Since I last blogged on here, I have used Metro bus service several times. Oddly, I haven't used MetroLink lately, but that's because the bus routes I have been taking to and from work and home meant MetroLink didn't actually play a major role in my travels. When I last used the service daily instead of frequently, I used numerous bus routes AND MetroLink frequently and was happy with the vast majority of my experiences.
So, 2009 hits and the cuts come for mass transit in St. Louis - especially in the county. It's been well-documented how hard the cuts were for regular riders who lived or worked in West St. Louis County as well as other parts of the Missouri side of the region. Thousands of workers were literally quitting their jobs or being forced to find alternate forms of transportation to their jobsites as a result of the route cuts. It hit me some, but not severely, as my best routes allow me to get to and from work in less than two hours in most cases. In fact, if I take the bus that goes near my workplace, I can get to the MetroLink station closest to my house LONG before the route I used to take which included a different station and a wait for the train and the additional stops through several other stations: in short, it cuts off a lot of time. That's on the way home. It's still usually a hit-and-miss proposition if I have to get to work at a later time because certain bus routes I usually take now run less-frequently in the middle of the day. But I sure am grateful that the routes near my residence still exist. I know it is not the same for tens of thousands of St. Louisans.
Over the past couple of weeks, the board at Metro was given good news that there would be some money coming from bills passed in Congress and the Missouri state government. It's good news for many whom altogether lost a stop which will return OR for those who needed more frequent runs of the current lines, but it's not going to mean the return of service to hundreds of miles of streets in our region.
For now, some consolation can be had that there will be some routes coming back IF money returns to the coffers. But that is a rather big "IF" hanging in the balance for so many.
+++++
I've said this in the past, but it bears repeating: If you haven't been a rider on the Metro Transit system in St. Louis lately, you are NOT ALLOWED to make judgment on whether or not it is a viable system.
Whether you know it or not, Metro's existence in the St. Louis region is a NECESSARY part of life...not an option...a NECESSARY form of transportation for good times and bad times. Should you not believe it now, wait for the rest of the nation to rebound from the depressed times long before St. Louis County rebounds.
I'll try to leave St. Charles County alone for the time-being, although there are so many reasons to call residents there "short sighted" when it comes to mass transit, as well.
Gotta run off to the traffic lanes and see the Big Bend overpass before it is demolished soon. Remember --- Big Bend closes at Highway 40/I-64 on June 1st. Aren't you glad that the Hampton overpass has reopened?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
St. Louis Transit Transition: Political Enemies Made
I cannot fairly and accurately weigh-in thus far in the earlygoing of St. Louis latest and greatest debacle regarding its mass transit: the deep cuts in service to Metro bus service and MetroLink light rail service, especially in St. Louis County. This is because I have had a vehicle thus far and have not had to deal with the headaches that have beset many of my fellow "regular" Metro riders. I'm sure I'll be riding either later this week, this weekend (when it will REALLY be different), or next week. However, I can weigh-in on how it will effect some of the politicians --- those who opposed Proposition M in St. Louis County are going to find themselves in a critical position: having to defend their actions to voters. And it won't be pretty because of the drastic changes which have come as a result of Proposition M's failure last November.
Cuts were inevitable because in 2008 when new Metro CEO Robert Baer told the public of the severe financial problems which were forcing his transit agency to ask public officials to a ballot measure before the voters of St. Louis County and City. Proposition M, as it was labled, was going to help keep most of the major routes intact --- although Baer and Metro officials had already spread the word that cuts were coming after they had inherited a financial mess leftover from lawsuits surrounding the MetroLink line which runs between Forest Park and Shrewsbury in South St. Louis County. Those cuts would be much less if Proposition M passed last November. Voters were going to have a single chance to help keep the transit system at operating levels somewhat similar to what had been ongoing since the Shrewsbury MetroLink line was opened in 2006. Without the money which would come from the voters, management would be making such deep cuts to service that many bus routes would simply cease to exist.
