 |
Re: EGBOK....
Author: BOB2
Date: 10-11-2014 - 08:06
Bob,
His editorial wasn't as bad as some of what's come before and the problems some in TRAC have had of alienating others without offering a way to solve the problem. I think he's getting the organization on a more business like focus. Focusing all of the legitimate outrage and frustration with the CHSR project into a constructive purpose is a difficult task.
I think the legislative conference is a good idea. It should focus more on the positive efforts our friends, like Art Brown and Mike Antonovich, and what they are trying to do to fix CHSR, and the progress the locals are making with the programs at SANDAG and OCTA to complete things like the completion of the LOSSAN double tracking.
I have been focusing my efforts on showing folks at the local levels the critical differences in how FRA is funding the poorly vetted and poorly planned HSR "projects" and the process used by FHWA and FTA. They require much more rigorous project planning and evaluation as a kind of "checks and balances" process, designed to attempt to weed out the real political turkey's, and assure a high degree of local consensus and "buy in" usually with matching funds. This isn't a "perfect" process either, but can't be any worse than what we are doing now.
I have also been planting the seed with some policy makers, that if such a process was in place, then the much better planned local corridor improvements, could at least compete as equals for these scarce HSIPR funds, with the giant money sucking machine at the CHSRA. Which would fund much more worthwhile and cost effective projects, and would have the effect of forcing the CHSRA to pull its head out of its @$$.... when it stops getting these blank checks from our two favorite idiot Senators.
Changing the HSIPR requirements for planning and project eligibility would go a long way toward getting at least some of this money to where it's needed, and would be better spent, on things like the UPT run through. Things which would produce real savings and benefits today. As opposed to funding incomplete and unfinished HSR segments to nowhere, which, as of now have no further funding commitments for completion.
Bob2
His editorial wasn't as bad as some of what's come before and the problems some in TRAC have had of alienating others without offering a way to solve the problem. I think he's getting the organization on a more business like focus. Focusing all of the legitimate outrage and frustration with the CHSR project into a constructive purpose is a difficult task.
I think the legislative conference is a good idea. It should focus more on the positive efforts our friends, like Art Brown and Mike Antonovich, and what they are trying to do to fix CHSR, and the progress the locals are making with the programs at SANDAG and OCTA to complete things like the completion of the LOSSAN double tracking.
I have been focusing my efforts on showing folks at the local levels the critical differences in how FRA is funding the poorly vetted and poorly planned HSR "projects" and the process used by FHWA and FTA. They require much more rigorous project planning and evaluation as a kind of "checks and balances" process, designed to attempt to weed out the real political turkey's, and assure a high degree of local consensus and "buy in" usually with matching funds. This isn't a "perfect" process either, but can't be any worse than what we are doing now.
I have also been planting the seed with some policy makers, that if such a process was in place, then the much better planned local corridor improvements, could at least compete as equals for these scarce HSIPR funds, with the giant money sucking machine at the CHSRA. Which would fund much more worthwhile and cost effective projects, and would have the effect of forcing the CHSRA to pull its head out of its @$$.... when it stops getting these blank checks from our two favorite idiot Senators.
Changing the HSIPR requirements for planning and project eligibility would go a long way toward getting at least some of this money to where it's needed, and would be better spent, on things like the UPT run through. Things which would produce real savings and benefits today. As opposed to funding incomplete and unfinished HSR segments to nowhere, which, as of now have no further funding commitments for completion.
Bob2
