:." I y,)� , . � � fi( a\ [- )I f \� F ; '` �P. , 1 1... , ' 3 4.le i i \; /t U �c I :-P- T, 7.�! - r?- / y`� \: /?'f . ✓. I. / 1y.� i r- rf+'4 \ /\ ,t,lj .rf \/ - � } fid , 1\ i sem:( e. <1 tir 1 i , > F, .14 , �) 9� 4 t i /It \ s4 a - y - j - \�r ':� i"Kyl` i } � �' S '�� + ;_ \ .+- I,1-c + i Jx r t/:. f,GI-�� I �': ..;s 'r x _• 1./ o i .J SLAY ' r s { i4„ er, ' t , r ,� -� '! .� �.( `- S•{ /l., Y{ 'f Zia a�_,f ,:�,� .� P t c�'• 1.':� r �li f f �t f ,� 1•. 1 f �,,, YYt _i. r >r i ti t S, { ti ri - a I t^'r' R - ti l � M.� - -'f' "vim' S * h V z r � ..,•\. t .-fl .a/- i i (- I Vit" .jy {. t I 1% 1 Y '. � /;� 11 i � -i� '! h am Y§I'— P., � 4 c�t �e i '. ;11 �1 �1 V__ + _),� / ...\ r \. r . I( ) 1^7: \ . a;/ 1 1 \ 1 , } / ��t Jam, \ J W lA / A y 1. r !:4 F- /:-�} � '-�-z' I n \1 .� f r r '� -(• L. r. - I} r t- t .� - � Jt -� 11 U � x ' %way \; r,\t � ) I,,� 1 ff } Y 1I.111) / �1 r. ',*1 K t. \ s/F . h t ,, \fir! ` r ./ .� \ '..V v , F A.r s , i f`- k;S��` A'.rt TM k. l T .�5. Y, „-_/ `'� .! \\ /.:r L - k (\ moi .` ( { \ F F7 s) t� ` `� )� - t C. v 1^ ! ./ ; a fif. ".'. i 1. \FJ O �- .". J -! 1-.y f\, / {. �L ` � 7• Ch 1 ^ t� / �1� / � #. ti d 1. '•,�`" \ \{> _<". / �, �',' \ r 5 i{. '''Jl..t-{ V.�'.�• I •t, - � � 't'� •-jam b "�Y J, a. ( , err I �� 'I J ! 1, i "'� \c RL o t \k N i / 1 y ( -r �,/ s p / 11" r r / y / 4 )`K. ;.. , j. q;� , 4 % y ti ayC r .l n-;` 1 .. /, .V l 4 > L \ / y ( <. E / ;� 1 l y .> , / 1; � of t( 1 % v °, ( ') -- b �\, f �` (1 C "Z� ids}z Yr 1 l �I F ' :, 4 - 4'i 5}'�� r ; fir. �)\ ) / Z i +,I? . r 1 �, a >ri � �' Off. 7 - j -� / 1 ,i 1 ,' fI I ` C ,� � '\ THE PRAIRIE LINE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY-LAWS ARTICLE I NAME AND PURPOSE Section 1 . NAME. This organization shall be known as The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee. ["RAC"1 Section 2. PURPOSE. The RAC is established to assist and advise the City of Yelm, Washington, in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, to be known as "ThePrairie Line." Section 3. AUTHORIZATION. The RAC was established by Resolution No. �, of the City Council of the City of Yelm, Washington, on q0 V 1998. ARTICLE 11 MEMBERSHIP AND FUNDING Section 1 . MEMBERS. The RAC shall consist of five members as follows: - the Mayor of Yelm, Washington or his/her designee - the Mayor of Roy, Washington or his/her designee j - two members appointed by the Mayor of Yelm 2- one member appointed by the Mayor of Roy Section 2. TERM OF SERVICE. The Mayors or their designees serve so long as the Mayor remains in elected office. The appointed members serve at the pleasure of the Mayor responsible for their appointment or his/her successor. ARTICLE III FINANCES Section 1 . FUNDING. The RAC shall be funded by an amount of up to one-half of one percent (0.5%) of any rents, profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Prairie Line. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 1 Section 2. ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS. Funding shall be budgeted annually as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works of the City of Yelm. This funding, called the Administrative Fund, and its use shall be subject to review and audit. Section 3. EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT. The RAC may by majority vote reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of its members out of the Administrative Fund. The RAC members may not receive any additional compensation. ARTICLE IV DUTIES OF THE RAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Section 1 . GENERAL. The RAC shall consult with the Director of Public Works of the City of Yelm ["Director"] a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property in the acquired branch line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for The Prairie Line. Said rail policy shall be submitted to the City Council of Yelm for approval. Section 2. BUDGETING. The RAC shall assist the Director in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other uses of the Administrative Fund created in Article III., Section 1 . The Director shall include the RAC's proposed budget in the budget for the Department of Public Works budget for approval by the City Council of Yelm. ARTICLE V MEETINGS AND LEADERSHIP Section 1 . MEETINGS. The RAC shall meet at the call of any one of the following: the Mayor of Yelm or designee; the Mayor of Roy or designee, or the Director of Public Works of Yelm. Section 2. LEADERSHIP. At its first meeting, the RAC shall designate a convener who will preside at each of the meetings and set the agenda. Section 3. NOTICE OF MEETINGS. Meetings may be called upon at least three days' notice to all Members by written communication. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 2 Section 4. COMMITTEES. The RAC may appoint committees to serve its purposes. All committees shall be answerable to the RAC. Committee members need not be members of the RAC and shall serve at its pleasure. Section 5. QUORUM. A majority of the members of the RAC shall constitute a quorum. ARTICLE VI MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 1 . CONFLICT OF INTEREST. No RAC member should take any position where a conflict of interest or bias might reasonably be thought to exist, unless the fact of such possible conflict has been fully disclosed. All activities should be conducted in a way which will give due recognition to competing points of view. Section 2. AMENDMENTS. These Bylaws may be amended at any meeting of the RAC by a vote of at least three members, provided that such proposed amendment shall first have been sent to each member at least seven days in advance of the meeting. Dated this day of 1998. By-laws of the Rail Advisory Committee - Page 3 CITY OF YELM RESOLUTION NO. 379 A RESOLUTION To state the guiding principles for the acquisition and use and operational oversight of the railroad branch line, the Yelm Branch Line, currently owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company; to create a Rail Advisory Committee to advise the city on the use, operation and development of the acquired property; and to provide guidance to the Director of Public Works on how to proceed; and WHEREAS, The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway(BNSF)currently operates over a railroad corridor called the Yelm Branch Line which extends from Milepost 8.55 near Lakeview on the north to mile post 25.55 in the City of Yelm on the south and has indicated its interest in discontinuing rail service over at least a part of that branch line; and WHEREAS, The City of Yelm has indicated its interest in acquiring all property interests now held by the BNSF in its Yelm Branch Line for general public welfare,economic development and investment purposes; and WHEREAS,The City of Roy has expressed its interest in participating with the City of Yelm in setting public policy for the use and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch, insofar as such use operation and development affects the City of Roy; and WHEREAS,The Yehn Chamber of Commerce has actively been supporting the public acquisition of the Yelm branch; and BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM,THE MAYOR CONCURRING: Section 1. The Council endorses the following guiding principles in acquisition, operation and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch Line(formerly known as the Northern Pacific's Prairie Line): All BNSF property interests its Yelm Branch Line, should be acquired by the City of Yelm and after such acquisition the line of railroad shall be referred to as "The Prairie Line." The preservation and vitality of businesses located along the BNSF's Yelm Branch Line should be preserved, and additional businesses should be encouraged to locate along the line. The exploration and development of commuter rail and other passenger uses in conjunction with development of the acquired property should be encouraged. The interests of the City of Roy and its citizens will be considered in any use or development of the BNSF's Yelm Branch line, and appropriate interlocal agreements or contracts may be entered into by the two Cities to achieve and carry out mutual interests and apportion ownership, as necessary. RESOLUTI/RES.98.RES379.DOC c Section 2. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee is established to assist and advise the City of Yelm in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, "The Prairie Line." (a) The Committee shall be composed of the Mayor of Yelm,the Mayor of Roy, or their designees, and three persons appointed by the City of Yelm and two person appointed by the City of Roy,to serve at the pleasure of the respective appointing Mayor. The Mayor of Yelm may designate one of the appointed members to serve as chairperson: (b)The committee members will receive no additional compensation, except that the City may reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of the appointees out of the marketing fund established herein, under the guidelines established by the City. Section 3. Rail Marketing Fund. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee shall advise the Public Works Director on an annual marketing budget as determined by the City of Yelm of up to 1/2 of 1% of any rents,profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Prairie Line. This fund to be created annually as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works,and its use shall be subject to review and audit. The fund shall be used to promote the use of the Prairie Rail Line. Section 4. The Director of Public Works shall: (a)Negotiate the acquisition of BNSF's Yelm Branch Line and appurtenant property with appropriate BNSF officials and submit to the council a proposal for such acquisition. (b)Develop in consultation with the Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee created herein, and submit to the Council for approval, a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property in the acquired branch line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for the acquired property. (c)Assist the Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other such uses of the rail Marketing Fund created in Section 3, and, as part of the Public Works' normal budgeting process. (d) Create a proposed bid requirement to solicit appropriate offers from competent rail operators to contract with the City for engaging in common and contract carrier freight rail service over the Prairie Line. The qualifications for a contract rail operator should emphasize financial responsibility and rail operation experience, and ability to meet current rail customer's transportation requirements. RESOLUTZ/RES.98/RES379.DOC 2 (e)Develop an Operating Agreement which the City may use to engage the services of a competent rail operator, or operators, ensuring that such agreement will provide an operator or operators who will meet the reasonable service requests of businesses who desire common carrier rail service, that the City will remain in overall control of the properties, and that such operators will be able to bear the full expense and risk attendant with such rail operations. (f) Develop a program of active oversight of future rail operations and other property uses in the Prairie Line to ensure all such uses are in compliance with contract, safety and public use requirements. (g) Prepare and file on behalf of the City any documents necessary to carry out the acquisition and operation of The Prairie Line with the Surface Transportation Board, the Federal Railroad Administration, the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission,the Washington Department of Transportation,the Association of American Railroads, or any similar agencies or organizations. Section 5. The Council supports all progressive and safe uses of the acquired property which will benefit the general public and directs the Mayor to explore all reasonable opportunities for The Prairie Line to yield a return on the City's investment; Provided,however,that such uses must be consistent, and not interfere,with the general acquisition purpose of providing freight and passenger rail service, so long as there is a reasonable demand or potential need for such services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Yelm,that RESOLUTION 379 is hereby approved and adopted. ADOPTED this�day of November 1998. K:MTIRYNV WOLF, MAYGYR ATTEST: A S P. BENNICK, CITY CLERK RESOLUTI/RES.98/RES379.DOC 3 CITY OF YELM RESOLUTION NO. 379 A RESOLUTION To state the guiding principles for the acquisition and use and operational oversight of the railroad branch line,the Yelm Branch Line, currently owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company; to create a Rail Advisory Committee to advise the city on the use, operation and development of the acquired property; and to provide guidance to the Director of Public Works on how to proceed; and WHEREAS, The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway(BNSF)currently operates over a railroad corridor called the Yelm Branch Line which extends from Milepost 8.55 near Lakeview on the north to mile post 25.55 in the City of Yelm on the south and has indicated its interest in discontinuing rail service over at least a part of that branch line; and WHEREAS, The City of Yelm has indicated its interest in acquiring all property interests now held by the BNSF in its Yelm Branch Line for general public welfare, economic development and investment purposes; and WHEREAS,The City of Roy has expressed its interest in participating with the City of Yelm in setting public policy for the use and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch, insofar as such use operation and development affects the City of Roy; and WHEREAS,The Yelm Chamber of Commerce has actively been supporting the public acquisition of the Yelm branch;and BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YELM,THE MAYOR . CONCURRING: Section 1. The Council endorses the following guiding principles in acquisition, operation and development of the BNSF Yelm Branch Line(formerly known as the Northern Pacific's Prairie Line): All BNSF property interests its Yelm Branch Line, should be acquired by the City of Yelm and after such acquisition the line of railroad shall be referred to as "The Prairie Line." The preservation and vitality of businesses located along the BNSF's Yelm Branch Line should be preserved, and additional businesses should be encouraged to locate along the line. The exploration and development of commuter rail and other passenger uses in conjunction with development of the acquired property should be encouraged. The interests of the City of Roy and its citizens will be considered in any use or development of the BNSF's Yelm Branch line, and appropriate interlocal agreements or contracts may be entered into by the two Cities to achieve and carry out mutual interests and apportion ownership, as necessary. RESOLUTI/RES.98.RES379.DOC Section 2. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee is established to assist and advise the City of Yelm in acquiring, operating and developing the acquired rail property, "The Prairie Line." (a) The Committee shall be composed of the Mayor of Yelm,the Mayor of Roy, or their designees, and three persons appointed by the City of Yelm and two person appointed by the City of Roy,to serve at the pleasure of the respective appointing Mayor. The Mayor of Yelm may designate one of the appointed members to serve as chairperson: (b)The committee members will receive no additional compensation, except that the City may reimburse any travel or administrative expenses of the appointees out of the marketing fund established herein, under the guidelines established by the City. Section 3. Rail Marketing Fund. The Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee shall advise the Public Works Director on an annual marketing budget as determined by the City of Yelm of up to 1/2 of 1% of any rents,profits or other payments received by the City of Yelm for use or uses of any part of the Prairie Line. This fund to be created annually as part of the operating budget of the Department of Public Works, and its use shall be subject to review and audit. The fund shall be used to promote the use of the Prairie Rail Line. Section 4. The Director of Public Works shall: (a)Negotiate the acquisition of BNSF's Yelm Branch Line and appurtenant property with appropriate BNSF officials and submit to the council a proposal for such acquisition. (b)Develop in consultation with the Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee created herein, and submit to the Council for approval, a proposed rail policy which will encourage and promote freight and commuter rail service, provide for safe and economical development and use of all property in the acquired branch line, and prepare a prudent and business-like property management plan for the acquired property. (c)Assist the Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee in preparing an appropriate budget for its operating expenditures and other such uses of the rail Marketing Fund created in Section 3, and, as part of the Public Works'normal budgeting process. (d) Create a proposed bid requirement to solicit appropriate offers from competent rail operators to contract with the City for engaging in common and contract carrier freight rail service over the Prairie Line. The qualifications for a contract rail operator should emphasize financial responsibility and rail operation experience, and ability to meet current rail customer's transportation requirements. RESOLUTZ/RES.98/RES379.DOC 2 (e)Develop an Operating Agreement which the City may use to engage the services of a competent rail operator, or operators, ensuring that such agreement will provide an operator or operators who will meet the reasonable service requests of businesses who desire common carrier rail service, that the City will remain in overall control of the properties, and that such operators will be able to bear the full expense and risk attendant with such rail operations. (f)Develop a program of active oversight of future rail operations and other property uses in the Prairie Line to ensure all such uses are in compliance with contract, safety and public use requirements. (g) Prepare and file on behalf of the City any documents necessary to carry out the acquisition and operation of The Prairie Line with the Surface Transportation Board,the Federal Railroad Administration,the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission,the Washington Department of Transportation,the Association of American Railroads, or any similar agencies or organizations. Section 5. The Council supports all progressive and safe uses of the acquired property which will benefit the general public and directs the Mayor to explore all reasonable opportunities for The Prairie Line to yield a return on the City's investment;Provided,however,that such uses must be consistent, and not interfere,with the general acquisition purpose of providing freight and passenger rail service, so long as there is a reasonable demand or potential need for such services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Yelm,that RESOLUTION 379 is hereby approved and adopted. ADOPTED this ZI- day of November 1998. KA M. WOLF, MAYGYR ATTEST: AGf,4ES P. BENNICK, CITY CLERK RESOLUTZ/RES.98/RES379.DOC 3 Subject: Yelm to Lakeview Rail Line,Adam Smiths Support. i Dear Linda, We take this opportunity to request your support for the completion of the Yelm to Lakeview rail line project and briefly explain why it is important to Yelm. We begin with a short history of what has transpired to date. The City of Yelm adopted a"Transportation Comprehensive Plan"in 1992 and amended the plan in 1997 to meet objectives for the State of Washington's"Growth Management Plan". It includes a component for the development and utilization of multi-modal rail. The Yelm Industrial Area has great potential for development, which would increase the number of family- wage jobs and allow more people to both live and work in the greater Yelm community. However,because of Yelm's distance from Interstate 5,it is difficult to be competitive and attract businesses to this area. To increase our competitive edge,we have been very proactive;taking advantage of all possible opportunities to better our future. In 1993 we purposely joined in as a partner to the South Puget Sound Foreign Trade Zone#216 knowing that this designation,along with an active rail connection were crucial to meet our established community goals. In 1997,another opportunity presented itself when we became aware of Burlington Northern Santa Fe's desire to divest itself of the Yelm-Roy segment. A committee was formed to attempt to save the line. This eventually turned into a strong partnership between local businesses of the Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce,the City of Yelm,the Port of Olympia and the Thurston County Economic Development Council. It also had the strong support from the Thurston Regional Planning Council and the Washington State Department of Transportation.We have support letters on file from each of these entities that are available upon request. The committee engaged the help of Charles E. Burnham,David Evans and Associates and Steven L.Day, Betts Patterson&Mmes to help with negotiations and in 1999 the"Yelm Roy Prairie Line"was acquired. The Cities of Yelm and Roy passed resolutions and a formal"Rail Advisory Committee"was formed to guide the future of the line and to create all necessary inter-local agreements. We had a great deal of support from your office,including regular attendance at our Rail Advisory Committee meetings by your staff. We know that this attention and support ultimately helped us to acquire the line from BNSF. We also had support from Senator Slade Gorton, Senator Patty Murray,Washington State Senator Karen Fraser,Washington State Senator Marilyn Rasmussen and State Representative Sandra Romero. With the help of Ray Allred at the Washington State Rail Office,and others in the Washington State Department of Transportation we were slated to receive a$500,000 state grant for a connection to Tacoma Eastern(in the vicinity of Miles Sand and Gravel)to offer an alternative connection point to the BNSF line at Roy,however with the passage of voter initiatives and the defeat of R-51,this money has been lost. The connection to the Tacoma Eastern line was and continues to be important due to the complexities involved in working with BNSF to offer an affordable"switching"service to the Yelm-Roy customers at Roy. If Yelm were to acquire the section of rail from Roy to Lakeview,we would own a piece of line with enough current and future traffic to make the switch for our customers more cost-effective. Currently we do not have a connection past the City of Roy.From a marketing standpoint,the completion of the link would give us two existing customers,Ft.Lewis and Wilcox Farms. It would also make viable a third customer,Miles Sand and Gravel. Miles has the potential of removing 200 truck trips per day from the road network. It is one of the reasons Washington DOT has enthusiastically endorsed this project. This initial customer base would allow us to obtain a quality operator for the line. All of this leaves us where we are today, without funding or a connection. Your help at the Federal level is vital for the future of this region as well as the City of Yelm. The rail line from Yelm to Lakeview provides an important freight corridor link to SE Thurston and Pierce Counties. It also offers this region a cost effective opportunity to link with Sound Transit, the greater Puget Sound commuter rail system. We have support from a variety of public and private organizations and look forward to working with you to provide the solutions to overcome these remaining obstacles. The lives of many people in this region will be affected for the better with your help. Sincerely.... Subject:Yelm to Lakeview Rail Line,Adam Smith's Support. Dear Linda, We take this opportunity to request your support for the completion of the Yelm to Lakeview rail line project and briefly explain why it is important to Yelm.We begin with a short hiAQMWe vvill then give you a brief hist of what has transpired to date_: First and fare!nost�Jle rail line provides a vital freight eorFidor-link to SE Thtwsten and Pieree Counties.1 also offers IMs region a eest effeeti to link%ith Sotmd Tfansit,the gFeater Puget Sotm eommuter rail system. Guffently we den't have a eouneetion past the City of Ray. From a fnafketing standpoint,the eempletieft 0 the fink would give us two&dstiag ettstomer-s, Ft.Lewis and Wileox F&rms.ft would also make viable thiFd ettstomer, Mies Sand and Gravel.Miles has the potential of mmoving 200 tFuek 4fips per day fre the-read-network-:Ft-is--onefl€the-reason-Washington-DOT-has-enthusiastieally-endorsed-tis-projeet.