Mueller Lake Park Outdoor Amphitheater
Provide a Balanced Perspective Instead of More Noise
RECEIVED Fri., April 24, 2009
Dear Editor,
Capital Metro is an easy whipping boy. Ben Wear at the Statesman pounds the agency and transit every chance he gets. I am disappointed that the Chronicle’s article ["What's Wrong With Cap Metro … and What's Right," News, April 24], while more factually accurate, is no better in tone and emphasis. In delaying the start-up of the rail line, Cap Metro is putting safety before public image, and it should be commended for that. Delays in large public works projects are very common, and the agency had to respond to requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration that were changed in midstream. As you reported, the financial “crisis” that Wear tried to drum up does not exist – the agency has less revenue because of spending on capital projects (which it is supposed to do) and a reduction in sales-tax income. The agency voluntarily agreed to give the city some of its tax revenues and has been making those payments.
It would be more helpful if the Chronicle took a reasoned look at what Cap Metro has accomplished despite many hurdles, including no funds for the rail project from the federal government, constant attacks from the road warriors, and a very narrowly defeated referendum in 2000. Capital Metro is trying to do something really positive for this community in the face of a lot of criticism (some deserved, some not), and it would be more informative if you provided a balanced perspective instead of adding one more harangue.
Capital Metro is an easy whipping boy. Ben Wear at the Statesman pounds the agency and transit every chance he gets. I am disappointed that the Chronicle’s article ["What's Wrong With Cap Metro … and What's Right," News, April 24], while more factually accurate, is no better in tone and emphasis. In delaying the start-up of the rail line, Cap Metro is putting safety before public image, and it should be commended for that. Delays in large public works projects are very common, and the agency had to respond to requirements of the Federal Railroad Administration that were changed in midstream. As you reported, the financial “crisis” that Wear tried to drum up does not exist – the agency has less revenue because of spending on capital projects (which it is supposed to do) and a reduction in sales-tax income. The agency voluntarily agreed to give the city some of its tax revenues and has been making those payments.
It would be more helpful if the Chronicle took a reasoned look at what Cap Metro has accomplished despite many hurdles, including no funds for the rail project from the federal government, constant attacks from the road warriors, and a very narrowly defeated referendum in 2000. Capital Metro is trying to do something really positive for this community in the face of a lot of criticism (some deserved, some not), and it would be more informative if you provided a balanced perspective instead of adding one more harangue.
Susan Pantell