County Executive Charlie Dooley supported, even helped introduce Proposition M. However it appears he didn't do enough talking to the citizens of the county - at least the ones who have half a brain about how thinking regionally will keep the region strong. Perhaps people like County councilman Greg Quinn of Ballwin and John Campisi of South County and Mehlville Fire Protection District Board of Directors member Aaron Hilmer only thought Metro was threatening such drastic cuts. They were clearly in the public eye opposing the measure. Hilmer, Quinn and Campisi spoke to various local media about their views. Hilmer clearly didn't want another one-half cent tax to help his residents be able to leave and go to downtown to shop. I guess Hilmer didn't want anyone from Ballwin to ride the buses down Lindbergh to get to South County Center --- nor, apparently, did Quinn. Hilmer may be one of the most vocal, but was far from the only short-sighted individual who opposed keeping the region's transit system fully functional. Quinn's area --- Ballwin --- no longer has bus service as of this week. Once Metro gets wise to Hilmer and Campisi's opposition, watch them completely cut service to South County. I WOULD CUT SERVICE TO SOUTH COUNTY NOW --- if I were a manager at Metro transit in St. Louis. Why wait? Since it's politics being played --- play the politics game right back. Ending service to South County Center may be necessary in order to kill off another suburban mall. Why not? I'd guess Hilmer would be happy about that because he would get fewer calls to the mall, thus saving his fire protection district money.
Look --- I will give Charlie Dooley credit for supporting Proposition M within government entities, but he also did not do enough on behalf of Metro as the November election became near. And he's been obviously MISHANDLING the situation with is Police Chief Jerry Lee, a completely different subject which has upset many county residents. But at least Dooley realized the regional need for a good mass transit system.
Which brings me to the point I'd like to make. The REGION will see some changes, or transitions, as the 21st Century unfolds further. The Metro cuts will cause St. Louis County some serious problems. Repeating: the Metro cuts will cause St. Louis County some SERIOUS PROBLEMS.
Doing research for this blog, I came across the website of one Cloria Brown of St. Louis County. She is apparently all about being critical of County Executive Dooley --- but her website shows how ignorant she is about the needs of the many who are now without transportation. She is already outwardly critical of Dooley and the County Council proposing that the taxing measure be put back onto the April ballot in 2010 in an effort to get mass transit back on track. Cloria Brown is quite obviously short-sighted if not ignorant about the needs of the region. But if she reads blogs like this or Steve Patterson's www.urbanreviewstl.com , she likely thinks people who pay attention to trends and find statistics which confirm our viewpoints on transportation and transit are just making it all up anyway! Reality doesn't hit these people in the face right away --- it will over time --- but many of these "anti" mass transit supporters will only move away from the very region where they "helped" vote down such measures anyway. In other words, they continue the flight away from metropolitan areas, instead of help qwell the problem. But sometimes there is hope for real understanding. Let's take the Highway 40/I-64 construction project. If the folks at Gateway Constructors had not instilled the fear of God into the minds of commuters, traffic jams around St. Louis midsection would have been MUCH worse over the past 15 months. Yes, some people actually heard THAT message and took heart.
A TV story about Ridefinders aired the other day, and it shows that few people have heard the news about the drastic cuts to service and how they will effect the average county resident in the path of those cuts. The folks at Ridefinders say they have only added a few new vanpools since the announcement of the service cuts to Metro bus lines. What this tells me is that there has not been enough publicity talking about the problems about to befall this region. St. Louisans who regularly ride the buses are finding the greatest problems this week and next, but they are not the only ones who will find things growing more difficult.
Who is going to be having the worst time? County commuters who want to go from West County to the city of St. Louis. As it should be, save those who supported Proposition M --- they don't deserve the blame.
Perhaps Councilmen John Campisi and Greg Quinn, and probably Mehlville FPD Board member Aaron Hilmer, will realize they made permanent enemies of THE PEOPLE when they lobbied against keeping the transit system functioning well through supporting Proposition M. The first drastic cuts took place this week.
Next election cycle for those gentlemen, their opponents will surely prove to their constituents that mass transit cuts were not only caused by the voters' ignorance, but also by the actions of these three men --- three lame duck candidates.
