C-TRAN forum

Published:

 

From Goldenoldie: How about including a C-Tran Forum??? Maybe something in the way of Bus Rapid Transit discussion???? or C-Tran and upcoming ballot measures???

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply.

Only Columbian staff members can create new forum threads.

Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Editor Libby Tucker, libby.tucker@columbian.com, or Social Media Coordinator Matt Wastradowski, matt.wastradowski@columbian.com.


132 comments

Comments

Another forum.....

nailingit — August 22, 2011 at 1:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yep Nailingit...another forum. Alleycat, if we could convince Mark Boldt to realize the county isn't equipped for the type of mass transit they are drooling for, then we should be running for Guvner of this here stayte!!!

It is my opinion that the transit authorities should be looking into just keeping their buses on the road...to keep their drivers and mechanics on duty (providing bennies) and to increase capacity during this very difficult economic time. Instead, they'd rather raise fares, increase sales tax and reduce service all in the name of "progress" AKA BRT with connection to LRT in our city. Does that mean I do not promote future possibilities such as BRT??? Of course not. In fact, when ridership increases and businesses are back to pre-recession numbers...I'm all for improvement...but not at the expense of cutting services to those whose lives depend on the buses for transportation.

As I've asked many a time before and I ask now...whatever happened to common sense???

goldenoldie — August 22, 2011 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks Libby! Even if some of us don't have the chance to vote on M&O; for LRT and upgrades such as BRT, this project as well as the CRC has EVERYTHING to do with all of us in order to move about in Clark County.

goldenoldie — August 22, 2011 at 1:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


A friend of mine just recently opened a store at 4th plain & gen.anderson ave.He bought the property last year.He asked the question of our city fathers about 4th plain and BRT.Nothing was said to him.He has invested over a mill.dollars.Now he faces the problem of only one way in and out and in only one direction to reach his store.Which is bound to decrease his customer flow.Also he and I went to a meeting a couple of months ago at the Stapelton precint and listened to a lady that designs BRT's.She told C-Tran that BRT will not work on 4th.palin.The C-Tran officals were there they paid no attention to her at all.Even the daily riders were against it.They would lose bus stops at the places they need to go.Also the riders concern was walking several blocks in bad weather with all their shopping bags.And some are handicapped.

terick — August 22, 2011 at 2:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey Goldie, I was in Rockwood the other day. I happened to stop at the US Bank just south of Glisan on 181st. I made a comment to the teller that I had never seen so much bullet resistant glass in one place. The bank was awash in it. She informed me that it was the neighborhood. She said that ever since loo-rail went in the neighborhood has been going to hell. The other tellers were agreeing and furthurmore some said they were scared to come to work mostly in the fall and winter months.

My point is this. If we do let the loo-rail system in over here what's to say we won't have the very same problems associated with it. People, don't listen to the politicians on this issue. Go and talk to the people who live and work in the area that Max is running in. They will tell you that it is a sorry mess. They wish they could have sold out before it came along.

Oh, it will start out OK but within a few years you will see the same thing over here.

If, and I mean if, it does manage to get a foothold then run it down I-5 to SR-500 to the mall. One caveat though, make the run to the south side of the mall and move the transit mall there also. Easier to get back on the freeways and less noise for the residents north on the mall.

JohnCasey — August 22, 2011 at 5:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey JohnCasey, you were in my old stomping grounds. I lived in the neighborhood just south of Stark Street on 180th Avenue. BeLIEVE me, I see what has happened to the neighborhood and that's why I'm making such a big stink! I don't want to see the same thing happen to a neighborhood that already has had problems and doesn't need to see it compounded by the greed of those who falsely publicly identify themselves as someone important in Clark County while their pocketbooks grow from the profits they will receive while stealing from the taxpayers.

goldenoldie — August 22, 2011 at 5:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Go, I've got relatives in that area and some new friends as well. I met them while I was checking out a lot and a house that was for sale. All the relatives and my new friends all want to move and they go further and say if you don't have loo-rail don't get it. Tell everybody that you know to vote down any politicians and any tax or bond measures that have anything to do with it.

The last twenty years have been a trial for most of the people and businesses that were there. You can only turn left at the stop lights. If the business is on the other side you have to go as many as ten blocks and back track to get to that point.

And another thing. I don't know what the cops are talking about when they say drug dealing has been curtailed in the area. I filled up at 181st and Burnside and I saw at least three deals going down. This was just after ten ... IN THE MORNING!!!! I would hate to see what it's like at ten at night. 181st has become the new 82nd AVE around the Max.

JohnCasey — August 22, 2011 at 6:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'd like to hear something more concrete concerning the BRT route. From the last news article, it could run between downtown and 164th Ave - or stop/start just about anywhere in between. Considering they would like to start in 2013, and seeing as how they've already been planning for at least a couple of years - doesn't it make sense that they should know? Is it possible they're waiting until after the November C-Tran sales tax initiative to reveal the plan they have?

BRT could eventually support commuting to work in downtown Vancouver. That's if the waterfront and other commercial projects there are successful - and one could argue having BRT will accelerate that growth. But realistically this won't be for several years because this economy isn't recovering anytime soon!

The only other use I see is supporting the MAX line at the Vancouver terminus. There's already a movement to vote NO on funding everything C-Tran because of suspicion funds will be diverted to the CRC. And I'm betting if this use of BRT gets a lot of air time, that movement will grow - a lot.

roger — August 22, 2011 at 7:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


How many business owners along Fourth Plain will suffer? Terick identified one; there will be a lot more. There are a lot of shops west of Andresen that go right to the sidewalk; will these have to go to support the bus lane and two way traffic? There will be a greatly diminished opportunity to make a left turn into a business parking lot; how many stores will go under do to the loss of customers this restriction will cause?

roger — August 22, 2011 at 8:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


What about park and ride lots on the east side? The only one I know of now is at the mall transfer station. This detour doesn't sound practical, so I'm suspecting people living near that area will have to park at the mall and walk to Fourth Plain. Or will they decided to have a shuttle service? But it makes sense to have another lot somewhere east of 138th.

And what's the turning radius for one of these beasts? How and where will this take place at each end of the route?

This is just one more example of what I see as the need for hundreds of millions of dollars (if not billions) being needed to get this project moving. I mean, they're not going to just paint lines down the middle of Fourth Plain and put BUS ONLY every little distance - are they?

roger — August 22, 2011 at 8:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oh boy, Oh boy!!! Folks, you've GOT to make it to the meetings. They are taking the input from all who attend in order to get the ball rolling...OR...to not do anything at all. I thought I knew just about everything with regards to the BRT and Fourth Plain Corridor. I was wrong. There's not enough space or enough word count for me to hit up every issue with regards to the project...and it is still in the advisory phase. They've got federal grant fund in place which they had to meet in order to begin the process which should cover right up to the end of the study and final Locally Preferred Alternative. Yeah, I know...the same verbiage as the CRC. The only difference is that this project would be done by 2014 and be utilized to better improve traffic flow on Fourth Plain. I asked them if the BRT would continue through on the limited stops AND include another bus service which would catch the other passengers...and they said most likely, given that a separate BRT lane were set up. I asked them "Wouldn't that defeat the purpose" to improve transit mobility without suffocating the automobile traffic? I think I got some individuals a bit frustrated tonight, lol.

Anyhow folks, there's several alternatives on the table...too many to discuss. I cannot stress enough to all of you that you ALL should attend at least one of the meetings. This route affects more people than just who live in the corridor. Anybody who takes the bus and transfers at Van Mall will definitely be affected by this.

Also...the conceptual design we see in the 20-year plan...that's one of the most expensive ones. The BRT improvements could simply be more turn outs, bypass transit stops OR it could be the Cadillac version shared tonight.

Anyhow folks...I could fill you in on more info tonight but right now my brain is in hyper drive right now with all the absorbed information. If you want to attend any of the meetings check out their website and GET INVOLVED!!!

http://www.c-tran.com/brt_files/templates/brt.php

goldenoldie — August 22, 2011 at 9:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Okay Roger, the BRT route they are planning right now goes from downtown, up Fourth Plain to Van Mall via Van Mall Drive. The next phase would be from Van Mall to 162nd Ave but that's a long ways away. They have no set plans yet as they are asking community input, are working on current ridership numbers, impacts of business upstarts and the downturn in our economy.

Even if CRC is never completed, the reasoning behind the BRT corridor on Fourth Plain is to reduce the impact of traffic flow, increase efficiency of bus service and so on and so forth. They will continue with the BRT...CRC or no CRC. They emphasized the FACT that light rail would not work on Fourth Plain, much to my relief. That was the first bit of common sense I'd heard all night by C-Tran to be honest.

It is my opinion they'd wait for a conceptual design and definitely install more bus turnouts no matter what (a good idea by David Madore who was also in attendance).

All I can say is the small crowd that showed...hit C-Tran and the RTC Representatives with both barrels loaded. I think they were overwhelmed by the question and answer time...and the bold opinions by me as well as the other folks in attendance. All the more reason why new faces need to show to these meetings...even if you don't ride the bus.

goldenoldie — August 22, 2011 at 9:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


BTW, If you want to get a good summary of concerns raised at the meeting, check out David Madore and Lynda Wilson's comments on the article about the meeting last night.

Excellent comments, David and Lynda.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 5:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


JohnCasey, I just noticed your other comment directed to me regarding Rockwood residents at 6:45 pm. What the current residents are saying are the exact comments I've been saying since I've gotten involved in community issues such as the BRT plan. The comment you shared emphasizes my stance regarding the degradation of what was once a peaceful family-oriented community. Is Lightrail progress??? Certainly not for the quiet segments of our community....but of course, we should be talking about improving the corridor of Fourth Plain...if there's really anything they can do about it.

