Hold The Mayo: Study Says DME Cant Repay Loan

[Poppa_Zit]

It's quite possible, that the defered maintenance is a result of having no money.

Needless speculation. The DME financials would be disclosed in the federal loan application process, which will be a matter of public record. After all, DME is using its assets as collateral for the loan.

[Poppa_Zit]

quote user="TheAntiGates"

Hey you were the one stating "EQUALLY improbable", and since I never offered any hard quantity to begin with, I was curious about your math in determining what's equal?  Seems as tho you were stretching as a matter of convenience.

Equal to it being probable, as in 50-50 chance, since it's all speculation anyway.

I'd be very concerned about the guardianship of the publics investment, just being conservatively cautious

Trying to pay the loan, along with the stockholders, and the employee's salaries, could get a little tense, if a rate war materializes. (I anticipate that pricing will be DM&E's primary tool to expand business, and to expect UP and BNSF to not retaliate would not be a bet I'd  care to make )

A rate war between UP and BNSF never materialized, did it? And if there was retaliation, we'd be skating on the thin ice of collusion charges.

Deferred maintenance becomes a distinct possibility, it always seems to be where declining RR's seek their salvation.

And even someone having the best of intentions could run that new plant right into the ground under such a scenario, until there was nothing left.

Being clear that maintenance isn't particularly high on their priority list to begin with, I think the concerns are valid.

What backs up your "being clear that maintenance isn't particularly high on their priority list"? I hope that you're not making the mistake of interpreting an increase in safety violations as an uptick in shoddy or unsafe maintenance, without knowing whether there's been an increase in inspections. And what do those safety violation numbers actually tell us? Are they all equally severe? Equally life-endangering?  

 "equally improbable"  seems like a bit of a stretch to me.  "remotely possible" seems a more apt description, but that is just me.

Choose whatever word you'd like. It's tough to assign values when we're speculating about the future.  

[solzrules]

It's quite possible, that the defered maintenance is a result of having no money.

Yes, and while not making any personal accusations against any of the involved people, let me just say that if dividends are where the money goes in lieu of maintenance, some people can make themselves very rich while riding a collapsing company into the ground. (worst case scenario)

It has happened before.

 

Like the Milwaukee Road, perhaps?????

 

[Anonymous]

It's quite possible, that the defered maintenance is a result of having no money.

Yes, and while not making any personal accusations against any of the involved people, let me just say that if dividends are where the money goes in lieu of maintenance, some people can make themselves very rich while riding a collapsing company into the ground. (worst case scenario)

It has happened before.

[Murphy Siding]

Trying to pay the loan, along with the stockholders, and the employee's salaries, could get a little tense, if a rate war materializes.

I've always felt that this was why the financing was elusive.  I would think the mere thought of a rate war with two established railroads would scare investors.

Being clear that maintenance isn't particularly high on their priority list to begin with, I think the concerns are valid.

It's quite possible, that the defered maintenance is a result of having no money.

[Anonymous]

Hey you were the one stating "EQUALLY improbable", and since I never offered any hard quantity to begin with, I was curious about your math in determining what's equal?  Seems as tho you were stretching as a matter of convenience.

I'd be very concerned about the guardianship of the publics investment, just being conservatively cautious

Trying to pay the loan, along with the stockholders, and the employee's salaries, could get a little tense, if a rate war materializes. (I anticipate that pricing will be DM&E's primary tool to expand business, and to expect UP and BNSF to not retaliate would not be a bet I'd  care to make )

Deferred maintenance becomes a distinct possibility, it always seems to be where declining RR's seek their salvation.

And even someone having the best of intentions could run that new plant right into the ground under such a scenario, until there was nothing left.

Being clear that maintenance isn't particularly high on their priority list to begin with, I think the concerns are valid.

 "equally improbable"  seems like a bit of a stretch to me.  "remotely possible" seems a more apt description, but that is just me.

