Union Station: Scandal Brewing

[soonerguru]

The new Gazette has an article outlining what appears to be a mushrooming scandal involving the new I-40, former Congressman Istook, the railroad, ODOT, and the former commuter rail track which still lies next to Union Station, awaiting destruction.

In my quickie reading of the article (I will spend more time with it tonight), it seems:

1. The railroad falsely claimed that the aforementioned commuter rail track, which was destined to be destroyed to make way for the new highway, had NOT been used for rail traffic, when in fact it had been -- one month earlier.

2. Citizen groups exposed this blatant misrepresentation of the facts.

3. A governing board, which initially gave clearance for the destruction of the rails, has now voided that decision, opening up the discussion for future debate.

4. Istook was at the heart of the matter, with ODOT a shadow player. Istook, who steered a ton of transportation money to his ancestral Mormon homeland, is now caught up 100 percent in the crosshairs of the Abramoff public corruption scandal that has engulfed the GOP.

This article is a must read for everyone on the board. If we were willingly mislead, and it appears we were, we need to put forth public protest that will put to shame the efforts behind saving the Gold Dome. This deal stinks to high heaven. It always has felt very "good ol' boy," but now, it appears, there's a smoking gun.

[Pete]

Board rules railroad company falsified Crosstown Expressway documents

Wednesday, June 18, 2008
By Ben Fenwick

TOC-BNSF-Union-Station-vert.jpgOn Aug. 30, 2005, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad signed an agreement with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation that ODOT, at taxpayer’s expense, would haul lumber in trucks for the Mid-States Wholesale Lumber Co., 101 S.E. Fourth. The estimated cost was $22,800.

‘FALSE’ MEANING
‘PREMATURE’ SPECULATION

The reason? BNSF was to abandon nearly three miles of track so that ODOT could build the new Crosstown Expressway, also known as the Interstate 40 Relocation Project, through a section of that rail line — and, incidentally, wipe out the rail yard for Oklahoma City’s Union Station.

However, when BNSF officials filed for permission with the U.S. Surface Transportation Board, they told a different story. The paperwork the company filed to give the track to ODOT claimed it had not been used for the previous two years — about 23 days after the railroad agreed to let trucks instead of trains haul the lumber.

When metro-area activists opposed to the Crosstown project presented the discrepancy to the board, the board ruled that BNSF falsified its application and threw out the paperwork.

“This means that its certification in September 2005 was false or misleading. As a result, we will reopen the January 2007 decision and reject BNSF’s notice of exemption as void,” the board ruled this month.

State transportation officials said the ruling might stop some construction on the Crosstown — for now.

“We are still pretty confident they will work it out,” said ODOT spokeswoman Brenda Perry. “We are not directly involved, but it affects us.”

A spokesman for BNSF refused an interview, instead issuing a statement prepared by the company.

“The ‘false or misleading information’ referenced in the STB decision dated June 3, 2008, was the result of a technicality that resulted in BNSF retaining and using less than 100 feet (the length of about one rail car) at the eastern end of this trackage near Shields Boulevard to serve a large shipper located nearby,” the release said.

Opponents to the Crosstown have a different view: The BNSF decision is proof that Oklahomans are being misled about the whole project, including its cost, its purpose and its would-be benefits for the city. With gas projected at $5 a gallon and beyond, does Oklahoma City need another highway, or a citywide commuter rail?

“Are they going to build a 10-lane highway across a rail line that is part of the national rail system and has jurisdiction?” asked Norman attorney Micheal Salem, who is working on the case. “Should ODOT continue to commit hundreds of millions of dollars to build a highway for which they have no authority, over the land that they’ve chosen already? Can they build a highway over an existing railroad without the authority of the federal government to do that?”

‘FALSE’ MEANING
For Common Cause community activist Edwin Kessler, a retired meteorologist who filed the protest, the very first action of the Crosstown Expressway was a deliberate attempt to mislead Oklahomans.

“There have been some lines cut and there is a controversy about that indicated in the STB ruling,” Kessler said. “It means they are not authorized to abandon the line, and if they want to abandon it, they will have to reapply.”

To others on the opposition, Kessler’s work — which includes photographing BNSF’s actions on-site, developing the legal angles and other behind-the-scenes actions — the victory before the STB is a stunning upset.

