Archive: Opinions

EditorialThe Ladoga Park battle with Norfolk Southern Railroad strikes me as a classic case of humanity.  All sides make assumptions about the other sides that may or may not be true.  Few talk to each other.  Real issues that could solve disputes are obscured  by people on each side being so close to the issue that they can't see the bigger picture.  Some of the problem is genuinely difficult, but it seems to me that a lot could be cleared up if people talked to each other more.  And listened.

While it is hard to feel sympathy for a behemoth company that has a history of not being responsive to Lansing locals, they have a point when they say they are closing crossings for safety reasons.  The railroad has held the right of way since the 1870s.  Many local residents actually trespass when building their stairways down the cliffs to get to docks and boat houses that are probably illegal.  And the fewer crossings the railroad has to contend with, the fewer possible crash-ups with vehicles blocking the tracks.  It seems to be more about avoiding litigation than about safety, but the argument can be made that it is about both.

Justice William Burin's lease allows him right of way over the closed crossing, but because he has lost the abstract he is in the unenviable position of having to pay to have it researched and reconstructed.  The railroad contends he has to prove the property was granted the right of way before the 1870s, of if after, by the railroad company.

Let me ask you something.  Do you know where your abstract is at this moment?  How many years ago did you buy your house, and how many times have you needed to reference that document?  The situation Judge Burin finds himself in may not be legally tight, but it is entirely understandable.  Besides, his deed grants him the right of way over the closed crossing.

This is a real problem because it is expensive to pay lawyers to do work like this.  The railroad has the advantage with plenty of money for lawyers that private citizens typically don't have.  This is the number one sticking point and I think it is entirely appropriate that New York State Senator Nozzolio and U.S. Congressman Michael Arcuri take up the banner for residents as they have been doing.

Residents are stressing safety issues, and this was the approach that got Nozzolio's attention.  Nozzolio said he could make better headway with the railroad if the Town and Fire District would partner with him to support their case.  Lansing Fire Chief Scott Purcell's letter says that the closed crossing is not a safety hazard so much as trees and large rocks on residents' properties that obstruct emergency vehicles once they get into the neighborhood.

All five Town Board members support the neighborhood, but that support is impotent because they don't own the road in question.  Ladoga Park Road is a private road.  The Town refused to plow it when residents asked them to a couple of years ago, with good reason.  Board members say that taxpayers shouldn't pay for services on private property, and the Town shouldn't take on liability for operating public machinery on private property.

When I asked Purcell about that he said that an access road owned by the railroad that goes between Myers Road and Ladoga Park Road is sufficient for his equipment to get into Ladoga Park on the side where the crossing was blocked.  He said that it would be a hazard if the railroad closed that access lane as well as the crossing, but as long as one of them is open emergency vehicles can get in.

He also said that obstructions on private lots keep the vehicles from getting to emergencies once they are in the neighborhood.  He said his fear was that residents would think getting the crossing open would solve the access problems.  He seems right to fear that if Wednesday's Town Board meeting was any indication.  Residents don't appear to want to consider removing the obstructions.

That surprised me.  Would cooperating with the fire department help them to convince the fire department to cooperate with them?  I talked to Purcell at the most recent Fire Commissioner's meeting, where he explained why he responded as he did.  As is usually the case there was only one member of the public there -- me.  The fire commissioners meet on the first Tuesday of every month, and they open the floor to the public twice during every meeting, but I haven't ever seen any public there to take advantage of that.

I would have thought that people who live on the lake would understand about getting ducks in a row.  It would have served them better to deal with these issues with the fire department before a letter was crafted.  Purcell says he doesn't need the railroad crossing as long as the access road is open, but there is no guarantee the railroad will keep that access open.  They could block it tomorrow if they wanted to.  If they did he would agree that opening the crossing is a good idea.  That gives residents a point they agree on that could make a stronger case.

Instead the letter, which has been forwarded by the Town to Arcuri and Nozzolio, muddies their case.

Of course the railroad could also open that crossing tomorrow if they wanted to.  Of all the railroad crossings they own, it seems ludicrous that they chose this one to close, despite the legal issues.  I walked the neighborhood, and have been there when it is flooded.  Some of the fire commissioners told me that they worried about their vehicles being carried off when responding in the neighborhood during floods, which are not uncommon there.   It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that turning a whole neighborhood into a dead-end street cut off from the world by railroad tracks isn't a great idea.

As for Judge Burin's deed -- a deed is a legal document.  Railroad officials rightly say that even a legal document can be illegal if it mistakenly grants rights the grantor is not authorized to give.  But the other side of that is that it could very well be legal.  I think it probably is.

Norfolk Southern agrees that the deed could be legal, and says if Burin or any other resident proves they have the right of way they will open the crossing instantly.  So everyone is in agreement that the parties' legal rights are ambiguous.  Given the low volume of traffic in the area it seems to me that erring on the side of the residents is the right thing to do, at least until one party or the other can prove his case.  Norfolk Southern says the burden is on Burin to prove it.  I don't see why it isn't on the company, or a shared burden.

This local ire would be a public relations nightmare to any corporation that cares about that sort of thing.  Norfolk Southern could be instant heroes by voluntarily reopening it.  Instead they appear to be bullies, despite their legal standing.  And as winter approaches Ladoga Park residents find themselves figuratively waiting for paint to dry as the issue drags on and on along the tracks without getting anywhere.

----
v4i40