While at the meeting last night, I got the distinct feeling that the officials with RTC, C-Tran and ICC believe that if they glorify the route along Fourth Plain Blvd, it should encourage new business. I had made a recommendation to C-Tran and the RTC representative to take a long hard look at the type of businesses, how many new upstarts there are as well as what businesses have left the area like AVX...and soon, Kyocera as they are in the process of trying to find a buyer for the complex. The folks at C-Tran rallied on the fact that there's an excellent business site and plenty of room for expansion...hoping that the economy will turn around soon and Fourth Plain will once again be a thriving infrastructure which will capitalize on better funding for the service they intend to improve. My comment..."Isn't that putting a lot on the table?" I believe it was Chuck Green (maybe another gentleman with C-Tran) who said in response "The Economy has to improve soon." I believe they were REALLY trying to convince themselves that the end of this economic bust is soon.

sigh...

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 6:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Terick, with regards to your comment that the lady representing the BRT stated "She told C-Tran that BRT will not work on 4th Plain."and that the C-Tran officals were there they paid no attention to her at all....

It's probably because she was speaking of the conceptual design on C-Tran's website. There are several options...including one which mirrors what we currently have. They are trying to figure out the most fiscally-responsible alternative to make improvements along Fourth Plain in order to move traffic better, provide more customer-friendly operations and to run more cost effectively. I agree with the lady's statement that certain designs...increasing lanes to provide BRT's own lane...cannot be achieved in all regions of the corridor. I suggested to the representative who had provided the design fundamentals that they might have to include more than one concept to meet the needs of the corridor without negatively impacting auto/bike/pedestrian traffic. He took that into consideration after my discussion with him. If it goes anywhere??? Who Knows???

Anyhow...there will be no overhead lines like the bus trolleys in Seattle. Any NEW BRT vehicles (typically a double...AKA articulated bus) would be hybrid electric and fuel much like many of the new cars on the road...but at a cost of nearly $1 million. Would that be cost effective???

Also, I brought up my observation to Chuck that Bus #44 was already a pre-emptive test to see how express lines would do on Fourth Plain and I asked if they had noticed a marked improvement on Bus #4 on Fourth Plain. I couldn't get a concrete answer from them so I suggested they do a study on that which they claim they will be doing just that. One note--the man representing RTC (sorry I didn't catch his name) acknowledged that the Fourth Plain Express Bus #44 was indeed a start to the improvements of time efficiency, much like what we could expect in the future with other routes...although the focus would be Fourth Plain first, then Mill Plain, Hwy 99 and I-205...I believe in that order with each project covered in their current estimations of final costs.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 6:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Again Folks...I can't stress enough how important it is for each and every individual of Clark County as well as commuters from Portland who utilize the buses on Fourth Plain in order to get to work or school in Vancouver...who is concerned about the rising cost of taxes and pending requests for tax increases and changes which affect their daily routine while driving through the corridor...to attend the meetings and get involved. No concern is too small for the folks at C-Tran and the Regional Transportation Commission. They want this to be a community-oriented service that the COMMUNITY has gathered together and emphasized what WE want in order to make the service more user friendly AND more cost effective Without your input, they are making decisions for themselves, thinking they are representing us.

Here's a couple of links which helps anybody who's planing on attending the next meeting:

http://www.c-tran.com/brt_files/pdfs/Alternatives%20Analysis%20Fact%20Sheet%2007-07-2011.pdf

http://www.c-tran.com/brt_files/about/major_decision_points.php

http://www.c-tran.com/brt_files/pdfs/C-TRAN_20_Year_Plan-Adopted_June_8_2010b.pdf

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 6:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- Just curious, do you rely on public transportation or use it frequently?

Personally I can't remember the last time I was on bus except to be shuttled at an airport.

I know that a lot off folks are dependent on public transportation for travel to school, work etc.

nailingit — August 23, 2011 at 7:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good morning, nailingit. To be honest, I don't utilize it as much as I used to when I went to Clark and worked after that. Now I just use mass transit for errands on occasion...but I still use it. Why do you ask? I do have friends who are dependent on it.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Due to one term tim and his cronnies not allowing a vote on the CRC, let alone lite rail, I will vote NO on every CTran measure forever.

AllenAnderson — August 23, 2011 at 8:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It might defeat the purpose of providing mobility for those who don't have vehicles to use every day, AllenA. Although right now, I use it sparingly, there will come a time where I will need to use it more often as we are a one-car family with no expectations of purchasing a second one. Yes, my daughter has her car at the house, but once she's living in her own place, I will have to rely on the buses more often and I want to see a more cost-effective mass transit which has trimmed the fat and improved services while not taxing the living daylights out of our system.

AllenA, I know the service in question may not impact you as much as it will the residents along the line and for those who use Fourth Plain frequently, but it does greatly impact folks. Still, your input is vital in making improvements to C-Tran which include cutting the fat from the budget. Rather than saying "I'll vote No on every Ballot Measure" as I once did, you should be putting your 2 cents worth in either on their website or at the meetings. You are after all, a member of the community of Clark County and you NEED to be heard!

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


As far as not allowing the vote...it could be there will be no CRC project to vote on and C-Tran would have to reestablish their budget projections in order to advance their improvements. Cutting the fat should always be their first priority.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Golden a point has to be made..only way is to get our local goverment to listen is by voting. I have a crew of friends that don't vote, same old arguement, won't make a difference. But I've been pushing hard to get them registered and to vote, and to get their people to do the same thing. Golden with just the few people I have been able to influence at least 10 to 15 people have told me they would vote, some for the first time. What they do in the voting booth is their own business, but they are going to vote. This is something that should scare the crap out of the CTran, and thus the CRC. People who have never voted are going to register, and I hope vote NO to CTran.

AllenAnderson — August 23, 2011 at 8:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I do miss the old syle of posting... with faceplant a lot of the old crew dropped off....to the dungon!

AllenAnderson — August 23, 2011 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


And that is your choice, Allen. You KNOW I respect that...but at the same time, would you vote against something which you haven't heard the entire context of what you'd be voting against? I'm not saying increasing sales tax in the affected zone is the answer...far from it, but they are willing to listen to any ideas for budget redirection and work to see if it is a viable alternative. That's why I say involvement is so vital. Believe me AllenA, if you could have heard our little group last night...nobody's letting C-Tran off the hook. We've made it perfectly clear that WE WANT ANSWERS and WE WANT ACCOUNTABILITY...and we want the improvements without strapping every single taxpayer, every single homeowner, every single business owner with higher taxation.

Just curious...how many of the C-Tran public meetings have you attended? Any at all??? I'll be honest. I could have attended more meetings and I have been neglectful. Now...they're stuck with me making a voice on this issue as I have been with other issues in the past with the county and city...as my schedule and transportation issues had to be addressed first.

At least I know that when the ballot measures are put in front of me, I will be fully informed and will know I have made the right decision, no matter which way I vote. Will I support or oppose the upcoming budget request to maintain and operate existing services??? I won't give my answer because I still have much homework to do before that times come. Am I convinced the BRT/LRT improvement/m&o; ballot measure will be the right one...even though I may not be able to vote on it??? No...but if I can continue to express my concerns, give my ideas or just sit and chat with the folks at C-Tran...then I'm doing myself as well as the rest of the community a favor by BEING involved.

AllenA, I want to see Vancouver recover and improve... but not at the expense of forcing small businesses out of their location or forcing homeowners out of their homes just to support the ideals of a mass transit vision. I couldn't live with the fact that I knowingly supported a project at the expense of my community members, no matter how many were adversely affected.

Involvement, AllenA...Involvement.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey....we're not the dungeon, AllenA...we're the BASEMENT!!! Even basements have their place in this world and many are quite fixed up. We're a lot cleaner in verbiage than I've witnessed on the FB side, lol...and we are more opinionated too, lol.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal


alleycat — August 22, 2011 at 1:18 p.m.

*"rethink" this transportation thingy and devise a "total transportation solution" from door to destination.*

Personal helicopters or for the elite, jetpacks.

I read the predictions in Mech. Illustrated in the 50's and still wonder why Eisenhower decided that interstate hwys. would be better......

mr_basil_seal — August 23, 2011 at 8:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


dang...I need to wake up. In my comment at 8:40, that should read "I won't give my answer because I still have much homework to do before that *time comes.*

Sorry about the typo.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Maybe teleporting, Basil??? Oh wait...a recent report in China said that's not possible. Hey I know....BUMPER CARS!!!!

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 8:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"Only recently has transportation comprised
such a large share of the family budget. The
proportion of household expenditures that is
devoted to transportation has grown from
under 10 percent in 1935 to about 14 percent
in 1960, to almost 20 percent from 1972
through today.
The growth of transportation expenditures
closely followed the drop in transit use and the
emergence of sprawl development."

(Transportation Costs and the American Dream)

Buses vs Cars. Buses vs Cars..Hmmm. Is that the choice here, will either significantly alter the total dollars spend on transportation? Do we like living in our cars and buses?
Think about it...20% of total household income devoted to transportation, on average. For the poor, it is much higher. That means each work week, one entire day goes for transportation related expenses. What a rat race existence. All to maintain the middle class suburban lifestyle. Is it worth it? Don't you want your life back? These politicians, Leavitt and Madore, are two sides of the conventional wisdom coin. The New Paradigm should shelve mass transit, highways, and suburbs, and get us back to the community, neighborhood, and small town model.

mangoboy — August 23, 2011 at 8:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Although I agree with your comment Mango, in all reality...it ain't gonna happen. The population explosion globally is pushing people to the smaller towns already and is causing the headaches of mobility. Oh how I wish Vancouver was a small town model...and I've looked to smaller towns to see if it was what I was looking for, but sadly, the smaller towns aren't as small as they once were. When the settlers moved to the Wild West, it was to get out of the cities forming on the east coast...then their relatives and friends moved out west...pushing the already existing population of tribal members into their own compact living zones better known as reservations; procreation continued at a rapid rate; immigration numbers grew through the roof...and that's what we have today.