“He accomplished a most significant task,” said Washington, D.C., attorney Fritz Kahn, who represented Common Cause to the board. “To get the STB to reopen a proceeding almost never happens. Moreover, to get the STB to rule against one of the Class I railroads as it did in ruling against Burlington Northern is something quite extraordinary.”

In its ruling, the board noted Kessler’s work as instrumental to the outcome of the case, and gave a scathing rebuke to BNSF, saying the company appeared to obfuscate the truth about the rail usage and the Crosstown construction.

“BNSF’s own evidence shows that it operated over a portion of the line during the (two)-year period prior to Sept. 23, 2005, confirming Mr. Kessler’s allegation that BNSF’s certification in its notice (that no local traffic had moved over the line for at least (two) years prior to the filing date) was false or misleading,” the board stated in its ruling. “Furthermore, despite multiple opportunities, BNSF has failed to provide an adequate explanation for the 2005 letters, in which BNSF seems to indicate that it provided rail service to Mid-States via the line within the (two)-year period prior to Sept. 23, 2005.”

Because of the misleading information, the board stated, it is reopening the proceedings. BNSF will have to reapply. This filing will be more involved, with proceedings on why removing the rail line is in the public’s interest.

“First of all, one of the questions that will have to be answered in additional proceedings, is what will be the purpose of rail use in Oklahoma City — that will be part of the ‘public interest, convenience and necessity’ that will be decided in a new abandonment proceeding,” Salem said.

Kahn agreed that BNSF’s task is likely to be widened considerably.

“The environmental-assessment report will be much more complex than BNSF had to file with this notice,” Kahn said. “The environment process will give citizens who are not shippers but have an interest in that line an opportunity to come in and testify. Before they file either a petition or an application, they have to consult with the specified Oklahoma and federal agencies to get their reaction on the environmental and historic effects on the proposed abandonment.”

‘PREMATURE’ SPECULATION
Among those watching it closely will be Tom Elmore, executive director of North American Transportation Institute, whose work against the Crosstown and for light-rail contributed to the recent decision. Former Oklahoma City U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook shepherded funding for the Crosstown project through Congress in 2004. The federal funding favored many of Istook’s political donors, who received contracts for the highway. Istook, however, did the opposite for political donors in Utah, Elmore said, earmarking funding for a light-rail and commuter rail system that serves an Air Force logistics base considered to be a competitor to Tinker Air Force Base.

“Istook provided the startup funding for commuter trains between Provo and Ogden linked to Hill Air Force Base,” Elmore said. “They will soon have 60 commuter trains a day between those communities in full operation. It is such a high-tech corridor that the trains don’t even have to whistle at crossings — the crossings have their own whistles. Hill is now the only air logistics center in the nation with oil-crisis-proof workforce mobility.”

But not Oklahoma, he said.

“The same guy, while he was funding that, was funding the Crosstown so Union Station would be destroyed — and don’t ever believe that he had anything other than that in mind,” Elmore said.

Istook did not return calls for comment.

Union Station — its rail yard slated for destruction because it lies in the path of the proposed Crosstown — was once the center of a massive commuter rail system in Oklahoma City that provided passenger service to Tinker, Norman, Edmond, Bethany and other surrounding communities. The easements and even lines for these still exist, but Elmore said the rail hub at Union Station will be wiped out by the Crosstown if it is allowed to proceed. However, ODOT’s Perry said a single rail line will be brought into Union Station should commuters wish to use it as a rail stop.

But now, Elmore said, there is a chance to reverse the destruction of the Union Station rail yard. Elmore said the ruling concerning the rail line has an effect similar to that of the movement to save the Walnut Avenue Bridge. That bridge, from Deep Deuce to Bricktown, was slated for destruction until civic activists opposed it in hearings at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. Now, the bridge is considered a vital link between new, upscale loft apartments and Bricktown’s establishments.

“Remember the Walnut Bridge? We didn’t fight it before the council, we didn’t fight it before the planning commission — we took it to the Corporation Commission because that’s where the fight was,” Elmore said. “Well, same thing here. We quit arguing with them, we took it to the STB, because that’s where the fight was, and that is where the fight’s been won.”

As for BNSF, the company’s release states that it intends to continue seeking to destroy the rail line in question so the Crosstown can go through.