--This initial-customer-base-would--allow-us-to-obtain--a-quality-oper-ator-for--the-line The City of Yelm adopted a"Transportation Comprehensive Plan"in 1992 and amended the plan in 1997 to meet objectives for the State of Washington's"Growth Management Plan".It includes a component for the development and utilization of multi-modal rail. The Yelm Industrial_Area hasgreat-potential for development_which_would increase the number family- wage jobs and allow more people to both live and work m the greater-Yelm commmuty _Howeverbecause of Yelm's distance Interstate 5,-it is difficult beY-e m-is--too,-fur-from-tnttrstate--S-to-be competitive and_attract businesses to.this-area.in-the-deMopnwM-our-industr-mal--area:--To-increase our competit-------- dge, we have been_vervproactiyex Aing_advantag--of-all--possible opportunities to_better.our future,--hi 1993-we purposeky�ometi in-as a partner-to the South Puget_Sound Foreign Trade Zone##216 knowing that this designation,-along with-an active rail-connection were to meet our established_community-goals We p�osely-set-up-a--foreign-trade-zone-in-ouf-�industnffl-area-wiith-the-reil--connection--in-mind: In 1997,-another-opportunitypresented itself wham we became aware of Burlington Northern Santa Fe's desire to divest itself of the Roy-3�elm--Yelm-Rox segment.A committee was formed to attempt to save the line.This eventually turned into a strong partnership between local businesses of the Yelm Area Chamber of cCommerce,the City of Yelm,Tthe Port of Olympia and the Thurston County Economic-Development Council. ItIt also had the strong support from the Thurston Regional Planning Council and the Washington State Department of Transportation.We have support letters on file from each of these entities that is.ge available ongpon request. The committee engaged the help of Charles E.Buniham,David Evans and Associates and Steven L.Day, Betts Patterson&Mines to help with negotiations acid in 1999 the"Yelm to-Roy Prairie ILine'was acquired.Resolutions were passed by the Cityies of Yelm and Roy and a formal"Rail Advisory Committee"was formed to guide the future of the line and to create all necessary inter-local agreements. We had a great deal of pelitiea'fekp support from your office,includingregular attendance at our Rail Advisory Committee meetings by your staff. We k now-that this attention and support ultimately helped us LQ 4quuire the line from BNSF_We also had support from Senator Slade Gorton, Senator Patty Murray, Washington State Senator Karen Fraser,Washington State Senator Marilyn Rasmussen and State Representative Sandra Romero. With the help of Ray Allred with the Washington State Rail Office,and others in the Washington State Department of Transportation we were able to have theStateslated to receive ae aside$500,000 state grant for a connection to Tacoma Eastern the vicinitx of Wes_Sand and Gravel)to offer an alternative connection point to the BNSF line at Roy,_however with th_heDassaae of voter initiatives and the defeat of R-51,,this money has been lost. The connection to the Tacoma Eastern line was and continues to be important due to the complexities_in_v_olved in-working with BNSF to offer an affordable"switchine service to the Yelm-Roy customers at_Ro_v__beeause-the BNSF was u 11ng to let use their-Rey--to Lakeview eenneetion at the time. set asidewas taken away with pas age of 695-and If Yelm were to acquire the section of rail from Roy to Lakeview,we would own a piece of line with enough current and future traffic to make the switch for our customers more cost-effective Currently we do not have a connection past the Cit of f Roy. From a marketingstandpoinb the completion of the link would give us two existing customers,Ft.Lewis and Wilcox Farms It would also make viable a third customer, Miles Sand and Gravel Miles has the potential of removing 200 truck trips per day from the road network.It is one of the reasons Washington DOT has enthusiastically endorsed this project This initial customer base would allow us to obtain aquahjy operator for the line All of this leaves us where we are today,without fimding or a connection.Your help at the Federal level is vital for the future of this region as well as the City of Yelm. The.rail_line from Yelm to_Lakeview proyides_an_important freight comdor link SE Thurston Pierce_Counti_es,_It also_offers this region_a cost_effecrive opportunity_to_link with Sound_Transit,_the_greater_Puget Sound commutes rail_system, We have support from a variety of public and private organizations and look forward to working with you to provide the solutions to overcome these remaining obstacles.The lives of many people in this region will be affected for the better with your help. Sincerely.... FROM:THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL T0: 360 458 4348 SEP 9, 1998 7:12AM #058 P.02 i` COMMUNITY PRESERVATION APPLICATION SCOPING SESSION September 10, 1998 Purpose: to develop a project proposal that will improve transportation in Thurston County, using TEA-21, Section 1221 funding �n Opportunity: to leverage proposed rail acquisition in the Yehn city environs C.'oustraints: 1. Must meet the purpose and intent of Section 1221 funding: ❑ Transportation and land use linkages u Rias toward construction v.planning a Emphasis on "partnering"with public and private entities ❑ Leverage other investments, especially other federal \` trallSportation sources v�J � O 2. Must be able to blend with other proposals throughout the state: u Fit the profile of a"demonstration project"to address GMA strategies a Fill a geographic niche (urban/suburban/exurban, location in state) ❑ Reinforce existing studies,proposals,issues around the state �-J ❑ Show phasing;and costs congruent with other proposals 3. Must persuade WSDOT and federal officials as to its merits and v V) priority: Q'. ❑ Engage the imagination/present a vision CJ ❑ Able to measure the project's effectiveness ` o Appear to be fully developed concept, instead of hasty effort `7 u Demonstrate public support via public processes and/or advocacy group engagement 13 Pass the "giggle test"for meeting other constraints P&hmwi(mCv�i/�Q � furl-". t)W 9f .50 v, � f�s� � . w5�`�r w CW� 5 �, a' -� 9� �O etz� . hucl� 4-� b-e la e q,, )6 a 5 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION APPLICATION SCOPING SESSION September 10, 1998 Purpose: to develop a project proposal that will further transportation in Thurston County. using TEA-21, Section 1221 funding Opportunity: to leverage proposed rail acquisition in the Yelm city environs Constraints: 1. Must meet the purpose and intent of Section 1221 funding: ❑ Transportation and land use linkages ❑ Bias toward construction v. planning ❑ Emphasis on"partnering" with public and private entities ❑ Leverage other investments, especially other federal transportation sources 2. Must be able to blend with other proposals throughout the state: ❑ Fit the profile of a"demonstration project"to address GMA strategies ❑ Fill a geographic niche (urban/suburban/exurban, location in state) ❑ Reinforce existing studies, proposals, issues around the state ❑ Show phasing and costs congruent with other proposals 3. Must persuade WSDOT and federal officials as to its merits and priority: ❑ Engage the imagination/ present a vision ❑ Able to measure the project's effectiveness ❑ Appear to be fully developed concept, instead of hasty effort ❑ Demonstrate public support via public processes and/or advocacy group engagement ❑ Pass the "giggle test" for meeting other constraints li i CONCEPT: PROVIDE FREIGHT AND PASSENGER TRAFFI 4 N IN THE SOUTH SOUND AREA (TACOMA TO SOUTH THURSTON COUNTY) Methodology: Provide traffic separation between freight and passenger rail between Auburn (north of Tacoma) and Tenino, using bypass track through south Thurston County. Methodology: Provide roadway traffic separation between freight and passenger vehicles between Tacoma and Bucoda, using corridor similar to SR 7/507/12 for freight movement. Constraints: Sensitivity to community character in Yelm, Tenino, Bucoda Upgrade rail facilities, grade separations Develop/upgrade roadways to industrial standard - T ,,w, Holly - -- - rort MerC r Pre<t,n ', o e 1e Fa: Orchard Slwthw�rth ®3 . Snoqualmie A Is;l-and mo . - 3 , " Issaquah E tirr; �1'Eil -% Lilliwau J I r.,RNF. P 160 . 4�• DERNF�l ,19 300 �- ., , Tukwila',o`P Renton ' ° -Nord I is ' 101 Beltair j Vashun TIm oodsport ii.od SeaTac e ' , I 16 A l 169 i t Lt ' " Hoodsport _ _ Des 167 KING } Potlatch Eahu'va 302 -t Moines°! Kent Masonry FOREST Allyn I aouarr �► ; Union 106 y r Federal Kanglev Dam --I • / 5 �✓ Grapeview��trerch Point Center Gig Harbor �/t,/ay uburn a,-,asks,-Pa mer M A S O N 7 .arellc,•,r. Tacoma Black 3 d, MCIvlirken' Home H.A.Han, 1 1 A Diamond Palmer J Dam ,Matlock ,oz Island I I. Dayton A _ .Lakeba ""' 705 Fit 169 Cumberland ° ng ranch 161 1t° 164 b 1s7• , Sumner Enumclaw Shelton / ioemma beach Lakewood al 17 . J \ 410 I Steilacoom a o, Y P' ' a G-, Kamilche 1r,,,T,., 1w 12 512 ; - Bonney 410 ° Buckley- ! _ -�nrLL _ ,rHG 162 Lake - ,LL 1OH VAT'[. WILD 1'F >'FBI i _ Nil 101 cCleary . ` ► 4Du Pont ort • ing 8 15 * FORT Graham Elma isqually LEWIS 165 - y ' '° - Lacey i.3 t Ro 1 161 •�CLEAR' —_.�-Tumwater '",IuN�E: N� - 7 Kapowsin - ro<> -= _ ' `wtLDe ttesdno Malone 1 �\��s East Olympia 510 r ,3 Close ne d `n orter o I McKenna + the �1 p. 121 Yel 702 I e 6 7 - a P I E R C E SPd ,Y< <, Littlerock Sunri e 1 4 Ma tow ` ,:. ' I MOJL�1T�- RAII�I4 ll,ate y Rainier ■ I i c'Jr'. Oakvill - d �� Eatonville �I -�� • enino La,Grande _•� , :,,jejarl 507 • �!! IE7I)]A& AP GLACIER v1EW'r- _ BLIcoda Lo Grande Dam Alder `rT rl m TSH U R S T O N' Alder Dom WILDF.R]Fis sltcr, Faradis Tono 7 Elbe I Center _ 706 Brooklyn I - — — - - skaak�mrn r �J�y� - As GdlVln entralia Col Dam ✓•'�� 1�II 1 �` Longmire' a I WC`kntralia cased Mineral �� l 'rah 'h�halis �/d3S�✓C P TATO,,. Dot * Littell•2' /�!Y/L J Wlwmf'. A 12 - Adna - �e(�etrarl�� _ L E W I',S Curtis Packw f 'barn Pe Ell attdo 1ock::on - rj �I Napavine 3 Marys Comer Onalaska R�• ,,�ssyro�k J Boisttort �� /4 Eihel Salkum 122 „ r Dom 12 11 ; Morton —� Randle %- rances J -_ Winlock * °` " 2 _! Mossyrock t' ,31 . Lzyws Ctor ��Silver-- Glenoma - _ - - 1 SCP 505 .}. — Dom Creek Q4, Toledo �j _ 1 GIFFORD LLS II Sob ade_5 ® 505 1�/��/0 � � t7sy/��J A H K I A K U M Rvdenvood 1, l Kid Vallev - -- 25 — r I aaavesr 504 Toutle 504 o.varer<.yy9r MOUNT-1,'T 73 or 3nrer I!� % 99 JCLIA BCTLER HANSEX - �7 (✓� ].I rL WILDLIFE t Silver Lake - "IST. H E L E,1[S N.F ��aa.-• awd ' REFUGE Castle Rock s r �NATQo ni -. Vinay Ridge 3 PINCHOT Johnston RiaOe iewpoant,, f Volcanic Ria story Stella 411 ^ IVOLCANiW W;niz Cathlamet 2 Lesimton C O W L I T Z \ i ♦ Mrs�,rehrx a..s 409 4 MONUMENT. ° d I els0 I 25� �%estport Lon-vie m — !� Y= 11, A I Aoe Cave > 17 Rainier Carrolls 'I so `",` NAT.I.ONAL Cougar N.F -■ za 5 q Sw,h Kala a/ 503 Dam Yale �� 'derHn Dam Ariel YaleI- W 1 L U L 5 ® 503 a Dom S K A M A N 1,-A ,-- Woo dland Amb�n * Chelatchie I.. 1 \ °. I TRAPPER FOREST \ Q ;,1ey �nCE�ury��,�e 011S� .knsdcle P olme 0064 :mond �° eR`O X00 0 Q Naco �01 od 9N Veazey °9c�� ear..^.sville 1-1 ARBOR / Q Laster .:--, Or, Enumclaw Jct. orlsle _oQlack Carbon opclisaaa Jct. f7OWilkeson Wilderness ' ulips 5 Carbonado " 9urrors ,°�0 0 S �� Ti° `rpxe elmont �(,0e0* Geo 2 ��e Bi cr v< Q iam `o °o Fairfax N oquAberdeen °< N (UP N me y ,a6 �° �� ' ✓L V� 6 d� F° .r °L. o < y l sa McrKncmpp0 c,° � Bridges11II1t�1 !!IIITTI�-�� 11IIFnnF,�� tt1!!1 ^^�11��1Hnj� ,� DRAFT Vesta i �jtlloncl As,ford ca 5cu . Bend yM I LW �' �'��'" 0 e� Holcomb bar i i Nallpee France i ACIFIC D ENVIRONS RAIL NETWORK 0 igton Northern 1 Pacific Wialis Western (Weyerhaeuser) ilwaukee Road ;urtis Milburn & Eastern j I Map 3 j YELM TO LAKEWOOD RAIL CORRIDOR Short term strategies: ❑ Capture Class I railroad abandonment(s) ❑ Rehabilitate rail facilities ❑ Engage short line service Medium term stratbgies: :i Facilitate freight rail operations for Ports of Olympia, Tacoma ❑ Identify scenarios for commuter / passenger rail routing Assess land use, accessibility impacts of commuter / passenger rail service Long term strategies: ❑ Optimize interregional freight rail movement ❑ Optimize interregional passenger rail movement ❑ Relieve freight and passenger travel in roadway corridors Integrate needed improvements with FAST, Cascadia Corridors, RTA, Amtrak CROSS SECTIONAL CONCEPTUAL PROFILE OF THE CASCADE FOOTHILLS RAILROAD HIGHWAY CORRIDOR L Electricity Transmission Tower Water Electrification Supply Catenari+?s Pipeline J Freight Railroad Tracks Automobile Truck Freeway Tollway V Wastewater Water Drainage i.nage Interceptor Carbon (� Sawar Pipeline Petroleum Natural Dioxide \� I � Products Gas Pipeline Fil�ero tic ryoyenic p Super nElectricity ducting Pipeline Cryogenic eeze Wall Telecommunication Pipeline Barrier Cable Line Freeze Wall Transmission Barrier Ca�-ile FROM:THURSTnN REG PLNG CNCL T0: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:44PM 4953 P.01 Ask Washington State AUG 21 1998 9, Department of Transportation Sid Morri9on PLANNING COUNCfE�',`,� r.,," :,:`, 73."- August 19, 1998 Harold Robertson, Director 11wiston Rcgiunal Planning tonne it > 24041 Heritat;C C0 4 ,r1 SW 413 Olympia,WA 9$302-6031 Kc ( omrnunity Picservation Grant Progrcun .. Scetion 1721 of TEA 21 Dew Mr. Robertson, Under TEA 2.1 - Section 1221, Congress established th Community Preservation Pilot Program This innovative pilot program provides funding, for plan ,, research and implementation projects linkii,g tianspoitation and land use The intent of the pilot program is to highlight techniques, strategies and projects used to link transportation and land use The goal is to capitalize on the use of alternate modes of transportation to preserve the capacity of the road and highway system. Ultimately,the pilot program seeks to fund strategies and projects that change travel behavior. To be eligible for this innovative TEA 21 pilot program, applicants must subnvt the Letter of Intent to the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA)by October 30, 1998. Grant applicants can be either local, regional or state government \ ashington is a leader in research on transportation and land use. linkages. "Tlie state's growth management program integrates local and regional plans and seeks modal integration, This leadership places communities in Washington in a unique position to obtain implementation grants � through the federal Community Preservation Pilot Program, Currently, WSDOT is taking a cooperative, suttewide approach to structuring the grant proposa . However, regional and local governments are welcome to submit their own unique,gmaPttptt� and l,cttcr of Intent to the FHWA. We are encouraging participation in drafting a cooperative approach to the Pilot Program by requesting that your organization begin thinking;about a project to propose Projects proposed for the cooperatu c approach should crc. I li ,t, tiansporta(ion wid land use and sock to capitalize 011 01c ule of alternate iwxics. Patti. e), "tnicturing of the c.mperativc appioach to the Pilot Program is also welcomed as 11,. !. 09ot begun LU C_ l4 "Y J: 0]: 36FM F 0 1 s FROM:THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL TO: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:42PM 4952 P.01 AUG 21 1998 Washington State Department of Transportation 0,- Sid Morrison PLANNING COUNCL'""` ' WA 98504 73;;.Q .August 19, 1998 Harold Robertson, Director Thurston Regional Planning Council 2404 Heritage Court SW#13 Olympia,WA 98502-6031 Rc: Conununity Proservation Grant Program- Section 1221 of TEA 21 Dear Mr. Robertson: Under TEA 21 - Section 1221, Congress established the Community Preservation Pilot Program, This innovative pilot program provides funding for planning, research and implementation projects linking transportation and land use. The intent of the pilot program is to highlight techniques, strategies and projects used to link transportation and land use. The goal is to capitalize on the use of alternate modes of transportation to preserve the capacity of the road and highway system. Ultimately,the pilot program seeks to fiord strategies and projects that change travel behavior To be eligible for this innovative TEA 21 pilot progran, applicants must submit the Letter of Intent to the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA)by October 30, 1998. Grant applicants can be either local, regional or state government. Washington is a leader in research on transportation quid land use linkages. The state's growth management program integrates local and regional plans and seeks modal integration. This leadership places communities in Washington in a unique position to obtain implementation grants __.. through the-federal Community Preservation Pilot Program. Mr. Harold Robertson August 19, 1998 Page 2 A project example might be the implementation of changes to land use near a proposed transit station that effectively reinforces the use of several modes. Other examples are the implementation of the "skinny street"concept applied to an urban center or the completion of a bicycle and pedestrian facility, linked to changes inland use initial discussions concerning the Pilot Program have centered on encouraging communities to suggest implementation projects already identified in long range plans. - wrifinv wheth— your oreaniration may propene a project, or otherwise wishesri^tit,- Please call Ryan Zulauf at(360)-705-7968 by August 27, 1998, to indicate your organizations de;it,. to participate Whim k� r,00gnin the short federal deadline may be a hindrance, imiln 111,01un t,y vour organir.a+ion is criti:al to the success of this cooperative response to the Conirnunity Preservation Pilot }'robram. Communities in Washinbton are uniquely situated to take advantage of this funding source under TFA 2 1. Let's work together to keep Washington a leader in creativc transportation and land use Solutions I look forward to working with Sou and your organization to find new,creative transportation solutions Since/rely, CHARLES E. HOWARD, !R Planning Manager Plaming and Programming Service Center Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot I�rogram TEA-21 Outreach: Discussion Materials for Initial Stakeholders Meeting U.S. Department of Transportation Room 10234, 1:00 pm to 4:30 p.m. August 5, 1998 f, INTRODUCTION The Department of Transportation (DOT) is preparing to Implement Section 1221 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21" Century (TEA-21), which establishes the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP). This paper provides information and questions for an initial meeting with stakeholders on the '�,i;:;1emQntation of this program The results of this meeting will be used in a Federal Regi ,tel Nntico, and a larger stake )holder meting bring planned for mid-September. IL BACKGROUND The TCSP provides funding for planning grants, implementation grants, and research to $ investigate and address the relationship between transportation and community and e system p ^rvation. States, local governments, and metropolitan planning o,ganiza (MPOs) are eligible for discretionary grants to plan and implement strategies ..