Bravo, OPB! You’re one of the few persons writing on this bulletin board who has made an effort to not only understand NCRA’s history but also to express your thoughts and questions well. Perhaps, however, a little additional context and a tad of correction.

One needs to remember the NCRA got its start as the North Coast Railroad operating only that portion of the railroad between Arcata and Willits that it purchased from the estate of the bankrupt Eureka Southern Railroad. The NWP did not reappear until August 1996 when the NCRA, in collaboration with the North Western Pacific Railroad Authority (NWPRA, the joint powers board you referred to) purchased that portion of the railroad south of Willits to Lombard from the SP. By August 1996, NCRA had added the property from Willits to Healdsburg and the NWPRA owned everything from Healdsburg to Lombard. Separately, the Golden Gate Bridge Authority had purchased the right of way from Ignacio to San Rafael from the SP.

As to the condition of the properties, for nearly five years before selling the track to the NCRA, the Eureka Southern’s Trustee had run the property further into the ground, in part, by cannibalizing assets and doing as little maintenance as possible. When you buy anything out of bankruptcy, what you see is what you get; no refunds or exchanges. Acquisition of the south end property from the SP, included some kind of obviously inadequate allowance toward the purchase price in consideration of property condition. In short, the property was broken down, used up, and worn out when the NCRA got it and there was no money to fix it. THAT WAS, AND IS, THE CORE PROBLEM.

Since the SP sold the former NWP properties there have been only three operators: the NCRA itself from inception until February 1998; Railways, Inc., as NCRA’s agent, from May 1998 until the FRA shutdown November 1998 (NOT 2001 as the IJ says), and the NWPY from February 2001 until September 2001. Railways was an agent for the NCRA and its contract was clear that the NCRA was responsible for the condition of the property. But NCRA had no money to put into correcting right of way, track, signal, or bridge defects.

The NWPY put its own money into correcting all of the FRA class 1 defects on the first 42 miles of the NWP from Lombard to (almost) Penngrove with plans to then reopen the next 11 miles to Windsor. NWPY’s contract with the NCRA contains two track maintenance provisions: 1.) the NCRA was responsible for improving the railroad to class 2 and 3 FRA track standards and 2.) until the agreed track improvements were complete, the NCRA had to pay NWPY the extra or added cost of maintaining NCRA’s broken down right of way, track, signals and bridges. NWPY was responsible for regular maintenance costs up to the national average for the agreed track standard. However, when NWPY’s bills for a portion of track maintenance started coming in, the NCRA elected to stonewall NWPY and to not pay anything it owed. Finally, in September 2001, NCRA unilaterally repudiated its agreement with NWPY and demanded NWPY stop running trains. That started the dispute that continues to this day.

You’re also right, OPB, about an unworkable “hodgepodge” of public owners, but the liability for deferred maintenance was the owners’, not the operators. The operators did not cause the conditions and were not about to risk their money to pull the owners’ chestnuts out of the fire. I'll bet the NWPY's owners regret the day they ever offered to use their money to try to jump start the NCRA. If NCRA did not want to accept responsibility for the track conditions and for correcting those conditions, then why did they keep signing contracts in which they agreed they were responsible?

LLL