“BNSF will be following up with the Surface Transportation Board to ensure the highway project’s objectives are met,” the company wrote. “BNSF emphasizes that service to area shippers has been and will continue to be uninterrupted by this or any subsequent trackage removal activity associated with the I-40 relocation project.”

John Bowman, ODOT Crosstown development engineer, said the ruling affects little work so far.

“There isn’t any work that is ongoing at the moment that is really predicated on that hearing,” Bowman said. “We have a number of projects ongoing and we are working with those contractors. … We are working at the east end, and the west end and those projects are out of the way.”

Might there be a way to bypass the rail yard, or perhaps bridge it, so the rail hub for Union Station is still usable? Bowman said ODOT will wait and see if it has to.

“I think it would be premature to speculate on that at this point in time until we see what the ruling will be,” he said. —Ben Fenwick

[metro]

I'd be nice if Istook's is finally exposed.

[blangtang]

one has to wonder why Istook offered no response. I'm hoping there is a follow up...

[blangtang]

I love the tone of this editorial !!! Thank Jeebus for the Gazette to offer another perspective!

-----------------------------------

Off track: Crosstown foes revel in slowing progress

The Oklahoman Editorial
You could almost hear the delight in a local rail enthusiast's reaction to a ruling that may delay construction of the Interstate 40 Crosstown in Oklahoma City. "It will mean a massive delay for them, we believe,” Tom Elmore said in a story Tuesday in The Oklahoman.

Isn't that swell? A highway project that's vitally important to Oklahoma City — indeed, to the nation — and has a price tag in the hundreds of millions of dollars may be delayed over a squabble involving abandoned railway line. Someone pass the champagne!

The stretch of track in question runs along the new Crosstown Expressway route. The hope is that the new expressway will be ready in 2012. The elevated portion of the current I-40 Crosstown is in bad shape and handles far more traffic than it was designed for. Delays in completing the new I-40 Crosstown would only exacerbate that problem, which has safety ramifications for motorists and truckers.

Of course that means little to Elmore and other obstructionists who have fought the new Crosstown because of their love of the rails. The owner of the tracks in question, BNSF Railway Co., wishes to abandon them. Three years ago, the railroad said the tracks hadn't been used for at least two years. Later it was discovered the railroad had moved some local traffic over the line during the time when it said the track hadn't been used. As a result, a federal transportation board has agreed to take another look at the abandonment request.

A delay in constructing the new I-40 Crosstown isn't a certainty. What is a certainty is that regardless of what rail lovers may think, the new highway must be built, and will be.

[Rover]

I hope that the persons responsible for the delays are required to pay the public back the millions of dollars the delays will cost. Some people have their own petty agenda and don't care that it costs everyone else. I guess they will be satisfied if the current crosstown collapses and causes severe catastrophic events.

[Toadrax]

How much would it cost to make the crosstown go over or around the rail yard?

How much would it cost to build a new railyard in a better location?

Pick the cheaper one and do it, it isn't that hard.

[soonerguru]

This editorial is a case of the Oklahoman's ownership forcing its agenda on the taxpayers. Changes can be made to save the track. Period. Don't listen to the lies, deflections and protestations from ODOT, etc.. This backroom alliance reminds one of the way Urban Renewal operates.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

Without having looked at most of the concepts you guys have been posting for the rail stuff....I say we run the track down the center medians of I-35 and I-40 with a couple of spurs for Tinker and the airport...Maybe NW Espresso.

[betts]

This editorial is a case of the Oklahoman's ownership forcing its agenda on the taxpayers. Changes can be made to save the track. Period. Don't listen to the lies, deflections and protestations from ODOT, etc.. This backroom alliance reminds one of the way Urban Renewal operates.

Some of the taxpayers agree with the agenda. I don't care about the track, nearly as much as I care about revitalization of downtown. No one has yet shown me how much it would cost to relocate light rail track to a more convenient location for commuters, versus how much it would cost to acquire right of way to relocate the Crosstown elsewhere. No one is saying ODOT is wonderful, but perhaps there are a lot of people who want the Crosstown at grade level or below, want the eyesore moved and want Core to Shore. It seems a shame to me to completely destroy what I consider an inspired plan to revitalize an incredibly large, blighted area, and make it a showpiece of urban renewal. Again, were the track in an incredibly convenient location for commuters, I might be more inclined to agree. But when people start talking about rail commuters having to catch buses because this marvelous hub isn't even in the proper location, I think the hub needs to go elsewhere.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