(-,,ch improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce environmental impacts of transportation, reduce the need for costly future public infrastn.ir'tl lrl investments ensure efficient access to jobs, services and centers of trade, ar.,i Y :rn!�+t? �levf:ic. rt!w ;? -:at:carr is and ident;fy strategiot s to encourage I;l iv,�te dev,7110";ri',er1t wi"z r-1t achieve: these goals f:-r thf' ri��,p .S pm mi! �,ti r� r V tf�7� Lr, XM rrt:l!r.-n Yearogrf9r F 1 2noo III oil iiallmooil FROM'THURSTON RE': PLNG CNCL T0: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:44PM #953 P.02 Mr Ilarold Robertson \ugust 19, 1998 A project example might be the implementation of changes to land use near a proposed transit station that effectively reinforces the use of several modes. Other examples are the implementation ofthc`skinny street" concept applied to an urban center or the completion of a bicycle and ped��n:�n fact;tq, hnkd to changes in land use. Initial discussions concerning tic Pilot Program havc c(:nlcre(l on cnwuraging communities to suggest implementation projects already identified in long range plans. _. The federal tirnchnc for the submittal of the Lcticr of Intent to_FI i1?VA is Shnrt Please indicate in writing,whether your organization may propose a project, or other%%ise vdshcs to participate. Please call Ryan Zulauf at(360)-705-7968 by August 27, 1998, to indicate your organizations dcsirc.to participate. While N�c rc qm/,i- the short federal dradllnc coati' be a hindrance, participation by your organization is critical to the success of this cooperative response to the Community Preservation Pilot Program. Communities in Washington are uniquely situated to take advantage of this funding source under TFA I i i it's %,, rrk together to keep Washington a leader in creative transportation and land use solutions. I look forward to working with you and your organization to find new, creative tlan:portatjon solutions. Sinccrcly, CHARLES E. HOWARD, IR Planning Manager Planning and Programming Service Center CLI I/RZ-Jr Enclosure �.c. WSDOT Rvelonal Adnsinistratur:; WSDOT Regional Planners 'fPO Regional p1wolers -1['PM Yii FROM:THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL T0: 3604588417 AUG 259 1998 2:45PM 4953 P.03 Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program TEA-21 Outreach: Discussion Materials for Initial Stakeholders Meeting U.S. Dcpa!lniutlt of Transportation R.00n, 10234, 1.00 pm to 4:30 p.m. August 5, 1998 1. INTRODUCTION The Department of Transportaticn (DOT) is preparing to implement Section 1221 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21' Century (TEA-21), which establishes the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP). This paper provides information and questions for an initial meeting with stakeholders on the implementation of this program. The results of this meeting will be used in a Federal Register Notice and a larger stakeholder meeting being piannea for mica-September. Ii. BACKGROUND { The TCSP provides funding for planning grants, implementation grants, and research to g g investigate and address the relationship between transportatior and community and e system preservation. States, local governments, and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are eligible for discretionary grants to plan and implement strategies which improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce environmental impacts of transportation, reduce the need for costly future public r-frastructure investments, ensL,re efficient access to )obs, services and centers of trade, and exam,r;e doveiaprrlent page;res a,)d ide;,tifr str atE3gic s to Hn;curare private sector development patterns which achieve these goals. Funding for the TCSP is $20 million in FY 1999 anct $25 million per year for FY 2000 through 2003 The size, �--.,)e and number of grants funded under TCSP will be ion)ridt-:1 ori the proposals received from potential grantees. DOT anticipates that in the first year of the program there may be 20 to 30 grants. Community Preservation Practices: The protects and research funded under this program will develop, implement, and evaluate transportation activities that support transportation and community and system preservation practices. The program will demonstrate transportation strategies that balance s^ort and long term environmental, economic, and social equity needs of communities. Examples of current community preservation practices include policies to direct spending to high growth areas: urban troy&, t:)^undarieS to guide metropolitan expansion; and green corridors that provide to major highway corridors for efficient and compact development l FROM: THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL TS: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:45PM 9953 P.04 Outreach and cooperation with partners and stakehoiders: The Federal Highway Administratior1 {FH'JVA), which is adm nlstering this program for DOT, is establishing this program in cooperation with other Federal agencies, state, regional, and local governments. To prepare the initial design and implementation of this program, FHWA has established a working group with representatives from Federai Transit Administration, Federal Railroad .Administration, Research and Special Programs AdministrationNolpe Research Center, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, and the Envircrimer,tal Protection Agency With this working group, FHWA is gathering input through a Federal Register Notice and through meetings with stakeholders conducted as part of DOT's outreach plans following the passage of TEA-21. Fo, ongoing input into the development and priorities for the program, FHWA is considering workshops with current and potential grantees and stakeholders and Federal Register Notices to announce priorities for upcoming grants. In addition, Section 5107 of TF-A-21 establishes an advisory board under the Surface Transportation-Environment Cooperative Research Prrzgram This board of scient,sts engineers and State and local agencies may provide another opportunity to gather ongoing input for the development of the program. Research: The TCSP includes a comprehensive research program to investigate the - ^ommrrnity preservation, and the environment. at�onships t:ehNcen transportation ,r;j t; investigate the role of the private sector in shaping such relationships. The research program also includes morlitoring and analysis of protects carried out under the grant program. The goal of the research program is to build a knowledge base of work in this field that will enable State, regional and Icc;al govemmert agencies t'-Ie private sector and interest groups to create communities which meet current and long term environmental, social equity, and economic goals. With coordination and input from its partners and stakeholders, the FHWA will identify and initiate needed research to support the purposes of the TCSP. The research may be conducted through cooperative agreements with organizations, contract support, or through State, local and MPO grants. FHWA is proposing to cor Cer1trate the research program on five areas; 1 . Synthesizing existing research and knowledge; 2 identifying gaps in our knowledge base and strategies for closing them; 3 Fvaluating effectiveness of each grant project and an overall program evaluatic�.n, 4 Developing needed tools and methodologies; and Effectively coordinating and disseminating results. tools and information developed by the program 2 FROM:THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL T0: 3684588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:46PM #953 P.05 111, PURPOSES OF THE TCSP Activities funded under TCSP must addrtss and integrate each of the purposes of the program. How'well proposed projects achieve each of these purposes will be a principal criterion in selecting proposals for funding. Activities eligible for funding under Title 23 or Chapter 53 of title 49 U.S.C. or other activities determined by the Secretary t0 bb appi opi tato arra eligible for funding. Additional prior ities and criteria for planning and or implementation grants follow in Parts III and IV. Grant proposals must address how proposed activities will demonstrably: 1) Improve the efficiency of the transportation system; Proposals for TCSP activities should identify, develop and evaluate new measures of transportation efficiency that are based on maximizing the use of existing community infrastructure, such as highways, rail and transit systems, nat;iral resources, and the built environment. Performance measures should include a focus on people and access rather than cars, or goods carried and services provided carried rather than miles traveled. 2) Reduce the Impacts of transportation on the environment; Proposals for TCSP activities should explore the long term direct and indirect social, economic and environmental impacts of transportation investments on the S ,1<J1ural and built environment. performance Measures should relate the results of ., 8 ind;v dual activities to the larger community and regional environment and the transportation system. 3) Reduce the need for costly future public infrastructure; Proposals for TCSP activities should describe how they will reduce the need for costly future public infrastructure investment and/or create tools and techniques to measure these savings. Performance measures should include projected investment savings from these activities. 4) Ensure efficient access to jobs, services and centers of trade; and for TCSP activities should clear!y demonstrate how they improve affordable access to jobs, services and centers of trade. This could also the use of new techrologies to reduce the need to travel. Performance r, c :aures should include improved access to jobs and services, and for freight movements. 5) Encourage private sector development patterns. Proposals for TCSP activities should identify effective strategies to encourage te sector investments that result in !and development patterns that help meet the goals of the program Performance measure should dernonstrate and montor charges in development patterns from TCSP activities 3 FROM:THURS-' _.. PEG PLNG CNCL T0: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:46PM 4953 P.06 IV. CRITERIA FOR PLANNING GRANTS • Plana ng assistance under the TCSP is intended to provide financial resources to States-and communities to explore integrating their community preservation and environmental initiatives with transportation programs. • Each planning grant will include a project evaluation coWi�ponr�vnt, • Priority will be given for proposals that: -- meet the purposes of the program described above;. -- demonstrate a commitment of non-Federal resources; and -- include public and private involvement including the involvement of non- traditional partners in the project team. V. CRITERIA FOR IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS • Implementation assistance under the TCSP is intended to provide financial resources to States and communities that have established community preservation programs to enable them to carry out projects that address transportation efficiency while meeting community preservation and environmental goals. Implementation grants are an incentive to applicants that have already instituted preservation practices. u • Priority will be given to applicants that have already instituted preservation or development programs and policies that: -- Are eligible for Federal highway and transit funding; -- Are coordinated with State and locally adopted preservation and development plans; -- Integrate transportation and community and system preservation practices; Promote investments in transportation infrastructure and transportation activities that minimize adverse environmental impacts; Encourage private sector investments and innovative strategies that address the purposes of TCSP; Propose activities that meet the purposes of the program; and/or Propose activities where implementation and results will be timely. • Implementation grants will be distributed equitably with respect to a diversity of populations and geographic regions. • These grants will need to include an evaluation component to measure the results of the activities- 4 FROM:THURSTON REG PLNG CNCL TO: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:47PM 9953 P.07 VI. PROGRAM ISSUES Relationship of TCSP To Current Transportation Planning Processes: Activities funoed by tnis program may be used to test or implement new, innovative planning methods and programs that significantly update and improve upon existing Statewide and MPO long-range transportation plans. The TCSP funds are intended to leverage new community preservation initiatives rather than to fund the ongoing planning activities of States and MPOs. TCSP-funded activities must demonstrate coordination w,th the State or %1PO to ensure the planning process is not circumvented. In addition, -i-ilvitles should encourage and improve public involvement in the overall planning process as well as in the individual project. Construction projects funded by the TCSP will ultimately be included in an approved State or MPO Transportation improvement Program (TIP), TCSP funds should not be requested for projects that have already been scheduled for funding and are in the current State or MPC? TIP. Non-construction activities funded by the TCSP, such as the development of regional plans and policies, project evaluations, and land development code changes, may not need to appear in a Statewide or MPO TIP, but should still have the support or endorsement of the State or MPO. Non-construction projects such as - these way result in changes to existing State and MPO pans and would need coordination with other jurisdictions within a metropolitan region or State. VII. LETTERS OF INTENT To lessen the burden of the application process, FHWA plans to request brief Letters of Intent (1.01) (3-4 pages). An 1.01 would briefly describe how the proposal addresses each of the purposes of the program and the specific criteria for planning or implementation grants FHWA is particularly interested in supporting s a ed with is that are ready to oegin and to collect and document results that can hers quickly. The LOI's should highiight when the proposal would be initiated and when results are expected. From the LOls, Fl,WVA will select the ones that will Ue asked to prepare 3 grant request for further consir'er,-'+.'orr PROPOSED TIME LINE FOR TCSP FY 1999 FY 2000 Proposed sed l TCSP Milestones p,Cp�o -__ issue Federal Register Notice and I Aug. 30, 1998 March 1999 I I Request for Letters of Intent -- Ma�19�9 _Comments and Letters of Intent Due Oce i Select 1 st round to Prepare Grant j Nov. 30, 1998 June 1999 Requests _ --- I Grant proposals from selected Jan. 30, 1999 f Aug. 1999 Letters of Intent Due -- �._ - - - - Feb. 30_, 1999 :— Oct. 1999 i Grants-awarded- — --- - 5 FROM:THURSTvid REG PLNG CNCL TO: 3604588417 AUG 25, 1998 2:48PM ##953 P.08 `Jill. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION The following_questions provide a framework for initial discussions with stakeholders at the August 51h meeting. 1. Project selection criteria: Should there be any additional weight or priority applied to any of trje criteria? Are the criteria by which the proposals will be evaluated clear and understandable? 2. Planning: How can we ensure that TCSP-funded activities support the existing Statewide and metropolitan planning process? How can this be done while still supporting innovative activities that may Ghallenge existing planning documents and processes or develop new planning techniques? 3. Grants: The TCSP addresses broad issues with regional or Statewide implications, Would funding of improvements to a single bus stop location, neighborhood street, or job center provide meaningful community preservation impacts on the larger region? Now should we balance grant-making between planning and implementation grants? Should tiger a be a cap on the size of implementation grants? Should land acquisition , and right-of-way purchases be funded? ., 4. Project timeliness: How important should the time line for implementation of projects be in our evaluation of proposed projects? S. Evaluation of projects: How can project sponsors effectively evaluate the results �)f activities? How can the results of indivjdual project evaluations be used to evaluate the overall impacts of TCSP? 6. Research: What gaps currently exist in our knowledge of community preservation practices? What experience -- both good and bad -- do we have with work in this field? What tools do practitioners need to achieve the integration of these issues in the planning process and in project implementation? T. Public and private sector involvement: How should grantees demonstrate a zommi+.ment of non-Federal resources and effective involvement of public and private partnac 5? How can we broaden the base of project oect participants ea sponsors,, hway fund encourage participation beyond the traditional recipients 8. General- Should requests for comments on the program and requests forLettersof ►;}tent go out in the same Federal Register notice? is the time line for Letter o nt and grants realistic? Should Letters of Intent be used for FY 2000 gran on and beyond ? What should the program be called (e g , TCSP, Co Y other)'? 9. Other issues: What other iss:Pes should bt! addressed? 6 Feet: M9f3N-c- 8(*-i <8: aip 04. yj�• , I( :� d, _ 7n3 Gi`��,.i� iW. -C�-+ti. I iI '1� L{1...'MC IJ a.LLt 61�. Jt ,! \.� �11V�'✓,,✓•17,r i '.. �iYf�iw� �r��•t(Ll QQi��}} p V, { I1 If SriT �# Oeilcros Vfi1Cilq io ifipt`)w l6r,+,, ifvs~'C7 �5 q. M ,tt y r 1p+ a �yA tosi t o b 0 1 rSu f c v 9 >�t,S flt t'Y :14) (Sj;i..,h �f"f 1 ii. .. ''J ,�, .�t1971��/ /IYf,T Va71'�� J„J�;c.F��. '2 s t Ji,�'."�l k'C� �s1! 9±l� t'JfC1 �:" : 3 qr1 Ir"]YA of f -ogqu4 f Zvi (1Jt .,} 1 t f ri sI �1r �v *�+✓�4 S f Fe ell e�i .«''7ty ,'L3 a T .,J 1- f�'.. ,.! �.s �: + �c.+ �• +✓y Y 7;11- sildw �!1ob 80, �-, �t � :s � .�. �?,'1tf;;a�.'"? "�t{iC��,� rt1 �t•1� L��7��r�1'�{;r�$�` ''� . �"' - + �--� i.�i{�IVi ,•t.-,7� ��i y�Ys"�f� . �:)R'�'T�11'�l 1t, i , fi ;K 2 Ei Or 2� 1 f?`I�Vd} t 10 -19911a b0orliodrigisn nol!f�-�Ol Mi tO g0lb✓rk �I#i�{GtV 0 e�"'�i,;y r. i °�L'1�G�`•,' r ", ,fw ` 'iii �' �� si :r,�,^•tii� r-it l.t,� r^ ,. ; ;.� i s1 �} f , i !^ r; ,� s3 �. 1-'- .. . -1 � is `arrt?"�t-} ��t''rl Nfii.E'i }' 6�k t`; �r.i t'y��•.I�f:'f'i �. , t' iY �l1'til 1 "�`a'F�; ed !a r�r.}or i so-Zg2srj-,Wq ijgW-jC-tr! 3b s1C,i .t "t`yi t � SL11"t tr�JZ�7�7"Ei gO11SLAV 1 c. .. +� PSO WOH. .etoe(Olq Hca nail ul va i !'•a 2(iC fsRl:I Jr3 ):Jni "60 iwoHl to ee I.Jv ni �4 +� 1 �] s s �] �$+t2 JL1 �u j! ^t r •t r c rtn+ yfa a " rliv �,�'� rI `ri�L�� , X111 ; ♦ s`S�}W� i 5 rtoi,��r^s'Vim} f e�it��.:� '��a�►, •` �� =� ft1£3#�Sgvlcc 1�C3 ��? etsvi` S. d "1 ie,e,-f-j C,i'1 ?;• !r r... �, y � i 8:v rl#`:y 4'✓w f ,� t 7' �{�: < � * , I '�> ��`� I': C. rt�., .•, .i7at.1�}i%!�S'.• it .�{'!� �f•1fQ, '�'*.F,►►C>�i;' i/'5�} � ,;,' �,�y{p"�. '�'s1' a' �,"�+�•7�, m t` i� 22rti�tz F1rfi1~~s�y lOT � _ Firm ; aAtil:) 1'SEdW 4 �;.:aitii"�,.sGl[�Adi." . ... .'. _... •'_-�`'« 5r..` . -:': - :...... - ..-'._:'. .-"JiYM:.�v_.....�c -'rSY1`�'&"'�.�t' ,r_ i._._.._ ._._._..ter. Trayspar=iol _-v Act for the 1.1 st Century http:..*,,*,Ar%vNv.*.',,,wa.do*.Zov-tea-I L T_7u"'L""Lu'*� IC C-' _., R r y 0 :lam 7_',rr_.en Ln I Jr v 0 Z ;u r'C.p m r --3r;J -F for a$sjSta:lCe un&-r subsec-io:1 ies e' ic to carry -..jff'P_eh-er.si-- e rc--- M tiecrta- ' 1. t--' r D, cr:rFin;UTlit- bet-eea transport:, and thr, _c-i., of -,.ri`:ate z F_ suc-i r r n Thr: 2 e'errer_tS. --'.'he shal_ f r -,arric.-d C,U',. ml:r� 'oring 371 -'arr- 0_1'. -A f-jrjs rar:1 L ani! t-D tc -Aan' _i -:7 - at'-OTi r-anz ar.d, crac t -The - cIs bn - C�l) ose T, - D, e e C enc v t'l-_ "M sp o t (A WE n Su C.f':at on ,DTI t`;e Y, t:)e im- pactsOf 7o redu�ze o r P unji<: jrjfras-_r,_cture; to pro-vide efficicrt tO JObs' services, D tr: M -.o exaTip.e patterns ant- ident-li.--l' ru t- Lq pattem.-:, which achieve _te gca-s id-entifir'd ir, It mi,Je a-vailable .(7 Y -tarv S- e rLo it L I, 1 7,: r i t rr..en 7 j rr h,e s:-t JD tCnl T1 73 r. - r r' � W 0� m DD OD A C _ A lD I[ LD i W T m 74 of 77 4di Alno i-:^l nw. -1 -I S r 7J U7 O Z m �l r z c� n z n r 0 W m m A 0 m A r J D C GI N V r-� lD 1,D D RJ A lD D 3 tt �D W r 75 of?7 ~ 8.