Request for Proposal: Glenwood Springs, Colorado Excursion/Dinner train

[Overmod]

'Maybe so, but Kip does have a good point: if his organization gets well-documented proposals with real financing details, they can use them -- probably VERY effectively -- to counter the RFTA scam arguments, and to work toward building a larger interest on the part of area residents and snowbirds alike.

That's true, I think, whether or not the 'proposers' actually intend to step up to the plate quickly or not...

Pity the folks who put the Ski Train together lo these thirty years ago aren't around now. Ross Rowland, who do you know that you might put these guys in contact with?

I know this isn't in line with the sort of strategy that WC followed after the Berkshire investment in the early '80s, but it might still be possible to develop a case for one of the private-equity firms to develop a 'presence' in some of the prospective service markets that would characterize the target section of the Aspen branch...

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by KipWheeler

Rails and Trails (R&T), a group of interested citizens from the Roaring Fork Valley, offer the RFP. It should not be confused with the overly restrictive and misdirected RFP issued by the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) in February of 2005. The experience of the operator is being sought in setting the response parameters. The offering is being submitted to the benefiting communities, not RFTA.

RFTA did receive a proposal, but it was for a partnership. Lacking an acceptable proposal it voted to scrap the rails and expressed it remains open to new proposals.

We are continuing to work on all the approaches, but we need a proposal in hand from a legitimate service provider/operator to complete the process.

Where else can we post this proposal to get the attention of excursion providers?

Searching the inter net has lead us to a number of communities safely and beneficially sharing a right of way with rail and trail.

This looks like a rabbit hole.

[Anonymous]

Rails and Trails (R&T), a group of interested citizens from the Roaring Fork Valley, offer the RFP. It should not be confused with the overly restrictive and misdirected RFP issued by the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) in February of 2005. The experience of the operator is being sought in setting the response parameters. The offering is being submitted to the benefiting communities, not RFTA.

RFTA did receive a proposal, but it was for a partnership. Lacking an acceptable proposal it voted to scrap the rails and expressed it remains open to new proposals.

We are continuing to work on all the approaches, but we need a proposal in hand from a legitimate service provider/operator to complete the process.

Where else can we post this proposal to get the attention of excursion providers?

Searching the inter net has lead us to a number of communities safely and beneficially sharing a right of way with rail and trail.

[Overmod]

Didn't I hear that the transit authority has already voted to tear up the rail for scrap, and has essentially given the golden brushoff to at least one qualified operator attempting to respond to an operating RFP... quite probably a version of this RFP... ?

I do not know whether, given that kind of history and evident mindset, publicizing the RFP beyond the current community of interest that knows about the Glenwood-Aspen line is likely to produce much effect. I'd think that grassroots lobbying of the social groups and other ways of reaching the (very affluent) electorate might be much more effective in producing (1) the appropriate combination of incentives and leverage to get the scrapping proposal suspended, and to direct the short-term research on trail development so that it's focused on joint rail/trail development, and (2) building a growing groundswell of real grass-roots and community interest in the various things that a rail service might provide.

Personally, I think that there are a number of potential niches that have at least theoretical promise: car-ferry operation; light frequent transit service; some flavor (pun intended) of dinner train or 'commissary' service; historical trips.

I also think that running the trail in common with the railroad ROW in the places noted in the recent news coverage of the 'scrapping' decision is an ultimately-suicidal appeal to plaintiff's bar to collect large money damages from whatever poor mark runs trains over that common section... and perhaps over some of the common people hiking it. Doesn't seem to me that there's any level of care with signals, gates, warning signs, etc. that quite eliminates all the logical risk -- and the whole shared rail/trail plan appears to be predicated on the assumption that the trail has the economic and social 'priority'...

[Anonymous]

This RFP with the latest updates and supplemental information is posted on the website kipwh.com.

Please review RFP.

Help is needed with how and where else to post this proposal request. [e-mail].