Some of the taxpayers agree with the agenda. I don't care about the track, nearly as much as I care about revitalization of downtown. No one has yet shown me how much it would cost to relocate light rail track to a more convenient location for commuters, versus how much it would cost to acquire right of way to relocate the Crosstown elsewhere. No one is saying ODOT is wonderful, but perhaps there are a lot of people who want the Crosstown at grade level or below, want the eyesore moved and want Core to Shore. It seems a shame to me to completely destroy what I consider an inspired plan to revitalize an incredibly large, blighted area, and make it a showpiece of urban renewal. Again, were the track in an incredibly convenient location for commuters, I might be more inclined to agree. But when people start talking about rail commuters having to catch buses because this marvelous hub isn't even in the proper location, I think the hub needs to go elsewhere.

Exactly!

[Chicken In The Rough]

Why is Union Station being excluded from C2S plans? Shouldn't it be the centerpiece of a massive Transit-Oriented-Development? Wouldn't it make Core To Shore a guaranteed success? I simply don't understand why its capacity as a commuter rail station must be diminished. Rail and freeways can peacefully coexist. Why is ODOT hellbent on this issue? Why is there no compromise or even a consideration of other issues? It would seem that other agendas are being served, and they're trying to shove this through before anyone notices the loss.

We lament the destruction of the Criterion and other glorious buildings in downtown. If the Union Station yard is what I've read, it would be a terrible loss to the city. It would mean forfeiting a significant commuter rail asset that could be developed into a gem. It could the hub of the single largest economic revitalization in our city's history.

[betts]

Why is Union Station being excluded from C2S plans? Shouldn't it be the centerpiece of a massive Transit-Oriented-Development? Wouldn't it make Core To Shore a guaranteed success? I simply don't understand why its capacity as a commuter rail station must be diminished. Rail and freeways can peacefully coexist. Why is ODOT hellbent on this issue? Why is there no compromise or even a consideration of other issues? It would seem that other agendas are being served, and they're trying to shove this through before anyone notices the loss.

We lament the destruction of the Criterion and other glorious buildings in downtown. If the Union Station yard is what I've read, it would be a terrible loss to the city. It would mean forfeiting a significant commuter rail asset that could be developed into a gem. It could the hub of the single largest economic revitalization in our city's history.

Go down and actually look at Union Station and the rail lines. Then drive to anywhere in the CBD and think about getting on a bus and having to ride to whereverer you work after riding the train. It's a great location for a restaurant/events center in the middle of our Central Park. I see it as a Tavern on the Green type place. But it's in the wrong location for a transportation hub. No one is talking about getting rid of the building, just the rail. It's not light rail rail anyway. That would have to be added, at the same cost it would be to add it in a far better location.


I

[Midtowner]

Istook should lose his law license over this if he knowingly falsified this information.

-- not that he will.

[metro]

betts, I can actually see it as a multi-modal hub. I've seen similar setups in Atlanta, New York, Philly, and Miami. If the BRT's run on time and frequently, I don't think people will have a problem riding a bus a few blocks to the inner core. Remember we're "extending downtown south" so by the time everything gets established, this area may be "downtown" or at least in the middle of everything. City and state leaders are bent on making Core To Shore the centerpiece of our state, so why not have a modern multi-modal transporation hub that is already ready to go in the middle of the states future showpiece district? There is tunnels and many lines already ready to go at Union Station. Possibly we could have more than one multimodal hub at some point down the road?

[Kerry]

@#%@^@^!!!!!!!!

Istook lose his law license? Consiracy theories about ODOT? For crying out loud already. In 2 years a 100 foot section of track was used to stage a rail car why it waiting to be loaded at a business that will now be using trucks. Why is this a big deal? Tom Elmore is an idiot and he is lying to push his own hatered of ODOT. Union Station cannot be used for light rail. Light rail and the tracks at Union Station are different. Light rail requires electricity. The only kind of passenger service that can exist at Union Station is heavy commuter rail and I doubt that will ever be done in Oklahoma.

What happened Tom, did ODOT take some land from your family 50 years ago to build an off ramp or something?

[bombermwc]

Id love to see Tom Elmore himself have to pay for delaying the crosstown. These people are pissing me and everyone else that drives I-40 off to no end. GIVE IT UP AND LET IT DIE!

