Poppa_Zit wrote: futuremodal wrote: I think some may find it inappropriate to make light of a situation that does have potential safety pitfalls. When you have a lot of people congregated in one area, it becomes more critical for emergency personel to be able to reach that area if need be. Relative expediency often is the difference between life and death in such situations, and a train blocking the only crossing into the area could have been a tragic situation.As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood....If the railroads don't start working together to address these types of complaints, and instead use these same complaints in a cutthroat manner against other railroads, the industry as a whole is going to suffer.Gimme me a break, FM. I resent your patronizing Ed and Snaggletooth with a preachy response in this thread. I can't believe there aren't some sort of laws to cover this sort of thing that aren't being reported in the story, which is about a lawsuit against BNSF and little else. Here in a civilized area, one must first obtain city or county permits to operate an entertainment venue such as a public festival. That means certain levels of proper security must be in place before the event opens. Is it possible the organizer of this event held it outside more-strict jurisdictions in order to save money?To wit, if the RF drew enough auto traffic to produce a ten-mile backup in 45 minutes, as is alleged in the story, in a civilized location the event organizers would have had to contract with the city/county/state for traffic control officers and have a cogent plan in place in order to obtain operating permits.Same with law enforcement personnel on site -- and this includes both police officers and safety teams. Around here, if you permit for -- say -- 5,000 attendance, you need to have one full-time advanced life support team and ALS vehicle spotted right on the premises during the entire run of the event, and X number of law enforcement people for crowd control. And you will be fined if you permit for only 5,000 in an attempt to save overhead and 25,000 people show up.On top of all this, there are permits to be obtained from the health department which would send representatives to the site to inspect food storage and handling facilities, etc. -- even mandating how many port-a-potties need to be available -- before the doors can open. And there would be inspectors on-site during the event to monitor food service to ensure compliance.FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too.
futuremodal wrote: I think some may find it inappropriate to make light of a situation that does have potential safety pitfalls. When you have a lot of people congregated in one area, it becomes more critical for emergency personel to be able to reach that area if need be. Relative expediency often is the difference between life and death in such situations, and a train blocking the only crossing into the area could have been a tragic situation.As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood....If the railroads don't start working together to address these types of complaints, and instead use these same complaints in a cutthroat manner against other railroads, the industry as a whole is going to suffer.
I think some may find it inappropriate to make light of a situation that does have potential safety pitfalls. When you have a lot of people congregated in one area, it becomes more critical for emergency personel to be able to reach that area if need be. Relative expediency often is the difference between life and death in such situations, and a train blocking the only crossing into the area could have been a tragic situation.
As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood.
...
If the railroads don't start working together to address these types of complaints, and instead use these same complaints in a cutthroat manner against other railroads, the industry as a whole is going to suffer.
Gimme me a break, FM. I resent your patronizing Ed and Snaggletooth with a preachy response in this thread.
I can't believe there aren't some sort of laws to cover this sort of thing that aren't being reported in the story, which is about a lawsuit against BNSF and little else.
Here in a civilized area, one must first obtain city or county permits to operate an entertainment venue such as a public festival. That means certain levels of proper security must be in place before the event opens. Is it possible the organizer of this event held it outside more-strict jurisdictions in order to save money?
To wit, if the RF drew enough auto traffic to produce a ten-mile backup in 45 minutes, as is alleged in the story, in a civilized location the event organizers would have had to contract with the city/county/state for traffic control officers and have a cogent plan in place in order to obtain operating permits.
Same with law enforcement personnel on site -- and this includes both police officers and safety teams. Around here, if you permit for -- say -- 5,000 attendance, you need to have one full-time advanced life support team and ALS vehicle spotted right on the premises during the entire run of the event, and X number of law enforcement people for crowd control. And you will be fined if you permit for only 5,000 in an attempt to save overhead and 25,000 people show up.
On top of all this, there are permits to be obtained from the health department which would send representatives to the site to inspect food storage and handling facilities, etc. -- even mandating how many port-a-potties need to be available -- before the doors can open. And there would be inspectors on-site during the event to monitor food service to ensure compliance.
FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too.
