On my way to Savannah, GA today......... Rita Ryan YOUR VIEW EXTRA ALL ABOARD FLORIDA Charles W. Atmore, Stuart Make service election issue Have you ever been to Savannah, Georgia? If not you should go sometime. There is a city comfortably ensconced in the present day while still full of what can only be called charm. It also has a railroad line that runs close by, not surprisingly. The difference between Savannah and Stuart is that the city fathers happen to be a group of six or eight women who rule with an iron hand. When a company applies for permission to tear down an old factory building to build a new one, they just don’t allow it. The company may stay, but to do so, they have to use and refurbish the old structure. If a City Council member wants to install halogen streetlights instead of the old decorative (and still sufficient) ones, it is not allowed. Care and concern as well as steadfast conviction goes into preserving the past. Airports charge landing and parking fees. Highways charge tolls and road wear fees. Boats have to pay mooring or slip rentals, and tourists have to eat and sleep — all of which bring in revenue. What do we get when we let trains, both commuter and freight, rattle through? We don’t even get a station, and we’re supposed to just accept this? Money is not always the best way to build a city, but it seems like our officials in Stuart are just looking at the money. What else can they be concerning themselves with, when they are willing to allow 32 more trains a day to pass through? Aren’t they aware of the traffic gridlocks this would create? Did they forget existing businesses and homeowners who would be adversely affected? Political office candidates could find themselves elected if they championed this issue alone. Somebody, please do something. This incursion has to be confronted. Michael Fort, Jensen Beach Bad comparisons from naysayers In response to the July 27 column by Tim Benson, “All Aboard Florida looks like a boondoggle, but Murphy waffling”: Just because I know what happened yesterday doesn’t mean I’m an expert on tomorrow. Precise measures of the past do not invalidate logical and conservative projections about the future. Business planners see the past as nothing more than a basis from which to draw variables and conclusions. Then we factor in change. That’s precisely how things get done. Selectively citing related (not relevant) statistics sounds convincing to those who will tolerate no more change, and no more risk. Moribund pessimists best be taken with a grain of salt. Comparing the host of unique and chronic issues facing passenger rail service in other parts of the country to All Aboard Florida reflects the simplistic thinking so many find easy to understand. Here there are minimal right-ofway leasing costs, no terribly expensive rail stations to maintain and no onerous labor costs. However, the biggest difference between other subsidized systems and AAF is here there is no complacency. The vaunted Northeast Corridor served by Amtrak is replete with it. For more than 10 years I provided hotel accommodations for Amtrak crews in the Northeast. I got to know complacency and indifference intimately. As a private-sector endeavor subject to market forces, the effort for superior service, safety and reliability will drive the success of AAF. Because it didn’t work there means it cannot work here? Really? Really? David A. Hershberger, Port St. Lucie Murphy anything but waffling I thoroughly enjoyed Tim Benson’s column in Sunday’s newspaper. However, I disagree somewhat that our beloved congressman, Patrick Murphy, is waffling on the All Aboard Florida issue. He’s not waffling at all. He’s simply acting like most Democratic legislators in that he’s saying one thing to the people that he supports our opposition to the AAF, all the while lining his campaign pockets and the pockets of friends and relatives. Nothing new here. Benson is 100 percent accurate with regard to the profitability of passenger rail service and/or any other so-called advantages such as time in transit. While I lived in Colorado, a “light rail” train was installed with service into downtown Denver from the suburbs. It loses money every year and is poorly managed. There used to be a rail service from downtown Denver to the ski slopes in Winter Park that was efficient and reasonable, but it went bankrupt. It is truly sad that passenger rail service can’t work anymore. Trains were a fun way to travel, but don’t believe for a Dade County second that Rep. Murphy will be of any effective use in stopping this “train wreck” of an idea — AAF. Stephen Meleski, Port St. Lucie Congressman in our corner Tim Benson’s July 27 column about the All Aboard Florida rail passenger proposal and Congressman Patrick Murphy’s position requires some corrections: I have followed this rail passenger proposal since its inception, and I see a bait-and-switch proposal from AAF management team. In February 2013, I had a conversation with the congressman regarding the rail proposal. Murphy was excited that a 100 percent private venture would invest billions into his district. Murphy, who is a certified public accountant, wanted to see AAF’s financial statements and feasibility study to ensure a successful project. It was the AAF team that started looking for a $1.6 billion loan from the feds and grants and financial assistance from Gov. Rick Scott and Florida. Here is what I consider a “bait and switch.” What was once a private venture turned into a project with government loans and grants. In Murphy’s second letter to Secretary Foxx, the congressman stipulated seven conditions before approving any loan. Also, the AAF team has sued to keep its financial statements and demand feasibility study private; and AAF’s lawsuit is succeeding, which continues the bait-and-switch suspicions. When the environmental, safety and social costs were identified by Treasure Coast residents, Murphy listened to his constituents and wrote the April 9, 2014, letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. Murphy is not interested in construction jobs from this railroad project, because his family construction business does not build railroads. Rail construction is highly specialized, with unique equipment, and I doubt if any builder in Florida has that capability. Which brings me to what I see as another bait and switch: Economic benefits from construction, as described by AAF, will probably go to out-of-state construction companies instead of being spent on Florida construction jobs. Edie Schor Bond, Fort Pierce Train TV spot mere propaganda I watched a TV propaganda promo for All Aboard Florida masquerading as a public service announcement. It derails history and is an insult to people’s memories. It portrayed the Florida East Coast railroad as the creator of all that was good in Florida. Actually, Florida created all that was good for the FEC — lucrative profits. And it’s still in the same business of exploiting the citizens and scoffing at efforts to maintain a way of life. The FEC in the mid-1960s, when the union went on strike, shut down the passenger service. Not only were the FEC employees thrown out on the street, with passenger service to Florida coming to a screeching halt, but the FEC ignored a court order to resume service. Now FEC is seeking to provide what is portrayed as much-needed services. That’s an affront to common sense. Common sense tells you it’s all about the widening of the Panama Canal and making the FEC profits even more lucrative. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. If past behavior is any predictor of future behavior, it’s not too late to stop this plan dead in its tracks. How do I know this? I was living in Miami, and my uncle worked for the FEC. Roger F. Field, Stuart As for Fort, back at him There are three points in Michael Fort’s July 27 guest column regarding the All Aboard Florida project I wish to comment on. First, he says visitors to our state “ ... need to have every transportation option we can provide.” I fail to see such a need beyond what is available now. Second, he says, “ ... it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the real estate development benefits.” My question is whose benefits and at what price in lowered land values for property owners outside the railroad corridor and outside the urban services boundary? And, third, he says the “ ... innate charm and beauty” of our area won’t be hurt by the AAF project. I say that charm and beauty certainly won’t be helped by the AAF project, given the strong likelihood of what will follow if the central planners of Seven50 and U.N. Agenda 21 have their way. Mr. Fort stays clear of the fact there hasn’t been a passenger or rapid transit system anywhere on the planet that has paid its own way. Inevitably we taxpayers have ended up paying a large chunk of the bill.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 09:27:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015