[Midtowner]

@#%@^@^!!!!!!!!

Istook lose his law license? Consiracy theories about ODOT? For crying out loud already. In 2 years a 100 foot section of track was used to stage a rail car why it waiting to be loaded at a business that will now be using trucks. Why is this a big deal? Tom Elmore is an idiot and he is lying to push his own hatered of ODOT. Union Station cannot be used for light rail. Light rail and the tracks at Union Station are different. Light rail requires electricity. The only kind of passenger service that can exist at Union Station is heavy commuter rail and I doubt that will ever be done in Oklahoma.

What happened Tom, did ODOT take some land from your family 50 years ago to build an off ramp or something?

What is valuable about the tracks at Union Station is the right of way, not the tracks themselves. Tracks are relatively cheap. Right of ways are not.

Also, like Metro said, the intent is to develop the C2S area -- a rail hub would only guarantee success there (but yeah, let's ignore little well-established facts like development following transit).

If Istook knowingly ran a conspiracy to defraud a judicial body, I don't think he should be practicing law. It's hard to tell if that's the case here, but I suppose the facts will come out. What he knew or did not know is crucial here. At the very least, he, counsel for BNSF and ODOT are guilty of not investigating the claims which went into their submission to the tribunal -- there's no excuse for that. Such a "little mistake" has the potential to cost the state millions of dollars, not to mention the area with a now partially constructed road which might never be finished which will probably be permanent blight if the tribunal doesn't approve the action on the second go-round.

[proud2Bsooner]

I think some on here are letting their political biases take precedent over what is best for the city. Istook is out of office, so who cares about him now. As someone posted, what if someone dies over this by falling concrete or a collapse? Would you feel better then if this situation really blew up?

The new crosstown needs to get done ASAP.

[betts]

I have no problem with rail coexisting with development. However, I have a major problem with not removing the Crosstown and locating it at or below grade. My question is: if right of way is so expensive, why not use the boulevard that will replace the crosstown as right of way for light rail? The city will own it, and it's a far more practical location for light rail. Heavy rail is already primarily running south of the river, as far as I can tell...perhaps I'm wrong there, and Amtrak is currently coexisting with heavy rail, so if there is some future major interest in cross country passenger rail, those lines could be used and a station could be built there. If I sit and think about how I would feel about taking mass transit somewhere, I can guarantee you I don't want to take a train and then get on a bus just because we have a rail station preexisting somewhere out of the way. As I said, we'd have to add light rail lines at Union Station anyway, as those are all heavy rail lines. If we've got useable right of way at the Boulevard, why not use it since it's so convenient to downtown, Bricktown, the Ford Center, etc?

[Kerry]

Betts you are exactly right. The new rail could go under the new boulevard and then connect with existing right-of-way once it leaves downtown. It can do all of this underground. Move I-40 6 blocks south and the rail r-o-w 6 blocks north. It is that easy.

[edcrunk]

just for the record i proposed that on the union station thread... 5.26.08

i'll post it all again.

the problems i see with what TOM ELMORE is proposing.

1. he wants patrons to ride to union station and catch a bus to the CBD, the FORD CENTER, BRICKTOWN / BALLPARK, HOTELS, the future CONVENTION CENTER...
does it not make more sense to have an intermodal station on the cusp of those popular destinations like many other cities do?

2. he doesn't want the train yard destroyed because it has rail that connects to outlying cities across the state.
the reason why the heartland flyer only runs twice a day is due to the fact that it shares the tracks with freight traffic.
if any of these rail lines is being used by freight traffic... then they too will only be able to run twice a day. this is not the 1900's. even people from small towns would rather come to the city and leave as they please than spend all day in town everytime they come to the city.
HE HAS ALSO FAILED TO MENTION THAT THE HEARTLAND FLYER HAS TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY 2 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MAKE MONEY!!!
so if the heartland flyer can't support itself (and there are a million reasons one would need to travel to dallas) then please tell me how a train to elk city is gonna make it.

