RAIL Act aims to improve safety Johnson, Sykes bill looks increase regulations, inspections Cincinnati’s plan to sell its railway is in jeopardy

Two U.S. representatives from Ohio have introduced a bipartisan bill to try to improve railroad safety in light of last month’s train derailment in East Palestine.

U.S. Reps. Bill Johnson (R-6th District) and Emilia Sykes (D-13) on Friday introduced the Reducing Accidents in Locomotives (RAIL) Act.

Under the act, the secretary of transportation would be directed to issue new rules to improve safety based on

Ohio lawmakers have stripped from the state’s transportation budget a specific measure city officials need to sell the Cincinnati Southern Railway.

The law governing the city-owned railroad, the Ferguson Act, currently says any money from a sale must be spent on debt payments. The Cincinnati Southern Railway Board, which wants to sell the city-owned railroad to Norfolk Southern for $1.6 billion, wants the Ferguson Act to say the money can only be spent on current infrastructure projects instead.

The Ohio House approved the $12.6 billion transportation budget with the board’s ask earlier this month, but changes by Senate Republicans would scrap that and maintain current law. That means Cincinnati could still sell the railway, as long as it used the proceeds for debt service.

“We think it’s important at this point to make sure the debt the city carries can be paid for,” Senate GOP spokesman John Fortney said.

The five members of the board, who are chosen by the mayor, don’t want to comment, a spokesman for the board said.

Cincinnati leaders hope to sell the railroad to Norfolk Southern. City voters would have to approve the sale, a ballot measure city leaders were hoping would come this November.

Pureval: This is the time to sell

It’s unclear what the state’s final transportation budget will look like. If the Senate approves a different plan, lawmakers will have to hash out differences through a process called conference committee.

“I’m committed to working alongside the General Assembly to pass the required legislation that allows the referendum for voters to decide,” Cincinnati Mayor Aftab Pureval said in a statement Wednesday afternoon. “There has never been a more important time for our city to get out of the rail business. Selling now gives us local control over our assets in an investment trust for generations to come. No longer would our future be tied to the unpredictable and risky rail industry.”

Rep. Bill Seitz, R-cincinnati, said he expects the issue to be discussed in conference committee and signaled that he’s not willing to let the proposal go.“i feel rather strongly that we should authorize the people of Cincinnati to vote on this very sound business proposition,” he said.

Proponents of the sale had first tried to get the state law changed in last year’s lame-duck session. But with questions about the sale swirling, it was moved to the state’s transportation bill, which is set for a vote at the end of the month.

Language pulled from transportation spending bill

That worried State Sen. Bill Blessing, R-colerain Township, who was concerned it would be buried and not have a proper vetting.

Blessing said he was told the railroad decision was being pulled from the transportation bill Tuesday, the same day the state sued Norfolk Southern over a Feb. 3 Norfolk Southern train derailment in East Palestine that spilled toxic chemicals.

Fortney said Norfolk Southern’s recent derailments in Ohio haven’t helped the situation, but he noted that discussions to sell the railway started long before that.

“Does the derailment have some legal impact?” he said. “No. They’re two separate issues. But safety is a huge concern.”

Pureval said the sale would be a “bold, once-in-a-generation opportunity for Cincinnati and our region; it is a top priority.”

“It will improve the lives of Cincinnatians by allowing us to repair more streets, improve more roads, and upgrade our parks and recreation centers. I’m committed to working alongside the general assembly to pass the required legislation that allows the referendum for voters to decide.”

Blessing isn’t sure what happens next.

“While it’s good to see that the enabling language was removed, we need to keep in mind that the House will have its say on this in conference committee, as will the governor since he could veto it if it’s amended back in,” Blessing said. “Moreover, it’s difficult to predict how this plays out in light of recent action taken by the attorney general’s office.”