[Poppa_Zit]

Well, the opinion of the Mayo Clinic spokeperson carries absolutely no weight, and even less -- if that's possible -- because Mayo is supporting its own selfish agenda under the guise of guarding my taxpayer dollars. LOL

Consider the government laid out a lot of our taxpayer dollars in loans to the airlines at a time when their futures looked much breaker, and that hasn't backfired. Why doesn't DME deserve the same chance?

While your scenario is possible, it is equally improbable. Plus, DME is putting its assets up as collateral. This taxpayer sees DME positioning itself to tap into a virtual 'pot 'o gold' in the Powder River Basin.

PS -- I see BNSFrailfan gave you his 'danasoft' signature.

Quote user: AntiGates:

A. Even a broken clock is correct twice per day, so isn't it possible that Mayo can pursue it's own selfish agenda AND  protect taxpayer interests as well? I don't see any hard and fast rule defining either as mutually exclusive

No one can possibly be so naive to believe Mayo is trying to do both. Please provide a record of Mayo's past efforts to protect taxpayers interests, especially those not in its own backyard.

B. No, not on the simplistic terms you advance, two wrongs never make a right. So just because the government was foolish with my money involving the airlines is absolutely NO (zipp, nada, etc) reason why they have to repeat the process with a RR.

Not simplistic -- apt. United Airlines was able to get through its difficult times and use the federal loan to emerge successfully from bankruptcy. Without the loan as a Band-Aid, what would have happened if the U.S. suddenly lost its largest airline? How is that a "wrong"? The taxpayers would have been forced to come to the rescue, either way.

Stupidity is not a protected minority in this country, it has no rights for equality.

If this is meant as a rip, I guess you got me. It just doesn't fit.

C. Equally improbable?  Ohhhh, I'd like to see your math on that assertion I think that is little more than a conveniant generalization on your part.

Convenient generalization? Naw, opinion. Present your math proving I'm wrong when there exists no comparable precedent on which to make a case either way. Why should I not think you're making a sweeping generalization here, dooming this to failure?   

D. Gee I coulda sworn it was the other way around, I never saw him using the sig until the day after I started.    Or is that what you really meant?

No, I was just kidding around. You had it first, then he picked it up, and now he's suddenly dropped it.

[Anonymous]

Until that loan is repaid, the improvements are taxpayer funded

And if that loan is defaulted upon , look who owns the mess left behind?

[Anonymous]

Well, the opinion of the Mayo Clinic spokeperson carries absolutely no weight, and even less -- if that's possible -- because Mayo is supporting its own selfish agenda under the guise of guarding my taxpayer dollars. LOL

Consider the government laid out a lot of our taxpayer dollars in loans to the airlines at a time when their futures looked much breaker, and that hasn't backfired. Why doesn't DME deserve the same chance?

While your scenario is possible, it is equally improbable. Plus, DME is putting its assets up as collateral. This taxpayer sees DME positioning itself to tap into a virtual 'pot 'o gold' in the Powder River Basin.

PS -- I see BNSFrailfan gave you his 'danasoft' signature.

A. Even a broken clock is correct twice per day, so isn't it possible that Mayo can pursue it's own selfish agenda AND  protect taxpayer interests as well? I don't see any hard and fast rule defining either as mutually exclusive

B. No, not on the simplistic terms you advance, two wrongs never make a right. So just because the government was foolish with my money involving the airlines is absolutely NO (zipp, nada, etc) reason why they have to repeat the process with a RR.

Stupidity is not a protected minority in this country, it has no rights for equality.

C. Equally improbable?  Ohhhh, I'd like to see your math on that assertion I think that is little more than a conveniant generalization on your part



D. Gee I coulda sworn it was the other way around, I never saw him using the sig until the day after I started.    Or is that what you really meant?