I'm saying they're going to be lame duck candidates now, but I'm not certain that's the case yet. That's because former Metro CEO Larry Salci (he of big mouth and even bigger debacles) could always file for office against one of these men and easily lose an election.
I would think that an uninformed person like Cloria Brown would back Larry Salci against Charlie Dooley. Well, unless she heard the message from others that Larry Salci caused the Metro debacle in the first place. Either way --- bet she'll vote against the measure that replaced Proposition M.
Former KMOX nighttime At Your Service host Jim White is right that "You can't fix stupid."
I wonder what it will take to correct the massive wrong ONE VOTE has assured for the moment.
Cuts were inevitable because in 2008 when new Metro CEO Robert Baer told the public of the severe financial problems which were forcing his transit agency to ask public officials to a ballot measure before the voters of St. Louis County and City. Proposition M, as it was labled, was going to help keep most of the major routes intact --- although Baer and Metro officials had already spread the word that cuts were coming after they had inherited a financial mess leftover from lawsuits surrounding the MetroLink line which runs between Forest Park and Shrewsbury in South St. Louis County. Those cuts would be much less if Proposition M passed last November. Voters were going to have a single chance to help keep the transit system at operating levels somewhat similar to what had been ongoing since the Shrewsbury MetroLink line was opened in 2006. Without the money which would come from the voters, management would be making such deep cuts to service that many bus routes would simply cease to exist.
County Executive Charlie Dooley supported, even helped introduce Proposition M. However it appears he didn't do enough talking to the citizens of the county - at least the ones who have half a brain about how thinking regionally will keep the region strong. Perhaps people like County councilman Greg Quinn of Ballwin and John Campisi of South County and Mehlville Fire Protection District Board of Directors member Aaron Hilmer only thought Metro was threatening such drastic cuts. They were clearly in the public eye opposing the measure. Hilmer, Quinn and Campisi spoke to various local media about their views. Hilmer clearly didn't want another one-half cent tax to help his residents be able to leave and go to downtown to shop. I guess Hilmer didn't want anyone from Ballwin to ride the buses down Lindbergh to get to South County Center --- nor, apparently, did Quinn. Hilmer may be one of the most vocal, but was far from the only short-sighted individual who opposed keeping the region's transit system fully functional. Quinn's area --- Ballwin --- no longer has bus service as of this week. Once Metro gets wise to Hilmer and Campisi's opposition, watch them completely cut service to South County. I WOULD CUT SERVICE TO SOUTH COUNTY NOW --- if I were a manager at Metro transit in St. Louis. Why wait? Since it's politics being played --- play the politics game right back. Ending service to South County Center may be necessary in order to kill off another suburban mall. Why not? I'd guess Hilmer would be happy about that because he would get fewer calls to the mall, thus saving his fire protection district money.
Look --- I will give Charlie Dooley credit for supporting Proposition M within government entities, but he also did not do enough on behalf of Metro as the November election became near. And he's been obviously MISHANDLING the situation with is Police Chief Jerry Lee, a completely different subject which has upset many county residents. But at least Dooley realized the regional need for a good mass transit system.
Which brings me to the point I'd like to make. The REGION will see some changes, or transitions, as the 21st Century unfolds further. The Metro cuts will cause St. Louis County some serious problems. Repeating: the Metro cuts will cause St. Louis County some SERIOUS PROBLEMS.
Doing research for this blog, I came across the website of one Cloria Brown of St. Louis County. She is apparently all about being critical of County Executive Dooley --- but her website shows how ignorant she is about the needs of the many who are now without transportation. She is already outwardly critical of Dooley and the County Council proposing that the taxing measure be put back onto the April ballot in 2010 in an effort to get mass transit back on track. Cloria Brown is quite obviously short-sighted if not ignorant about the needs of the region. But if she reads blogs like this or Steve Patterson's www.urbanreviewstl.com , she likely thinks people who pay attention to trends and find statistics which confirm our viewpoints on transportation and transit are just making it all up anyway! Reality doesn't hit these people in the face right away --- it will over time --- but many of these "anti" mass transit supporters will only move away from the very region where they "helped" vote down such measures anyway. In other words, they continue the flight away from metropolitan areas, instead of help qwell the problem. But sometimes there is hope for real understanding. Let's take the Highway 40/I-64 construction project. If the folks at Gateway Constructors had not instilled the fear of God into the minds of commuters, traffic jams around St. Louis midsection would have been MUCH worse over the past 15 months. Yes, some people actually heard THAT message and took heart.