How come every thread somehow goes back to the DME with him????
futuremodal wrote: snagletooth wrote: What does a train in emergency have to do with DM&E. Did the engineer here there were DM&E workers heading to Wyoming in that traffic? Maybe they were transloading an ISO container into a boxcar? Or maybe, just maybe, the conducter got picked-on by the Black Night and seeking revenge for this insult!! Okay, it's like this..... See, let me explain the obvious to you........Hmmmm, if you've been following the BNSF vs DM&E saga lately......... Know what? There's no way I can bring Ed and Snagletooth into the meaty part of the Bell curve regarding this tongue-in-cheek bit of presumed irony without insulting them to some degree, so guys......have a nice day.
snagletooth wrote: What does a train in emergency have to do with DM&E. Did the engineer here there were DM&E workers heading to Wyoming in that traffic? Maybe they were transloading an ISO container into a boxcar? Or maybe, just maybe, the conducter got picked-on by the Black Night and seeking revenge for this insult!!
Okay, it's like this.....
See, let me explain the obvious to you........
Hmmmm, if you've been following the BNSF vs DM&E saga lately.........
Know what? There's no way I can bring Ed and Snagletooth into the meaty part of the Bell curve regarding this tongue-in-cheek bit of presumed irony without insulting them to some degree, so guys......have a nice day.
edbenton wrote: Poppa Zit THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I try not to get riled up with Dave but he gets under my skin.
Poppa Zit THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I try not to get riled up with Dave but he gets under my skin.
He doesn't bother me at all because I know his type, Ed.
He's frustrated -- condescending guys like him who pat themselves on the back as having a superior intellect while stepping on others commands a response, methinks. FM lives in a fantasy world of his own creation -- one where he is clever. The real world isn't so kind for him.
The dead giveaway is that truly intelligent people don't act like that.
Poppa_Zit wrote: edbenton wrote: Poppa Zit THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I try not to get riled up with Dave but he gets under my skin.He doesn't bother me at all because I know his type, Ed.He's frustrated -- condescending guys like him who pat themselves on the back as having a superior intellect while stepping on others commands a response, methinks. FM lives in a fantasy world of his own creation -- one where he is clever. The real world isn't so kind for him.The dead giveaway is that truly intelligent people don't act like that.
I don't usually weigh in on situations like this, but I do have to say that this seems more like a bait and trap.
The initial reference to the DM&E was a joke. You can laugh at the joke, groan at the joke, or ignore the joke, but instead people attacked the poster (one of those posts is now deleted, sketchy to say the least). He was again attacked after incorporating information in a decent fashion. Valid points? Maybe, maybe not, but still presented in a decent fashion.
Argue the points, not the person that posts them. If they have an invalid point, point them in the right direction. Attacking the poster only nets one thing: ire.
I love this forum and I'd hate to see it descend into polarized flame wars like I've seen happen on many sites. Staying on topic is definitely key, speaking of which...
Are there any rules (federal, state, or local) that allow for cutting a train during an emergency stop after walking X distance/number of cars past a crossing? With a 10k foot train and one guy walking, I could see a concern for a 2 hour blockage and I can see a way this could lead to the resurgance of the caboose.
Andrew Falconer wrote: 10 Mile Backup?I just noticed that bit of hyperbole in the story. The whole story was so lopsided it is hard to notice all the exaggerations. How could they have a 10 Mile Backup on an Interstate?Andrew
10 Mile Backup?
I just noticed that bit of hyperbole in the story. The whole story was so lopsided it is hard to notice all the exaggerations. How could they have a 10 Mile Backup on an Interstate?
Andrew
They would back up on the shoulder if it is handled like the Renaissance Festival in Shakopee, Minnesota. They sometimes back up several miles for that one. It has two access points, but one is subject to crossing the U.P. Mankato line, which is occassionally blocked for 20 minutes or so.
I do not understand the fine points of the law that would pertain to the Colorado incident. It sounds like it is OK to run trains and do switching over the crossing, but it is not OK to block it for any other reason. Yet a blockage for switching could be a long time, depending on the moves. It seems like a time limit for routine work is needed with an exception for railroad emergency caused blockages.
A derailment could close that crossing for a couple days. They might even have to build a new, temporary road and crossing in a different location just to get the people in and out while the wreck is picked up.
Krazykat112079 wrote:I don't usually weigh in on situations like this, but I do have to say that this seems more like a bait and trap. The initial reference to the DM&E was a joke. You can laugh at the joke, groan at the joke, or ignore the joke, but instead people attacked the poster (one of those posts is now deleted, sketchy to say the least). He was again attacked after incorporating information in a decent fashion. Valid points? Maybe, maybe not, but still presented in a decent fashion.Argue the points, not the person that posts them. If they have an invalid point, point them in the right direction. Attacking the poster only nets one thing: ire.