[Poppa_Zit]

Mayo turns to top guns to lobby against DM&E

By FREDERIC J. FROMMER

WASHINGTON -- (Sept. 11) The Mayo Clinic has tapped a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney and a former Democratic congressional leadership staffer to help it lobby against an expansion plan by the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad, federal reports show.

According to Mayo's most recent lobbying report, covering activity through June 30 of this year, the clinic has spent $60,000 in lobbying against DM&E as of that date.

Mayo has enlisted the Washington law firm of Manatt Phelps & Phillips, which lists among its lobbyists on DM&E Dean McGrath, who worked as Cheney's deputy chief of staff; and James Datri, the former executive director of the House Democratic Caucus.

The clinic is lobbying against a $2.3 billion federal loan application that DM&E has pending with the Federal Railroad Administration to help pay for the expansion. Mayo argues that the increased flow of higher-speed trains through Rochester, where the clinic is based, would increase the risk of accidents and put its patients in danger.

"We've said from the outset we were going to do what we felt was appropriate to protect our patients and our staff and our community," said Mayo spokesman Chris Gade. "On the lobbying front, there's a variety of perspectives that we're using to make those points."

Stephen M. Ryan, a partner with Manatt Phelps & Phillips and Mayo's chief lobbyist on the DM&E issue, said it was no coincidence that the firm enlisted a Republican and Democrat to lobby.

"There's never a project where we're not 'D' and 'R,'" he said. "It's a Republican government, so you have to have a Republican on it. And certainly the Democrats are important."

Mayo also has other former government officials in its corner in non-lobbying capacities. Former Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., joined the clinic's board of directors earlier this year, and has called on DM&E to find a route that goes around Rochester.

Also, Bill Janklow, a former South Dakota congressman and governor, is providing advice to the Mayo Clinic on the DM&E issue.

No lobbying reports for DM&E are yet on file for this year, although a complete list is not yet available. The railroad, based in Sioux Falls, S.D., did not respond to requests seeking its most recent lobby filing.

In an e-mail, DM&E spokesman Jafar Karim said the railroad "has relied primarily on our broad support from agriculture organizations, economic development groups and the 55 of 56 communities on the line supporting the project."

Before joining the Senate at the beginning of last year, John Thune earned $220,000 as DM&E's chief lobbyist over an 18-month period. After winning his Senate seat, the South Dakota Republican inserted language into a transportation bill that helped the railroad apply for the loan.

The DM&E wants to add track to the Powder River Basin coal fields in Wyoming and upgrade its existing system in South Dakota and Minnesota. The project would involve building about 280 miles of new track and upgrading 600 miles of existing track.  (AP)

 

Hmmmm. This story just ran on the Associated Press wire. Does my sarcastic eye notice a DIFFERENT Mayo Clinic spokesman this time -- and NO mention this time of the DME's "long history of a cavalier attitude toward safety?"

Looks like Mayo is rolling out the heavy artillery over this. I just think it's cheesy to make this a sympathetic issue of "the safety of our patients." We're talking about upgrading 880 miles of track, much bigger in scope than the Mayo Clinic locale.  

[solzrules]

And yet another blah blah article from an oppostion organization saying that its' view is correct and everyone else is wrong.  Perhaps if the railroad was allowed to upgrade their infrastructure and bring the track up to 2006 standards they wouldn't have safety problems.  Seems to me the STB has said this too.  And the court system. 

Another interesting point about sticking it to the taxpayers.  Loans need to be repaid.  This isn't a grant or a corporate donation as some have stated.  It is a loan, low interest yes, but a loan all the same.  DME will have to pay it back. 

[Poppa_Zit]

"DM&E has a long history of a cavalier attitude toward safety, and these numbers illustrate that safety remains a low priority for the railroad's management," Mayo Clinic spokesperson Lee Aase said. "The FRA's own safety data suggests that an unsafe railroad should not be rewarded with a massive taxpayer-backed subsidy."