+'14(48 1:52 PA CITY OF WORKSPUBLIC Memo To: Rail Advisory Committee From:Ken Garmann CC: File Date: 02/15/00 Re: "RAC" Meeting "RAC" committee members, there has been an advisory meeting scheduled for February 24th - 4:00 p.m. at the Prairie Hotel conference room located at 701 Prairie Park Lane NE in Yelm. Please mark your calendars for that date! Hope to see you all there. KG 0 Page 1 02/16/2000 11: 23 3604588417 PUBLIC WORK- PAGE 01/01 CITY OF YELM PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Memo To: Rail Advisory Committee From:Ken Garmann CC: File Date: 02/15/00 Re: "RAC' Meeting "RAC" committee members, there has been an advisory meeting scheduled for February 24" - 4:00 p,m. at the Prairie Hotel conference room located at 701 Prairie Park Lane NE in Yelm. Please mark your calendars for that date) Hope to see you all there. KG • Page 1 ACTIVITY REPORT TIME 02/16/2000 13:00 NO. DATE TIME FAX N0. /NAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT COMMENT 02/16 09:50 1 360 438 2986 49 01 OK RX ECM #03 02/16 10:14 94382986 39 01 OK TX ECM #05 02/16 11: 23 94584348 16 01 OK TX ECM 005 02/16 11: 25 92538430279 20 01 OK TX #05 02/16 11: 26 94586950 15 01 OK TX ECM #05 02/16 11: 28 92539229781 16 01 OK TX ECM #05 02/16 11: 29 912063437053 16 01 OK TX ECM #05 02/16 11: 30 94588301 37 01 OK TX #05 02/16 11: 46 94584307 21 01 OK TX ECM #06 02/16 11: 51 912538333746 16 01 OK TX ECM #05 02/16 11: 54 94588501 00 00 -- BUSY TX #05 02/16 11: 56 92538333746 BUSY TX 02/16 12:38 3603523964 01-AB 03 OK RX ECM BUSY: BUSY/NO RESPONSE / NG POOR LINE CONDITION / CV COVERPAGE ((( CA CALL BACK MSG POL POLLING RET RETRIEVAL TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REP[ TIME : 02/16/2000 11:51 DATE DIME 02/16 11:51 FAX N0./NAME 912538333746 DURATION 00:00:16 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM Law Offices N�� BETTS PATTERSON & MINES, Ps 800 Financial Center 1215 Fourth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98161-1090 Fax: 206-343-7053 Stephen L. Day Phone: 206-292-9988 entail: sday@bpmlaw.com December 18, 1998 Mr. Ken Garmann Director of Public Works City of Yelm 105 Yelm Avenue West P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Ken: For your information, enclosed is the December 1998 issue of Regional View. Sincerely, Stephen L. Day SLD:smt Enclosure PACIFIC NORTHWEST ASSOCIATION OF RAIL SHIPPERS FALL SEMINAR September 15-16, 1999 WHAT RAIL SHIPPERS SEEK: IT'S NOT "RE-REGULATION," "FORCED ACCESS," OR "OPEN ACCESS" by Michael F. McBride LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P. 1875 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20009-5728 (202) 986-8050 (Telephone) (202) 986-8102 (Facsimile) mfmcbrid@llgm.com (E-Mail) WHAT RAIL SHIPPERS SEEK: IT'S NOT "RE-REGUL,ATION," "FORCED ACCESS," OR "OPEN ACCESS" by Michael F. McBride' ' "These guys[the railroads]just don't get it. No matter what relief is offered for captive shippers, the railroad industry closes ranks and calls it reregulation. "It's just ridiculous. There are many cases where a railroad has a monopoly. Trying to undo a monopoly is in fact deregulation, not reregulation. The big lie[of AAR] is getting a little old."' INTRODUCTION Rail shippers are very frustrated by what they perceive to be the inadequate remedies available to them at the Surface Transportation Board (the "STB" or "the Board"). See Attachment 1 ("Shippers Demand More Railroad Competition"). Some of the fault, certainly, lies with the law, which as interpreted is tilted substantially in favor of the railroads(as compared with other regulatory statutes). But some of the fault, shippers believe, also lies with the Board or its predecessor, The Interstate Commerce Commission ("ICC"). Then, too, a major part of problem also stems from the attitude of the railroads towards the shippers,2 but their attitude, of course, may at least in part be the product of governmental policies that have caused railroads to believe they have no reason to respond to the shippers' needs. Railroads have actually persuaded themselves that they have a property right to the revenue stream of their captive customers!' On that issue, at least, the railroads' attitude is not the direct result of the policies of the *Mr. McBride is a partner in the Washington,D.C.law offices of LeBoeuf,Lamb,Greene&MacRae,L.L.P. Mr.McBride represents Edison Electric Institute and other shipper interests before the Surface Transportation Board and in the courts. ' "Hutchison Proposes Third Alternative," Journal of Commerce, March 31, 1999 at IA(remarks of Ed Emmett, President, National Industrial Transportation League). 2 No other industry has such acrimonious relations with its customers, particularly its best customers, and no other industry had to be ordered by the Government(as the STB had to do in Ex Parte No. 575 in April 1998)to talk to its customers about matters of mutual interest. There is no better proof of the extent of the problem. 3 In one ICC proceeding a few years ago, Omaha Public Power District obtained the right to cross the lines of the Burlington Northern Railroad to "build out" to the lines of the Union Pacific. The ICC held that BN was entitled to compensation for the fair market value of its real estate, but not for the revenues it would lose if OPPD switched to UP. BN actually sought judicial review of the ICC's decision, arguing that it was entitled to $28.5 million(its estimate of the present value of the future revenue stream from OPPD's business)rather than about$5300, OPPD's estimate of the value of the real estate being taken (which the ICC adopted as the value BN was entitled to receive for its property). The case was settled before the D.C. Circuit could decide it. More recently, Arvid Roach, counsel to AAR and UP, has stated that, in his opinion at least, the railroads have a constitutional "property interest" in such revenue streams of all of their captive shippers. See "Oppose `Open Access,"' Traffic World, March 8, 1999 (Attachment 2). While I do not believe a court would accept the railroads' argument (I am not aware of any court having accepted that argument for any other industry), the fact that the railroad industry seriously asserts such a (continued...) ICC/STB, because the ICC held that a railroad is not entitled to the revenue stream from a captive shipper before it can be required to allow a shipper to cross its lines to reach a competitor railroad. See footnote 3, supra. But the general notion asserted by railroads that they have a right to keep their captive customers • for themselves and "exploit" that captivity in setting rates (as the Eighth Circuit seemed to imply in affirming the STB's "bottleneck rate"decisions,MidAmerican Energy Co. v. STB, 169 F.3d 1099(8th Cir. 1999), petition for certiorari filed July 1999) may underlay both the railroads' attitude toward their customers and the fanciful notion that the railroads have a Constitutionally protected "property interest" in the revenues from their captive traffic. While the notion that the railroads' franchise entitles them to their revenue streams from the captive shippers is emphatically not grounded in the Constitution, as railroad counsel sometimes assert, because the railroads act under grant of governmental authority and as such are obliged to serve the public in a reasonable manner,' the STB seems to believe that it is obliged, other than in the "build out" and line crossing exemption proceedings, to ensure that the railroads' revenues from their captive customers are not materially reduced by whatever action it is considering. Shippers emphatically reject that general concept, asserting that Congress, in the Staggers Rail Act of 1980,emphasized that competition,not regulation,should be promoted. (Also, railroads generally are free to abandon lines, and have done so, and are not compelled to make investments, as utilities are.) It is true by definition that genuine competition leads to better service and rate decreases, a proposition asserted by none other than Union Pacific Railroad in the Canadian National/Illinois Central Railroad merger proceeding at the STB (see letter dated March 19, 1999 at 1)(emphases in original): Genuine competition, however, is about much more than this: it is about rate decreases and service improvements. Only the introduction of an independent second competitor can ensure continued, genuine competition. What has happened is that the ICC and STB have interpreted the Staggers Act to promote revenue adequacy over all other goals in most of their actions. The result, it seems to many shippers, is that the railroads are neither effectively regulated nor competitive for the 30 percent or so of their traffic that is captive, and that the problem has grown steadily worse as a result of the torrent of railroad mergers and acquisitions since 1980. Space does permit a listing of all of the shippers' frustrations over the last 20 years, but this paper lays out the reasons for some of those frustrations, and what the shippers have asked Congress or the STB to do about them. Preliminarily, however, I must say that the shippers' preferred relief—enactment of S. 621, the "Railroad Competition and Service Improvement Act of 1999," and H.R. 2874, the companion bill in the House, which I discuss at greater length later in this paper — is not "re-regulation," as Ed Emmett, President of NIT League, stated so well in the quotation that appears at the beginning of this paper. The '(...continued) proposition strongly suggests that the gulf between the Class I railroads and their best customers is wide indeed. FPC v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U.S. 591, 603 (1944) ("Hope"), citing with approval the concurring opinion of Justices Brandeis and Holmes in Missouri ex rel. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. Public Service Comm'n of Missouri, 262 U.S. 276, 289(1923). 2 railroads coined that term, but of course it assumes that they are now deregulated, which simply is not true. In 1979, Congress actually considered an Administration proposal to completely deregulate the railroads within five years (see S. 796), but it rejected that bill in favor of what became the Staggers Rail Act of 1980. That statute preserved substantial jurisdiction over railroad rates, services, abandonments, and mergers. All S. 621 and H.R. 2874 would do is "level the playing field" that now tilts dramatically in favor of the railroads by implementing what shippers believe was the original intent of Congress in enacting the Staggers Act by promoting competition, rather than regulation, as the remedy. The irony of this debate is that the railroads are trying to preserve the regulatory system they live under; it is the shippers who are seeking to implement competition wherever possible, which is the very antithesis of regulation. Some of the specific reasons that have caused rail shippers such frustration, and have caused them to seek legislative relief or relief at the STB, are: 1. Merger and Acquisition Policy. Because of a reduction in the number of 40 Class I railroads from more than 40 in 1980 to only about seven today, rail shippers have lost much of the competition they once enjoyed. (Effectively, there are only five large carriers, with no more than two having the franchise to serve most markets. Vast areas of the country are served by only one railroad, under their exclusive franchises.) Virtually no major market is served by more than two railroads, and many are only served by one. Although some mergers have produced some efficiencies, they have been accompanied generally by worse service and higher overall transportation costs to shippers. Huge acquisition premiums have been passed along to captive shippers, contrary to the policy in every other regulated industry.5 In the Conrail proceeding, appeals from which are pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the amount of the acquisition premium is shown below: ACQUISITION PREMIUM CALCULATION Acquisition Premium (Book) Conrail Acquisition Price, Including Assumed $20.018 billion' Obligations Conrail Assets — Gross Book Value $ 8.510 billion Acquisition Premium (L.1-L.2) $11 .508 billion Source: CSX/NS-195, Further Erratum to V.S. of William Whitehurst, Jr. Obviously, this premium is so large that CSX and NS are likely to raise rates wherever possible. The premium is also causing the fee Canadian Pacific must pay CSX to use its tracks into New York city to be at 71 cents/car-mile instead of the 29 cents/car-mile CSX and NS agreed to charge one another. CSX, in fact, is trying to raise it to $1.22/car-mile. CP has said it cannot compete with CSX if CP is s See Hope, supra, citing with approval the concurring opinion of Justices Brandeis and Holmes in Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., supra, 262 U.S. 276 (1923); see also id. at 310 ("Value is a word of many meanings. That with which commissions and courts in these proceedings are concerned, in so-called confiscation cases, is a special value for rate-making purposes, not exchange value."). 3 charged more than 36 cents/car-mile. As of this writing, the STB has not ruled on petitions to reconsider the CP trackage-rights fee. There is also an inconsistency between the STB's merger policy and its "bottleneck" decisions. This can best be illustrated by reference to the case of MidAmerican Energy's plant at Sergeant Bluff, • Iowa, north of Council Bluffs. Before the Union Pacific-Chicago & North Western Railroad merger, MidAmerican could get a separate rate from C&NW for the "bottleneck" portion of its coal movement from Council Bluffs to Sergeant Bluff, and combine it with separate rates on UP and BN from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. As a result of the UP-C&NW merger, however, a combined UP-C&NW is no longer indifferent to whether UP or BN originates MidAmerican's coal, but the STB's attitude in rail mergers is that such "end-to-end" mergers as UP-C&NW create no competitive harm. Rather, the STB's policy is, "file a rate complaint" if a shipper asserts that its rail rate is excessive. Of course, MidAmerican did file a rate complaint; it was one of the "bottleneck" cases. And, of course, the STB dismissed it.' So the combination of rail mergers and the "bottleneck" cases has deprived shippers of a remedy in either type of proceeding. Yet, there is no question that a shipper such as MidAmerican has lost competition as a result of a combination of the two policies. This also refutes the STB's constant characterization of all rail mergers as "pro-competitive." Some, such as the Canadian National/Illinois Central merger, may be (especially once the STB protected the "2-to-1" shippers in Geismar, Louisiana), but other mergers have, in fact, reduced competition for many shippers, even seemingly captive ones such as MidAmerican and the other "bottleneck" complainants. 2. Loss of Competition. Current law instructs the STB to treat competition as the equal of profitability in regulating railroads. The ICC and STB have treated railroad profitability as the preeminent policy consideration. 3. Competition in Terminal Areas. Closely related to the ICC's and STB's concern with railroad revenue adequacy over all other considerations was the ICC's decision to require a shipper to show competitive abuse as a prerequisite to obtaining terminal trackage rights or reciprocal switching in a terminal area. Current law does not contain a requirement for showing competitive abuse, requiring only that the rights requested be pro-competitive and in the public interest. Congress should instruct the STB to enforce existing law. S. 621 would do that, by eliminating the extra-statutory "competitive abuse" test from the Board's competitive access standards. See Midtec Paper Corp. v. Chicago and North Western Transp. Co., 857 F.2d 1487(D.C. Cir. 1988), aff'g 1 I.C.C.2d 362, 364(1985)and 1986 ICC Lexis 214 (July 22, 1986). There is also a conflict between the ICC/STB policy of requiring a showing of"competitive abuse" before it will permit a shipper to prevail under the terminal trackage rights/reciprocal switching provision and the STB's policy of not requiring a railroad to make a similar showing before gaining terminal trackage rights in a merger, acquisition, or control proceeding. The STB has decided, apparently, that 6 In dismissing the rate challenges of MidAmerican and other captive shippers after the ICC had adopted a policy that captive shippers should seek relief through a rate complaint rather than in a merger proceeding, the STB reminds me of the Ninth Circuit's characterization of the Secretary of Interior, after he refused to follow an earlier Department of Interior policy: "To say to these appellants, `The joke is on you. You shouldn't have trusted us,' is hardly worthy of our great government." Brandt v. Hickel, 427 F.2d 53, 57 (9th Cir. 1970). 4 mergers are in the public interest, and therefore such a showing should not be required, but that providing terminal trackage rights or reciprocal switching to a shipper is not so important. That may seem harsh, but otherwise why adhere to the extra-statutory "competitive abuse" standard? The shippers proposed, in the Ex Pane No. 575 proceeding, that the Board do just that. The railroads, of course, objected; no surprise there. But the Board merely told the Congress the dispute was "fundamental" (see Attachment 3, Chairman Morgan's December 21, 1998 letter to Sens. McCain and Hutchison), but did not otherwise resolve the matter. Surely, the Board does not maintain that it could not eliminate its own extra-statutory "competitive abuse" standard. Indeed, the Board did separately eliminate the ICC's "product and geographic competition" standard, even though that had been upheld by the Fifth Circuit as being within the ICC's discretion. So the Board has chosen to continue to interpret the terminal trackage rights/reciprocal switching statute one way for shippers, the other way for railroads. 4. "Bottleneck"Cases. The STB ruled that it does not have authority to require railroads to quote rates only over a "bottleneck" segment of a transportation movement, that is, over the portion where there is no competition. Because of the statutory requirement that rates for the entire movement exceed the costs of the entire movement by a substantial amount, the effect of the ruling is to require the shipper to subsidize a railroad over the entire movement, and thus to lose the benefit of competition over the "bottleneck" segment. Stated differently, with a "bottleneck" rate, a shipper could rely on competition to determine its rate fro the remainder of the movement. As already discussed, the STB's decision was appealed to the Eighth Circuit; but the Eighth Circuit affirmed, simply deferring to the STB under the Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-43 (1984). The Court of Appeals also relied on the railroads'need to be "revenue-adequate" in construing the statute,even though the STB itself disclaimed that rationale. The Eighth Circuit stated that it might have ruled differently if it had made the decision on its own. 5. "Revenue Adequacy" Determinations. The STB is required by statute to make annual determinations about the adequacy of railroad revenues. But the method adopted by the ICC and continued by the STB is so flawed as to be considered "nonsensical" and "archeological" by Professor Alfred E. Kahn, the Nation's leading regulatory economist and the "father of deregulation." Dr. Kahn concluded that the Board's findings are hopelessly flawed because acquisition premiums have been added to the railroad investment bases, and because of numerous other defects. Apparently Dr. Kahn's comments were effective, because STB Chairman Morgan has suggested that Congress might repeal the requirement to make such findings. But the Board's findings annually show profitable railroads as "revenue-inadequate," based on which railroads argue that they are not yet earning sufficient revenues and that neither Congress nor the STB should make any changes in law or policy that would cost railroads any revenue. Those arguments anger shippers. 6. Rate Case Guidelines. The ICC prescribed rate guidelines for large-volume shippers in Ex Parte No.347 (Sub-No. 1), Coal Rate Guidelines —Nationwide, 1 I.C.C.2d 520 (1985), affd sub nom. Conrail v. United States, 812 F.2d 1444 (3d Cir. 1987). While the Coal Rate Guidelines are workable for the few large shippers whose traffic cycles between the same origin and destination, such as a coal- burning utility, the guidelines do not work well—or at all—for shippers with multiple origin-destination pairs, such as chemical shippers. And they do not work at all, for small shippers. Moreover, large shippers now have to pay over $54,000 just to file their complaint, the fee will increase to over$230,000 over the next several years, and the cases are so complex they can cost $1 million or more to try. (The legendary McCarty Farms litigation apparently cost about $6 million and required a special act of the Montana Legislature to pursue!) 5 The STB did adopt small shipment guidelines in Ex Parte No. 347 (Sub-No. 2), but they have conceptual problems. It is almost certain that a prescribed rate under the small shipment guidelines would lead to a higher prescribed rate than under the Coal Rate Guidelines decisions (where rates at the level of 180 percent of variable costs have typically been prescribed). Shipper counsel are not entirely confident that a decision in favor of the shippers under the small shipment guidelines would survive judicial review. (The Association of American Railroads challenged the small shipment guidelines, but also suggested that the challenge was not ripe for judicial review, and the D.C. Circuit agreed, so the guidelines may be challenged if a shipper ever files under them and prevails — yet another reason to discourage shippers from pursuing relief.) Not only would a shipper have to prevail under the guidelines—and some at least, will not — but it would then have to prevail on judicial review, shouldering the burden, along with the Board for all small shippers of defending the decision against certain railroad industry attacks. (While the Board has a good record of defending its decisions, no sensible litigant would leave the defense of the agency's decision to the agency alone.) Which small shipper is going to want to be the first to have to litigate successfully before both the Board and the Court of Appeals? 7. "Market Dominance" Guidelines. As if the problems with the STB's rate guidelines were not enough, from 1981 until recently the STB allowed consideration of"product and geographic" competition in its determinations of"market dominance." (The STB must find that a railroad has "market dominance" to have the statutory authority to prescribe a lower rate.) While the STB was right to eliminate product and geographic competition,the railroads have dragged out the proceeding at the STB, and have now taken the matter to the D.C. Circuit now that the Board has denied reconsideration. Thus, for at least one or two years, shippers will not fully enjoy the benefit of the STB's decision, for fear that the courts will overturn the STB's decision. Previously because of considerations of "product and geographic" competition, most shippers have had no interest in seeking a lower rail rate from the STB, because that inquiry leads to massive discovery into a shipper's business, rather than into transportation alternatives, if any, available to using the railroad. Thus, what Congress intended be a practical decision to be made expeditiously has instead turned into "antitrust-like" proceedings. This is just the opposite of what Congress intended, and shippers seek codification of the Board's decision excluding product and geographic competition. 