Reality sucks sometimes, my friend.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 9:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Gold I agree with a lot of what you are saying.I have only attended one meeting and I got the impression that it was just to appease the little people.The insiders have already made up their minds.C-Tran and the elected ones want that BRT so it can go to Clark College than on to Delta Park via loot rail.It is very easy to see through their hidden agenda.Talk with some of the people that use 4th Plain buses and also with the business owners along the route.BRT will be good for the commuters from that area that go to work in Portland.How many of the daily riders use it for that now?What % of the 6,000 riders use it fot that?That is a question that has been asked of C-Tran in the past, with no answer.

terick — August 23, 2011 at 10:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Terick, I've kept myself quite busy, studying the information they have available on line, spoke with the officials one on one and attended the meetings with this one being the first where I actually involved myself in the task I sought. I asked a lot of questions and raised several concerns. The first issue I wish to directly address to you and everyone else is that "Yes," C-Tran has made their mind up on one thing, but it isn't the design of the improvement. They have budgets they must stick to. They want this to work for the community as it will be the community who will be paying for it either in fares or taxes. You have to ask yourself..."Why would they wish for an elitist POV in order to develop an *Iconic* transit system which will obviously be against just about every supportive voter, knocking out any chance of voter approval?" Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of encouraging more ridership and improving service?

Now...regarding BRT...it is not to improve service just for the folks going to Portland. IN fact, it will only help about 15% of the daily ridership in our community...around 3000 folks each direction who actually go into Portland...some stopping at Jantzen Beach...others continuing to other points in Portland. It is to improve traffic flow in the corridor (Fourth Plain) and to improve upon Clark County's own alternate transportation hub as a more cost-effective operating entity as well as working to improve the alternate transportation in order to attract future businesses to Fourth Plain. How many times have you been in a vehicle, stuck behind the bus as it loaded everyone up...about a 5 minute delay?

David Madore had pushed for more bus turnouts to reduce that issue, but that would probably be a last effort if budget restraints prevented the corridor design eventually chosen.

At the Open House, I strongly encouraged C-Tran officials to NOT think of making transit mobility better for Portland and that we NEED to FOCUS on CLARK COUNTY, NOT Portland. We ALL know that by bringing MAX to Clark, it will not improve transit mobility for Vancouver as the folks at C-Tran emphasized as well which is why they are not pushing to extend the light rail system past Clark College....if even into Vancouver at all considering the slow pace and high price tag discouraging the entire process. Light rail to Vancouver was the idea of TriMet and had the support of Royce Pollard, our previous mayor which brought this forward to gain support by others who thought it sounded like a good idea before the economic numbers began to do a nosedive around 2005 and have continued to do so with maybe a little positive spurt in between and that's about it. C-Tran KNOWS light rail is not right for Clark County and they emphasized that at the meeting.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 10:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


(giggles and grins, here)

...you could imagine the look on their faces when they discovered who I am in real life beyond Goldenoldie. I revealed that in an email to Chuck Green. I'll just say...the reaction was priceless!!!

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 11:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie,

There needs to be a diaspora back to the abandoned towns and communities of the country, which have rotted away from lack of jobs and a government that does not not know provide incentives and designate target communities. But that is not relevant to Vancouver, WA--here, the neighborhoods need to come first, not the massive transportation corridors like I5 and 4th Plain. Neighborhoods that are self sustaining, that minimize the need to expend huge amounts of resources driving and busing all over the metro area in search of sustenance and entertainment. Look what happened to many towns that the interstate system bypassed. They stagnated and are on life support. Ironically, the overlooked towns offer the most promise because they have not be ruined by transportation culture/infrastructure.

mangoboy — August 23, 2011 at 1:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie I just read the comments on the face book side by David Madore.Also I read the Cs reporting.My question is is it worth saving 5 to 10 min.per stop when we are putting at risk the possibilty of busness's going out because of no access to their stores?Also the money that would be spent on the whole project is just mind boggling.I for one think that C-Tran has wasted far to much money now.

terick — August 23, 2011 at 3 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Also worth reading on the facebook side is the exchange between Rep Jim Moeller and Ms. Lynda Wilson. If her numbers are accurate, they go a long way toward supporting Mr. David Madore's point that we'll be paying a LOT of money for a project that won't speed the trip up all that much.

As for the wisdom of voting No on all C-Tran initiatives - at a certain point people just don't want to pay for anything. (Ask the Evergreen School District.) In the case of C-Tran, they're seen as an active player in the CRC "we need light rail" project, which is a major strike against them. They can point out all day how a certain pot of money can only be spent on whatever, but many people are tired of the ever increasing cost of all these modernization projects.

roger — August 23, 2011 at 3:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oooh mango...I like the way you think although I've seen many towns that were bypassed and are doing just fine without big government intervention. Remember that little town in Oregon that had the tornado last year? Aumsville I believe it was. I believe they were offered federal aide but the townsfolk said they'd work together to do the repairs themselves. As far as Vancouver...along Fourth Plain westward from Van Mall...aren't they already staggering and basically on life support? To improve the "corridor" of Fourth Plain, it will take more than just improving bus service and I'm sure C-Tran as well as the city knows that.

..

Terick, your question is on the minds of a lot of people...me included. That's why my first and foremost thought is to scour out the fat at C-Tran which through community input, C-Tran will be able to hear just what it is that people expect out of them.

..

Mango and Terick, the corridor improvement doesn't have to be a multi-million dollar venture. Heck, with Bus 44, we're already seeing a taste of what improvements are possible...and all it took was an express bus added to the same route as the regular buses. I still think bus pullouts is the number one priority to help reduce back up caused by the buses along Fourth Plain..(great idea, David). Also...if they wanted to increase transit mobility, they are going to have to look into improving security and safety on the routes which could mean more funding needed for policing or for security. I don't see that happening.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 3:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, you are absolutely right and I'm one of those people who really doesn't want to pay more taxes either...a casual bus rider who used to utilize it every single day for college classes as well as for going to work. You see, here's my point. We NEED to gather together as a community to voice our concerns to C-Tran. We NEED to fix what isn't working or to look deep into the budget woes of C-Tran and offer our recommendations to provide better service. It is my opinion that there are many folks who have the capacity to delve into issues at C-Tran, to carve out the unnecessary expenses - to find out where we can make improvements. It doesn't have to be the "David Madore's" who step up to the plate. This little Jane Doe has stepped up to be heard...and I am getting the answers I sought. Yes, some of the questions I raised last night will take several days for them to provide the information I asked, but they are listening. I'm no wealthy business woman...no politician. I'm an ordinary, middle-aged housewife, mother of three and grandmother of three who recognizes the fact that this is OUR community and we need to stay involved...and if folks at this time are not involved...it's time to step up to the plate and come out swinging!!!

Roger, I'm not preaching FOR C-Tran...far from it. I'm fighting for the rights of us homeowners, the business owners, the riders and taxpayers. And DANG IT(not my original words of choice but I'm keeping it clean for the C)!!! I want service I can depend on and know it can be provided without bilking us over and over again. I'm not saying "Vote Yes" and I'm not saying "Vote No." I'm saying for EVERYONE to do the homework, to ask the questions - to let themselves be heard. Nothing more, nothing less. What I have shared today regarding the meeting was for informational purposes only...and I've got some people talking...even if it's only visible in discussion with you, Terick, Mangoboy, Allen Anderson, John Casey, Nailingit and ELISI on the other forum who has made note of my comments. (and without this website we're posting on...that's a handful of people who I never would have been able to discuss the matter. Thanks, Columbian...Libby especially for opening this forum).

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 3:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


on a personal note Goldie I find this side much more interesting and informative than the FB side.Beside as I have stated before I am completely computer dumb.I don't know face book from back book.I thank all on this side.

terick — August 23, 2011 at 4 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I know enough about facebook just in order to avoid it like the plague, Terick. I wish there was a way for the forum and the facebook comments to intermingle in the articles rather than separating us as the Columbian has done. So much, would I love to discuss the issues with Madore and the others but just like our government, we are separated into two groups on the Columbian as well, sad to say. It's the sign of the times, my friend...the sign of the times.

And you know what peeves me the most??? It's when I see comments which I know to be inaccurate and folks like David aren't reacting when I know HE knows the information to be inaccurate. Oh that just burns me...and I won't go on FB, either.

goldenoldie — August 23, 2011 at 4:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie @ 11:01...I thought you said you were in the Witness Protection program or something like that. That's why you wouldn't go FB. I thought you were Livia Soprano!

nailingit — August 23, 2011 at 9 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I think this warrants an expose' in a future Sunday edition of the 'C'! la Madrina dons the cape of the "middle aged" ticked off LRT, BRT and BLT unfriendly! Bacon be damned! Truth, Justice, and the local millionaire conservative's mouthpieces way. Fighting for freedom! (no taxes) Better government! (no taxes) Honesty! (no taxes) and the right to express opinion! (no taxes) Look...up in the sky! Don't give no bird, Don't ride no train....no it's goldenoldie!

nailingit — August 23, 2011 at 9:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldie @ 11:01: Was there a phone booth handy for your quick change that caused the crowd to gasp in awe and disbelief when you revealed your true and humble identity? Really.... :D

C'mon. Madore is about as far removed from the little people and downtrodden as one can be. You happen to agree with his positions on LR and BRT. However, I can bet the farm that your positive regard for him is not unconditional: If he were to disagree with you or challenge your position in any reasonable way, you would jump on his poor hide like a chicken on a june bug. As you soon will on me.......

manthou — August 24, 2011 at 6:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit at 9:30 PM: Grandiosity comes to mind.

manthou — August 24, 2011 at 6:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, you continue to amuse me lately with your comments...but dude - step away from the TV once in a while and experience TRUE life...and I'm far from any superhero...just quite vocal (and wordy in my posts, lol).