And I agree with all of that.
Murphy Siding wrote: futuremodal wrote: As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood.That seems like a stretch of logic. The arguement could be made, that this would be reason enough for the regulators to cut down the number of grade crossings. Did the highway owners gave the railorad permission to cross their ROW, or vice-versa?
futuremodal wrote: As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood.
Usually, the RR's have preceded the roads that cross them. That's not the issue, though. The issue is this ongoing PR shortcoming of the railroads that may lead to more regulations. Cities already are using the courts to get RR speed limits lowered through towns, so it's really not a stretch that some states may try to limit train length under the guise of public safety.
Hey, weren't the caboose requirements all at the state level? What if some states start requiring cabooses again?
futuremodal wrote: Murphy Siding wrote: futuremodal wrote: As train lengths increase, the likelyhood of a crossing being blocked also increases. Since constructing grade crossing separations is an expensive proposition, it may be that the regulators decide to force railroads to limit train length to reduce that statistical likelyhood.That seems like a stretch of logic. The arguement could be made, that this would be reason enough for the regulators to cut down the number of grade crossings. Did the highway owners gave the railorad permission to cross their ROW, or vice-versa?Usually, the RR's have preceded the roads that cross them. That's not the issue, though. The issue is this ongoing PR shortcoming of the railroads that may lead to more regulations. Cities already are using the courts to get RR speed limits lowered through towns, so it's really not a stretch that some states may try to limit train length under the guise of public safety. Hey, weren't the caboose requirements all at the state level? What if some states start requiring cabooses again?
FM, don't give our governor any ideas....
Andrew Falconer wrote: What has to be done to educate the public? Have a Discovery Channel and TLC channel reality show about railroads that is like the show "Dangerous Catch"?Andrew
What has to be done to educate the public?
Have a Discovery Channel and TLC channel reality show about railroads that is like the show "Dangerous Catch"?
Actually, in the DC area, you can't go too long watching TV or listening to radio without hearing about all freight railroads (and defense contractors) do for you. Of course, they tend to run thicker when Congress is actually in session.
Poppa_Zit wrote: FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too.
Hey PZitty,
Where in this thread have I bashed BNSF? I am simply pointing out the irony of BNSF aligning itself with anti-railroad types aka the Mayo Morons, then itself being attacked by anti-railroad types aka the faux Medievalites.
For what it's worth, both the Mayo Morons and the Faux Medievalites are wrong. BNSF is right to fight this, but they are wrong to fight the DM&E via idiot proxy as well. Turnabout is fair play, eh?
What I would question for someone like you is why you don't also see the irony? The simpler minds like Ed and Snag, yeah, I can see why they'd miss it, but you?
futuremodal wrote: The simpler minds like Ed and Snag
Dave, was that necessary ?
nanaimo73 wrote: futuremodal wrote: The simpler minds like Ed and Snag Dave, was that necessary ?
In his mind YES because everytime he comes up with any kind of plus about an OA trial Snag and about 10 others and I blow about 500 holes in it plus show why it would not work here in the US.
Yes. Obviously.....
edbenton wrote: In his mind YES because everytime he comes up with any kind of plus about an OA trial Snag and about 10 others and I blow about 500 holes in it plus show why it would not work here in the US.
futuremodal wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too. Hey PZitty,Where in this thread have I bashed BNSF? I am simply pointing out the irony of BNSF aligning itself with anti-railroad types aka the Mayo Morons, then itself being attacked by anti-railroad types aka the faux Medievalites.For what it's worth, both the Mayo Morons and the Faux Medievalites are wrong. BNSF is right to fight this, but they are wrong to fight the DM&E via idiot proxy as well. Turnabout is fair play, eh?What I would question for someone like you is why you don't also see the irony? The simpler minds like Ed and Snag, yeah, I can see why they'd miss it, but you?
snagletooth wrote: futuremodal wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too. Hey PZitty,Where in this thread have I bashed BNSF? I am simply pointing out the irony of BNSF aligning itself with anti-railroad types aka the Mayo Morons, then itself being attacked by anti-railroad types aka the faux Medievalites.For what it's worth, both the Mayo Morons and the Faux Medievalites are wrong. BNSF is right to fight this, but they are wrong to fight the DM&E via idiot proxy as well. Turnabout is fair play, eh?What I would question for someone like you is why you don't also see the irony? The simpler minds like Ed and Snag, yeah, I can see why they'd miss it, but you?Well, as I stated before, I (and I'm sure others) did get it the "humor and irony". We just don't think it was all that humorous or ironic, so much it wasn't even worth the time it took you to write it. Unless, as the deleted postered stated, you're intent wasn't to be humurous and ironic, but to derail another thread with BNSF/DME rants. In which case, "ironically" you've managed succesfully. on two seperate threads, no less. And where I didn't think that was your attemt at the time, but you still ramming the BNSF/ DME thing down our throats makes me think otherwise, and the post that would clarify all this being quickly deleted is the real "humor" and "irony"!
