(The following article by James Quirk Jr. was posted on the Burlington Hawkeye website on April 12.)
DAVENPORT, Iowa — An attempt to establish that the city of Burlington was home to BNSF Railway’s primary locomotive repair shops before the railroad transferred and eliminated local shops jobs was the agenda of the city’s legal team in Day 1 of Burlington v. BNSF.
BNSF’s legal team, meanwhile, tried to discredit witnesses the city called to the stand Monday.
City Manager Bruce Slagle was the first to testify in the trial before Judge Charles Wolle in the U.S District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
Power presented an enlarged aerial photograph of the 22.25 acres of riverfront property the city wants the court to order BNSF to start paying rent for using.
Power told the court that an initial appraisal of the property indicated it carried a $2.7 million value, and that BNSF should pay $220,000 annually in rent.
But after recently receiving monetary figures of what the railroad collects in rent from riverfront property occupied by ADM/Growmark’s grain elevator, the worth of the property was revised to $1.34 million and that the annual rent should be $170,000, he said.
BNSF’s attorney, Michael Thrall, later referenced the annual rent the city is seeking to be $107,000, but nobody clarified which was the correct figure. Thrall added that a railroad–paid appraisal indicated BNSF should pay at most $60,000 per year in rent.
Power asked Slagle numerous questions about city efforts to keep BNSF shops in the city before the railroad’s ultimate exodus, which started in January 2003 and was completed in 2004. He also asked questions about what led to the city’s decision to file a lawsuit against the railroad.
Power asked Slagle whether the riverfront property in question is open for public use.
“They are under control of the Burlington Northern (railroad) and its tenants,” Slagle said.
Slagle later testified that he became aware of old 1858 and 1880 agreements made between the city and railroad late in 2001. In late 2002, he said the railroad had alerted the city that it was considering consolidating its locomotive repair shops in either Burlington or Topeka, Kan.
Slagle said he and other city officials met with BNSF representatives in an effort to keep the shops in Burlington.
In January 2003, BNSF announced it planned to transfer or eliminate 250 of its 380 local shops positions, Slagle said. By the end of the year, BNSF announced that it planned to close the local shops, he said.
Slagle said BNSF officials, before the city filed the lawsuit in March 2004, were told that an agreement was in place between the city and railroad that prevented BNSF from opening its principal locomotive repair shops elsewhere.
The city suit alleges the railroad breached an 1858 agreement that stipulates the railroad could use the riverfront property as long as it maintains its principal locomotive shops in the city. The city contends that an 1836 Act of Congress established the riverfront as public trust property that can’t be sold.
Slagle testified that the only reason the city filed the lawsuit was to start collecting rent from BNSF.
Slagle said he and the City Council believed at the time it was filed it was the right thing to do.
Under cross examination, Thrall, citing articles that appeared in The Hawk Eye after the suit was filed, questioned Slagle regarding comments made by Mayor Mike Edwards.
Edwards said two years ago that he was hopeful the lawsuit would encourage BNSF to return the lost jobs to Burlington.
Slagle said he was present when Edwards made the comments, but that the council knew that the lawsuit was about receiving compensation.
Slagle said Edwards apparently was hopeful the railroad would change its mind.
Thrall also questioned Slagle’s statement that the council was behind the lawsuit, alluding to Councilman Mike Campbell objection to filing the lawsuit.
“He (Campbell) may have a different opinion,” Slagle said, adding that Campbell’s “general opinion” was that the city should still be compensated by BNSF for use of the property.”
Wolle said that one council member being against the lawsuit is irrelevant.
The city then called former BNSF employee George De–Hague to the stand.
Outside of several years during World War II, DeHague worked as a machinist at the local shops from 1940 until 1962. From 1962 before retiring in 1984, DeHague served as an official with the International Association Machinists and Aerospace Workers union where he continued to deal with railroad union employees from Burlington as well as from across the country.
DeHague testified that he believed that the railroad shops in Burlington were the largest locomotive repair shops, or what is known in the business as “back shops,” in the Burlington Northern lines.
He also testified that on different occasions during his tenure as a union official when there was talk about the railroad consolidating its shops, three different Burlington Northern officials told him that the city had nothing to be concerned about because of the old agreements that prevented the railroad from leaving Burlington.
Under cross examination, DeHague testified that he’s still a union member and an advocate for the railroad’s union employees and has had adverse dealings with railroad officials in the past regarding union issues.
Another city witness, Rick Heyland, testified that he started work with BNSF as an electrician in 1971 before becoming an employee of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, a position that allowed him to continue his association with the railroad and union employees.
Regarding locomotive repair work in the Burlington shops, no other shop on the BNSF lines could compare to it, Heyland said.
For instance, in 1998 the large back shop in Topeka overhauled 187 train engines, he said, but the shops in Burlington overhauled between 215 and 225 locomotives.
Like he did with DeHague, Thrall asked Heyland if he was an advocate of the union employees and Heyland gave an affirmative response.
Testimony from the city’s fourth witness, Rudolph Daniels, was just getting under way when Wolle called it a day at about 5 p.m. Monday.
Daniels testified that he taught a course on railroads at Western Iowa Tech Community College and wrote a book on the topic, “Trains Across the Continent.”
Power intends to continue questioning Daniels when the trial resumes at 9 a.m. today. Other city witnesses scheduled to take the stand today include attorney Dan Cahill, who helped the city hammer out a 1985 agreement with the railroad, and former Councilman Jerry Rigdon.