3. if you look at any city that has light rail... they follow the highways. there are stops at every highway junction and multiple points in between. have you ever rode the TRINITY RAILWAY EXPRESS? this is the type of heavy rail that i believe he is proposing. there are VERY few stops and you get incredible views of the beautiful FT. WORTH BARRIO! it's the grossest thing i've ever seen and leaves one with the worst impression of that town. however, it is a necessity to link the DFW METROPLEX in that way. i don't recall us having another major city that travels to ours to work every day. anyways, do many of these local lines not go thru some of the ugliest parts of our city as well in order to get to these destinations around the state?

4. i do not want to go out of my way 10 miles to drive straight thru my city. that is just retarded, bro! also, i love driving I-40 because i have a PASSION for OKC's downtown.

5. once the old crosstown is destroyed... wouldn't the new boulevard provide a right of way for light rail? (this isn't a problem, but a counter to one of his arguments.)


look guys, we have millions of visitors that drive on I-40 thru our city and whether we like it or not... we get judged by what they see when they do make that drive. when DALLAS redid 75/CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY... they turned that highway into a work of art, just like we're doing. whenever we brought in out of town bands or dj's to dallas... i purposely drove them down that highway to go eat or what not. just cuz i wanted them to leave with a good impression of my city.
this is okc's chance to do that. the street bridges over the crosstown and the pedestrian bridge are gonna be something fantastic. C2S is not only gonna allow our CBD to expand, but also give us a chance to beautify our city. i can't wait for the retail, the condos and that big green park! hanging out by the river... watching boats, kids flying kites, a big ass ferris wheel on the other side! it's gonna set okc in a positive new direction for the next 30 years.
yes, union station will be it's center piece! it's a grand building and once the post office and the all the other crap is razed and C2S starts to take shape... it will be our crown jewel. whatever it morphs into will be a storied building with an amazing past. it won't lose it's history or it's soul despite what some may say.


[steps off soapbox]

o0 3DW@RD!CU$$ 0o

MySpace.com - 3DW@RD!CU$$ [crunktronic] - 35 - Male - OKLAHOMA CITY [four oh five], OKLAHOMA - www.myspace.com/edcrunk

[soonerguru]

proud2besooner,

I couldn't care less about Istook's looney politics, although I don't and didn't subscribe to them. My concern is the whole crony affair of deceiving the public, if that indeed happen, and stifling public debate to ensure execution of backroom deals. Frankly, as a citizen, such dealings should concern you, too, regardless of the politics of the participants.

This board is doing great things for this city by exposing a lot of old time systems that have run things -- often poorly -- in secrecy and out of the purview of the public's input or comment for generations.

It's not unlike "creative destruction" in capitalism.

This city is charting an upward path forward, and since we're getting all grown up and all maybe we can join other big cities and have spirited public debate. Have you watched the news in NYC or Chicago? The citizens there are involved and fighting to get their positions heard. It's a great thing in a democracy.

Remember, we're dealing with tax dollars, here, both federal and state. It's our right to know what's happening, why, and who is involved. If malfeasance is involved, we have every right and even a duty to expose deception and wrongdoing.

You seem to be suggesting a "you broke it, you buy it" philosophy. We must "hurry and up and finish this" without further discussion. Why? Trust me, there are workarounds available if the parties involved have to go that route.

What's most important is the future of our city. Period.

[Toadrax]

If the people in charge are not willing to tell us how much it would cost to build a new railyard compared to how much it would cost to build the crosstown around/over the yard... they are not doing their job.

How can anyone say that they are making the right choice if they do not even have the facts in front of them? How much would it cost to keep the current highway in safe condition while we find out the facts?

How bad of shape is our crosstown right now anyway? If it is really inches to collapse and people are going to die, why is it still open? I think that has nothing to do with the railyard and should be treated as a different issue.

If someone dies due to the overpass collapsing it would have nothing to do with the railyard so it is kind of dumb to even bring it up.

[betts]

How bad of shape is our crosstown right now anyway? If it is really inches to collapse and people are going to die, why is it still open? I think that has nothing to do with the railyard and should be treated as a different issue.

If someone dies due to the overpass collapsing it would have nothing to do with the railyard so it is kind of dumb to even bring it up.

I don't think they can be treated like completely different issues, because the new Crosstown cannot be completed if the railyard cannot be dismantled. They're not really working in that area right now anyway, so some delay doesn't matter, but when they're ready to build the main road, if it is delayed due to a fight over the railyard, and I-40 collapses, those who obstructed construction of the new road would have some degree of responsibility, IMO.