8. The STB Doesn't Follow Its Own Railroad Cost Index. The ICC adopted an index—referred to as the "Rail Cost Adjustment Factor" by statute — that reflects productivity savings as well as cost increases. Now the STB has refused to require the railroads to follow that index in establishing fees, such as trackage rights fees, that shippers must pay. Shippers were to be entitled to an index that only tracks the railroads' costs, rather than indices that overstate the railroads' costs. Even though Congress codified the ICC's Productivity Adjustment decision in Ex Pane No. 290 (Sub-No. 4), 5 I.C.C.2d 434(1989), ajf'd sub nom. Edison Electric Inst. v. ICC, 969 F.2d 1221 (D.C. Cir. 1992), in 49 U.S.C. § 10708, the Board has not followed the obvious intent of Congress. The Board has allowed CSX and NS to avoid use of the productivity-adjusted RCAF for tariff rates, which is the only type of rate to which the RCAF applies! 6 *************** PROVISIONS OF S. 621 AND H.R. 2874 In response to the pleas of many, many shippers and shipper groups, Senators Burns, Conrad, • Dorgan, Roberts,and Rockefeller introduced S. 621, the "Railroad Competition and Service Improvement Act of 1999," on March 15, 1999 (Attachment 4). Congressional Record, S.2674 (daily ed., March 15, 1999). H.R. 2874, introduced in August by Congressman Quinn, is substantively identical. Major provisions affecting shippers are: o Increased Competition. The bill would elevate the promotion of rail-to-rail competition over all other policy goals. o "Bottleneck Rate" Relief. The bill would reverse that portion of the STB's "bottleneck" decisions that held that the STB did not have authority to require railroads to provide a rate, at a shipper's request, between origin or destination and any point of interchange with another railroad. Shippers believe that existing laws should have been so interpreted. • Terminal Trackage Rights/Reciprocal Switching. The bill would overturn the ICC's Midtec decision and permit a shipper to obtain terminal trackage rights or reciprocal switching without proving "competitive abuse." Shippers believe existing law should have been so interpreted. o Relief for Certain Agricultural Shippers. The bill would establish performance standards for railroads serving grain origins under a certain size (i.e., 4000 carloads per year, which use rail for over 60 percent of the grain shipped), and require the railroads to pay damages for failure to provide adequate service. Also, the bill would solve the small shipper rate-case problem by establishing a rate cap of 180 percent of variable cost for such shippers, equivalent to the rate levels prescribed for captive coal shippers in the "stand-alone cost" cases under the Board's Coal Rate Guidelines. o Eliminate Product and Geographic Competition from Market Dominance Determinations. The bill would codify the Board's December 1998 decision in Ex Parte No. 627 eliminating product and geographic competition from market dominance determinations. The railroads have sought reconsideration of the Board's decision, and have said that, if reconsideration is denied, they would seek review of the decision in the Court of Appeals, thus subjecting current rate disputes to years of uncertainty. The bill would eliminate the uncertainty. o Eliminate Annual Revenue Adequacy Determinations. The bill would follow Dr. Kahn's recommendation to eliminate the "nonsensical" and "archeological" determinations of the "revenue adequacy" of the Class I railroads. It would not eliminate the consideration of railroad revenue adequacy or inadequacy in rate proceedings, if relevant. (The Board's "stand-alone cost" methodology has nothing to do with revenue adequacy, so in such proceedings the concept is irrelevant. In proceedings brought under the Ex Pane No. 347 (Sub-No. 2) small shipper guidelines, however(should there ever be any), revenue adequacy or inadequacy would be relevant.) 7 o Railroad Reporting Obligations. The bill would require the railroads to report certain standardized data periodically to the Department of Transportation, under rules to be established by DOT. Some of the railroads are already reporting some such data voluntarily. There are two other STB reauthorization bills pending. One, S. 98, introduced by Commerce Committee Chairman McCain and others, would simply reauthorize the Board and subject the Chairman's position to Senate confirmation. Shippers are opposed to a "clean" reauthorization of the STB without substantive changes to the statute. The other bill, S. 747, introduced by Subcommittee Chairman Hutchison, would address some, but not all, of the shippers' concerns. Most notably, and unfortunately, it would codify, not reverse, the objectionable portion of the STB's "bottleneck" decisions. Nevertheless, shippers regard S. 747 as a good start toward the sort of legislation that is sorely needed. None of the bills would impose "open access" on the railroad industry. See Attachment 5 ("No One Proposes Open Access — Yet"). Railroad claims to the contrary (see Attachment 2) are just scare tactics. CONCLUSION In many ways, the policies of the ICC/STB have been tilted in favor of the railroads and against shippers, even under provisions of the statute that are neutral on their face, and thus were intended to be applied in an even-handed manner. When agencies adopt "heads I win,tails you lose"policies consistently favoring one group over another, sooner or later the inconsistencies will be the undoing of the very policies that the agency most cherishes. The railroads and the STB should fear that outcome. It is true that, in the last year, the STB has moved in the direction of the shippers to some extent, but on the most important issues, such as the "bottleneck" cases and with respect to terminal trackage rights/reciprocal switching, it has not done so, leaving those matters to Congress, as STB Chairman Morgan explicitly did in her December 21, 1998 letter. It therefore should come as no surprise to the railroads and the STB that shippers have pursued legislative relief that the STB has been unable or unwilling to award on its own, for they were essentially encouraged to do so. The most fundamental problem, however, is the attitude that the railroads have developed as monopolists. It is the attitude one would expect of a monopolist, but it will, in the end, be what produces change in favor of the shippers. The attitude is indifference, or even downright hostility toward the customer's needs and even the customer's point of view. The solution is simple: shippers should be treated as customers! In every other industry, customers reign supreme. But in the railroad industry, shippers are not treated as customers. In fact, a very major customer recently reminded a railroad that it is a customer. The railroad said "no you're not, you're a shipper!" Is there any wonder why shippers are so angry? 8 ATTACHMENT 1 April 5, 1999; at .� Shippers Demand More railroad Competition By Davrer.MACrur.EA And ANNA WIDE Man MS The Railroads Are Calling the Shots Staff Reporter of TttE w&u Srnanz JovnN u Deregulation and consumatlon have allowed a handful of railroads tD control Rtes in maAVS In eastern Texas. Champion Interna tional Corp.'s plywood and lumber mills where they have little or no cornpetition.The revenue derived in these markets so-called capdve complain they have lost customers in Cali- revenue,is growing.The chart shows total rail reverua ftm the largest commodities and the foriva because rail shipments became un- amount of the total that is'captnre.' reliable. Electric utility Minnesota Power Inc.says the high cost of transporting coal Wroads Cott'trol Rates.."r ...and Pass Along lavestmot Costs by rail means it must charge customers be- to biWoos I Freight caf costs,ln.biMons tween 5170 and 67c more for electricity than fe - $3, consumers in other areas. And a Kansas _ l Tatsl � Shippers farmer insists growers are shouldering 6 t� Railroads higher costs now that railroads are picking —Captive 2 up grain in fewer towns. In the most vigorous attack on the rail- roads in decades,shippers say they are be- 2 ing hit by puce gouging and poor service =4,. because of the lack of rail competition. Groups representing shippers of bulk grain and - tyd trtalet GeK leer 'ef Ye '9t 'e2 '23-.'04-'16 '96 goods—ranging from coal to � .. f�-Yetttebs _� s.�,. : r chemicals—are pressuring railroads to im r , p .Sauras CJ:PabcdY S +6Rltc 6Gnlb d As�orstm �= a; T a�s►t? .. rove service, backing legislation to lower rail rates and clamoring for changes in government policy toward railroads. pand capacity and boost efficiency, while Shippers attribute most of their prob- making local managers more accountable lems to the rapid consolidation of the U.S. forerformance. They say any.regulatory rail industry, where the number of major" changes now would jeopardize their ef- railroads has fallen from 40 in 1980 to just a handful today.Some shippers still are fum- torts. "The worst thing that could happen to railroads is to have the government ing over the disruptions and delays in rail shipping that followed Union Pacific squeeze railroad revenue just when we Corp.'s integration of Southern Pacific have such enormous capital needs." says Rail Corp.in 1997.Others are miffed at the Hark Aron, executive vice president of federal Surface Transportation Board, CSX Corp. He adds that some shippers which reviews rail mergers and competi- might benefit for a while,but"they'd only tion,for decisions they regard as favoring hurt themselves in the long run.'• railroads to the detriment of customers. But many rail shippers say they are be- 11mely Service Required ing overcharged. Dow Chemical Co.. Mid- land.Mich.,says it is captive to Union Pa- Meanwhile. major railroads have cut cific for much of its$200 million-a-year rail- their work forces by about 6001c and track shipping costs and often pays 30% more networks by around 357, since 1980, while than shippers in competitive rail markets. freight traffic has grown more than 454c.At ,Making matters worse, some shippers the same time. customers of all forms of of grain, coal and other commodities say transportation have adopted a policy of low Please Turn to Page A6.Column 1 inventories and just-in-time delivery,mak- ing them increasingly dependent on timely service—and highly critical when that ser- vice fails to meet expectations. Railroads are taking advantage of cus- tomers that have no choice but to rely on rail service." says Diane Duff. executive director of the Alliance for Rail Competi- tion.a Washington group that largely rep- resents utilities. chemical companies and agriculture interests."We just want to im- prove our bargaining position." Opposition to Regulation For their part, railroads accuse ship- pers of trying to "reregulate" the rail in- dustry• turning back the clock before the 1980 law that allowed railroads to price their services at market levels. That law. which also made it easier for railroads to shed unprofitable lines. is widely credited with reviving the rail industry's fortunes. Even so, railroads say their earnings and stock performance remain below the aver- age for U.S.companies. Railroads say they are working to fix the service problems.spending nearly 201,7c of their annual revenue on capital to ex- Shippers Want More Competition Continued F7rnn Page AP of lobbying in Washington that is unusual railroads have shifted to them much of the for the low-profile rail industry. But any rail industry's investment cost,such as for move to pass rail-reform legislation this freight-car purchases.Although producers year faces big obstacles. House Trans- of chemicals and plastics have historically portation Committee Chairman Bud Shus- shouldered this burden, Dow Chemical ter, a Pennsylvania Republican. has been says it has had to lease more than 1,000 ad- a strong supporter of rail deregulation,and ditional rail cars temporarily to deal with is unlikely to back major changes. Ship- rail-service delays. pers are sharply divided between those To address shipper concerns, the Sen- that move bulk and nonbulk goods.The lat- ate is considering legislation, fiercely op- ter can easily move by truck. so the rail- posed by railroads, to open some of their roads compete aggressively to haw them. tracks to competition.The bills would man- Some economists are ambivalent. date access for alternative railroads, put Theodore Keeler. professor of economics curbs on rail rates and give special treat- at the University of California at Berkeley, ment for smaller shippers. One bill would says that 'railroads are not ear-rung ade- overturn a decision by the Surface Trans uate profits and some shippers portation Board and force railroads to q P Ppetfeel they quote a rate over "bottleneck" se are not getting as good a deal as they segments, should." Still, he recalls the 1970s, when those limited stretches of track that con neer to another railroad.It also would limit nearly Zac`of the rail network was in bank- the fees and ease the filing process for bank- ruptcy."Things are far better for both rail- the and shippers than they were 25 years small agncultural shippers making com- plaints about rates, and require railroads agohe says. to submit service-performance reports to the Transportation Department. Such legislation could benefit Min- nesota Power, the Duluth-based electric utility. Its largest generating station, at Cohasset• Minn., depends on Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp.for its coal trans- portation. Although a second railroad is only SO miles away, Burlington isn't re- qwred to provide access to the second rail- road even though doing so could save money for Minnesota Power. As a result, Minnesota Power says it pays 3007c to 40th more for its transportation services than it would if it could obtain bids from both rail- roads. "Were so close to having competi- tion. says Bruce Browers,manager of fu- els at Minnesota Power. "But it might as ,veil be a million miles away." Slower, less-consistent rail service has hecome a fact of life for Champion Interna- ttonal's plywood and lumber mills in East Texas. Richard Kerth, Champion's trans- poriatiun manager, says the Stamford. Coon.. company lost customers in Califor- nia when rail service went from 15 days to as lung as 45 days. Although rail service since improved. fir. Kerth wants to open .,he Uaiun Pacific track sen-nng the mills to second railroad. "Champion has to com- pete for business." he says. "Why should- n't the railroads?" Steve Baccus,who runs a family farm in Minneapolis. Kan., has other issues with the railroads. He says he had to buy large trucks to haw his grain longer distances, now that railroads increasingly.prefer to use fewer and larger loading depots. A Union Pacific spokesman says the new hubs handle efficient 100-car trains and keep American grain competitive over- seas." Competition issues have set off a flood fflGommentark ATTACHMENT 2 Oppose ` 0 pen Access ' ' Railroads arc not earning more than their full costs today. Since Staggers, real rail rates ha%e fallen more than 50 percent. ome shipper groups are promoting railroad "open These declines hayc affected jointly served and exclusively served access"in Congress this year."Open access"propos- traffic alike. Fortunately, in a deregulated environment rail pro- als take various forms, including universal trackage ductivity has risen even more, and the industry has moved rights,mandatory reciprocal switching,and manda- toward revenue adequac\ — but it is still not there. Rail rates ton,"bottleneck"rates over any segment of a through movement. cannot be forced sharpy downward,as"open access"proponents But all of these proposals have one thing in common: they are seek,without condemning the railroads to chronic revenue inad- aimed at undercutting rail revenue. They would strike at the equacy. heart of the railroads' ability to invest at the veru time when Some argue it is unfair that railroads are allowed to charge adding capacity is most crucial.They would lead to shrinkage of higher mark-ups over cost to some users than others.But in tact, rail services and the ultimate nonviability of the railroads. They this is the only system that allows the railroads to be viable with- are anti-competitive — not, as claimed, pro-competitive — out public subsidy. .-knd it is the fairest system. If mark-ups were because, by trying to force more competi- forced to he equalized,traffic with a lover tion where the marketplace will not sup- The United States has the demand for rail service would simply shift port it, they would wipe out the basis for to trucking or other alternatives, and the the strong, sustainable competition that lowest rail rates and the remaining traffic could not generate the exists now. highest level of rail revenue needed for continued provision of The Staggers Rail Act of 1980,which sig- rail service. Relatively rail-dependent ship- nificant.l deregulated railroading,has been efficiency in the world. Pers would be under pressure to provide a huge success. The United States has the more,not less,revenue than they do today. lowest rail rates and the highest level of rail efficiency in the "Differential pricing"—charging mark-ups that reflect shippers' world.To attack the marketplace underpinnings of this success is relative demand for rail service — together with the current folly. maximum rate limits enforced by the Surface Transportation Railroading is highly competitive now.Large bodies of traffic, Board,allows every shipper to pay the lowest possible rate consis- such as intermodal and motor vehicle traffic, are fully competi- tent with a self-sustaining rail system. rive between railroads. Many shipper facilities are competitively Proponents of"open access" do not propose to compensate served. Trucks, water carriers and source competition constrain the railroads for the value they will lose through such measures. rail rates. Rail shippers, many of them larger than the railroads If they did,the measures would not yield the rate reductions their that sen•e them, often have significant economic leverage. New proponents seek. As a result,"open access" schemes would be innovations such as transloading and build-outs are continually unconstitutional takings of property, unless the taxpayers were raising the level of competition even higher. forced to pick up the tab. The companies that are pushing for But even• rail-served facility does not have two-railroad ser- these measures would of course tight to the death against the vice and that does not reflect any inadequacy in existing competi- forced sharing,at below-full-%aloe compensation,of their assets. tion. Railroads never had government-granted monopolies like It is just as inappropriate to force such a regime on the railroads. electric utilities and telephone companies. The present level of Finally, "open access" schemes would engender inefficiency rail competition reflects private marketplace decisions by and pervasive regulation. Access fees would have to be fought investors as to which rail markets will sustain multiple carriers over in acrimonious litigation la single trackage rights rental dis- and which will not.Artificially trying to engineer more competi- pute berveen Union Pacific and Southern Pacific took a decade tion than the private capital markets can support can only reduce to resolve in the 1980s and 1990s)."Bottleneck"schemes would the present level of rail competition by sapping the ability of rail- re-balkanize rail routings and damage efficiency. And forced, roads to cover their full costs of providing sen-ice. below-cost trackage rights would give rise to mvriad contentious Railroading is extremely capital-intensive. Railroads invest disputes about operations and investment, as landlord railroads three times more per revenue dollar than the average S&P 300 understandably sought to avoid spending money on service and company.To coyer their high fixed costs and stay viable,railroads infrastructure that they had no realistic hope of recovering.This must earn on average some 150 percent of their variable costs. is what has happened in Britain,where"open access"simply gave Where there is head-to-head, origin-to-destination competition rise to battling roadbed and sen•ice monopolies. bet-ween two or more railroads, the average rate is estimated at 106 percent of variable cost.Clearly,if all traffic is forced into the Arvid E. Roach 11 is in attorney with the law firm of Covington� head-to-head competitive mode,railroads simpiv will not be able Burling in ttiishingron, D.C. He has represented Union Pacific and to remain viable. other rrcnisparratiori clients. The views stated here are his own. 34 •nfiickCl 1111.1) •March 8, 1999 ATTACHMENT 3 �rS►Oo1 F,,urfttrP Lrttnsparttttian Nattra lfas4ington. 0.(5. 20423.0001 Voce of the Ohalrman December 21, 1998 The Honorable John McCain Chairman Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison Chairman Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Chairman McCain and Chairman Hutchison: In our letter of June 30, 1998, Vice Chairman Owen and I reported to you on the Board's recent informational hearings to examine issues of rail access and competition in today's railroad industry. After summarizing the testimony, the Board responses to the testimony(including the Board's April 17 decision, copy attached hereto as Addendum A), and further actions that might be taken by Congress, our letter reported on certain ongoing private-sector initiatives. The purpose of this follow-up letter is to inform you of the outcome of the Board's proceedings and the private-sector initiatives undertaken as a result of the hearings; and to suggest possible ways in which related issues that are still outstanding might be addressed. 