"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." ~Mahatma Gandhi
It because one talks common sense, the other should be TriMets agent. Why Jason backs up TriMets poor decisions is beyond me.
I do not think TriMet is perfect.I don't agree with how they did the Portland Mall--how having an auto lane at all times was put ahead of transit. I have issues with how the Yellow Line uses Interstate instead of being along I-5, where it could be more reliable and faster, including avoiding multiple street jogs.I don't think its good how people (such as on the weekend Line 67 trips) have lost service they had came to depend on.I think Al has an argument that TriMet is wrongly telling him that he can't do on his own time what an ordinary citizen (as in not an employee) can do.HOWEVER, I think many of problems that people have with TriMet stem from the fact that they're trying to compete in an environment that actively tries to prevent them from being successful.Specifically, we have governments that mandate an oversupply of parking and give away their own (e.g. on-street) for free. We have governments that don't charge road users the costs of road runoff treatment. We have governments that subsidize street maintenance with non-user fee sources. We have governments that prevent and discourage denser development, which would increase the amount of potential transit riders along a given line. And there's much more than those things.MOREOVER, many of Erik's arguments and ideas can be demonstrated to be wrong, bad or have negative effects that outweigh the positive ones. For example, not opening (or discontinuing) WES or the MAX Green Line could make TriMet liable to the FTA, Portland & Western and/or others. And ceasing spending on the Columbia River Crossing project would not save any money as their costs are being paid for by the state governments.AND, it's not just what he says, but how he says it. If he would make his arguments in a calmer, nicer way, I'd consider some of them to have some merit. An example would be how the Powell Blvd. MAX station isn't exactly at Powell Blvd.
I realize I'm coming to this late, given that I am just coming back from vacation, but -I agree with Jason in that sometimes Erik states things as fact when such statements can be proven to be false or at best are unsubstantiated. It's fine to have an opinion, but any factual statements need to be truthful.Examples:Erik stated that TriMet has no plan to replace its bus fleet. (that's totally false)Yesterday Erik said "TriMet intentionally refuses federal funding which would have paid for the bus at 12 years of age" (I see no evidence that TriMet was offered money for bus purchases and refused it -- though TriMet was offered money for 4-6 hybrids for the 72 line and accepted)Erik stated that the Opticom emitters used to hold signals were totally disabled. (this is unsubstantiated - and there is evidence from TriMet that suggests this is false)I could go on and on, but I think that's enough to make the point.
Post a Comment