Good point, Chances are that if DM&E is indifferent to maintaining safe standards  on the physical plant already under it's control, what comfort can there be in expecting that  their attitude is going to improve in respect to the taxpayer funded improvements?

I'd be worried that somone might have intentions of milking the cow hard for 5 years and then let a worn and  threadbare infastructure go into default,  further saddling the taxpayers with 5 years of deferred maintenance as reward for their generousity

Well, the opinion of the Mayo Clinic spokeperson carries absolutely no weight, and even less -- if that's possible -- because Mayo is supporting its own selfish agenda under the guise of guarding my taxpayer dollars. LOL

Consider the government laid out a lot of our taxpayer dollars in loans to the airlines at a time when their futures looked much breaker, and that hasn't backfired. Why doesn't DME deserve the same chance?

While your scenario is possible, it is equally improbable. Plus, DME is putting its assets up as collateral. This taxpayer sees DME positioning itself to tap into a virtual 'pot 'o gold' in the Powder River Basin.

PS -- I see BNSFrailfan gave you his 'danasoft' signature.

[Anonymous]

"DM&E has a long history of a cavalier attitude toward safety, and these numbers illustrate that safety remains a low priority for the railroad's management," Mayo Clinic spokesperson Lee Aase said. "The FRA's own safety data suggests that an unsafe railroad should not be rewarded with a massive taxpayer-backed subsidy."

Good point, Chances are that if DM&E is indifferent to maintaining safe standards  on the physical plant already under it's control, what comfort can there be in expecting that  their attitude is going to improve in respect to the taxpayer funded improvements?

I'd be worried that somone might have intentions of milking the cow hard for 5 years and then let a worn and  threadbare infastructure go into default,  further saddling the taxpayers with 5 years of deferred maintenance as reward for their generousity

[Poppa_Zit]

 

"Opposition group raps DM&E safety record

 

September 11, 2006

ROCHESTER, Minn. -The Rochester Coalition - a committee representing the city of Rochester, Minn., Olmsted County, Mayo Clinic, and the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce - continues to drive opposition to the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern's plans to rebuild and expand the railroad for coal trains. According to the coalition, the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern has set a new company record of 3,712 safety defects, failing to meet federal safety standards more times in the first eight months of 2006 than in all of 2005. DM&E has applied to the Federal Railroad Administration for a $2.3 billion loan to finance its proposed rail project. The Rochester Coalition used FRA statistics to document its concerns with safety at DM&E in a submission to the FRA urging that the loan be rejected.
Through August inspectors logged 3,712 safety defects at DM&E and its Iowa, Chicago & Eastern subsidiary on 342 inspection reports, according to the FRA. Inspectors recorded 3,546 defects on 466 inspection reports in 2005. At the current pace, DM&E is on track for an annual total of 5,568 defects, nearly four times the 1,400 safety defects at DM&E in 2004, the coalition asserts.
"DM&E has a long history of a cavalier attitude toward safety, and these numbers illustrate that safety remains a low priority for the railroad's management," Mayo Clinic spokesperson Lee Aase said. "The FRA's own safety data suggests that an unsafe railroad should not be rewarded with a massive taxpayer-backed subsidy." Aase failed to mention that if the project were built, the railroad would have an all-new track structure that would eliminate nearly all federal defects.

 

My red highlighting is to show what can be construed as an actionable statement. IMHO, to issue such a quote for the record is incredibly stupid, incredibly arrogant, or both.

 

How exactly does the DM&E safety record relate to the railroad's ability to repay a government loan? Maybe the DM&E should commission a counter-study that highlights malpractice suits at Mayo vs. government-issued research grants? Corruption in City of Rochester and Olmsted County government? And, oh golly, shiver in me boots --the 800-pound gorilla of the quadrangle -- the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce.  

The concerns of the "coalition" smear campaign are misplaced, and thinly-disguised at best. The DM&E should also file a countersuit for restraint of trade.

