First, thank you for the compliment.

Second, I’m for moving people from west (and west of) Boise into Boise in the most cost effective manner possible. So I’d be going with high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, van pools, car pools, express commuter buses, and bus rapid transit (BRT) to accomplish that.

Folks that I know who have worked in the public transit business tell me that’s the most cost effective way to go for Boise right now. Commuter rail may work in San Diego but, besides better year round weather, San Diego has a lot more people and much higher population density than Boise. I’m told population, and more importantly population density, are critical factors for rail service (commuter, light, streetcar, etc)and that Boise barely has the population density now to support a bus system let alone rail of any type. I’m also told COMPASS planners have said in open meetings that they don’t foresee the population density of the Valley changing very significantly over the next 20 – 30 years.

Those “experts” listed a total of 5 reasons why commuter rail is not a good idea for Boise. In addition to too many crossings, the story lists poor track quality, insufficient right of way, competition from freight traffic, and high cost / no money. The transit folks I know were totally shocked at the “experts” findings. They were thinking here comes another pep rally. It was the opposite. The story is still on line at: http://www.idahostatesman.com/transportation/story/771363.html . Maybe the Guardian could have his transportation correspondent research prior studies about the Boise rail line. I’m told studies have been done and using the current tracks isn’t quite as simple as it first appears.

As to government, I expect government at all levels to deliver the highest possible level of service to its citizens while operating in the most efficient manner possible. I expect all public officials (and employees) to be proper stewards of the taxpayer dollar. I don’t support schemes by public officials to increase revenue so they can further their “legacies.” The Downtown Streetcar and commuter or light rail are examples of the legacy category in my opinion. Folks I know that have worked in the public sector tell me the waste of public money is incredible – particularly in school districts. That’s the short version of my government philosophy.

Part of your rather rambling press release says:

“The local area would benefit from a commuter train instead of an Amtrak line. We are widening I-84 to handle more commuter traffic, but we aren’t putting in a commuter train. This would actually help reduce pollution, especially if we built a nuclear plant to power electric (not diesel) commuter trains. These trains could stop in all the major bedroom communities and actually benefit Boise.”

That’s not a proposal? Where’s the mention about trolleys?

And I really do care about your opinions and proposals. I care about the opinions and proposals of ALL city council candidates. I would be very much interested in hearing your proposals about improving the bus system. This is the first I’ve heard you have a position on that. Or, from another post, what your proposal for sidewalks actually is. Maybe you could post your proposals on your web site so everyone could see them. The (rather rambling) press releases also.

Maybe you could tell us how you propose the City make up the $ 500,000 (or so) loss in revenue from the use of the City owned portion of the railroad tracks should Amtrak return to Boise. Or your position on the HOV lanes, some of which will be in Boise. Or how you plan to monitor and eventually reduce, or at least slow the growth in, the City budget. I’d be interested in learning about your positions on those issues also.

As to bias, my only bias is that candidates for City Council have their facts right. So far, in my opinion, you’re not doing too well in that department.

Good job. You get an A. Maybe even a gold star. You know the names of the streets where traffic might get stopped if Amtrak came to town. You got something right for a change. But since we don’t know yet what the Amtrak schedule might be, we don’t know if Amtrak would in fact stop traffic on those streets during critical times like morning and evening rush hours.

But it is a safe bet those same streets, and air quality, would be adversely impacted by a commuter train. Like the one you propose. That train might even worsen air quality rather than improve it. Why? Because it would tie traffic flow into knots as the train passes through each grade crossing at those streets. Commuter rail, by definition, would need to operate during the morning and evening rush hours at a minimum.

Back in May the so called “experts” told a gathering at BSU that commuter rail would not work in the Treasure Valley because, among other things, there are too many crossings. Like the ones you’ve noted. Maybe you missed that forum. This is one of the few times I’d agree with the so called “experts.”

So instead of promoting a choo choo, how about enlightening yourself about the HOV (that would be High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes that have been, and are being, built into I – 84 as part of the widening project. Then enlighten us how you think they could be used to best advantage.

For starters, maybe they could be used for express commuter buses, bus rapid transit (also know as BRT), van pools, or car pools. All lower cost public transportation forms than a commuter rail line.

Please, enlighten us. And when you enlighten us maybe you also could enlighten us as to the difference you see between Amtrak and the commuter rail line you propose. Both would tie up traffic.

You are right about all the north/south intersections on the bench which would be affected by trains. We try to stay north of State Street if at all possible.