A TV story about Ridefinders aired the other day, and it shows that few people have heard the news about the drastic cuts to service and how they will effect the average county resident in the path of those cuts. The folks at Ridefinders say they have only added a few new vanpools since the announcement of the service cuts to Metro bus lines. What this tells me is that there has not been enough publicity talking about the problems about to befall this region. St. Louisans who regularly ride the buses are finding the greatest problems this week and next, but they are not the only ones who will find things growing more difficult.
Who is going to be having the worst time? County commuters who want to go from West County to the city of St. Louis. As it should be, save those who supported Proposition M --- they don't deserve the blame.
Perhaps Councilmen John Campisi and Greg Quinn, and probably Mehlville FPD Board member Aaron Hilmer, will realize they made permanent enemies of THE PEOPLE when they lobbied against keeping the transit system functioning well through supporting Proposition M. The first drastic cuts took place this week.
Next election cycle for those gentlemen, their opponents will surely prove to their constituents that mass transit cuts were not only caused by the voters' ignorance, but also by the actions of these three men --- three lame duck candidates.
I'm saying they're going to be lame duck candidates now, but I'm not certain that's the case yet. That's because former Metro CEO Larry Salci (he of big mouth and even bigger debacles) could always file for office against one of these men and easily lose an election.
I would think that an uninformed person like Cloria Brown would back Larry Salci against Charlie Dooley. Well, unless she heard the message from others that Larry Salci caused the Metro debacle in the first place. Either way --- bet she'll vote against the measure that replaced Proposition M.
Former KMOX nighttime At Your Service host Jim White is right that "You can't fix stupid."
I wonder what it will take to correct the massive wrong ONE VOTE has assured for the moment.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
"Reverend" V. Gene Robinson - Mr. Slap In The Face
Why do I put "Reverend" at all for this guy?
It is a slap in the face.
Now let's talk about V. Gene Robinson, he who brought up in the first place something being "a slap in the face".
What did V. Gene Robinson liken to a slap in the face?
President-elect Obama asked an outspoken Christian pastor - Rick Warren, who has a clear view that homosexual marriage is against God's will - to lead prayers at his inauguration.
Now the president-elect has granted Robinson a place of honor in leading a prayer during the upcoming kickoff celebrations before Obama's inauguration.
I'm sure Robinson will not recant his position that having a Christian pastor leading the inaugural prayers is a slap in the face. I seriously doubt I will recant my position that Robinson being called "Reverend" is --- according to Christians --- a slap in the face to Christianity.
Some will read this column and take things out of context in order to denigrate my words, my commentary. Some may re-post this and add words which alter the meaning of what I state. However this should be taken as A WHOLE COLUMN and not pieces to be singled-out for minutia-laden bits.
Well, here is the big theological discussion.
Gene Robinson is a gay Episcopal priest.
Christian denominations will tell you the statement "gay priest" is oxymoronic.
Nearly-Christian denominations will claim their savior but will say anything to be inclusive until they feel attacked by their own Christianity.
The teachings of the Roman Catholic church (Christians who have a leader from Rome...the Pope) say homosexuality is an abomination - homosexual marriage will not take place in a Catholic church. Lutheran teachings also follow the words of the apostle Paul who pointed out in his letters about God's teachings on sexual immorality. Now make sure you realize that there is a clear split between Lutheran synods in the United States on the issue of homosexuality and marriage --- the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America largely ignores traditional Lutheran-Christian theology and has allowed in their statements room for individuals to believe that homosexual behavior is acceptable. Many other Christian-reformed or protestant denominations have evaluated statements about sexual immorality and homosexuality and state that the two are more than merely related. Some Christian denominations would go much further and say that homosexual activity is a human abomination and not just against God's word. There are varying degrees of theological interpretation. To break that down more, there is theology and there is logical. In man, we find logic (I know I LOVE logic) in allowing for inclusion and not being divisive. But what of theological divisiveness presented by the likes of "Reverend" V. Gene Robinson and those of true Christian teachers and believers?