Pop Z

PS -- The company that prepared the report for the coaltion is Bearing Point. I always wondered what the company on Phil Mickelson's visor did for humanity. Now I know.

 

 

[samfp1943]

What began my interest in this subject was a question-Could great projects like the transcontinental railroad be built today? Instead of 1863, what if it would have been attempted in 2006?
Would it ever pass the NIMBY test, enviromental impact studies, political divisiveness, and it's "speculative nature?" I think not.

From the TRAINS NewsWire for 11September 2002: I've lost count of the Rounds, but here is the latest volley in this Battle of Rochester.  This one might be titled; " You're Ugly, and Your Mother Dresses You Funny!"

"Opposition group raps DM&E safety record

Print | Email | Contact Us

September 11, 2006

ROCHESTER, Minn. -The Rochester Coalition - a committee representing the city of Rochester, Minn., Olmsted County, Mayo Clinic, and the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce - continues to drive opposition to the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern's plans to rebuild and expand the railroad for coal trains. According to the coalition, the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern has set a new company record of 3,712 safety defects, failing to meet federal safety standards more times in the first eight months of 2006 than in all of 2005. DM&E has applied to the Federal Railroad Administration for a $2.3 billion loan to finance its proposed rail project. The Rochester Coalition used FRA statistics to document its concerns with safety at DM&E in a submission to the FRA urging that the loan be rejected.
Through August inspectors logged 3,712 safety defects at DM&E and its Iowa, Chicago & Eastern subsidiary on 342 inspection reports, according to the FRA. Inspectors recorded 3,546 defects on 466 inspection reports in 2005. At the current pace, DM&E is on track for an annual total of 5,568 defects, nearly four times the 1,400 safety defects at DM&E in 2004, the coalition asserts.
"DM&E has a long history of a cavalier attitude toward safety, and these numbers illustrate that safety remains a low priority for the railroad's management," Mayo Clinic spokesperson Lee Aase said. "The FRA's own safety data suggests that an unsafe railroad should not be rewarded with a massive taxpayer-backed subsidy." Aase failed to mention that if the project were built, the railroad would have an all-new track structure that would eliminate nearly all federal defects[ my italics,SP."

 

 

I would suspect that few railroads are drawing the number of inspection, and inspectors as this railroad is getting during this process. Which might explain why so many violations in shuch a short period of time. You turn loose with enough inspectors and they will find stuff in violation. The very reason for the loans is to increaser capacity and make that increased capacity safer. The coalition in Rochester would like to see the whole railroad scrapped out and gone; a pretty micro view of the situation, I think. 

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb

Any non-profit(NP) orginization is bound by very specific guidlines as to what it can and cannot use its resources for. It can use money outside these areas but the funds can not be co-mingled or it risks it NP status. "(The "supposedly" nonprofit Mayo Clinic? What's he implying here?)" Depending on their motivation and resource allocation they could be putting their NP status at risk.

What?! You mean "NP" stands for "non profit", not "Northern Pacific"?

Hmmmm, come to think of it, both definitions are apt for the railroad in question.[;)]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

zardoz: I've seen most of those newspaper articles, including the first one in today's Argus Leader, which was a full page , paid for (*paid advertizement*) "article". I'm not disputing anything mentioned in any of those newspaper items. I'm just asking futuremodal what *polls* he's talking about, as I don't recall seeing any?

Where do you think these statements draw their credibility:

"The DM&E project is supported by 55 of the 56 communities served by DM&E, and the overwhelming majority of agriculture and economic development organizations in Minnesota and South Dakota."

What, you think KS is making these claims up?

[rrandb]

Any non-profit(NP) orginization is bound by very specific guidlines as to what it can and cannot use its resources for. It can use money outside these areas but the funds can not be co-mingled or it risks it NP status. "(The "supposedly" nonprofit Mayo Clinic? What's he implying here?)" Depending on their motivation and resource allocation they could be putting their NP status at risk.