..

Okay Manthou, now that's hilarious!!! If you could have received the email I received, you would have laughed at it yourself. It was fun to imagine the look on his face when he read his email. The reaction was priceless.

Actually, with regards to David Madore...he was blending right in with the rest of us - nothing special except for the obvious reasons, the representatives from C-Tran knew who he was. There were a couple of people there who just wanted to see and hear the information and didn't say anything...probably because this was all new to them. Manthou, it was also obvious there were some of us who were well prepared and asked the questions is all, but we weren't treated any differently by the reps from the way they treated David. In all honesty, saying he's about as far removed from the "little people" is an inaccurate depiction. He was as personable as everyone else in the room. He was standing right there with his back to me. Did I notice? Not really. He was respectful, friendly and showed obvious concern with regards to the subject of the evening open house. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't idolize the man like SOME people have made it out to be (and you know who you are). I just know that folks who have similar concerns will definitely team together in situations like this and will ask the questions which further explain what the other one asked and will both find questions on their minds which the other one hasn't shared. In fact, if I am to admire anyone...it's any person who has the guts to stand up and be heard and to get their point across and their concerns addressed. That puts him in a crowd of folks with like minds who truly want a positive change for our community. Nothing more, nothing less.

goldenoldie — August 24, 2011 at 6:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Speaking of Madore and his flipside opponent, Leavitt, I really don't like these guys' attitude about coming on the Columbian website, making speeches, and then disappearing behind the curtains. And their weird obsession with knowing everyone's name and insisting everyone use their "real name." They can't understand that many of us are not into self promotion like they are. And they are really naive if they think the Columbian is going to enforce their rules and verify the identity of every poster. The whole idea of come up to the microphone, state your full name and address, is like being in a court room and giving sworn testimony.

mangoboy — August 24, 2011 at 7:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


No, Alleycat...nobody was sitting. We were all standing and there were a dozen people there and sometimes we'd crowd around a display in order to get a better view and to be able to hear the spokesperson. What's the point of introducing myself? I'm not out for recognition...for notoriety. My purpose is to speak up and get the job done...to ask the questions and voice my concerns, alley. I did not feel a need to share my name. David Madore, as a businessman and community activist gets more exposure by sharing his name, shaking hands and introducing himself. We are two distinctly different people. Now if I was at a community meeting where I would have to share my name, then I would...but not at an open house.

Now...as far as one of his employees running for city council...

Everyone who qualifies for the position has a right to run for the position, wouldn't you say? Just because they work for US Digital doesn't mean they cannot run for office. I don't quite understand your prejudice for someone because of their religious background. If they get the job done in the manner respected by the community, isn't that what's important?

goldenoldie — August 24, 2011 at 3:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Also Alleycat, when Mr. Green handed me his business card with email, I felt it necessary at that time to identify myself to him so he'd know where I am coming from..and he certainly did. Is it really wrong??? So what if a few of the officials at C-Tran know who I am. I'm working to IMPROVE our county and keeping my identity low key which fits my lifestyle just fine.

goldenoldie — August 24, 2011 at 3:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So I go to an open house for which I'm glad I did, and I can't stress enough how important it is for the folks in the community to attend and share as much information I gathered as possible in order to inform the public...and suddenly the focus turns to why I didn't introduce myself to a private business owner???

Why do I bother???

The FOCUS OF THIS FORUM is to discuss the issues of C-Tran and upcoming changes...NOT the life of Goldenoldie and whether or not she wishes to stay out of the limelight.

sheesh!!!

goldenoldie — August 24, 2011 at 4:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


From what Goldie has told us, and from info put out on the facebook side, it seems the main reason we "need" the BRT is because the current buses can't run on time. The two reasons given are people with wheelchairs and the time it takes for a line of people to look for the fare and pay it. Can the second problem be fixed with ticket selling boxes at the stops, so all one has to do is show the driver the ticket? And the first problem sounds like an interesting court battle - the right for equal access vs. the right to have a transportation system run on time.

But in my book the best comment was that made by the last poster on facebook - he rode the #4 growing up, and figured out early on that he'll get somewhere on time by taking an earlier bus. Gee - sounds like the same logic I apply on my morning commute to P'town - I double my "clear sailing" time and eliminate about 90% of the stress.

Which brings me to how I feel about all these transportation projects. I chose to live where I do because I like the area. So I accept the time it takes to get somewhere else, be that P'town, downtown Vancouver, or the east side stores around Mill Plain/164th Ave. I knew about the occasional bridge lifts, and the fact that any sort of accident on either bridge means a backup. And I don't think I should have to pay for someone else who refuses to accept these realities of living in Vancouver. I didn't agree with Cranky on much, but his "Move to P'town" rant was dead right in my book.

roger — August 24, 2011 at 5:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


In other cities, roger, you cannot pay for public transportation with change or cash. If you don't have a card or ticket, you don't ride. That speeds things up as far as boarding goes. It takes planning on the part of the customers.

Could some change as simple as that help the busses run faster?

I do like the natural logic of your personal story: leave early, arrive on time!

manthou — August 24, 2011 at 6:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger...there's a survey on the c-tran website which you could take. At the end of it is a paragraph where you can put in your two-cents worth. I think your idea about tickets is an excellent one and should be shared with c-tran. That's exactly the type of input they need in order to improve service...cutting back on down time. Go for it, Roger!!!

And your statement regarding the support of a comment on FB...spot on!!! I couldn't agree more!!! When I was working, I adjusted my time slot of when to catch the bus in order to make the transfers in time to get to my destination. One other point I brought up to the c-tran reps... I had told them that in order for the buses to be functional for the working class, they need to have early enough bus routes beyond the Fourth Plain corridor like Bus 7, Bus 82 and so on and so forth, so that the connections can be made. I stressed the importance of the fact that the students who use the bus to Clark also need access from outlying areas in order to attend their morning classes on time.

They've got a lot to think over after Monday night. They're expecting a higher turnover at the Jim Parsley Community Center and for those who cannot attend...the survey would help.

goldenoldie — August 24, 2011 at 8:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yeah!!! I think someone's been listening to me!!! I strongly urged C-Tran to hit up on our community news website to get the word out for people to get cracking and study before voting on the proposed sales tax increase to pay for existing services and for the future proposal to pay for BRT improvements and that dreaded LRT dead end.

Kudos for the Columbian providing an article emphasizing the NEED for everyone to do their homework...especially the voters!!! I saw a few comments by regular visitors to the site, suggesting that C-Tran do THEIR homework...but the voice represented by the voters in the manner of whether or not the proposition will pass is the BIGGEST suggestion of all to C-Tran...and I'm sure they are already scrambling for Plan B should the voters say NO. THAT'S why it's so vital for EVERYONE to get involved and contact C-Tran through attending the meetings, the open house events or online and putting in their two-cents worth! It's OUR mass transit system and we DON'T need to be stuck with a Mini-Me Trimet in our front yard now, do we.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/au...

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 6:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


BTW, glad to see C-Tran has a meeting in Portland as well. Commuters living in Portland who come to Vancouver have to know what's going on in our neck of the woods across the Columbia from their homes as well although they will not be able to vote on the propositions, but their input is necessary.

http://c-tran.com/ballot_measure.html
(bottom of page)

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 6:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal


**"""Instead we ought to be designing to live within our means, functional and practical designs and sustainability."""**

Alley, I'm not going to discuss my personal choice when it comes to introducing myself to others and vice versa. This is a forum on C-Tran. Let's keep it focused, okay.

Now...I've highlighted the most important quote I recognize by your two-part posts as I believe in the exact same ideals as that 1000% and it should be reminded to the powers that be. Well stated quote, Alley.

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 7:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Okay alley, I'll make one statement. Given the heated debate at the Open House and the time constraints set forth by the Evergreen School District and the fact that I left ten minutes after the Open House ended and that Mr. Madore was intent in gathering a bit more information as well as talking to Mr. Eric Florip with the C...

there was no time for congeniality. There was work to be done, alleycat. So why don't you let it rest for now.

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 7:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie,

OK - I checked out the C-Tran link, and zeroed in on the proposed reduction plan if the 1st ballot measure fails.

What they've done is confirm the viewpoint that C-Tran needs to work on improving EXISTING service and quit getting involved with grandiose schemes to "improve" the transportation grid. I would gladly pay a much higher sales tax increase than is being asked for this November IF I knew they would use the money to better serve the part of our community that depends on buses to get to work. This would include 24 hour service on a few routes, and have weekend hours mirror weekday ones on those same routes.

What I won't support (willingly) is an overpriced BRT or MAX light rail extension. I work near PDX and get zip for the taxes I pay that state. Other than an occasional lunch, I do all my shopping on this side of the river. That will most definitely change if these projects are pushed on us.

Goldie, I hear what you're saying about letting them know what we think. The problem is, the C-Tran Board is largely the same crowd that has ignored what people have been saying about the CRC. Back around 2007 the CRC website had a comment page where easily 75% of the hundreds of posters were against the project. That was ignored, and eventually disappeared - it wasn't what the "movers and shakers" wanted to hear. We've since been relegated to the status of a "handful of the same people who say No to everything." So why should I expect different with this project?