Okay - so the problem is likely in the delineation by mankind of sexual immorality according to God's word - the Holy Bible.
What do you believe? Do you believe that the apostle Paul spoke for God? Paul's words are on the pages he wrote to the church-members in Rome, Corinth, etc. Those words are in the Holy Bible. If you believe in God and Christ Jesus as your savior, you likely believe that the Holy Bible is GOD'S WORDS as transcribed by the apostles and prophets. This includes old and new testament writings, so Paul's letters are to be taken literally by those who follow the teachings of God.
Let me be clear that I am not a theology student (...yet...) and therefore can be called into question over my writings. My words are not from God. But let me also be clear --- being a theology school graduate does not mean you are speaking for God, either. No, in fact, God's words in the Holy Bible do God's speaking.
Interpretations by man must be based upon what God states in the Bible and not man's feelings about man.
That last sentence should stand as "okay" unless I am wrong. Of course I maintain that I am not God. Alas, I do not think I am wrong with that statement.
Back to V. Gene Robinson. He has been added to the lineup - he may have received his invitation at the same time or even before Warren's invitation to lead the inaugural prayers - to show that the Obama administration is inclusive and not divisive.
Is there something else that needs to be said on this subject? Sure. Here's a quotation from a published article in the Chicago Tribune:
Robinson said in his interview with the Concord paper that he would not use the Bible in his address at Lincoln Memorial.
"While that is a holy and sacred text to me, it is not for many Americans," Robinson said. "I will be careful not to be especially Christian in my prayer. This is a prayer for the whole nation."
WITH THAT STATEMENT IN MIND, answer this question: To what degree is V. Gene Robinson a CHRISTIAN?
He said he will not use the Bible. So, if that is his desire, so be it.
V. Gene Robinson is stating clearly that his prayer is NOT A CHRISTIAN PRAYER.
THAT FACT is a SLAP IN THE FACE to God and Jesus Christ.
The fact is --- V. Gene Robinson is not being "Reverend".
I am being irreverent, and critical - but I am not a Reverend. I am just another human sinner. I will apologize to God for my irreverence to another human. That is called repentence.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Here is yet another quotation from the published article in the ChicagoTribune:
In a statement late Monday, Warren complimented Obama's decision to invite Robinson. "President-elect Obama has again demonstrated his genuine commitment to bringing all Americans of goodwill together in search of common ground," Warren said. "I applaud his desire to be the president of every citizen."
I wonder if pastor Rick Warren finds calling V. Gene Robinson "Reverend" a "slap in the face"???
It is a slap in the face.
Now let's talk about V. Gene Robinson, he who brought up in the first place something being "a slap in the face".
What did V. Gene Robinson liken to a slap in the face?
President-elect Obama asked an outspoken Christian pastor - Rick Warren, who has a clear view that homosexual marriage is against God's will - to lead prayers at his inauguration.
Now the president-elect has granted Robinson a place of honor in leading a prayer during the upcoming kickoff celebrations before Obama's inauguration.
I'm sure Robinson will not recant his position that having a Christian pastor leading the inaugural prayers is a slap in the face. I seriously doubt I will recant my position that Robinson being called "Reverend" is --- according to Christians --- a slap in the face to Christianity.
Some will read this column and take things out of context in order to denigrate my words, my commentary. Some may re-post this and add words which alter the meaning of what I state. However this should be taken as A WHOLE COLUMN and not pieces to be singled-out for minutia-laden bits.
Well, here is the big theological discussion.
Gene Robinson is a gay Episcopal priest.
Christian denominations will tell you the statement "gay priest" is oxymoronic.
