Albany and Eastern Railroad officials apparently think it’s ridiculous that neighbors are disputing a $720 bill the railroad has delivered to them.
A&E has been talking about the charge since last spring. Neighbors expressed concern about it then. They didn’t get much in the way of explanations though and still haven’t.
Last month, when they received what the company said was its third notification letter, but what at least some neighbors say was the first they’d seen on the subject, they still didn’t really get an explanation. A TV news crew was reportedly threatened with legal action for standing in A&E’s right-of-way while doing a story on the issue.
Most recently, the railroad released a statement that essentially argues that it has the legal authority to impose a fee on its neighbors.
What A&E has not explained is a justification for the authority for the majority of the fees it’s charging, nor has it explained why it sets the majority of the charge, a permit fee, at $600.
The purpose of the annual $120 maintenance fee is pretty clear and doesn’t really require explanation.
Charging such maintenance fees appears to be standard practice with some railroads. In fact, when The New Era did a web search, we found a form for a crossing for Burlington Northern, the previous owner of the line.
Maybe that’s why the railroad thinks its neighbors are ridiculous for disputing the fee.
But where does that authority come from in the first place? And what’s the justification behind the permit fee? We aren’t sure. So far, we haven’t been able to find anyone who can tell us that, although the railroad business is a rather complex maze of regulations. It might be buried in there somewhere, but we haven’t been able to find anyone who will tell us where.
A&E spokesman Jared G. Cornell, director of sales and marketing, told us the whole thing “has gotten out of hand” and is “pretty ridiculous.”
His only answer to any of this is that the railroad has the authority to collect these fees, therefore it will; but in the statement, he suggests that folks research it from “reliable sources.”
Apparently, he and the railroad cannot be bothered to explain it – unless they don’t believe that they are reliable sources. Or, possibly, they just do not care what people think.
We certainly understand that A&E is a for-profit company and that its reason for existence is to make money. But there is more than just cash on the line here. There’s what is known as political capital. Even though A&E isn’t a political institution, the principle applies here.
Prior to the surfacing of this fees issue, A&E had been in the news frequently, including in this newspaper, regarding its efforts to improve the condition of its railroad lines, including the one between Sweet Home and Lebanon. The company is working to bring them up to standards that would allow them to be used productively for commerce.
Company representatives have more than once stated that they see industrial growth potential in Sweet Home, which is why they are committing the time, effort and money necessary to revamp the line.
We agree. There is a work force here that smart, entreprenurial business people could employ in a very positive way for their own profit and for Sweet Home’s good.
All that represents a plus in the political capital ledger. Sweet Home wants the railroad to happen. People want local jobs that pay a liveable wage. None of us wants to be unemployed or see a neighbor in that state. We like A&E for building that railroad.
The fact is, though, much of the money being used to rebuild the local railroad line comes, at least indirectly, from us – the citizens. A&E is using lottery funds from a Connect Oregon III grant to finance a reported $2.6 million of the $4 million project.
Without putting too fine a point on it, after the Oregon public ponies up to pay for the project, the railroad then bills people who have lived along and crossed the railroad line for decades – for free. That’s where the negatives start appearing in the political capital ledger.
Sweet Home and Lebanon are relatively small, and good will is an important part of life in such communities. It’s pretty clear that A&E is losing good will over this – on many levels.
A&E might have an answer, but so far it hasn’t bothered to provide it. Not all of us are experts on railroad right-of-ways and A&E, so far, has passed up the opportunity to help us learn even what they want us to know.
Were A&E willing to actually talk to its neighbors and the public – or to the press – we might learn that these rails are its property, and neighbors who wish to cross it should help maintain the crossings.
It may not be entirely unreasonable to share that cost.
Until now, though, apparently no one’s bothered. The rails and crossings have been in disuse and disrepair for years. Property owners have lived on the other side of those tracks from Highway 20 for decades, and apparently no one has really bothered them much, if at all, about their crossings.
Some say they have Burlington Northern permits, but A&E hasn’t indicated that it would accept those. We’d like to ask that question, but company officials don’t appear to be eager to talk about that.
Unless something changes, this looks like it will be a drawn-out affair. The legal wrangling could be costly, dollar-wise. The fact that some people have pre-existing crossing permits and what that means or doesn’t mean, the history and condition of the railroad line prior to the largess A&E got from the Legislature to do the repairs – these are burning questions that will have to be resolved, at least in the minds of the public.
The real cost, though, will be that political capital.
Happy people are good neighbors. Unhappy people often are not.
A&E needs to weigh the costs of its policies in terms of how they are going to affect the people who live along its railroad lines and the people who finance them.
Good neighbors discuss problems and work out solutions. Those who don’t may not live happily ever after.