METRO wants more land and more money.
Who ever would have seen that coming (aside from folks who are always derisively labeled “METRO critics” in the typical METRO cheerleading stories/blog posts)?
The Chron story did feature this bit of amusement from David Wolff:
“We are transparent. We are accountable. Those who say we are not are not well informed,” he said.
Baghdad Bob was more credible.
UPDATE: Barry Klein’s comment on the Chron.com story is worth reproducing in its entirety:
At yesterday’s board meeting the Metro chairman admitted that four rail extensions will cost $1.5 billion. Combined with the $1.5 billion for the University line, the fifth extension, announced in December, the cost of the 30 mile Metro rail project is now $3 billion. Six years ago Metro won a referendum claiming that 22 miles of new rail in five corridors would cost $1.2 billion. All this was explained to the Metro Board.
So…instead of reading about the $1.8 billion difference between the cost projected on election day in 2003 and the cost today, and the several people who asked the Metro board for a new election because of the higher cost and other changes, we are reading about a relatively small amount of $100 million added to the 2009 contract for four corridors…Why is that fact more noteworthy than the additional $1.8 billion budget busting difference in the cost of five corridors?
Good question.
(Old) Forum Comments (12)