Nearly-Christian denominations will claim their savior but will say anything to be inclusive until they feel attacked by their own Christianity.
The teachings of the Roman Catholic church (Christians who have a leader from Rome...the Pope) say homosexuality is an abomination - homosexual marriage will not take place in a Catholic church. Lutheran teachings also follow the words of the apostle Paul who pointed out in his letters about God's teachings on sexual immorality. Now make sure you realize that there is a clear split between Lutheran synods in the United States on the issue of homosexuality and marriage --- the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America largely ignores traditional Lutheran-Christian theology and has allowed in their statements room for individuals to believe that homosexual behavior is acceptable. Many other Christian-reformed or protestant denominations have evaluated statements about sexual immorality and homosexuality and state that the two are more than merely related. Some Christian denominations would go much further and say that homosexual activity is a human abomination and not just against God's word. There are varying degrees of theological interpretation. To break that down more, there is theology and there is logical. In man, we find logic (I know I LOVE logic) in allowing for inclusion and not being divisive. But what of theological divisiveness presented by the likes of "Reverend" V. Gene Robinson and those of true Christian teachers and believers?
Okay - so the problem is likely in the delineation by mankind of sexual immorality according to God's word - the Holy Bible.
What do you believe? Do you believe that the apostle Paul spoke for God? Paul's words are on the pages he wrote to the church-members in Rome, Corinth, etc. Those words are in the Holy Bible. If you believe in God and Christ Jesus as your savior, you likely believe that the Holy Bible is GOD'S WORDS as transcribed by the apostles and prophets. This includes old and new testament writings, so Paul's letters are to be taken literally by those who follow the teachings of God.
Let me be clear that I am not a theology student (...yet...) and therefore can be called into question over my writings. My words are not from God. But let me also be clear --- being a theology school graduate does not mean you are speaking for God, either. No, in fact, God's words in the Holy Bible do God's speaking.
Interpretations by man must be based upon what God states in the Bible and not man's feelings about man.
That last sentence should stand as "okay" unless I am wrong. Of course I maintain that I am not God. Alas, I do not think I am wrong with that statement.
Back to V. Gene Robinson. He has been added to the lineup - he may have received his invitation at the same time or even before Warren's invitation to lead the inaugural prayers - to show that the Obama administration is inclusive and not divisive.
Is there something else that needs to be said on this subject? Sure. Here's a quotation from a published article in the Chicago Tribune:
Robinson said in his interview with the Concord paper that he would not use the Bible in his address at Lincoln Memorial.
"While that is a holy and sacred text to me, it is not for many Americans," Robinson said. "I will be careful not to be especially Christian in my prayer. This is a prayer for the whole nation."
WITH THAT STATEMENT IN MIND, answer this question: To what degree is V. Gene Robinson a CHRISTIAN?
He said he will not use the Bible. So, if that is his desire, so be it.
V. Gene Robinson is stating clearly that his prayer is NOT A CHRISTIAN PRAYER.
THAT FACT is a SLAP IN THE FACE to God and Jesus Christ.
The fact is --- V. Gene Robinson is not being "Reverend".
I am being irreverent, and critical - but I am not a Reverend. I am just another human sinner. I will apologize to God for my irreverence to another human. That is called repentence.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Here is yet another quotation from the published article in the ChicagoTribune:
In a statement late Monday, Warren complimented Obama's decision to invite Robinson. "President-elect Obama has again demonstrated his genuine commitment to bringing all Americans of goodwill together in search of common ground," Warren said. "I applaud his desire to be the president of every citizen."
I wonder if pastor Rick Warren finds calling V. Gene Robinson "Reverend" a "slap in the face"???
A Change
This blog will likely discuss things such as traveling through the region where I live - St. Louis MO USA. However, with the new year 2009 on hand, I've decided to use this LESS for travel and more for commentary. Today, it's more general --- and I hope you enjoy religious discussions, because that's where I'm going. A separate post is to follow (but, of course, it will actually be above this once it is posted).
Thanks for stopping past here and reading in the first place.
Thanks for stopping past here and reading in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