Snag,
I have to give you and Ed credit. These past few days you two have brought more than one instance of having my sides split. First, Ed makes a point about spelling out the words "Cheif Operating Officer" for my benefit........and accuses Candian Pacific of being an "unreliable source".
Now you're accusing me of derailling a thread about BNSF vs anti-railroad kooks by daring to mention BNSF's ironic position on the matter of anti-railroad kooks................
You two should audition for "Last Comic Standing"! The nation could use a new comedy duo right about now!
Wow can we say full of himself. Anyway on to this topic. You make mention of access to this area and I cant remeber who posted it but they gave a great rundown of what all would be there. Yes you would have cops on the ground and at least a couple EMS units ( one ALS one BLS) perhaps even an engine company for any fires on site or to assist with the ALS rig.
Now you say how sad it would be that if that poor ambulance couldnt make it by that mean old train.Please give my brother first responders some credit.Obviously you make plans for such situations. Called wargaming or thinking on your feet. Simple solution start an IV get the cops and the engine guys to clear a space and call in the bird.Problem solved.Now the pt gets to a hospital quicker to get that lance pulled out of his backside that the Black Knight lodged there
Hey Tim dont worry about Blago, hes too worried now that he raised cig taxes to pay for schools and what not, and also BANNED SMOKING IN PUBLIC AREAS I guess he doesnt read the papers and didnt see what happened in NYC when Bloomberg did that.
Maybe the caboose will be what gets Blago out of the mess hes made. I like the idea some engineers I dont like to ride with.
Yes we are on time but this is yesterdays train
futuremodal wrote: snagletooth wrote: futuremodal wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too. Hey PZitty,Where in this thread have I bashed BNSF? I am simply pointing out the irony of BNSF aligning itself with anti-railroad types aka the Mayo Morons, then itself being attacked by anti-railroad types aka the faux Medievalites.For what it's worth, both the Mayo Morons and the Faux Medievalites are wrong. BNSF is right to fight this, but they are wrong to fight the DM&E via idiot proxy as well. Turnabout is fair play, eh?What I would question for someone like you is why you don't also see the irony? The simpler minds like Ed and Snag, yeah, I can see why they'd miss it, but you?Well, as I stated before, I (and I'm sure others) did get it the "humor and irony". We just don't think it was all that humorous or ironic, so much it wasn't even worth the time it took you to write it. Unless, as the deleted postered stated, you're intent wasn't to be humurous and ironic, but to derail another thread with BNSF/DME rants. In which case, "ironically" you've managed succesfully. on two seperate threads, no less. And where I didn't think that was your attemt at the time, but you still ramming the BNSF/ DME thing down our throats makes me think otherwise, and the post that would clarify all this being quickly deleted is the real "humor" and "irony"!Snag,I have to give you and Ed credit. These past few days you two have brought more than one instance of having my sides split. First, Ed makes a point about spelling out the words "Cheif Operating Officer" for my benefit........and accuses Candian Pacific of being an "unreliable source".Now you're accusing me of derailling a thread about BNSF vs anti-railroad kooks by daring to mention BNSF's ironic position on the matter of anti-railroad kooks................You two should audition for "Last Comic Standing"! The nation could use a new comedy duo right about now!
As the man said, anywho.
