Posner '77 discusses proposed purchase of Dinky

This article is an online exclusive. The Daily Princetonian will resume regular publication on Sept. 15. Visit the website throughout the summer for updates.

At the Borough Council meeting on Tuesday night, Chairman of the Railroad Development Corporation Henry Posner III ’77 gave a presentation on his proposed joint venture with the Borough to condemn the University’s ownership of the Dinky station and compel the University to sell it under eminent domain. RDC would provide the payment to the University at no cost to the Borough, he said.

The price to purchase the station would be determined by a third-party appraiser, and the Borough would enter a public-private partnership with RDC, forming the Princeton Community Rail Authority, Posner said.

Should NJ Transit choose to discontinue its service to Princeton, he added, PCRA would find another operator to control the line to Princeton Junction. The partnership could be ended upon the Borough’s decision to exit the partnership or the Borough’s decision to buy out RDC’s share.

In response to questions from members of the Council, Posner said that he was not opposed to the proposed creation of the Arts and Transit Neighborhood, but would like to see the project carried out in a way that would not be damaging to public transit.

“The University has tied these two projects together in a way that I think is unnecessary,” Council member Jo Butler said. “So there’s this big lovely project, that we all support for the arts and we all think would be just grand for the community and the University, and I’m wondering why, you, as an alum, would be willing to be a spoiler of all of that [for the University]?”

“I love Princeton, but to me Princeton is the community,” Posner said in reply. “It would be wrong to effectively marginalize the Dinky and make it less useful to the traveling public.”

“Like many projects around the world where you’ve got transit-oriented development, somehow you can figure a way to incorporate public transportation into a project as opposed to marginalizing it outside of a project,” he added. “Having seen many complex railroad transactions over the years, this seemed to be something that cried out for a solution, and I didn’t see anybody else putting their hands with a solution, so that is why I did what I did.”

Posner’s comments were met with applause, as they were at several points throughout the night.

Councilman Roger Martindell asked if the condemnation of the University’s ownership of the station could provoke New Jersey Transit to cancel service to Princeton Station. Posner replied that he did not believe NJ Transit’s decision would be at all related to the identity of the owner of the station, and that he did not believe NJ Transit had any motivation to cancel the service.

“I’m not aware that the Dinky is on anybody’s hit list,” he said. “Ask New Jersey Transit. I’ve heard all this discussion about how it’s in danger and all that, but I have lots of friends in the industry — the industry’s not that big — and my understanding is the Dinky is in the middle of the pack as far as their operations go, and, let’s face it, everything they do loses money.”

“There’s nothing going on that I’ve heard of within NJ Transit that suggests that the Dinky is being held up as the poster child for hopelessly inefficient lines,” he added. “I know of no reason why New Jersey Transit would not want to continue service to Princeton just like they are right now.”

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Martindell pointed out that Governor Chris Christie and his appointees make up four of the seven directors of NJ Transit. The governor, an ex officio member of the University’s Board of Trustees, has expressed support for the University’s Arts and Transit Neighborhood proposal. “If they were inclined to support the University over the interests of the users of the rail line, the users of the rail line could end up on the short end of the stick,” Martindell explained.

Posner replied that he thought purchasing the station would better insulate the Princeton community against a political move to shut down the Dinky than agreeing to the relocation would.

“I will not dismiss the possibility that there could be a top-down political move against the Dinky ... but I would turn that logic around and say that’s precisely the reason there needs to be a Princeton Community Rail Authority,” he added.

“How is it that you’re repaying yourselves?” Councilman David Goldfarb asked of the RDC. “Why would you feel good about that, having taken money from where it could be productive for you to be put it where it’s doing nothing for you?”

Posner explained that the RDC does not expect to receive a monetary return on its investment unless the Borough at some point purchases RDC’s ownership of the station.

Goldfarb continued with the point, asking, “What other inducements are there in this arrangement that makes this attractive to you?”

“You mean other than doing the right thing?” Posner responded.

Martindell also noted that costs to the Borough could arise from severance damages representing the loss to the property owners of the surrounding lands if the purchase was found to affect their uses.

“If Princeton University wants to build an arts campus, for example, it might argue to a jury that it can’t build the arts campus that it seeks if there’s a railroad going through it,” Martindell said, noting that the taxpayers of Princeton could be left “holding the bag” in the event of a lawsuit.

Posner said that PCRA would provide the funding for all such transaction costs. “PCRA’s pockets are as deep as my pockets,” he said. “There is the theoretical possibility that it could be a quagmire. That’s a risk that I’m willing to take.”

“If it is true that having a finger-shaped piece of railroad jutting into an arts complex destroys the value of the complex, then is it not also true that undue inflexibility in designing that complex is the true cause of the loss of value?” he added.

Posner said that he was not opposed to the possibility of eventually constructing a light rail line in the Dinky’s place, but that PCRA would preserve the Dinky in the short term.

In response to an inquiry about the University’s 1984 sales agreement, Posner said he did not support the claim that the agreement secures the University’s right to move the station. “I’ve looked at that letter any number of times, and I certainly don’t read it the way it’s being read, and especially not New Jersey Transit’s self-serving interpretation,” he said.

Posner also cited the University’s employee shuttle bus as evidence that the commute to the Dinky should not be made longer. “If the University, itself, for its own employees, thinks it’s such an unconscionable distance that they’ve got to run a bus, then imagine what it’s going to be like to take the Dinky then take a shuttle to a shuttle,” he said.