1. Board Proceedings. As we pointed out in our prior letter, the Board initiated rulemaking proceedings addressing market dominance and service inadequacies. The Board has completed those proceedings. In Market Dominance Determinations - Product and Geomp is CCoo petition_ STB Ex Parte No. 627 (STB served Dec. 21, 1998), the Board repealed the product and geographic competition tests of the market dominance rules. This change applies to both large and small rail rate cases. In Relief for Service Inadequacies STB Ex Parte No. 628 (STB served Dec. 21, 1998), the Board issued rules giving shippers and smaller railroads opportunities to obtain service from alternate carvers during periods of.poor service, using either the emergency service or the access provisions of the law. Copies of these decisions are attached as Addenda B and C. 2. Railroad Industry Discussions. One of the issues that arose at the Board's hearings was the desire of smaller railroads to eliminate industry restrictions on their ability to compete. The Board directed the railroads to address this issue through private-sector discussions. As our earlier letter noted, the large and small railroads separately indicated that they were having some difficulties in reaching agreement, but the Board encouraged them to continue their dialogue, and indicated that it would take action, as appropnate, if they did not reach agreciment. We are pleased to report that in September, an agreement was reached, portions of which were formally approved by the Board. A copy of the Board's press release announcing the agreement is attached as Addendum D. 3. AAR/NGFA Agreement. In our June 30 letter, we advised you that, consistent with the Board's preference that private parties seek non-litigative dispute resolution mechanisms, the railroads were meeting with the National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) in an effort to arrive at an agreement on a mandatory arbitration program to resolve certain disputes. The Association of American Railroads (AAR) and the NGFA recently announced such an agreement. A copy of the AARJNGFA press release describing the agreement is attached as Addendum E. 4. Formalized Dialogue Among Railroads and Shippers. Another issue that arose at the Board's hearings involved the concern of some shippers that railroads had not been adequately communicating with them. To address this concern, the Board directed railroads to establish formalized dialogue with their shippers and their employees, particularly about service issues in general, small shipper issues, and any other relevant matters. The railroads have organized and conducted discrete and formalized meetings with various shippers and shipper groups throughout the Nation. The meetings, which have been attended by Chairman Morgan, were held in Chicago, IL; Houston, TX; Atlanta, GA; Newark, NJ; and Portland, OR. AAR's letter to the Board describing the meetings and the follow-up actions to be taken—including, among other things, issuance of performance reports by each of the large railroads, development of a plan for facilitating interline movements, and continuation of the outreach meetings—is attached as Addendum F. The Board, which supports the continued dialogue that the AAR letter promises, will be closely monitoring all of these follow-up steps. In addition to the AAR letter, a letter from various shippers regarding those meetings, and Chairman Morgan's response to that letter, are attached as Addenda G and H. 5. Additional Railroad/Shipper Discussions. Other shipper concerns that were raised at the Board's hearings involved railroad "revenue adequacy" and the Board's competitive access rules in general. Concluding that each of these issues could be better addressed initially in a private-sector rather than governmental forum, the Board directed railroads to meet with shipper groups to address the issues under the auspices of an Administrative Law Judge. Although extensive meetings were conducted, the parties could not reach agreement on these issues. Attached as Addendum I are copies of the reports that the parties submitted to the Board on their recommendations as to these issues. Revenue Adequacy. Although the concept of revenue adequacy has thus far had minimal real-world impact, the existing judicially approved revenue adequacy measurement, which focuses on a railroad's return on investment, has been a source of controversy. Based on suggestions from railroad and shipper representatives at the Ex Parte No. 575 hearing, the Board -2- directed railroads to meet with shippers with a view toward selecting a panel of three disinterested experts to make recommendations as to an appropriate revenue adequacy standard, and to name a panel and report back to the Board by May 15, 1998. The panel was then to report back with final recommendations on July 15, 1998. Shippers opposed this approach, contending that it would be expensive and inefficient for them to pay part of the costs of the expert panel, while also paying for litigation associated with the conduct of the proceeding before the panel and the Board (and, presumably, if either side wanted to litigate further, the courts). Ultimately, most of the participating shippers recommended that the Board itself initiate a new rulemaking looking to adoption of a revenue adequacy approach that would permit the Board to consider a variety of financial indicators in determining whether railroads are revenue adequate.' By contrast, contending that the multiple indicator approach advanced by the shippers would not provide enough certainty or predictability, the railroads supported the expert neutral panel approach. Competitive Access. The Board directed railroads and shippers to attempt to find common ground, and to meet, negotiate, and report back to the Board by August 3, 1998. After extensive meetings, the parties reached an impasse. The principal areas of concern involved the definition of terminal areas; the scope of reciprocal switching; appropriate compensation to an incumbent carrier; and, perhaps most fundamentally, whether access to other carriers ought to be required only when an incumbent carrier has acted in some sort of an anticompetitive way, or whether it ought to be provided whenever additional competition is determined to be in the public interest. 6. Possible Resolutions of Revenue Adequacy, Competitive Access, and Small Rate Case Issues. The Board appreciates the opportunity to assist Congress in addressing the transportation issues that face the Nation during these important times and believes that it has appropriately addressed matters of concern within the scope of the authority given to it by Congress. Nevertheless, it is likely that certain legislative proposals will be discussed in Congress during the next session. Following are some thoughts on some of the issues as to which legislative proposals are likely. Revenue Adequacy. The revenue adequacy issue, in our view, has unnecessarily polarized the transportation community. The underlying policy objective--that the Board's regulatory approach among other goals permit railroads to earn adequate revenues—is a laudable one that should be retained As we see it, however, and as we have testified before, the revenue adequacy status of any particular railroad has little practical effect. Revenue adequacy is not a factor in maximum rate cases prosecuted under the "stand-alone cost" (SAC) methodology. It is not a factor in construction, merger, or abandonment proceedings. Revenue adequacy does play a small role in rate cases brought under the "small case" guidelines, but to date, no such cases ' The shippers indicated that, given the Board's own resources and their own priorities, they would not object if the Board deferred this rulemaking until a later date. -3- have been brought. Therefore. Congress may wish to consider legislatively abolishing the requirement that the Board determine on a regular basis which railroads are revenue adequate. That is not to say that Congress should abandon the concept of revenue adequacy. As we have testified before, in order to oversee the industry, the Board needs to have some indication of how the industry is faring financially. Moreover, revenue adequacy is one of the non-SAC constraints in the Board's "constrained market pricing" (CMP) methodology for handling larger maximum rate cases. Although, thus far, all railroad rate cases brought under CMP have been handled under SAC procedures, if a"revenue adequacy" case were brought, the Board would need a basis on which to address it. For those reasons, and because Congress may not wish to abolish the revenue adequacy requirement immediately, the questions that have been raised about the Board's current revenue adequacy methodology cannot be ignored. With its credibility on the issue under challenge by several shippers, however, the Board, with its limited resources, does not plan to undertake the shippers' proposed rulemaking at this time. Rather, given the benefits, the Board continues to support the expert panel approach that was suggested by both shipper and railroad interests during the Board's Ex Parte No. 575 hearings. The shippers are correct that someone would need to provide funding for the expert panel; that costs rise as layers of litigation are added to the regulatory process; and that it is the Board, and not a private expert panel, that is charged with establishing regulatory procedures. Nevertheless, the Board is willing to make a commitment to give great deference to the expert panel, which would be a competent body that would be perceived as neutral if selected after agreement among the private parties. If the private parties were also to give the expert panel deference, rather than to litigate should they disagree with its (and the Board's) conclusions, then not only would the parties' confidence in the objectivity of the process likely be enhanced, but the overall costs also would likely be contained Competitive Access. In its Ex Parte No. 575 decision served April 17, 1998, the Board addressed in some detail the implications of the competitive access debate. The differences between the railroads and the shippers on the Board's competitive access rules are fundamental, and they raise basic policy issues---concerning the appropriate role of competition, differential pricing, and how railroads earn revenues and structure their services—that are more appropriately resolved by Congress than by an administrative agency. Moreover, the so-called "bottleneck cases,"which involve issues related to competitive access, are still being reviewed in court. For those reasons, although the Board has moved aggressively to adopt the new rules described above to open up access during times of poor service, the Board does not plan to initiate administrative action to otherwise revisit the competitive access rules at this time.' Z Should Congress choose to review the issue, we*would note, as we did in our April 17 decision, that the shape and condition of the rail system that open access would produce is a significant but unresolved issue. Certain shippers assume that the replacement of differential pricing by purely competitive pricing would reduce the rates paid by shippers, and that added competition would result in increased infrastructure investment. The railroads, by contrast, argue (continued...) -4- Small Rate Cases. As you know, the Board has adopted small rate case guidelines, which apply in cases in which CMP cannot be practicably used. Under these small case guidelines, the Board reviews the profits that the carrier obtains from the challenged rate from three perspectives: it compares them with the profits that railroads in general cam from comparable traffic; it compares them with the level of profits that the carrier would need to obtain from all of its potentially captive traffic in order to become "revenue adequate"; and it compares them with the profits that the defendant carrier earns on all of its potentially captive traffic. Taken together, these three comparisons are designed to permit carriers to price "differentially" as provided under the law, in a way that will promote their financial health, while still protecting individual shippers from bearing an unfair share of a particular carrier's revenue needs. Although the procedures may sound complex, in fact the information needed to make this sort of a case is readily available at reasonable cost. Moreover, the Board concluded, after reviewing many years of debate, that these guidelines are the only procedures that have been identified that readily address each of the concerns that the Board must consider under the statute. Nevertheless, we are aware that certain shippers are concerned that, for small cases, anything other than a single benchmark test could unreasonably impede access to the regulatory process. If Congress agrees, it could adopt specific small rate case standards. As an example, it could provide that, for certain types of cases, all rates above a specified revenue-to-variable cost ratio, or series of ratios, would be considered unreasonable. If this approach were to follow the tenets of the existing statute, the specifics of such an approach—for example, the cases to which it would apply, and the level or levels at which rates might be capped—would have to balance issues such as differential pricing and railroad revenue need against the fairness in requiring captive shippers to pay substantially higher prices than competitive shippers. 7. The Override of Railroad Collective Bargaining Agreements. Another matter that may be presented to Congress next year is the question of limiting the authority of arbitrators under the standard labor conditions imposed by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) or the Board to modify existing collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) in the process of implementing approved rail consolidations. This process has become extremely controversial since a decision of the Supreme Court in 1991. That decision, Norfolk & Western Ry. v. z(...continued) that, because their traffic base would shrink, the rates paid by those shippers that would continue to receive service would actually increase, even as overall revenues received by railroads would decline, because the overall traffic base from which costs could be recovered would be reduced. Additionally, as the Board noted in the April 17 decision, carriers could be expected to seek to maintain an adequate rate of return by cutting their costs, which could include shedding unprofitable lines and reducing new investment in infrastructure. Thus, while certain shipper representatives believe that an open access system would ensure better service, concern has been raised that, unless smaller railroads were able to fill in service gaps that could be created, open access could produce a smaller rail system that would serve fewer shippers, and a different mix of customers, than are served today, with different types and levels of, and perhaps more selectively provided, service. -5- American Tran Dispatchers Ass'n, 499 U.S. 117 (199 1) (h&}, held that the exemption from all other laws to carry out approved rail consolidations provided by former 49 U.S.C. 11341(a) and carried forward as 49 U.S.C. 1132 1(a) extends to existing CBAs and operates automatically to permit the override of CBA provisions as necessary for implementation of an approved rail consolidation. Present practice for implementing Board-approved rail consolidations is for the unions and the railroads involved to negotiate agreements to enable implementation of the Board- approved transaction. If they are unable to agree, the matter is submitted to an arbitrator selected by the parties or the National Mediation Board if the parries cannot agree on the choice of an arbitrator. Because the arbitrator is acting under section 11321(a), he or she has the authority and the obligation to modify existing CBAs as necessary to carry out the transaction. In the recent Conrail Acquisition' decision, at the request of the various labor organizations, the Board specifically declined to make a finding in its decision approving the transaction that overriding provisions in Conrail CBAs was necessary to carry out the transaction. Rather, the Board specifically left the determination of necessity to the process of negotiation and, if necessary, arbitration. Even more recently, in the men` decision, the Board elaborated on the limitations on arbitrators' authority to modify CBAs as permitted by the Supreme Court's N&W decision. In Carmen the Board held that overrides of CBAs by arbitrators are limited, among other things, to the override authority exercised by arbitrators during the period 1940-1980, an era marked by labor/management peace regarding the implementation of rail consolidations. A copy of the men decision is attached as Addendum J. Nonetheless, the Board is aware that labor representatives oppose, and are understandably dissatisfied with, any provision or action that permits overriding any existing CBA provisions. If Congress were to agree with their position, given the Supreme Court decision in New, some modification of section 11321(a) so as to exclude CBAs, or some other legislative expression, could address labor's concerns in this area. 8. Conclusion. Again, we appreciate the confidence that Congress has shown by allowing us to play a role in this important process, and we remain committed to providing a ' CSX Co=ration and CSX Tran=rtation Inc Norfolk Southern Corporation and Norfolk Southern Ra'lwa y Company — Control and C?' QT eases_ /A_g=ents Conrail Inc and Consolidated Rail Corporation, STB Finance Docket No. 33388, Decision No. 89 (STB served July 23, 1998). CSX C.o=ration — Control — Chessie System. Inc, and Seaboard Coast Tine Industries. Inc, (Arbitration Review), Finance Docket No. 28905 (Sub-No. 22), and Norfolk Southern Corooration -- Control -- Norfolk and Western Railway Company and Southern Railway company (Arbitration Review) Finance Docket No. 29430 (Sub-No. 20) (STB served Sept. 25, 1998). This decision was not appealed by any party. -6- forum for constructive dialogue and appropriate regulatory relief. If we can be of further assistance in this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely/, /J Linda J. Morgan Addenda cc: The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings Ranking Democrat Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation -7- ATTACHMENT 4 II 106TH CONGRESS Se621 1ST SESSIO. To enhance competition among and between rail carriers in order to ensure efficient rail service and reasonable rail rates in any case in which there is an absence of effective competition. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES JL-%Rcx 15, 1999 11r. ROCIMFELLER (for himself, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. BuR\S, and Mr. ROBERTS and `Ir. CONRAD) introduced the folloNving bill; whieli Nvas read rn•ice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science. and Transportation A BILL To enhance competition amonc and between rail carriers in order to ensure efficient rail service and reasonable rail rates in any case in which there is an absence of effective competition. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 4 This Act may be cited as the "Railroad Competition 5 and Service Improvement Act of 1999". 6 SEC. 2. PURPOSES. 7 The purposes of this Act are— 2 1 (1) to clarify the rail transportation policy of 2 the United States by requiring the Surface Trans- 3 portation Board to accord greater weight to the need 4 for increased competition between and among rail 5 carriers and consistent and efficient rail service in 6 its decision making; 7 (2) to eliminate unreasonable barriers to com- 8 petition among rail carriers serving the same geo- 9 graphic areas and ensure that smaller carload or 10 intermodal shippers are not precluded from access- 11 ing rail systems due to volume requirements; 12 (3) to ensure reasonable rail rates for captive 13 rail shippers; 14 (4) to provide relief for certain agricultural fa- 15 cilities lacking effective competitive alternatives; and 16 (5) to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens 17 from the rate reasonableness procedures of the Sur- 18 face Transportation Board. 19 SEC. 3. FINDINGS. 20 The Congress finds that: 21 (1) Prior to 1976, the Interstate Commerce 22 Commission regulated most of the rates that rail- 23 roads charged shippers. The Railroad Revitalization 24 and Regulatory Act (1976) and the Staggers Rail 25 Act (1980) limited the regulation of the rail industry •S 621 IS 3 1 by allowing the Interstate Commerce Commission to 2 regulate rates only %Dere -railroads have no effective 3 competition and established the Interstate Com- 4 merce Commission's process for resolving rate dis- 5 putes. 6 (2) In 1976, when the Congress began the proc- 7 ess of railroad deregulation, there were 63 class I 8 railroads in the United States. By 1997, through 9 mergers and other factors, the number of class I 10 railroads shrunk to nine. 11 (3) The nine class I carriers accounted for more 12 than 90 percent of the industry's freight revenue 13 and 71 percent of the industry's mileage operated in 14 1997. 15 (4) Rail industry consolidation has diminished 16 competition, creating an even greater dependence 17 upon a rate relief process through a regulatory body 18 such as the Surface Transportation Board. 19 (5) Agricultural, chemical, and utility industries 20 in particular rely heavily upon rail transportation, 21 and unreasonable rail rates and inadequate service 22 have a dramatic impact on these important indus- 23 tries. 