There are times when you see something going wrong, and yet no one steps out to fix it. It happens in relationships, it happens in business, it happens in wars, and it apparently happens in mass transit.
It's not just that FasTracks keeps seeing costs increases with no end in sight, it seems like there is no thought to "is this the right approach" and instead all the effort is applied to how to fund wherever it is we are going.
I agree that trains look cool. And the theory of a fast rail line is sure compelling. But so far it seems that every study shows that buses would be faster, cheaper, and more convenient. Yet even the Camera's question assumes we continue as is with FasTracks and just worry about how to fund it.
And with that, let's grade the candidates...
Ken Wilson D+ : The George Bush approach - no discussion of if we should even be doing this and the entire exercise will provide a profit so no taxes will be needed. Ken - should we even be doing this? And what if the city does not make a profit on the transit village? Yes real estate can be very profitable. It can also have very high losses.
Rob Smoke A- : Ok, hell has officially frozen over. I find Rob's answer clear, concise, and spot on. I would have preferred a bit more detail on why he thinks the transit village would be a dismal failure but overall - great answer.
Eric Rutherford C+ : No questioning of if we should even do this. But a very realistic picture of the costs we will face and how to go about addressing them.
Tom Riley A+ : Another clear answer of intervention - why are we going to do something that makes absolutely no sense? And a very clear understanding of the details of the issues.
Larry Quilling B : Good answer. Not a lot of detail but the basic concept of we need to see if it makes sense first is clearly stated.
Susan Peterson D- : No thought to should we be doing this. And a proposal to discourage car usage in favor of bikes - to Denver. Yes Susan lets get 5,000 people to bike each way daily - that's going to happen.
Eugene Pearson C+ : A clear grasp of many of the issues and some good answers on how to address them. But no thought of if we should be doing this.
Susan Osborne D- : No discussion of if we should be doing this. And no knowledge of if we would need taxes and for what.
Alan O'Hashi B+ : Short and general answer but clearly wants to look at what is the best way to achieve our goals (as opposed what is the best way to have some trains).
Lisa Morzel D+ : No mention of if FasTracks makes any sense. And no mention of where we would get additional funds to cover this aside from finding "cost savings."
Adam Massey B- : Incredibly short generic answer but he does call for a study of alternatives.
Kathy Kramer A+ : You go girl. An impassioned eloquent statement as to why FasTracks has turned from a good idea into a mess, that we need something that makes sense, and an understanding that you have to make a solution more compelling than using a car.
Nabil Karkamaz F : no answer
Philip Hernandez C- : No discussion of if we should do this. But he does say all of these various new plans should be combined into a single tax vote. (He doesn't say it but a single vote would have such a huge price tag it would almost certainly lose - which is one way to kill this turkey.)
Andrew Harrison F : no answer
Crystal Gray C- : no discussion of if we should do this. A general discussion of the issues around how to fund this, but no proposal on what approach she would take. I would hope for some specifics on this from a sitting council member.
Angelique Espinoza C+ : No discussion of if we should do this. But a decent short listing of the issues with cars vs taxes and that we should put the decision on the ballot.
Macon Cowles D+ : No discussion of if FasTracks makes any sense. And wants to find solutions other than additional taxes. That's a great idea - the problem is this requires so much money that at least part will have to come from taxes.
Shawn Coleman B- : Interesting answer. He does not question if we should implement FasTracks. But he does say lets hold off on this as it is not needed today and that is the same end result.
Philip Bradley F+ : This is really in la-la land. Ok, we are going to implement FasTracks but fund it from existing savings and voluntary donations from individuals and businesses. And you've seen this implemented successfully where...
Matthew Applebaum C+ : Ok, Matt assumes that we are going to build FasTracks. But on the plus side he has some very good answers on how to fund it. And they are realistic and sensible.
Postscript: What I find fascinating is that the studies I have read so far show that buses would have a lower carbon footprint and a smaller impact on the environment. So where do our PLAN Boulder candidates come out on this? 2 C's and 5 D's (kudos to Eugene who was the high scorer with a C+). You start to get the feeling that PLAN Boulder's answer to any problem is to build something. Great for the construction industry but it's not always the best solution.
