"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." ~Mahatma Gandhi
Why would anyone hire an unarticulate unempathitic unqualified asshole to operate a people business?The ship is sinking, chapter 9 is coming.Maybe this is the real reason?http://www.cnbc.com/id/47963267
Great job by Mayor Adams..he has been one of the single most important and visible supporters of public transit.Looked like Neil did a rather poor job of being "transparant" and forthright with his Board bosses. Well now..wonder what they think of that?
Okay, this is the second time I've heard the theory that TM BoD has some intent to actually Bankrupt the District. My question: Would it actually be legal for Gubernatorial Appointees, who are otherwise private citizens, to Bankrupt a Public Utility/Service? I don't think so. And this goes to my argument that we all need to ban together to change ORS 267 and make the BoD accountable by direct elections.I agree with Al M, good on Sam Adams! Wouldn't he make a great TMGM??? I hear he'll be looking for a new job soon.....
agreed! Sam would make a great General Manager of Trimet!
If Sam would be a great GM of TriMet and it's a strong supporter of TriMet, you might as well shut down the bus system yesterday.He's just as much in bed with the idiots running TriMet. He has absolutely no concern about the majority of TriMet's service, or for any of TriMet's service territory outside Portland city limits (and that's by Sam's definition - west of East 60th Avenue.)His scheme would segregate out one group of high school students (in Portland Public Schools) and give them special status. But not kids in Parkrose, David Douglas or Centennial School Districts - or any of the other dozen or so districts that fall in TriMet's service territory. Yes - there are poor kids in Hillsboro, in Cornelius and Forest Grove; in Tigard and Tualatin; in Oregon City and in Gresham and Troutdale.Why should regional taxpayers have to pitch in $2 million, to give to the City of Portland, to give preferential treatment to one group of high school students?If you want to argue high school students should get a free ride (and I don't even believe that) it should be TriMet wide, system wide - not just one group of students in one city, at the expense of the entire district. Sam is OUT OF LINE.
I'll argue that when faced with loosing vital transit services for any citizen, you make the tough decisons and lead--With a focused effort to stop borrowing & building railWith a focused effort to not hire ANY non service-essential staff, such as Labor Relation or Safety Directors. With a focused effort to exhaust every avenue and review every dollar until you and your ATU partners achieve a workable and affordable solution.With a focused effort to reduce costs with every division that does not directly contribute to relaible and safe transit service, such as IT, Capitol Projects,Transportation Mgrs, Customer Service.Buy furniture and hire new Execs, or transport kids to and from school?TriMet got caught by Sam--he simply played hardball which is his job to do.
Good Job Sammy, Mary looked like an idiot on the news trying to spin the furniture BS.
While I semi agree there should be free rides for school kids (to and from school, not to their dealers and the mall at 12 midnight! Seriously, why do they get a free ride to the parties on a Saturday night?), I have a real hard time with this one. Basically it breaks down like this:The state originally paid for it, they no longer had a budget to do so and cut funds to it. Trimet picked up a partial amount of the tab, and now can no longer afford it either. So how does Sammy fix this problem? Not by trying to make room in a failing budget, but by extorting us with loan shark tactics to charge us thousands of dollars to put up ONE SHELTER and benches for our customers at a lower costs. Anytime you can stick it to McFarland, an angel gets it's wings and I smile, but don't think Sammy wouldn't extort the public just as harsh too if he gets away with this?
Anonymous ("While I semi agree...")While I agree that we should not be paying for non-school related trips, I think this is like arguing over the change in the couch cushions.The state is obligated to pay 70% of the cost of Yellow Bus service (ORS 327.013 (3)(a)(A)). If PPS had yellow bus service for high schools then cost would be $5.2M -- so it's in the taxpayers' best interest to have this program continue; but IMO what needs to change is simply to get the state to pay for this sort of arrangement as an available alternative to yellow bus service.
Post a Comment