24 (6) According to a report issued by the General 25 Accounting Office, " . . . [t]he Surface Transpor- •S 621 IS 4 1 tation Board's standard procedures for obtaining 2 rate relief are highly complex and time-consuming" 3 and the General Accounting Office estimates that 4 over "70 percent [of shippers] believe that the time, 5 complexity, and costs of filing complaints are bar- 6 riers that often preclude them from seeking relief." 7 (7) The General Accounting Office analyzed all 8 41 rate complaints filed with the Interstate Com- 9 merce Commission and its successor, the Surface 10 Transportation Board, since 1990 and found that 11 each complaint cost shippers between $500,000 to 12 $3 million apiece and took between a few months 13 and 16 years to resolve. 14 (8) The General Accounting Office surveyed 15 over 700 shippers and found that- 16 (A) 75 percent of the shippers believed 17 that they are overcharged with unreasonable 18 rates and 19 (B) over 70 percent of the shippers be- 20 lieved that the time, complexity, and costs of fil- 21 ing complaints create unsurmountable barriers 22 and therefore preclude them from pursuing the 23 rate relief they are entitled to under the law. •S 621 IS 1 (9) The General Accounting Office suzTey of 2 shippers identified the following barriers to obtain- 3 ing rate relief under the current process: 4 (A) The costs associated with filing com- 5 plaints outweighs the benefits of winning relief. 6 (B) The rate complaint process is too com- 7 plex and too lengthy. 8 (C) Developing the stand-alone revenue-to- 9 variable cost model is too costly. 10 (D) Most shippers believe that the STB is 11 most likely to decide in favor of the railroad. 12 (E) The discovery process is too difficult 13 because the shipper is dependent upon the rail- 14 road for all the necessary data. 15 (F) Responding to the railroads requests 16 for discovery is too difficult and time con- 17 suming. 18 (G) Shippers fear reprisal from the rail- 19 roads. 20 (H) The Surface Transportation Board fil- 21 ing fee is too high. 22 (10) According to the General Accounting Of- 23- fice report, the vast majority of shippers believe that 24 the following changes in the rate relief process are •S 621 IS 6 1 necessary to provide them with the ability to seek 2 the rate relief: 3 (A) The Surface Transportation Board's 4 time limit for deciding a rate relief case should 5 be shortened. 6 (B) The complaint fee required upon filing 7 should be eliminated or reduced. 8 (C) The market dominance requirement 9 should be simplified. 10 (D) Mandatory binding arbitration should 11 be used to resolve rate disputes. 12 (E) The Surface Transportation Board's 13 jurisdictional threshold of 1807o revenue-to- 14 variable cost should be lowered. 15 (11) According to the General Accounting Of- 16 Tice report, shippers believe that increasing competi- 17 tion in the railroad industry would lower rates and 18 diminish the need for a rate complaint process. Pro- 19 posals to increase railroad competition identified in 20 the report include the followring: 21 (A) Require the STB to grant trackage 22 rights; require reciprocal switching at the near- 23 est junction or interchange upon request of a 24 shipper or competing railroad; and increase rail 25 access for shortline and regional railroads. -S 621 IS 7 1 (B) Overturn the STB's "bottle neck" de- 2 cision by requiring railroads to quote a rate for 3 all route segments. 4 (12) Consolidation in the railroad industry has 5 diminished competition, thwarting the intended ob- 6 jectives of deregulation to allow competition to lower 7 rates and improve service. g (13) The rate protection intended for shippers 9 without effective competition has been de-railed by a 10 complex, costly, and time-consuming maze of dis- 11 covert', findings, and appeals that take years and 12 cost millions of dollars. 13 (14) Because of diminished rail competition, a 14 rate relief process plagued with unsurmountable bar- 15 riers and blanket antitrust immunity unique to the 16 railroad industry, captive shippers have no effective 17 recourse under the current system. 18 SEC. 4. CLARIFICATION OF RAIL TRANSPORTATION POL- 19 ICY. 20 Section 10101 of title 49, United States Code, is 21 amended- 22 (1) by inserting "(a1 IN GENERAL.—" before 23 "In regulating"; and 24 (2) by adding at the end the following: •S 621 IS 8 1 "(b) PRIJLARl OB.JE=7ES.--The primary objectives 2 of the rail transportation policy of the United States shall 3 be- 4 "(1) to ensure effective competition among rail 5 carriers at origin and destination; 6 "(2) to maintain reasonable rates in the ab- 7 sence of effective competition; and 8 "(3) to maintain consistent and efficient rail 9 transportation service to shippers, including the 10 timely provision of railcars requested by shippers; 11 and 12 "(4) to ensure that smaller carload and inter- 13 modal shippers are not precluded from accessing rail 14 systems due to volume requirements.". 15 SEC. 5. FOSTERING RAIL TO RAIL COMPETITION. 16 (a) ESTABLISIDIENT OF KXTE.—Section 11101(a) of 17 title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 18 the first sentence the following: "Upon the request of a 19 shipper, a rail carrier shall establish a rate for transpor- 20 tation and provide service requested by the shipper be- 21 tween any two points on the system of that carrier where 22 traffic originates, terminates, or may reasonably be inter- 23 changed. A carrier shall establish a rate and provide serv- 24 ice upon such request without regard to— •S 621 IS 9 1 "(1) whether the rate established is for only 17 part of a movement between an origin and a destina- r 3 tion; 4 11(2) whether the shipper has made arrange- 5 ments for transportation for any other part of that 6 movement; or 7 "(3) whether the shipper currently has a con- 8 tract with any rail carrier for part or all of its trans- 9 portation needs over the route of movement. 10 "If such a contract exists, the rate established by the car- 11 rier shall not apply to transportation covered by the con- 12 tract.". 13 (b) REVIEW OF REASONABLENESS OF R.XTES.—Sec- 14 tion 10701(d) of title 49, United States Code, is 15 amended- 16 (1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para- 17 graph (4); and 18 (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol- 19 lowing: 20 "(3) A shipper may challenge the reasonable- 21 ness of any rate established by a rail carrier in ac- 22 cordance with sections 11101(a) and 10701(c) of 23 this title. The Board shall determine the reasonable- 24 ness of the rate so challenged without regard to— S 621 IS -- 2 10 1 "(A) whether the rate established is for 2 only part of a movement between an origin and 3 a destination; 4 "(B) whether the shipper has made ar- 5 rangements for transportation for any other 6 part of that movement; or 7 "(C) whether the shipper currently has a 8 contract with a rail carrier for any part of the 9 rail traffic at issue, provided that the rate pre- 10 scribed by the Board shall not apply to trans- 11 portation covered by such a contract.". 12 SEC. 6. SE%IPLIFIED RELIEF PROCESS FOR CERTAIN AGRI- 13 CULTURAL SHIPPERS. 14 (a) LIMITATION ON FEES.—Notwithstanding any 15 other provision of law, the Surface Transportation Board 16 shall not impose fees in excess of $1,000 for services col- 17 lected from an eligible facility in connection with rail max- 18 imum rate complaints under part 1002 of title 49, Code 19 of Federal Regulations. 20 (b) SIMPLIFIED RATE AND SERVICE RELIEF.—Sec- 21 tion 10701 of title 49, United States Code, is amended 22 by adding at the end thereof the following: .23 "(e) SIMPLIFIED RATES AND SERVICES.- 24 "(1) IN GEN ERM..—Notwithstanding any other 25 provision of law, a rail carrier may not charge a rate •S 621 IS 11 1 for shipments from or to an eligible facility which re- 2 sults in a revenue-to-variable cost percentage, using 3 system average costs, for the transportation service 4 to which the rate applies that is greater than 180 5 percent. 6 "(2) ACCEPT I CE OF REQt ESTS.—Not-A ith- 7 standing any other provision of law, a rail carrier 8 shall accept all requests, for grain service from an 9 eligible facility up to a maximum of 110 percent of 10 the grain carloads shipped from or to the facility in 11 the immediately preceding calendar year. If, in a 12 majority of instances, a rail carrier does not in any 13 45-day period, supply the number of grain cars so 14 ordered by an eligible facility or does not initiate 15 service within 30 days of the reasonably specified 16 loading date, the eligible facility may request that an 17 alternative rail carrier provide the service using the 18 tracks of the original carrier. If the alternative rail 19 carrier agrees to provide such service, and such serv- 20 ice can be provided without substantially impairing 21 the ability of the carrier whose tracks reach the fa- 22 cility to use such tracks to handle its own business, 23 the Board shall order the alternative carrier to com- 24 mence service and to compensate the other carrier 25 for the use of its tracks. The alternative carrier shall -S 621 IS 12 1 provide reasonable compensation to the original car- 2 rier for the use of the original carrier's tracks. 3 "(3) CANCELLATION PENALTIES.—A carrier 4 may accept car orders under paragraph (2) subject 5 to reasonable penalties for service requests that are 6 canceled by the requester. If the carrier fills such or- 7 ders more than 15 days after the reasonably speci- 8 fled loading date, the carrier may not assess a pen- 9 alty for canceled car orders. 10 "(4) DA..NLAGES.—A rail carrier that fails to 11 provide service under the requirements of paragraph 12 (2) is liable for damages to an eligible facility that 13 does not have access to an alternative carrier, in- 14 cluding lost profits, attorney's fees, and any other 15 consequences attributable to the carrier's failure to 16 provide the ordered service. A claim for such damage 17 may be brought in an appropriate United States 18 District Court or before the Board. 19 11(5) TIMETABLE FOR BOARD PROCEEDING.- 20 The Board shall conclude any proceeding brought 21 under this subsection no later than 180 days from 22 the date a complaint is filed. 23 "(6) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection: 24 "(A) ELIGIBLE FACILITY.—The term `eli- 25 gible facility' means a shipper facility that— •S 621 IS 13 1 "(i) is the origin or destination for not 2 more than 4,000 carloads annually of 3 grain as defined in section 3(g) of the 4 United States Grain Standards Act (7 5 U.S.C. 75(g)); 6 "(d) is served by a single rail carrier 7 at its origin; g "(iii) has more than 60 percent of the 9 facility's inbound or outbound grain and 10 grain product shipments (excluding the de- ll livery of grain to the facility by producers), 12 measured by weight or bushels moved via 13 a rail carrier in the immediately preceding 14 calendar year; and 15 "(iv) the rate charged by the rail car- 16 rier for the majority of shipments of grain 17 and grain products from or to the facility, 18 excluding premium for special service pro- 19 grams, results in a revenue-to-variable cost 20 percentage, using system average costs, for 21 the transportation to which the rate ap- 22 plies that is equal to or greater than 180 23 percent. 24 "(B) REASONABLE Coll PEN SATION.—The 25 term `reasonable compensation' shall mean an •S 621 IS 14 1 amount no greater than the total shared costs 2 of the original carrier and the alternative car- 3 rier incurred, on a usage basis, for the provision 4 of service to an eligible facility. If the carriers 5 are unable to agree on compensation terms 6 within 15 days after the facility, requests service 7 from the alternative carrier, the alternative car- 8 rier or the eligible facility may request the 9 Board to establish the compensation and the 10 Board shall establish the compensation within 11 45 days after such request is made. 12 "(C) OPIGI\U, CAIMIER.—The term 13 `original carrier' means a rail carrier which pro- 14 vides the only rail service to an eligible facility 15 using its own tracks or provides such service 16 over an exclusive lease of the tracks serving the 17 eligible facility. 18 "(D) m,FIIN.IT -E ('_\IIPII•:P.—The term 19 `alternative carrier' means a rail carrier that is 20 not an original carrier to an eligible facility.". 21 SEC. 7. COMPETITIVE RAIL SERVICE IN TERMINAL AREAS. 22 (a) TR.1CIi.WE RI(7n'rs.—Section 11102(a) of title 23 49, United States Code. is amended- 24 (1) by striking "mai-" in the first sentence and 25 inserting "shall"; •S 621 IS 15 1 (2) by inserting [as a new second sentence] 2 after "business." the following: "In making this de- 3 termination, the Board shall not require evidence of 4 anticompetitive conduct by the rail carrier from 5 which access is sought."; and 6 (3) by striking "may establish" in the nest-to- 7 last sentence and inserting "shall." 8 (b) RECIPROC.IL SIVITCHIN G.—Section 11102(c)(1) 9 of title 49, United States Code, is amended- 10 (1) by striking "may" in the first sentence and 11 inserting "shall"; 12 (2) by inserting after "service." the following: 13 "In making this determination, the Board shall not 14 require evidence of anticompetitive conduct by the 15 rail carrier from which access is sought."; and 16 (3) by striking "may establish" in the last sen- 17 tence and inserting "shall". 18 SEC. 8. SIMPLIFIED STANDARDS FOR MARKET DOMINANCE. 19 Section 10707(d)(1)(A) of title 49, United States 20 Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the fol- 21 lowing: "The Board shall not consider evidence of product 22 or geographic competition in making a market dominance 23 determination under this section.". •S 621 IS 16 1 SEC. 9. REVENUE ADEQUACY DETERM NATIONS. 2 (a) RAIL TRANSPORTATION POLICY.—Section 3 10101(3) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 4 striking "revenues, as determined by the Board;" and in-. 5 serting "revenues;". 6 (b) STANDARDS FOR R.-ITES.—Section 10701(d)(2) is 7 amended by striking "revenues, as established by the 8 Board under section 10704(a)(2) of this title" and insert- 9 ing "revenues.". 10 (c) REVENUE ADEQUACY DETER\IINATIONS.—Sec- 11 tion 10704(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 12 amended- 13 (1) by striking "(a)(1)" and inserting "(a) 14 and 15 (2) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3). 16 SEC. 10. RAIL CARRIER SERVICE QUALITY PERFORMANCE 17 REPORTS. 18 (a) IN GEN ER�_L.—Chapter 5 of subtitle I of title 49, 19 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 20 thereof the following: 21 "SUBCILXPTER III. PERFOR\L-1NCE REPORTS 22 "§ 541. Rail carrier service quality performance re- 23 ports 24 "(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Transportation 25 shall require, by regulation, each rail carrier to submit a 26 monthly report to the Secretary, in such uniform format •S 621 IS 17 1 as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe, containing 2 information about- 3 "(1) its on-time performance; 4 "(2) its car availability deadline performance; 5 "(3) its average train speed; 6 "(4) its average terminal dwell time; 7 "(5) the number of its cars loaded (by major 8 commodity group); and 9 "(6) such other aspects of its performance as a 10 rail carrier as the Secretary may require. 11 "(b) INFORALAMON FURNISHED TO STB; THE PUB- 12 LIC.—The Secretary shall furnish a copy of each report 13 required under subsection (a) to the Surface Transpor- 14 tation Board no later than the next business day following 15 its receipt by the Secretary, and shall make each such re- 16 port available to the public. 17 "(c) ANNu L, REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.—The Sec- 18 retary shall transmit to the Congress an annual report 19 based upon information received by the Secretary under 20 this section. 21 "(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the definitions 22 in section 10102 apply.". 23- (b) CONFORMING A-mENDMENT.—The chapter anal- 24 vsis for chapter 5 of subtitle I of title 49, United States •S 621 IS 18 1 Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the fol- 2 lowing: "SUBCHAPTER III. PERFORMANCE REPORTS "541. Rail carrier service quality performance reports". O •S 621 IS _... _...._. ...... .... .. ..... .... .... ... ........................_...... _. _. ... ......._................ ATTACHMENT 5 duce competition in an industry that today has little or none. unlikely that they will earn sufficient revenue to attract ime�t- Indeed,it would be difficult to cite an industry that is as sheltered ment capital (as they themselves suggest), perhaps the indu:,;- from competition as are the trunkline railroads. There is no may have outlived its usefulness. Other industries do not en:o% doubt that in the absence of competition railroads have been the luxury of having been freed of competition.The radroads. :n enjoying attractive earnings, enabling them to invest in capital their opposition to competitive access, have failed to offer am improvements (devoted largely, it should be noted, to the han- plausible explanation why they should be. dling of marginally priced truck-competitive traffic) and to have significant profits. If competition among the railroads renders it —Kuhn is a transportation ntrornei: No One pen oses Prop ` 0 Access ' Yet allowed CSX and NS to write up those asset values,which could then lead to rate increases. (Indeed,some of the increases will be In the March 8 Traffic World. Arvid Roach, the enor- unchallengeable, because the premium will raise the effective mously capable attorney for Union Pacific Railroad "jurisdiction threshold" for determining captive rates.) This and the Association of American Railroads,authored a could not happen in any other regulated industry. Shippers are commentary urging everyone to oppose open access." challenging the STB's decision in the pending appeals from the As I told Arvid just last week when I debated him at the STB's decision because they maintain they should not be charted Escalation Consultants'Conference on"Finding Nays to Control with rate increases to pay for Conrail.Indeed,what is particulariv Railroad Expenses;' no one is proposing'open access" galling is that I raised the concern of shippers over this in their legislative proposals to Congress,at least at the issue with the STB before CSX and NS paid most of present time. Since Arvid's response to me was,"That's the acquisition price for Conrail,and the board said it what it amounts to,"allow me to respond to the rest of would do nothing about it before CSX and NS spent his commentary. `= the money but that it would be an issue in the pro- Arvid's entire premise seems to be that"Railroads ceeding. When we got to the end, the board said it are not earning more than their full costs today" But would not be fair to CSX and NS to deal with the issue his premise is fatally in a manner different from other railroads! So much flawed,because it is based for the matter being an issue"in the proceeding." on the Surface Transportation The statutory standard with respect to revenue adequacy w Board's annual revenue adequacy essentially is whether railroads are able to cover costs,repay debt determinations, which Professor and raise capital under honest,economical and efficient manage- Alfred E. Kahn has rightly called ment. The latter portion of the standard would preclude asset "nonsensical,""archeological;' and write-ups (and associated rate increases) in am• other regulated so fatally flawed as to appropriately industry,and should have precluded the STB from allowing CSX be eliminated.Dr. Kahn and his col- and NS to write up Conrail's assets.