In closing, allow me to address Mr. David Madore, seeing as how he has become part of this discussion. I don't know him, but I've read enough to be fairly certain he is an Evangelical Christian. I don't care for them - to me, religion is a personal concern, and Evangelicals tend to want everyone else to live by their views on life (or sharing the word of God, if you prefer). Having said that, I'm slowly coming around to agreeing with you that because he's willing to spend his money he's our only real viable alternative to the people calling the shots right now. And on both projects (CRC and BRT) he makes a whole lot more sense than they do.

roger — August 25, 2011 at 7:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Alleycat -
"We need a total "transportation solution" and that starts with the proper "city design". We have an horrendous "design problem" in the area. We have a County with many cities, yet we have a deficient transportation solution and no existing industrial/manufacturing base."

Am I hearing you say we need to plow everything under and start over? Put everyone in apartment buildings along a few main routes, or 1200 sq ft single family homes on postage stamp lots like in Portland? Now, I'm a relative newcomer (moved here in 2001), but I've always heard Vancouver began growing as a so-called bedroom suburb of Portland. I can't say for certainty, but I'm betting the majority of the population would prefer it stays this way.

What is needed is an attitude change. We are a suburb. You don't have everything within easy reach - you often have to drive to get where you work and play. So be it. The trade off is the ability to plant a garden or two, open your windows at night and hear frogs and crickets (and an occasional catfight), etc.

roger — August 25, 2011 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


alleycat,

Very nice pics of a Chilean resort. My dream when younger was a cabin in the Smokies back in western Carolina. But I'll settle for my nice litle cul-de-sac home, and a 2 minute walk to a fantastic view of both Hood and St Helens. Much better than tripping over people, like when I lived in a Manhattan highrise and in an apartment complex in the LA area.

But I think we're supposed to be arguing about BRT here.

roger — August 25, 2011 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Alley...with a project such as SanAlfonso...and the headache of the Columbia River Crossing project looming over our heads...$2-3.5 billion for improvements is a bit much for Vancouver, wouldn't you say? Both projects mentioned...the one in Chile and the the one in Vancouver cost about the same...and the San Alfonso costs about $4 mil to maintain and operate annually. Now alley, I like the fact that you are dreaming big dreams for Vancouver...but honestly, look at the type of reception the city is getting for the waterfront improvement project.

Let's get focused on the project at hand (Fourth Plain Corridor) and see if we can improve on the financial needs of C-Tran without adversely impacting the people of Vancouver and Clark County (as well as some folks from Multnomah County and beyond).

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 10:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger you hit the problem right on the noggin with your comment at 7:38 am. All along, I've said the planning issues are lacking in the city...but not enough people are getting involved to make the decisions work for the community as far as I'm concerned. And just like the City of Vancouver, we need to persevere with C-Tran. Would you rather they continue with the project without listening to the people? They are ASKING us for our input. They KNOW there's a lot of people who do not want to pay for more sales tax and they KNOW they have a fight on their hands if they don't get things moving in the right direction. I believe they also KNOW that this is a gamble of sorts when proposing upcoming improvements to Fourth Plain for C-Tran because the majority of the people who utilize Fourth Plain aren't on the buses and don't want to drive through a corridor with increased challenges.

goldenoldie — August 25, 2011 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A suggestion for Goldenoldie--"Mr" Madore has open houses once in a while which he graciously hosts himself-why not check in and take a tour?
This bus biz-is it really that complicated? Redo 4th Plain, rebuild the sidewalks, crossings, and covered bus stops, etc. It really comes down to funding of what can be done. And lately, just getting roads resurfaced is a huge accomplishment.
Think about what will help the neighborhoods first, then the folks who are just using it to get from a to b. It's too late to change our transportation/settlement patterns anyway, there is too much invested in 40-60 foot wide asphalt runways for gas hogs. Never mind that the people going each way are only about two feet wide, and small electric vehicles, bikes, and motorbikes not much more.

Regarding the Waterfront-the concept is good, but the reality is a enclave for the wealthy, out of scale, separate from Downtown. But who knows, it might be revised given all the uncertainties lately.


mangoboy — August 25, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


A quote by Mr. David Madore in the article "CRC might take two years longer":

*If the light rail dictators were open honest forthright representatives that wanted light rail, their plan would be a simple stand alone light rail bridge. That would be simple, narrow, and ought to be low cost. And they would offer us a choice.
Alas, none of that is the case. The tolls are to pay for light rail. The bait is a bridge.
It is a classic bait and switch game of deception and force.*

Spot on, David!!! I couldn't agree more with you, sir.

goldenoldie — August 31, 2011 at 7:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


...........

nailingit — August 31, 2011 at 10:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit on August 31, 2011 at 10:19 am

"""..........."""

????????????

I know...I'm speaking of the crossing on a C-Tran forum, but they're connected to the Crossing Project in the design of the BRT corridor. They are trying to decide whether or not it should have a direct route from Fourth Plain to the proposed Fort Vancouver/McLoughlin Blvd Transit Center, stay on Fourth Plain to Main or both.

goldenoldie — September 2, 2011 at 6:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal


In reading the article in the Columbian concerning the crossing and loo-rail I realized two things. Councilor Roberts isn't too bright and councilor Collette is.

But that's not all. If you read the comments on the article you will see that we, who don't want it, are still in the majority.

I just had to laugh at the statements concerning Safeway and Target.

Some people are STILL laboring under the assumption that rail is a REQUIREMENT to the new bridge. It is NOT. What the feds say is that there be a rapid system in place. That means it could be buses. ... IJITS !!!

JohnCasey — September 9, 2011 at 7:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie do you have a link to who is on the 16 member corridor advisory commitee? I would like to hear what they have to say.Also could you keep us posted as to when the next meeting is and where.

terick — September 14, 2011 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Sorry Terick. I've been for the most part...away from the computer for a couple of days and just happened upon your comment. Here's the list and link for you:

http://www.c-tran.com/brt_files/committees/cac.php

CAC Members:

*Randy Akstul*l, Orchards Business Owner
*Donna Brown*, C-TRAN's Citizens Advisory Committee
*Scott Allen*, Sifton and Heritage Neighborhood Associations
*Jennifer Halleck*, Vancouver School District
*Leah Jackson*, Downtown Vancouver Business Owner; Bicycle/Pedestrian
Representative
*Harry Kiick*, C-TRAN's Citizens Advisory Committee; Chair of C-TRAN ADA Task
Force
*Dimitry Mishchuk*, North Image Neighborhood Association
*Poonam Nagpal*, Clark College Student Representative
*Dick Malin*, Central Park Neighborhood Association; Clark County High Capacity
Transit System Study Task Force
*Javier Navarro*, Fourth Plain International Square Business Owner; Fourth Plain
Merchants' Association
*Melissa Scholl*, Fourth Plain Transit Rider, Representing Visually Impaired
Stakeholders
*Bill Steiner*, Corridor Businesses Owner; Fourth Plain Merchants' Association
*Barry Sullivan*, Corridor Businesses Owner; Fourth Plain Merchants' Association
*Pat Stryker*, Columbia River Mental Health Services
*Judy Tiffany*, C-TRAN's Citizens Advisory Committee; Fourth Plain transit rider;
Fourth Plain Renewal Task Force
*Bob Williamson*, Clark College

goldenoldie — September 18, 2011 at 5:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/se...

Well Mister David Madore, here's my response to your comment which ends with "Is this an IQ Test?"

You couldn't have spelled it out any better, sir. The problem is that the powers that be are so disconnected with the community...they don't even recognize when a skunk is a skunk. They just see a black and white kitty. Must be their clothespins on their noses are holding firm.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2011 at 6:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


And that IQ test you asked...I'd love to have that run by the folks at C-Tran to see what the results would be. Most likely, you'd receive a bunch of blank stares and a comment like "Can we get back with you on that? Send me an email requesting the information." (Sorry guys at C-Tran...no disrespect intended, but the spending habits clearly outlined by Mr. Madore in just a few paragraphs is something you NEED to take seriously if you want the voters to support your service.)

goldenoldie — September 20, 2011 at 6:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie did you read the post by Tim one term on the face book side.He thinks we all are stupid.I hope we can show him at the ballot box that we are not.

terick — September 20, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks for bringing it to my attention, terick. Good time to post the quote by One Term Timmy:

*Timothy D Leavitt · Top Commenter · Vancouver, Washington
It's plain and simple, contrary to the smoke and mirrors that some are hiding behind: Down economy equals down tax revenues does not equal down demand for service....in any form of public services, except building permits. The CTRAN Board, Management and Employees have done a stellar job in fiscally conservative management during declining revenues over the past decade, increasing hard and soft costs, and increasing demand. Funny that some who clamor for "pay as you go" and "no debt" now argue contrary to CTRAN, which has been managed such that it IS a pay as you go agency....no debt! How about that...NO debt! Self-insured, revenues revenues generated by allowing private business to advertise. Cash to pay for ongoing capital and maintenance needs....no bonding necessary. Oh...the hypocrisy and lack of concern for real people here in our community. Smoke and mirrors and misdirection to confuse the real attitude of "what's in it for me?". I'm happy that some elite businessmen and special interests see a bigger picture of community values and economy.*

Smooth move, Timmy Boy. You're doing a great job by alienating your constituents for your re-election. Did you forget that it's the little people who make up the majority of your city??? Sir, you'd best be checking out just how full most of the buses are running about now...especially those hybrid buses which are such a "wonderful" investment for C-Tran (sarcasm). Some of them are filled with empty, rank air like the molecules in your brain.

goldenoldie — September 20, 2011 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- Mr. Leavitt is a real person. Not just an avatar. I suggest you show just a small amount of decency on this forum. Your name calling and sarcasm have no place here. Vote against Mr. Leavitt in the next election if you will but please, your vitriol is boring and improper.

nailingit — September 23, 2011 at 8:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Actually, Nailingit...why don't you send your message to Mayor Leavitt? It appears he's thinking of the people of Vancouver as though *they* are all just avatars and HE's our Mayor. I'd say he's got a certain attitude adjustment needed.. As far as what I said...I'd say it all again. Flag me if you wish but I will not allow myself to be herded into the world of political correctness just because I said something you didn't appreciate..

goldenoldie — September 24, 2011 at 2:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I don't flag anyone. I just requested a small amount of decency be shown (to our elected Mayor nonetheless)...I should have known better..

