MPR: Rochester Fights Railroad Expansion

Rochester Fights Railroad Expansion
By Art Hughes
December 16, 1998

The opposition to a proposed rail expansion is opening a rift between urban and rural residents of southeastern Minnesota. Rochester officials hold their first public meeting tonight since a federal board gave their approval to the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern (DM&E) Railroad expansion plan. Rochester has been a hub of opposition to the proposal since it was announced early this year. But now, city officials' insistence on moving the tracks to go around Rochester has angered rural residents, who say the tracks should run through the city as they have for more than a century.

WHEN DM&E ANNOUNCED its ambitious redevelopment plan last spring, officials from Rochester and Olmsted County joined forces. Since then, they've used their collective political resources against the railroad. DM&E wants to spend $1.4 billion to improve and extend their tracks to haul coal from Wyoming to Winona, increasing the number of trains from a handful a day to as many as three dozen. The city and the county each kicked in for a hastily prepared consultant's report that showed that a new track around the city would cost pretty much the same as adequately improving the existing tracks through the middle of town - give or take a few million dollars. As officials nodded their heads in approval, people like Kathy King, who live south of Rochester and miles from any railroad tracks, realized they needed to get involved.

King: The line they have would go west of our sheds. It's behind those bins and the sheds up on the other side of the little ... behind the garage. It would go down ... see this rise over here?

King has lived on the same Olmsted County farm with her husband Terry for 30 years. It's hard for her to picture a coal train rumbling through the rolling farm and forest land near her home on the ridge of a scenic river valley. King says most of those making the decisions about where to focus money and energy over the coal train issue live in the city.

King: The perception in the county, in the out-county area, is that the city of Rochester, and the Rochester county board members, are a formidable block of power.

King, whose previous political activism was limited to getting Byron's first traffic light installed, sits at her dining room table covered with thick file folders, notes, and maps.

King: There's a young man that farms this piece, and this piece, and this piece here. Just starting — young fellow. He works a job, his wife works a job, and they farm. And effectively all of his land would be split in half and some would be landlocked. And the railroad does not allow you legally to cross wherever you want; he would have property that he can't get to. And that effects his economic bottom line. I mean, this is a business. They maybe say they've got a lot of businesses in Rochester, but you can move a dry cleaning business to another building, you know, that kind of thing; there is that opportunity to do that. He can't move that land.

When rural residents started to complain, county board member Paul Wilson, a vocal opponent of DM&E's plan, backed off the by-pass idea. He drafted a resolution opposing any changes to the current railroad traffic through Rochester. Still, Wilson says officials need to consider what's best for everyone.

Wilson: I think the bottom line is we need to look at what least affects the most people. I think that's where the decision point comes. I know the USDA has supported it recently. That's interesting. If there's a need for rural America to have that, then maybe, some people tell me, "Why isn't it out there then?" So you see you gotta look at both sides and how they see these issues.

Even though city officials also signed off on Wilson's "no-build" resolution, the by-pass option remains viable. Rochester mayor Chuck Canfield says city officials are still working to solidify a proposed route south of the city that would take the bulk of the increased rail traffic away from homes and busy streets.

Canfield: Anybody who lives south of town automatically opposes it because they believe it'll go past their ... in a couple instances it certainly will. But there would be no reason to frighten or think the impact would happen to thousands of folks, because that's not going to happen.

In an attempt to perhaps calm rural residents' fears, Rochester officials are keeping themselves open to some extraordinary options. The city is spending about $5,000 to study a tunnel in Norway some 50-or-60 feet below ground. Such a feat would be a challenge in Rochester since it would have to run below the Zumbro River. Of course, any changes elected officials propose to DM&E's plan to run on the existing tracks through the city is merely conjecture. The railroad company currently has all the legal control it needs to use its tracks any way it wants.

	Sign up to receive e-mail newsletters

	Audio help

	Text: Sm : Md : Lg