[solzrules]

Zardoz -
that made for some interesting reading. Thanks for the post!

[Murphy Siding]

zardoz: I've seen most of those newspaper articles, including the first one in today's Argus Leader, which was a full page , paid for (*paid advertizement*) "article". I'm not disputing anything mentioned in any of those newspaper items. I'm just asking futuremodal what *polls* he's talking about, as I don't recall seeing any?

[zardoz]

And for another view, there's this from a few weeks ago in the US News & World Report:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060529/29earmarks.htm

edit:
Here is a response to the above article:

DM&E President Kevin Schieffer didn't appreciate the "earmark" reference and in a letter to the editor denies it's accurate.


Your article subtitled "A case study of why earmarks may be getting out of hand" ["Loading the Pork Train," May 29] incorrectly portrays Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad as an earmark recipient. The legislation that you state was "earmarked" for us had 73 House sponsors and 10 Senate sponsors from around the country. Ironically, one of the Senate sponsors was Sen. Mark Dayton, who withdrew his sponsorship only after the provision became law. Congress amended the program because it encourages rail infrastructure investment to relieve critical national congestion. We are one of dozens of railroads that applied and are subject to the same criteria. Railroads have received these loans for more than 30 years; all are repaid, proving effective oversight.

http://postbulletin.typepad.com/honk/2006/06/index.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And there's more:
Mayo's 'tax-exempt' war on DM&E
DM&E President Kevin Schieffer fired away at the "Mayo/Rochester funded" study released today that says his $2.5 billion expansion project is a financial turkey.

In a news release, Schieffer repeatedly refers to "Mayo/Rochester" claims that have been disproven or rejected over the years:

“We will review this latest in a long series of claims by a Mayo/Rochester-funded 'study,' but based purely on their track record of rejected claims, we are not concerned by this latest claim,” said Schieffer. “It does, however, amaze me that Rochester can continue to spend taxpayer dollars on this kind of thing, and that the supposedly non-profit Mayo clinic is allowed to use its unlimited, tax-free resources to attack a project that has the overwhelming support of the states affected" ...

The "supposedly" nonprofit Mayo Clinic? What's he implying here?

"Given that their latest claims pretend to be made on behalf of taxpayers, perhaps it’s time to look more closely at who is paying for what here.”

More parsing is needed here...presumably Schieffer is questioning the financing of the Rochester Coalition, the group that's representing city, county, clinic and other interests.

The DM&E project is supported by 55 of the 56 communities served by DM&E, and the overwhelming majority of agriculture and economic development organizations in Minnesota and South Dakota. Mayo and Rochester are trying to kill the project with taxpayer money and tax exempt donations.

That last crack about Mayo using "tax exempt donations" to wage its battle with the DM&E ought to ice any remaining interest in negotiations.

The DM&E, of course, has applied for an attractive $2.5 billion, low-interest federal loan, with taxpayer impact and tax implications on a grand scale.

http://postbulletin.typepad.com/honk/2006/05/index.html
(to see the study mentioned above, you need to be a subscriber to the paper)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And more:
Tiff over tracks
Sen. Norm Coleman is annoyed that fellow Sen. Mark Dayton doesn't give him more credit for laboring to make the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad project more palatable to Rochester.

According to the Star Tribune,

Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., who earlier said he'd throw his body on the tracks if necessary, told reporters that "no one else has lifted a finger" to help him stop the project from going through downtown.

That drew a quick retort from the office of Republican Sen. Norm Coleman.

"There's a reason why Time magazine recently listed Senator Dayton as one of the most ineffective senators in Washington, and this pretty much is the latest example of why," said Tom Steward, Coleman's spokesman. "He's not a bridge builder, but a bridge burner." ...

http://postbulletin.typepad.com/honk/2006/05/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perspective on the railroad project from a Stewartville reader:

I thought maybe I could inject a little humor into the DM&E controversy....We had just settled in at the Frontier Motel for about ten minutes before the first train went by, sounding the horn for at least a minute. I thought good, we have that over with for the night! To my surprise it continued through the night about every half hour or so....I don't know how anyone could ever live near that area or get used to the noise unless they had severe hearing loss.

