Independent Record Stores
Don't Write That, Write This
RECEIVED Thu., Feb. 2, 2006
Dear Editor,
Two local internet portals (Metroblogging Austin and Austinist) have both reported the theory that the effort to squeeze the Capital Metro union was due to Capital Metro's failure to seek federal funding for the commuter rail starter line despite pre-election claims that they would ["What Good Are Unions?," News, Feb. 3]. (Meaning that Capital Metro is on the hook for the full $90 million, or whatever it's grown to now, rather than roughly half.)
I'm disappointed that the Chronicle chose not to mention this particular angle of the story. Unlike the 2000 light rail plan, which was viewed favorably by the feds and probably would have received substantial federal funding, this commuter rail line's projected ridership is so low that Capital Metro, in my opinion, didn't even want to ask the feds, because they knew what the answer would be, and what a PR black eye it would generate for them.
Add that to the fact that part of this "deal with the devil" (Krusee, Daugherty, etc.) was to leave the 1/4 cent "rebate" alone, and it's no wonder Capital Metro needs to squeeze the union for rail dollars. But remember: It didn't have to be this way. A better light rail line that would have, unlike this system, served urban Austin would not have led us down this path.
Two local internet portals (Metroblogging Austin and Austinist) have both reported the theory that the effort to squeeze the Capital Metro union was due to Capital Metro's failure to seek federal funding for the commuter rail starter line despite pre-election claims that they would ["What Good Are Unions?," News, Feb. 3]. (Meaning that Capital Metro is on the hook for the full $90 million, or whatever it's grown to now, rather than roughly half.)
I'm disappointed that the Chronicle chose not to mention this particular angle of the story. Unlike the 2000 light rail plan, which was viewed favorably by the feds and probably would have received substantial federal funding, this commuter rail line's projected ridership is so low that Capital Metro, in my opinion, didn't even want to ask the feds, because they knew what the answer would be, and what a PR black eye it would generate for them.
Add that to the fact that part of this "deal with the devil" (Krusee, Daugherty, etc.) was to leave the 1/4 cent "rebate" alone, and it's no wonder Capital Metro needs to squeeze the union for rail dollars. But remember: It didn't have to be this way. A better light rail line that would have, unlike this system, served urban Austin would not have led us down this path.
Regards,
Mike Dahmus
Mike Dahmus