..sigh.......

Since you are so passionate in your hate towards Mr. Leavitt, might I suggest you contact him in person. Most likely you''ll find a human being trying to do the best he can with what he's got.

It is the name calling and belittling that you, "elisi", and a few others take part in that mucks things up in the basement.I just asked if you could tone it down a little...that's all. Political Correctness has nothing to do with it.

Treating others as you want to be treated has everything to do with it.

Grow up or shut up. It matters not to me which one.

nailingit — September 24, 2011 at 2:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Did I say I hated the man? No I did not. I took offense to his elitist attitude towards those who disagree with him. I will say this that I have lost respect for a man who made promises to voters that he knew all too well that he could not fulfill and manipulated his verbiage in a manner which got him elected. I admit I got hot under the collar but I do not regret one letter of the comment I had stated before.

Now, for you to tell me to grow up or shut up...that puts you in the same category as Mayor Leavitt. Trying to prevent others from speaking their mind is not what I'd determine as someone with substance, nailingit. Furthermore, I will show respect where respect is earned with regards to the mayor when he has proven to the voters that he is a man of his words.

You have the nerve, the audacity to order others to write...to comment the way YOU want them to comment. It doesn't work that way, bud. I cannot speak for the others but I speak for myself. I will tone it down as I see fit, not as nailingit sees fit. If you don't like what I post, then you can just as easily click "Ignore User."

Finally, you state "treat others as you would want to be treated."

You might heed your own advice.

goldenoldie — September 24, 2011 at 3:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Isn't this supposed to be a forum about C-Tran and not a forum of personal attacks between those who comment???

goldenoldie — September 24, 2011 at 3:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


@ 3:08...exactly what I thought goldenoldie. I actually thought some substance might be provided. I just asked you to tone it down with the personal attacks. That's all. Quit trying to turn the tables. Take responsibility for your vitriolic uncalled for, and as previously stated, boring insults. Relax. Some of you..are just like children. You can provide some insight on this subject, but when things aren't going your way you behave like an over stimulated adolescent.

Anymore, just asking for civil discourse is out of bounds.

Pease...just a call for civility, and remember the old forum? You are the one that loves to censor. GO ahead and continue to embarrass yourself if that is what you wish. sigh...

nailingit — September 24, 2011 at 3:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


So nailingit, what is your take on the bus rapid transit corridor? What improvements would you like to see along Fourth Plain Road? What suggestions do you have for saving money for our transit company? How can traffic mobility be improved with the reduction of one lane each direction? How safe will it be for the pedestrians if they go ahead with the design element of transit stations in the medians? Does C-tran need to continue investing in Hybrid Buses, given the fact that they will never pay for themselves? How can the elderly and physically challenged be best served by C-Tran? Are there routes which could be scaled back an a connector bus for select times be implemented at an additional fee to those few who would otherwise lose out on the loss of their routes?

Remember nailingit, this IS a forum about C-Tran, not your forum to instill obviously obnoxious and feeble attempts at trolling...claiming I'm censoring people which yes, in the past I have suggested removal to some but now find that to be less than effective, so I don't bother...but nice try. And as for that bleak comment about asking for civil discourse...our Illustrious mayor would instigate that all by his little lonesome if he keeps up the little nasty quips against the very people who voted him in in the first place. I merely reacted on his biased comment. Nothing more, nothing less, Nailingit. Stop trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. It isn't going to work.

Hey, I know... How about a forum entitled "Nailingit's Condescending Personal Attacks." That should be right up your "Alley," Nailingit!!! ;))

goldenoldie — September 24, 2011 at 6:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


sigh......

nailingit — September 24, 2011 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — September 24, 2011 at 8:13 p.m.

ditto, nailingit. So how about we move on and discuss the subject matter of this link??? Do you have any ideas from what I'd asked regarding SEEEEEE TRAN??? After all, it IS our transit mobility for OUR community that should be discussed, right???

I'm serious in the questions I'm aksing regarding C-Tran. I share emails with Chuck Green and Jim Quintana who in turn share my emails with Scott Patterson and Katy Belokonny. I think the more input to C-Tran from the folks of Clark County, the better idea the folks at C-Tran have in what the people want.

I hope the only response regarding the matter from someone as well versed as you can provide more than just "sigh......," nailingit. Care to try to respond to the matters at hand? I'm all ears.

goldenoldie — September 25, 2011 at 5:16 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"aksing" should be "asking." Time for a cup of java to wake me up.

goldenoldie — September 25, 2011 at 5:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Here's my perspective, as someone who is honored to work with children and young people who have physical disabilities:

I LOVE C Tran! I LOVE light rail! I LOVE C-Van! These programs are essential to my students' self-determination and independence. They ride C-Tran to work, to stores, to the doctor, to school. Those who cannot travel independently have C-Van paratransit at their fingertips. Many transfer to PDX light rail to see a sports game, concert, or restaurant.

My colleagues and I are big C-Tran fans and will vote YES on the upcoming ballot measure, as will our young adult students.

And that, my friends, is another side, another perspective on this C-Tran issue.

manthou — September 25, 2011 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oooh, Manthou. I'm glad you have stepped in with excellent discussion points. Now...how would you feel about the Bus Rapid Transit Corridor placing the Transit Stations in the Median with accessibility onto the BRT vehicles from the left side? I'm concerned with pedestrian safety for those who are trying to cross the street in order to get to the stations safely.

goldenoldie — September 25, 2011 at 6:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Also Manthou...I can see where you would find implementation of light rail in Vancouver would help a select group of people to travel to venues which our fine city is lacking. We all know it's coming no matter how loud we scream. So now the question is...how will C-Tran make the accessibility more user friendly? There's talk of the BRT having two distinct routes...one on Fourth Plain solely and another eventually branching over the LRT Station. Should C-Tran implement both routes, what will that do for local vehicular access to the station, to Clark College and to the proposed Baseball Stadium as well as to Hudson's Bay High School and the highly popular region around Fort Vancouver?

These are the types of questions I was asking at the Open House. I'd love to see other people's input regarding the same thing, although some would rather keep silent.

goldenoldie — September 25, 2011 at 6:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Pedestrian safety is a big issue for my students and others like them. They have met with Jim Quintana and C-Tran often to discuss safety concerns, for sure. They do a very good job of self-advocacy and know from experience where the issues are. I consider them public transportation master consumers. My knowledge base pales by comparison.

manthou — September 25, 2011 at 6:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou, never underestimate yourself. You just never know...there may come a time where you'd have to face the needs of riding mass transit if you don't already. For a moment, try to place yourself in the position of those you help or of an elderly relative or friend who might need to use mass transit and think about what you'd want to see happen. This is a HUGE project they are undertaking. The upgrade needs to be done right the first time or we could be facing BIG headaches in the future, much like TriMet has had with WES in the Tualatin area.

goldenoldie — September 25, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou I think that it might intrest you to attend some of the meeting they are and will be having.I have been to one and the drift I got from some of the people that use the 4thplain route is that they feel that the distance they will have to walk to get the bus is going to be to great.As it is now the bus stops at the locations they all use.That would all change with brt.Also you need to think about the busness's that this would directly affect.On a personal note I don't want literail.The route for literail will go right past my busness and I feel like it will be very detrimental to the way we operate.

terick — September 26, 2011 at 2:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou, Sep 25 @ 5:28 --

I can agree that voting "NO on all things C-Tran" as some are proposing is wrong. You give one of many good reasons why the system needs to be supported.

Having said that, the C-Tran Board is comprised of, among others, members of the Vancouver City Council and the Clark County Commissioners. These are the people who have clearly demonstrated an agenda that they intend to pursue, no matter what the wishes of or impact on the general populace. The business of pushing the light rail funding vote to 2012 so a reduced voting district can be gerrymandered is a deal breaker in the eyes of many. The trust factor is such that when C-Tran says this year's funding will NOT be used for light rail, they aren't believed. Hence the increasing number of people who will vote No this year.

I'm also conflicted on the following point. BRT is supposed to move rapidly from Point A to Point B, with a minimum number of stops in between. Pulling up to a stop and waiting a number of minutes while a wheelchair boards, a bicycle is loaded, or someone has to count their change to see if they have the fare defeats this goal.

Personally, I think we need to put our effort and funding into working toward improving the current C-Tran. BRT and light rail are going to be ultra-expensive projects that are likely to deliver little in return. Look at Portland now - they've sunk more money than they have into MAX to the detriment of the Tri-Met bus lines. People never know whether their bus will be early or late, and missing connecting rides is a frequent occurrence. We can still pull C-Tran back from that fate.

roger — September 27, 2011 at 6:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger, one word for you.....

***BINGO!!!!!***

goldenoldie — September 28, 2011 at 6:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Eric Florip, good job in showing us voters a picture of an all but empty bus with the attached article. It definitely paints the absolute picture we are all witnessing with C-Tran and it's those hidden messages that everyone needs to be on the lookout for. Kudos to you, Eric...even if it was unintentional.

I see they're starting the scare tactics to try to force everyone to support them. Cutting two of the most popular runs to save money??? Nonsense, utterly nonsense. Who's going to cut their own foot off when there's no wound, C-Tran???

On the FB side of the Columbian, Michael Evans said he'd vote yes as long as the administrators would take a 25 percent wage cut and reduce the number of supervisory staff prior to the vote.