I take no sides on the DM&E issue, I can see both points of view. On the one hand, I am a Mayo employee & have worked at Methodist Hospital and noticed how loud the trains are when they go through.

It is, however, ironical that Mayo gets steam for its buildings from a recently dug pipeline to the power plant fueled by coal. I don't know what the solution is, perhaps taking the train underground when it goes past Mayo? It would require a lot of digging, but then they have moved quite a large limestone hill by 48th Street in the last year. (emphasis mine)

http://postbulletin.typepad.com/honk/2006/05/index.html

[Anonymous]

Would they oppose a freeway or a Walmart? And by the way How about 300 trucks pulling coal going past there Hospital? One 100 car train does that in 5 min..

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding
What polls would those be?

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006606180330
We commend and thank Sen. John Thune for his work in promoting the DM&E railroad upgrade project. The fact that 55 out of 56 communities on the line are supporting the project speaks for itself.

Railroads provide cost-effective marketing opportunities that might not otherwise exist for South Dakota's agricultural commodities. Places that were difficult or impossible for farmers and ranchers to ship their goods to in the past are now accessible via rail, including sea ports in the Northwest and processing facilities in other states. With increasing diesel fuel costs, railroads are becoming an even more valuable shipping option.

The benefits to South Dakota from the DM&E upgrade extend far beyond the thousands of jobs it creates in communities across the state. The state's farmers and ranchers, as well as agricultural service industries such as grain elevators and farm supply companies, benefit from the opportunities provided by a sound railroad system. A recent USDA study indicates that rail transportation could increase annual net farm/ranch income by $90 million in South Dakota and Minnesota.

In turn, all South Dakotans benefit.

[Anonymous]

I believe that DM&E should merge with KCS.

This guy Sheiffer doe not impress me as being particularly smooth. He comes across as cocky and defiant.

Some guy like Haverty could probably find a middle ground solution most folks would find agreeable.

[zardoz]

I bet by now the folks at DM&E are beginning to regret that they even started the whole proposed operation. I mean, how many times does one have obstacles placed in one's path before you just get tired of climbing over them.

Too bad that the utilities and businesses and people that would benefit from the alleged advantages (cost, reliability of delivery) of having a third rail carrier handling coal shipments do not join forces with the DM&E and go after the Mayo clinic and all the others that have suddenly climbed on the anti-progress bandwagon.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

Looks like some folks are finally awakening from their slumber, and thinking about what the looming changes will mean to the world they've become accustomed to. [2c]

To be honest, I think most towns didn't worry because they never thought the DME proposal would actually amount to anything.

Come on, now. Isn't this sudden *concern* about DM&E operations through SD towns mostly a media creation? Don't most polls show widespread support for DM&E?

What polls would those be?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

Looks like some folks are finally awakening from their slumber, and thinking about what the looming changes will mean to the world they've become accustomed to. [2c]

To be honest, I think most towns didn't worry because they never thought the DME proposal would actually amount to anything.

Come on, now. Isn't this sudden *concern* about DM&E operations through SD towns mostly a media creation? Don't most polls show widespread support for DM&E?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding


To be honest, I think most towns didn't worry because they never thought the DME proposal would actually amount to anything.

That is definitely another strong possibility.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

Looks like some folks are finally awakening from their slumber, and thinking about what the looming changes will mean to the world they've become accustomed to. [2c]

To be honest, I think most towns didn't worry because they never thought the DME proposal would actually amount to anything.

[rrandb]

It sounds to me like the DOT and DME are being responsible and planning to address concerns and issues of cities along the route. As a foot note the 2.5 billion is just the Fed loan. The total cost will be even greater.