(See FPC v. HopeNatural G+, league, Professor Jerome Hass of Co., 320 U.S.391 (1944).) In anv event,even Arvid's client Union Cornell University,exhaustively cat- Pacific had no difficulty raising capital during its service crisis in alogued the flaws in the STB's fact,the offering was over-subscribed).So there is no inability to methodology and concluded it raise capital,cover costs or pay debt,by any of the railroads.Why could not be fixed. Primarilv, this is not eliminate the charade, then? Even STB Chairman Morgan due to the fictitious values assigned has suggested to Congress that it might Wyant to repeal the to railroad assets, partly because of requirement that the STB do annual revenue adequacy determi- asset write-ups following acquisi- nations.Apparently Dr.Kahn was persuasive. tions and mergers. Arvid rightly responds that most railroad rates are not regu- • _ The latest example is in the Con- lated, and thus the"fatal circularity" explained by the Supreme rail transaction, where Conrail's Court in Hope and by Dr. Kahn to the STB (to no avail) is, in assets had a gross book value (used Arvid's view. inapplicable.That very issue is before the 22nd U.S. for revenue adequacy and ratemak- Circuit in the Conrail appeals, but the STB's treatment of the ing purposes) of S8.51 billion; CSX matter is wrong, because some railroad rates are regulated, and and NS paid over 520 billion for there is no more reason to subject captive railroad customers to Conrail, including assumed obliga- rate increases to pay for acquisition premiums than there is to tions, for an acquisition premium require captive customers of other regulated industries to pay of S 1 1.3 billion, and the STB such premiums. Photo by Trans Pixs March 15, 1999• •:3'5t111 il)I.I 45 •� � ............. . ......... ....... .. ......... .... -... ..... ..... L Toy IC - ar The STB also tried to slough off shippers'complaints in its annual returns are not the government's concern,iust as the goy- Conrail decision by saying it was preposterous to claim that, ernment does not concern itself with the profitability of other since there are (allegedly) so few captive rail shippers, they unregulated industries. could not possibly pay the entire acquisition premium. But it is Shippers are not unconcerned about the railroads' financial arguable that there are not so few captive rail shippers;after all, health,so they would not repeal the provisions of law that allow how many left the union Pacific system during its service crisis? —indeed, require—the STB to consider the revenue adequacy In any event, shippers never argued to the STB that captive of railroads during rate proceedings.While the STB's maximum shippers would pay all of the acquisition premium paid for rate standards for large shipments—"stand-alone costs"—have Conrail and, if there are so few captive shippers, why not pro- no dependence on revenue adequacy, the STB's small shipper tett them? if they are required to pay any of it, that would be guidelines do. We would not change that. So how can .Arvid too much. We do hope NS and CSX recover it,so long as they argue that the shippers' proposals would unconstitutionally recover it from new business and cutting costs, which is what "take"the railroads property?It's preposterous. they said they would do to pay for Conrail.We are concerned, But railroads seem concerned only with their own revenue though,that NS and CSX cannot make up an adequacy.Take the farm community;it has not acquisition premium of$11.3 billion by taking suffered for a long time as much as it is now,at truck traffic off I-95. least in the upper plains states.tet the farmers Indeed,CSX has been telling shippers that it CSX has been there pay higher rail rates to go shorter dis- w•ould have to raise rates to pay for Conrail.We tances to the ports of the Pacific Northwest will see, but there was no reason the STB telling shippers than do farmers in Nebraska or Missouri,who should not have held CSX and NS to their rep- have competition. So where is the railroads' resentations to the board(both said it was their that it would have claimed concern with their customers' finan- risk,and that they did not intend to raise rates). to raise rates to Pay tial health? As for the matters shippers have advocated Arvid also claims that the shippers would to Congress,the proposals are largely deregula- for Conrail. do away with differential pricing, through tory or simply carry out existing law, not which railroads price in accordance with "reregulatory" as the railroads would have it. demand.Wrong again;the shippers'proposals For example: shippers would have the STB elevate competition to Congress do not propose any change in the 180-percent over all other policies in regulating the railroads. That is what "jurisdictional threshold;' which is the statutory embodiment Congress said when it enacted the Staggers Rail Act of 1980; of differential pricing, nor do they propose to eliminate the instead, revenue adequacy has been the primary policy the ICC STB's "stand-alone cost" standard, through which the captive and STB have espoused. customers are made to pay disproportionately for the rail net- Shippers have asked Congress to provide the STB with"bot- work. tleneck" rate jurisdiction, which all other network industries Railroads are the only service industry that seems to want to have. That would promote competition and be deregulatory, fight with its customers rather than work constructively with since it would mean that only the"bottleneck"portion of a rate, them.That alone demonstrates the problem. not the entire through rate,would be regulated. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., chairman of the Commerce Shippers would have the STB implement the"terminal track- Committee, and others, such as Rep. Bud Shuster, R-Pa., chair- age rights and reciprocal switching" provisions of existing law man of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,want without requiring a showing of"competitive abuse."Existing law to increase competition in the airline industry so as to improve does not contain the"competitive abuse" standard; the ICC service.Rail shippers are working to explain to Congress that the added it out of thin air in the mid-1980s. principle is right, but that it should be applied to the railroad Shippers would have certain agricultural shippers provided industn• as well. The problems are quite similar. The railroads %%ith meaningful rate and service remedies.Now,they cannot bring can succeed in a competitive environment,just as the other net- a rate case before the STB that can win under the existing rate stan- work industries have done. But if the shippers' reasonable and dards(remember the McCarty Farms litigation?)and they have no incremental proposals are rebuffed,perhaps the shippers will— effective remedv at common law for tariff traffic.(Contracts,under someday—propose"open access."So,Arvid,tell your clients to which most nonagricultural shippers move their freight, can or consider the current proposals seriously, before what you and should contain their own liability provisions. Most agricultural they really fear is proposed. shippers lack the leverage to obtain service guarantees.) And, Arvid, if we every get there, don't fear two railroads Shippers would have Congress codify the STB's recent"prod- competing for every shipper. As Dr. Kahn put it so well, uct and geographic competition"decision in Ex Parte No. 627. "Oligopolists tend not to compete to the death!" What's so outrageous or"reregulatory"about that? Finally,shippers would eliminate the annual revenue adequa- McBride represents the Edison Electric Institute and other shippers cy determinations of the STB,for the reasons given by Professors and shipper groups on transportation-related matters. The views Kahn and Hass.Since the railroads are largely deregulated, their expressed herein are his own. 46•trafficll'l iRLI I •March 15, 1999 1�Nif R F ry DELTA RAIL Corporation 203 41ST. STREET S.E. P.O. BOX P, AUBURN, WA 98071 (206) • 838.5992 • 924-3594 Contractor License No. DE-LT-AR-C207JB October 2, 1986 B-0712 TOWN OF YELM P.O. Box 479 Yelm, Washington 98597 ATTENTION: Gene Borges Public Works Gentlemen: In response to your request today, we are pleased to forward a copy of our company brochure for your information. We are very interested in your upcoming project involving construction of railroad trackage to serve industry in your town. We also furnish the following unit prices for track construction for your use. These prices are for budgeting purposes and do not necess- arily reflect the costs at the actual time of construction. The prices include minor grade preparation in addition to costs of track construc- tion. They do not include any applicable sales taxes. Construct Track $60.00 - $65.00 per track foot Construct Turnout $16,000.00 - $18,000.00 each Asphalt Grade Crossing $55.00 - $60.00 per track foot If you have any further question please feel free to call the office at any time. Sincerely, DELTA RAIL CORPORATION Charles E. Burnham Vice President CEB/njc J TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Maintenance Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Clients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Key Personnel Resumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Corporate Organizational Chart . . . . . . . . . 9 Resume of Major Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Resume of Design/Construct Projects. . . . . . . 12 Equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 PROJECT CAPABILITIES DESIGN: Delta Rail Corporation employs two licensed Civil Engineers who have expertise in the field of Railroad Construction and Design. See personnel resumes and list of previous design/construct pro- jects, enclosed in this brochure. PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION: Delta Rail Corporation has performed a wide range of projects as described in the Resume of Major Projects. Construction including concrete, earthwork, utilities, grade crossing signals, crane rail , standard track, light rail , exotic trackwork specialties. PROJECT MANAGEMENT: Contract administration will be performed by our Main Office Staff. On-site construction supervision will be performed by Delta Rail Corporation Superintendent. Quality control will be performed by our Engineers or a qualified outside testing faci- lity as necessary. See personnel resumes/organizational chart enclosed in this brochure. PERSONNEL: Delta Rail Corproation employs qualified personnel to perform, design, and construct all phases of our projects. We will mobilize sufficient personnel to complete your project in a timely manner. CAPABILITIES: Construction and maintenance of standard railroad track serving industry, Federal Government and State Government. Crane rail construction and maintenance on concrete and wood ties, for private and public industry, including Government and Port authorities. Construction and maintenance of the following type of grade crossings: High density polyethylene Precast concrete panels Cast in place concrete Metal sections Precast concrete slabs Rubber panels Treated Timber Sections Flange Guards for asphaltic concrete -1- Demolition and salvage of railroad tracks. Inspection and maintenance programs for privately owned indus- trial tracks. Railroad Engineering and Design of railroad track for Industri- al Parks, Private Industry, and Government-owned facilities. Design, installation, and maintenance of grade crossing signals , including cantilever type and crossing gates. -2- DELTA RAIL CORPORATION Maintenance Agreements CLIENT LOCATION Pennwalt Corporation Tacoma, Washington Continental Grain Company Tacoma, Washington Continental Grain Company Longview, Washington Boise Cascade Steilacoom, Washington Boeing Commercial Airplane Plant All Puget Sound Facilities Occidental Chemical Tacoma, Washington Champion International Tacoma, Washington (Kraft Mill ) Champion International Tacoma, Washington (Stud Mill ) Reichold Chemical Tacoma, Washington Reynolds Metals Longview, Washington Kaiser Aluminum Tacoma, Washington Weyerhaeuser Company Longview, Aberdeen, Everett, Washington -3- CLIENTS Allied Chemical The Koll Company Alaska Hydrotrain Max J . Kuney Company ARCO Kyle Railways Barclay-Dean Langendorf Bakery Jack A. Benaroya Company Leisure Investment Bloch Steel Palmer G. Lewis Boeing Commercial Airplane Company Louisiana Pacific Boise Cascade Manson Construction & Engineering Buffelen Woodworking Metro (Seattle) Burlington Northern, Inc McCann Construction Chehalis Western Railroad Nalley' s Fine Foods Cas-Kar Construction National Distribution Frank Coluccio Construction Occidental Chemical Corporation Columbia & Cowlitz Railway Company Pacific Car & Foundry Concrete Technology Pennwalt Corporation Continental Grain Company Port of Everett Crowley Maritime Port of Seattle D & R Cedar Company Port of Tacoma Donald M. Drake Company Port of Woodland Evans Products, Inc Puget Power & Light Ford Motor Company Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Hugh S. Ferguson Company Red River Army Depot General Services Administration (GSA) Savanna Army Depot General Construction Company Sears, Roebuck & Company S. J. Groves and Sons Company Seattle & Northcoast Railroad Hannon Brothers Construction M. A. Segale Company Harold W. Hill Construction Shell Oil Company R. W. Huff Company St. Maries River Railroad Iddings, Inc St. Regis Paper Company Intertec Construction Company Tacoma Belt Line Railroad Island Construction Trans Pacific Development, Inc Jefferson County, Washington Umatilla Army Depot Jorgenson Steel United States Navy Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation United States Postal Service Peter Kiewit Sons ' Company Westcoast Electric Company -4- Clients, Cont. West Coast Grocery Weyerhaeuser Company Wick Construction Company Woodworth & Company -5- KEY PERSONNEL EXPERIENCE RESUMES Ronald V. Perrone President and administrative executive, with a degree in Civil Engineering from South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. Currently registered as a Professional Engineer in the States of Washington and Oregon. An active member in the following professional societies: American Railway Engineer- ing Association, American Society of Civil Engineers, Washington Society of Professional Engineers, and National Railroad Construction and Mainte- nance Association. Twenty-two years experience in railroad engineering and construction. Eleven of these years were with the Milwaukee Railroad Engineering Department as Project Engineer on projects to construct inter- modal yards in Spokane and Seattle, Washington; two Auto Marshalling yards in Kent, IvIashington. The above projects had a total dollar volume of two million dollars. Four years were spent with a major railroad construction company as Project Manager to construct the track of Washington Public Power Supply System Nuclear Power Plants Numbers 1 & 4 at Hanford, Washing- ton; the "FAST" track for the Department of Transportation Test Center at Pueblo, Colorado; coal loop track for Portland General Electric Coal Plant at Boardman, Oregon. The total dollar volume of the above projects was in excess of four million dollars. Seven years as President of Delta Rail Corporation, supervising contracts with an aggregate sum in excess of fif- teen million dollars. -6- Charles E. Burnham Vice President and Operations Manager, with a degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Washington. Currently registered as a Professional Engineer in Washington State. An active member in the following profes- sional societies: American Railway Engineering Association, Washington Society of Professional Engineers, and National Society of Professional Engineers. Twelve years experience in railroad engineering and construction. Four of these years were with the Milwaukee Railroad as a Field Engineer on general trackwork and bridge construction projects with a total dollar volume of one-half million dollars, and one year with a major railroad construction company as a Project Engineer for the construction of track for a Business Park for Jack A. Benaroya Company in Renton, Washington, and construction of a coal loop track for Kerr-McGee at Gillette, Wyoming. The above projects had a total volume in excess of one million dollars. Seven years as Vice President of Delta Rail Corporation, supervision con- tract operations with an aggregate sum in excess of fifteen million dollars. -7- Joel R. Boren Superintendent. Nineteen years experience in railroad construction, with four of these years spent with a survey crew with the United States Depart- ment of the Interior. Two years as a track foreman and eight years experi- ence as Division Signal Supervisor with the Milwaukee Railroad, converting an existing Alternating Current circuit to Centralize Traffic Control for costs in excess of three million dollars. One year as foreman for a major railroad construction company working on two projects with a total dollar volume of one-half million dollars. Seven years with Delta Rail Corpora- tion as Superintendent in charge of crews for projects with a total dollar volume in excess of fifteen million dollars. Brenda G. Burton Corporate Secretary and Office Manager. Eleven years experience in book- keeping, accounts receivable and payable, credit management, and office management. Five years were spent with Boise Cascade Corporation in Taco- ma, Washington, as Accounts Receivable and Credit Manager. An active member in the National Association of Credit Management and Credit Executives of Puget Sound. Two years with Delta Rail Corporation as Office Manager in charge of bookkeeping, accounts receivable and payable, and payroll . -8- BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT Ronald V. Perrone FVICE PRESIDENT Charles E. Burnham i i i OFFICE MANAGER SUPERINTENDENT Brenda G. Burton , i Joel R. Boren i FIELD ENGINEER i NTom Jirava PAYROLL I HEAD FOREMAN ---� FOREMAN FOREMAN i FOREMAN CLERK ,) MECHANIC EQUIPMENT MECHANIC I OPERATOR i DELTA RAIL CORPORATION Organizational Chart Auburn, Washington August 8, 1986 -9- RESUME OF MAJOR PROJECTS CONTRACT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS VOLUME TYPE OF WORK PROJECT LOCATION 1 . Jack A. Benaroya Company $ 1 ,028,413 Engineering, Design & Construction of Kent, Washington Kent, Washington Industrial Park Tracks 2. Harold Hill Construction 280,660 Engineering, Design & Construction of Kent, Washington Mercer Island, Washington Industrial Park Tracks 3. Pacific Car & Foundry Company 321 ,074 Replace & Construct Additional Tracks Renton, Washington Renton, Washington in Concrete 4. U. S. Navy 705,198 Install Crane and Railroad Track Bremerton, Washington Puget Sound Naval Shipyard for Nuclear Water Pit 5. Port of Tacoma 196,999 Reconstruct Grade Crossings Tacoma , Washington Tacoma, Washington 6. City of Seattle 260,119 Reconstruct Track for Waterfront Seattle, Washington Seattle, Washington Streetcar Trolley 7. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical 177,221 Upgrade Existing Track, Install Mead, Washington Mead, Washington Rubber Grade Crossing 8. Boeing Commercial Airplane Company 133,014 Install Rubber Grade Crossing Renton, Washington Seattle, Washington 9. State of Washington 755,610 Construct 22 Miles of New Mainline Richland, Washington Olympia, Washington 10. Occidental Chemical Corporation 130,105 Upgrade Track & Turnout Tacoma, Washington Tacoma, Washington 11. Red River Army Depot 1 ,238,823 Repair Railroad Texarkana, Texas Texarkana, Texas -10- CONTRACT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS VOLUME TYPE OF WORK PROJECT LOCATION 12. Umatilla Army Depot 161 ,969 Replace Cross Ties Umatilla, Oregon Umatilla, Oregon 13. Savanna Army Depot 253,802 Replace Cross Ties Savanna, Illinois Savanna, Illinois 14. Port of Seattle 126,886 Install Crane Rail Terminal 20 Seattle, Washington Seattle, Washington 15. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical 136,145 Rehabilitate Industry Track Spokane, Washington Spokane, Washington 16. Port of Tacoma 141 ,962 Construct Intermodal Rail Facility Tacoma, Washington Tacoma, Washington 17. State of Alaska 216,613 Construct 1 Mile of New Lead Track Fairbanks, Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska -11- RESUME OF DESIGN/CONSTRUCT PROJECTS CONTRACT OWNERS NAME AND ADDRESS VOLUME DESCRIPTION OF WORK PROJECT LOCATION Jack A. Benaroya $ 1,028,413 Engineering, Design, and Construct 21 ,550 Kent, Washington Seattle, Washington feet of track, including 18 turnouts Harold Hill Construction Company 280,660 Engineering, Design, and Construct 8,153 Kent, Washington Mercer Island, Washington feet of track, including 4 turnouts Occidental Chemical Company 185,756 Engineering, Design, and Construct 10,750 Tacoma, Washington Tacoma, Washington feet of track, including 37 turnouts Barclay-Dean 28,895 Engineering, Design, and Construct 850 Bellevue, Washington Bellevue, Washington feet of track, including 2 turnouts Bloch Steel Industries 43,698 Enaineering, Design, and Construct 1,500 Seattle, Washington Seattle, Washington feet of track, including 2 turnouts D & R Cedar 3,550 Preliminary Engineering and Survey of 5,075 Marysville, Washington Marysville, Washington feet of track, including 2 turnouts Iddings, Inc. Engineering, Design, and Construction of Kent, Washington Kent, Washington industry turnout Jefferson County 10,000 Engineering, Design, and Installation of Port Townsend, Washington Port Townsend, Washington grade crossing signals Lakewood Industrial Park 40,727 Engineering, Design, and Construction of Tacoma, Washington Tacoma, Washington 750 feet of track Leisure Investment 97,676 Engineering, Design, and Construction of Tacoma, Washington Tacoma, Washington 2,100 feet of track -1.2- EQUIPMENT Delta Rail Corporation owns a small specialized fleet of track equipment to assure that our track construction meets a high professional standard. Included are: Tamper Junior - Machine vibrates and squeezes the ballast to proper compaction beneath each cross tie. Jackson Multiple Tamper - Equipment has its own track raising jacks, surfacing lights and lining lights. It is used to tamp long sections of track to an exact final grade. _Jackson Tamper - Two machines used to maintain surface of existing track. Track Liner - Machine has lining lights and is used to Place track exactly on line and provide circular curves. Ballast Spreader - These two machines each carry 20 tons of track ballast to be dumped onto the track as required. Fairmont Hydraulic Spike Puller - Machine allows one man to pull spikes from existing tracks. Safetran Power Wrench - Used to tighten rail joint bolts to in excess of 20,000 foot-pounds. Tamper Ballast Regulator - Equipped with plows and broom to distribute track ballast as required for final shoulder shaping. Geismar Abrasive Rail Saws - The company owns five saws used to cut raid Nordberg Rail Drills - The company owns four drills to drill holes in rail for track bolts. MTM Automatic Rail Drill - This drill is used for high pro- jection rail drilling. Railroad Push Cars - Eight ten thousand capacity cars are used to carry rail , plates, bars, and track accessories. One signal push car used to carry rail grinder. Special Track Hand Tools - Enough hand tools to equip seven track crews. Tamper Section Gang - This machine removes the track spikes, removes and inserts tie and spikes the new tie. Power Jack - This machine raises the track to design grade. -13- Rail Laying Crane - On track machine to lay rail for new construction or maintenance. We have additional equipment to support our track equipment. International 515 Pay Loader - Additionally equipped with forks to handle rail and cross ties. Case 580 Super E Backhoe - Equipped with front-end bucket and forks to handle rail and cross ties. International 270 A Backhoe - Equipped with front-end bucket and forks to handle rail and cross ties. Ford F-900 Semi-Tractor - Equipped with 8-ton crane. Used to haul equipment and materials. Lowboy Trailer - Used with semi-tracktor to haul equipment, etc. . . . Ford F750 Truck with 12-ton Crane - Equipped with trailer hitch to haul general trailer. Ford F750 5-Yard Box Dump Truck - Equipped with hitch to haul general trailer. Sullair 160-CFM Air Compressor Sullair 185-CFM Air Compressor Ingersoll -Rand 160-CFM Air Compressor Gas Powered Welder - 300 AMP AC/DC Portable Gas Rail Grinder Forklift - 9,000 lb. capacity Ford Pick-Ups - Seven each, two with canopies -14-