Sounds reasonable to me. So C-Tran Administrators...how 'bout it??? You want majority support, do what Michael Evans recommends and you'll get majority support.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/oc...

goldenoldie — October 9, 2011 at 6:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The C-Tran Board brought this "crisis" about by moving the light rail vote to 2012 as this would allow a restricted voting district. The clear intent is to do everything possible to force light rail through to Vancouver. "No on everything C-Tran" is the backlash against this ploy to try to stack the deck against the anti-light rail crowd. While the current cost of operations could probably use some fine tuning, this type of "No" response would not gain the support it has if not for the actions of the board.

roger — October 9, 2011 at 8:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good Sunday to you, goldie!

Do you really think that C-Tran will get majority support for this measure if C-Tran administration accepts salary and/or benefit cuts?

I wish I had your confidence about that. :)

manthou — October 9, 2011 at 8:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


There are constructive comments being made to the article - on both sides. One that I thought totally uncalled for came from David Madore, where he chastised Eric Florip for writing a one-sided article. In my book this kid Florip is rapidly becoming one of the best reporters The Columbian has. I usually read one of their articles and start asking "what about this, and what about that?" Eric tends to take that extra step and consider these kinds of questions when interviewing for his articles. This one was clearly intended to address the impact of a "No" vote; C-Tran says routes will be cut, and he checked the impact on riders.

Keep up the good work, young fella!!

roger — October 9, 2011 at 8:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Good Sunday to you as well, Manthou. I hope your day is going well. I had to chuckle a bit on your comment. You asked good questions that made me take in a second thought on the matter. As it is right now (or at least earlier this summer), C-Tran has(d) $40 million at least in extra money for "Tough Times" according to the article yet they want to cut two of the highest volume passenger routes to save money. Definitely time for a double take at our existing system, you think??? Wouldn't you think they'd want to retain the higher volume routes??? Maybe they're trying to portray the "need" for light rail into our city since they haven't been able to convince the majority of the people that it is needed. Possibly another scheme in the works???

Seems to me the folks of Clark County are suffering the ills from some slick card sharks gambling with the lives of our folks in the community who rely on mass transit to get around. They almost had me convinced but as it stands right now...I'd be voting a resounding "NO" if I get the chance to vote on the sales tax increase. Poor management should not be compensated with more money if they can't get it right the first time.

goldenoldie — October 9, 2011 at 5:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger — October 9, 2011 at 8:57 a.m.

My first impression when I read the article was the same as David's, Roger...till I realized the negative propaganda in the photo...and almost empty bus. And I TOTALLY agree with you about Eric Florip's talent. I hope he's a keeper. I enjoy reading his well thought, well presented articles.

goldenoldie — October 9, 2011 at 5:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The opinion section today had requested everyone to vote yes on Proposition 1, C-Tran's request for a sales tax increase to pay for existing services. It still doesn't convince me to vote yes on Prop 1. It's still a no go for me!!! Why hasn't C-Tran bothered to show how much money they have saved in eliminating 36 jobs Who'd you hit up, C-Tran??? The little people? What about cutting the wages of those in high positions? Or even eliminating a couple of those positions? Instead, you cut the positions to part time, then eliminated the positions, huh!!!

As it stands right now, a resounding NO vote comes from me. Cut the fat, C-Tran...not the services on the disabled.

goldenoldie — October 12, 2011 at 7:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


What the opinion by the C didn't say was what routes would be cut.It was anounced last week what the routes were.It looked to me to be some of the most used routes.Wouldn't you think that you woud cut the least used of the routes?Is C-Tran saying that they will cut the routes that will hurt the riders the most in order to gather sympathy in order to force a yes vote.It does not work for me I will be voteing no on anything C-Tran.

terick — October 12, 2011 at 9:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Exactly, terick...and that's why so many of us who support C-Tran's services are voting NO on Proposition 1. Mismanagement is the key issue. C-Tran is so pent up in improving existing services to match modern transit facilities with BRT transfer centers, articulated buses which used to plague Portland for cost ineffectiveness then transitioned to light rail (hint voters...that's what C-Tran will do as well), eliminating buses to downtown Portland which provide much better service than light rail ever could, redesigning Fourth Plain Road possibly into a two lane thoroughfare, which would greatly impact commuter traffic from private vehicles which will also increase the danger to pedestrians who need to cross the street...

Need I say more??? The leaders of our community are so caught up in trying to improve a "Sleeper Community" rather than our own independent working county separated from Portland, that they have forgotten the real needs of our county. Our own infrastructure!!! Instead, they want MAX to Vancouver...building upon congestion-plagued Fort Vancouver Way...even trying to talk the community into the "need(???)" for a minor league team next door to a parking garage which was supposed to be designated for light rail...not baseball, eliminating a nice green space next to Marshall Center, reduction of available parking spaces for College students at Clark...

sigh........times ten!!!

..

VOTE NO ON PROP 1, people. We don't need another Trimet.

goldenoldie — October 12, 2011 at 10:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


In the interest of promoting free speech and diversity of opinion, I am posting the link to Preserve Our Busses:

http://www.preserveourbuses.com/

I'll gladly pay the tax to keep Clark County Moving (shameless plug for my favorite PAC) and will vote YES for Prop 1.

manthou — October 16, 2011 at 8:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou, be thankful you have an income coming in that will help to pay that extra sales tax with your purchases. Many folks in Clark County do not have that luxury.

goldenoldie — October 17, 2011 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I am grateful every day for my good fortune, goldie. I believe those of us who earn more should pay more in taxes, too. :)
__________________________________________________

You suggested that I email Tiffany Couch and ask her whether she was going to turn over her investigative report on C-Tran and Prop 1 to law enforcement.

I did. She did not answer the question posed. However, she did send me her rebuttal to C-Tran's response to her report. She also sent me the emails she exchanged with Marc Boldt and Steve Stuart, which were much more enlightening.

If you have corresponded with her, I am sure you received them, too.

After reading these emails, I am convinced that she truly believes she has found some irregularities that are not in the best public interest. She answered my concerns about her hiring Debbie Peterson (she no longer works for Ms Couch). By taking a stand against C-Tran, she admits worrying about putting her business's health in jeopardy because she is, indeed, going after the good ol' boyz with a challenge that they might find a little inconvenient. All this is in her letter to Steve Stuart.

Goldie: my sensory systems, brain, ears, eyes are wide open to learning everything about this controversy. I am a little more convinced that she is not as tied to Madore and NoTolls crowd as I once thought. And I am wondering why Jeff Hamm felt it so important to visit Ms. Couch's office personally, when she was happy with their email exchanges. Makes me wonder if he has something to be worried about?

I think this is hugely newsworthy and amazed that we are not seeing more of it in The Columbian. I will assume a crack reporter(s), however, is working on it as I type. :)

I have been in the position of advocating on behalf of others and receiving all sorts of push-back and ugly from administrators who find themselves suddenly on the hot seat. It is not fun. I am getting the sense that Tiffany Couch truly believes the tax payers are being duped or manipulated and she beleives this so strongly, that she is willing to take the risk and the heat.

An old military saying: You know you are over the target when you start taking flak.

Bottom line: I am reserving my judgment until I get more information.

manthou — November 6, 2011 at 8:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I want to add in full disclosure: I already voted YES on Prop 1 and would still vote YES today.

I am one of the Clark County small business owners who think we need to "Keep Clark County Moving" by investing in basic bus services AND future High Capacity Transit options. I am willing to pay what it takes and hope that the county finds a way to extract more tax revenues from those of us who have the reliable income and investments to pay for these services. When our office was in PDX, businesses paid an additional tax for the TriMet transportation area. We needed it. We and our clients used it. We did our part to pay for it. The joys of doing business in a prime area, tra la, tra la.

Am I happy at the possibility that the C-Tran folks may have manipulated or witheld information about the HCT priority in their budget in trying to garner support for Prop 1? Not at all. This allegation made by Tiffany Couch, if true, will hurt C-Tran's credibility with loyal supporters, like myself. If she is wrong, then the only person she hurts is herself and her professional reputation. I eagerly await more information.

These kind of manipulations are rampant in campaign literature during "crazy" season. But it is no excuse. We all are tired of them and good on Tiffany Couch if she caught them in the act. We all should be as vigilant. However, candidates and political activists are counting on us to be a little lazy and to lack the expertise needed to sniff out the bs.

I know you and others take a different view of HCT priorities. I respect that. But we can agree that this is an interesting controversy that we all should be paying close attention to.

manthou — November 6, 2011 at 9:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Allen @ 9:25 am: If Tiffany Couch is correct in her allegations, then heads may start to roll and charges may, indeed be filed.

Keeping an open mind is good advice while this works its way through the system, kind of like a bad meal.

manthou — November 6, 2011 at 9:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou, I was informed by a very wise man in recent days to not believe or even trust everything we read when it comes to mass media...Columbian included. I was also educated by another person (you, in fact in a post you said yesterday) that it is quite easy to take someone's word for it, believing what I want to believe because the informational bias suit my needs. I saw your comments to me in last night's posts regarding jumping to conclusions regarding religious affiliations and I wanted to say, I too am not without fault when it comes to prejudices. it is something we all must work on.

