You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “In the Big Muddy”.
In the Big Muddy
by Nancy Oates on January 9, 2017
• Permalink
Tagged GoTriangle, Light Rail
Posted by Nancy Oates on January 9, 2017
http://chapelhillwatch.com/2017/01/09/in-the-big-muddy/
Previous Post
To a Healthy New Year
To a Healthy New Year
Next Post
I have a dream; do you?
I have a dream; do you?
Recent Comments
- Nancy Oates on We’re still here
- Deborah Fulghieri on We’re still here
- Pluramus on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- Plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
- Plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
- Nancy Oates on Greene Tract series continues
- plurimus on Greene Tract series continues
Blogroll
Categories
- 140 West
- Budget
- Business
- Carolina North
- CH2020
- Committees
- Community life
- Council Members
- County business
- Courts
- Courtyards of Homestead
- COVID-19
- Deer
- Downtown Chapel Hill
- Economic development
- Elections
- Environment
- Ethics
- Food Trucks
- Homeless Shelter
- Housing
- Land Use
- Library
- Lifestyle
- Media
- Museum
- Northside
- Occupy Protests
- Parking
- Police
- Politics
- Public Works
- Roads
- Sanitation workers
- Schools
- Social justice
- Spending
- Taxes
- Technology
- Town staff
- Transportation
- Trees
- UNC
- Uncategorized
- Work and Money
Tag Cloud
123 West Franklin advisory boards affordability American Legion annexation Bicycle Apartments bond referendum BRT Bus ads candidates Carolina Flats cell phones Central West CH2020 Charterwood Community Home Trust comprehensive plan county commissioners county government development Ephesus-Fordham fireworks form-based zoning Franklin Street Friends of Downtown Growth health care Historic District Commission historic districts Holidays Light Rail Obey Creek park-and-ride personalities real estate sales Rogers Road Shortbread Silent Sam students The Edge Timber Hollow towing traffic Trinitas VOEMeta
plurimus
/ January 9, 2017GoTriangle has fooled the commissioners once again. GoTriangle have performed the end run around the material changes clause that could have allowed for changes.
Who has been responsible for managing the GoTriangle relationship on behalf of the taxpayers? Why has the news media been so reluctant to challenge the obvious obfuscations? Beside the panorama of metaphor, how do the taxpaying citizens put a stop to this nonsense?
Bonnie Hauser
/ January 9, 2017Unfortunately the decision point has moved out to 2020 – when we’ll be about $100 million deep in the big muddy – and for some, too late to turn back.
If you read the plan, the funds to pay back the new loans are not committed.
Yes feels like 2008. If the commissioners are fooled, it will be at our expense.
Oh – and why isn’t the council asking about what happens to the funds for MLK BRT and using more transit $$ to fund the shortfall in federal funds for new buses?
George Entenman
/ January 9, 2017I too would like to see the MLK BRT idea implemented. If nothing else, it might show a viable alternative to light rail.
Bonnie Hauser
/ January 9, 2017Good point George. MLK BRT is about 1/10 the cost of DOLRT and serves the 2020 focus areas to UNC. It can eventually go south to Chatham Park.
Wonder what it does to the DOLRT ridership projections?