I hope it helped you to contact Ms. Couch directly in order to further understand just what it was she was doing. I highly respect your decision to vote yes for Proposition 1, because you fully believed in what you were voting for. I on the other hand, am going the other direction because I see the need for C-Tran to correct their issues before seeking more funding to fulfill their aspirations of moving into the future. I hope you in turn will respect me for my decision as well. I believe it all comes back to that "informational bias" which has allowed the both of us to vote the way we did. In my heart of hearts, it was difficult to vote NO...but I know it was the right decision in my case. I do understand your decision and in your case, it too was the right decision, Manthou.

goldenoldie — November 6, 2011 at 10:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou,

I read your post from last night about the C-Tran documents being gone - I checked where I read them yesterday and they're no longer there. Interesting. Also gone is the link to her CRC research.

http://acuityforensics.blogspot.com/

I did find her CRC slideshow as a standalone.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct;=j&q;=acuity%20group%20pllc&source;=web&cd;=13&ved;=0CCcQFjACOAo&url;=http%3A%2F%2Fti.org%2FCouchCRCUpdate.pptx&ei;=-9G2TrmTMZSNigLW9YF1&usg;=AFQjCNGw-memTHT2RPCQv5CkiV9-8i_TJA&cad;=rja

As near as I can tell, her findings indicate that a practice seems to be to bid on an aspect of the project, and then file a supplemental or mark-up charge. I'm guessing that this may be OK in limited cases, but the frequency of this causes her to believe CRC isn't being adequately managed.

I also found the C-Tran Executive Summary. She pretty much says the only reason C-Tran needs a rate increase is to support future development (BRT, light rail), and that they'll have to come back and ask us for more.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct;=j&q;=acuity%20group%20pllc&source;=web&cd;=15&ved;=0CDQQFjAEOAo&url;=http%3A%2F%2Fcolumbian.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com%2Fnews%2Fdocuments%2F2011%2F11%2F04%2FCTran_Financial_Analysis.pdf&ei;=DNO2Tu_DMYmliQKgo8hR&usg;=AFQjCNED7Pr9xwt5xiPBSRTD25ynJdsZNw&cad;=rja

"If preserving current levels of bus service is truly what the C-Tran board wants; they can change policy direction at any time. A change of policy that preserves current levels of bus service would mean that requests for additional sales tax dollars would not be necessary for many years. In fact, if C-Tran’s estimated sales tax revenue growth (as per their C-Tran 2030 plan) were to be realized; that revenue growth would likely offset the projected cash downfall and would provide for C-Tran’s operational and capital costs long past our projections. However, if C-Tran’s board policy is to provide for High Capacity Transit services regardless of the cost, then not only will current bus service levels be affected; but the Agency will likely not be able to sustain
those planned bus rapid transit and light rail services without significant future requests for sales tax increases and/or future government subsidies."

roger — November 6, 2011 at 10:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal


My question of the day is........................................

What is it the Columbian is trying to hide from the people and why???

goldenoldie — November 6, 2011 at 11:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — November 6, 2011 at 10:14 a.m.

typo: It should read "confirmation bias." Sorry about that, manthou...but I did mean every word I said, nevertheless.

Anyhow, I wish you and everyone else a great afternoon.

goldenoldie — November 6, 2011 at 11:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger: I think Tiffany Couch removed them to avoid any accusation of playing politics through her business. You'd want to do that to be squeaky clean and to avoid offending potential and current clients.

manthou — November 6, 2011 at 11:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Update: Tiffany Couch has re-posted information on her website blog, with more emails. Note the second one from Steve Stuart and her terse reply. So much for keeping politics out of her business.

She has been working with another anti-light rail activist called Tom Rubin from CA in public information sessions hosted by Madore's Couv dot com. His email to her is in this also, cheering her on and offering advice.

For those interested, you can see these emails here:

http://acuityforensics.blogspot.com/

Rather than clearing things up for me, this only clouds the issues.

manthou — November 6, 2011 at 8:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Here's what is clouding the issues for me in this latest C-Tran battle-of-the numbers: Tiffany Couch's ego (her last email to Stuart is disappointingly snarky to me) and Steve Stuart's ego. We have some personality disorders here, lead by narcissicism and histrionics and a fight-to-the-death need to win, no matter how many innocent bodies are sacrified along the way.

This is less about the little guy, the public, you and I and our neighbors and more about who has the bigger figurative pecker.

manthou — November 7, 2011 at 6 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Well Folks, today is the 8th of November...the decision day for C-Tran. It has definitely been a roller coaster when it comes to making the decision on the ballot. In my heart of hearts, I have tried my best to inform the public about BRT versus LRT in Clark County and I only hope that if this proposition does pass, that the folks at C-Tran will not pull what TriMet pulled on the people of Portland, transitioning from buses, to BRT then LRT with fixed routes and problems plaguing the transit service.

If the proposition fails, then it's time for C-Tran to roll up their sleeves and make the necessary cuts which would in turn save C-Van for the folks who need it most...just to keep the buses running. Maybe they will see the need to stop purchasing the expensive hybrid buses and hopefully they will see the need to concentrate on the needs of the people rather than hypnotizing themselves with visions of utopian super corridors, flying freely amongst vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.

IF the proposition fails, it will send a clear message to the folks involved with CRC that we aren't playing any games with our lives and for the folks with CRC to realize we won't allow them to play games with our lives either.

We will know at 8:30 pm...maybe.

goldenoldie — November 8, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Prop 1 is passing. Look at Clark County Elections link:

http://www.co.clark.wa.us/elections/results/2011/2011GeneralNovElectionResults.pdf

manthou — November 8, 2011 at 8:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Yes it is passing, Manthou...by a narrow margin. I believe their next request might not be so lucky. Only time will tell. Either way, I'll be submitting an email to Chuck Green at C-Tran, congratulating them on their request for a sales tax increase but there will be a strong suggestion to further study where cutbacks can still be made should Prop 2 fail so that improvements to Fourth Plain could still be made. I still believe the turnouts at the bus stops closer to town should be a priority right now...not hybrid buses which take too many years to pay for themselves. They need to open up the lanes for through traffic.

I'll admit, it wasn't the turnout I'd hoped but that doesn't mean MY work is done. In fact, it generates my personal need to push forward in order to make C-Tran even better and more efficient than Trimet ever could be...at a cost affordable to the folks of Clark County.

(Oh, too funny. A segment of the CAPTCHA letters is Rtc...Regional Transportation Commission???...lol)

goldenoldie — November 9, 2011 at 6:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***HEY C-tran!!! Here's a reminder to think very deeply about being part of the LRT system in Portland!!!***

I'd recommend that you keep the express buses to Portland in service even after the possibility of a transition to BRT and a Vancouver connection to MAX comes to fruition or you might lose some of your customers. Folks aren't going to take kindly to annual sales tax increases, you know. Always remember this...

***We Want EFFICIENCY!!!***

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2011/11/early-morning_power_outage_slo.html

goldenoldie — November 10, 2011 at 8:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Tiffany Couch will be meeting with Greg Kimsey and Marc Boldt soon to review her concerns about C-Tran's budget.

I have to hand it to her: she is smart, tenacious, and backs up her concerns with data (qualities most politicians are hoping don't exist in the voting population). I still worry about where her ego and personal politics is in this. Are they blinding her objectivity? Do they cause her to interpret C-Tran financial data to support her personal theory (confirmatory bias)? Her comment at the end of the story below about Greg Kimsey finally being a politician that gave her positive feedback makes me wonder about motivation, too. Why do you care what politicians say? Did she expect a grateful bear hug? This has become her personal war and, like David Madore, makes me wonder how truly concerned about the pubic she really is.

It pays to be suspicious of all sides right now. But this issue she raised has grabbed my attention and I eagerly await more info. I am surprised at the relative "ho hum" response on the forums here, outside our passionate friend, goldie!

From Madore's new online media service this new story: http://couv.com/issues/c-tran-couch

Do you think The Columbian will cover the results of this meeting, too?

manthou — November 11, 2011 at 7:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Manthou, here's a thought to ponder.

Tiffany Couch is a respected professional in her field. She has contracts that take her worldwide in the field of forensic audits. The request by Madore wasn't an elbow rub. It was a customer/client relationship in my opinion. I'm sure Mr. Madore had explained why he wanted her to take the job which raised some obvious questions...but it was also the needed convincing he had to discuss in order for her to accept the task. I'm sure she was aware of the risks of taking on such a job in the political climate of the Columbia River Crossing.

I believe she has done the job as she has been trained to do without prejudice in order to keep the facts where they must remain...in the documentation. I also believe she has a right to her opinion and she withheld her opinion till *after* her work was completed. Could it be she has become so vocal because of what she has discovered???

I guess only time will tell. That is, IF the powers that be allow the information to go public.

I'm still wondering why Dean & Associates believe they do not have to provide a public disclosure regarding how they utilized the tax dollars in their consultation. It would seem to me that holding this type of information is more damaging to the outcome of the overall project and acceptance at the federal level is at risk with regards to future funding.

goldenoldie — November 11, 2011 at 9:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


You point out many good questions to ponder, indeed, goldenoldie. I guess it does not really matter much what the motivation was. The end result is that C-Tran's accounting practices have been questioned for deeper scrutiny, which is always a good thing. Tiffany Couch's challenge may have positive impacts in how they report to the people in the future (as long as they don't find better ways to hide information). For that, I am grateful to her.

My understanding about Dean and Associates: As a private contractor making part of their income through public funding, I think that the contract accounting with the CRC should be on the public record. Afterall, it is a government entity.

Not all of their business, however, comes from government.

My guess is, they sued to protect their business accounting records from private sources. I could really care less about their other contracts with private companies. I will bet they will ultimately have to hand over the CRC portion only.

David Madore would have a cow if someone asked him to share his private contract books with the public, ya know. :)

We will see how this plays out soon enough.

manthou — November 11, 2011 at 10:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Published Sunday, November 20th. Written by Jeff Hamm, C-Tran CEO:

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/no...

Good clarifications. I imagine we are going to see a lot more like it.

manthou — November 20, 2011 at 9:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hullo? Anyone? Anyone? How 'bout this article?

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/de...

http://www.columbian.com/CTran-election-map-2011/

Those of us who live and work downtown, who own small businesses, are the strongest supporters of public transportation. Not surprising, is it?

manthou — December 14, 2011 at 5:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login