We must let the show go on. I've had my say, let the show go on and get back on topic before this one gets deleted over this ranting, too, FM.
snagletooth wrote: futuremodal wrote: snagletooth wrote: futuremodal wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: FM, I can see no reason for you to enter this discussion save for your obvious bias against BNSF and your morbid obsession to align yourself with anyone and anything going against that railroad. Take off your "BNSF is always wrong" t-shirt, willya? That act is getting old. I'd tell you why, but ... well, you have yourself a nice day, too. Hey PZitty,Where in this thread have I bashed BNSF? I am simply pointing out the irony of BNSF aligning itself with anti-railroad types aka the Mayo Morons, then itself being attacked by anti-railroad types aka the faux Medievalites.For what it's worth, both the Mayo Morons and the Faux Medievalites are wrong. BNSF is right to fight this, but they are wrong to fight the DM&E via idiot proxy as well. Turnabout is fair play, eh?What I would question for someone like you is why you don't also see the irony? The simpler minds like Ed and Snag, yeah, I can see why they'd miss it, but you?Well, as I stated before, I (and I'm sure others) did get it the "humor and irony". We just don't think it was all that humorous or ironic, so much it wasn't even worth the time it took you to write it. Unless, as the deleted postered stated, you're intent wasn't to be humurous and ironic, but to derail another thread with BNSF/DME rants. In which case, "ironically" you've managed succesfully. on two seperate threads, no less. And where I didn't think that was your attemt at the time, but you still ramming the BNSF/ DME thing down our throats makes me think otherwise, and the post that would clarify all this being quickly deleted is the real "humor" and "irony"!Snag,I have to give you and Ed credit. These past few days you two have brought more than one instance of having my sides split. First, Ed makes a point about spelling out the words "Cheif Operating Officer" for my benefit........and accuses Candian Pacific of being an "unreliable source".Now you're accusing me of derailling a thread about BNSF vs anti-railroad kooks by daring to mention BNSF's ironic position on the matter of anti-railroad kooks................You two should audition for "Last Comic Standing"! The nation could use a new comedy duo right about now! I didn't accuse you, I clearly stated someone else did, and after reviewing the last couple of days, I'm now incline to agree. And I didn't bring up BNSF kooks, you did. Anyone who can read can clearly see that. As the man said, anywho.We must let the show go on. I've had my say, let the show go on and get back on topic before this one gets deleted over this ranting, too, FM.
Agreed.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5648743,00.html
I'm wondering if that 'fact' is due to improper knowledge of who does what on the part of the plaintiff. That's speculation on my part. In the recently linked to article, one part stated that the train clearing the crossing causing a chaotic situation that led to an accident. That seems bogus to me. It'd be like saying that because a boat caused a bridge to have to raise its center span thus blocking traffic the same thing would occur and be the boat operators fault. Aren't the drivers of each vehicle responsible for the operation of that vehicle?
I've worked event staff (parking) for events at a facility in Appleton, WI called Waverly Beach. The only road access to this venue is crossed by CN trackage. We have had times when, due to switching moves, the crossing is blocked for up to 15/20 minutes. People simply wait and when the tracks are clear we (parking staff) direct them where to go. Now if a bar/grill/small venue has parking staff why wouldn't a festival? If it's of any size I'd be surprised if it didn't have any. Plus its not like the tracks went in the day prior to the festival. It's something to think of when planning for your event, at least to me.
If it were my event to plan I'd have contacted the RR to find out when they typically run trains with an eye to managing traffic and/or coordinating show times if I was that concerned about traffic flow on the RR.
Dan
CNW 6000 wrote:I'm wondering if that 'fact' is due to improper knowledge of who does what on the part of the plaintiff.
I'm wondering if that 'fact' is due to improper knowledge of who does what on the part of the plaintiff.
That 'fact' is not the only thing in the article needing a check...
Rocky Mountain News wrote:T.R. Rice, an attorney for the railway company, said it was his understanding that the engineer thought he had cleared the crossing when, in fact, he hadn't. "The guy screwed up, and he inconvenienced a lot of people, and cost my client a lot of money," Rice said.
T.R. Rice, an attorney for the railway company, said it was his understanding that the engineer thought he had cleared the crossing when, in fact, he hadn't.
"The guy screwed up, and he inconvenienced a lot of people, and cost my client a lot of money," Rice said.
So, which is it....it Mr. Rice an attorney for the Railway Company, or the Renaissance Fair?
Rocky Mountain News wrote: This is not the first time the Renaissance Festival has been embroiled in a legal battle. After former Larkspur Mayor Myrna Been accused festival owner Jim Paradise Sr. of owing $1.6 million in unpaid water and sewer fees, he threatened to move the festival out of town.
This is not the first time the Renaissance Festival has been embroiled in a legal battle. After former Larkspur Mayor Myrna Been accused festival owner Jim Paradise Sr. of owing $1.6 million in unpaid water and sewer fees, he threatened to move the festival out of town.
A cynical person might suspect the festival organizers were looking for someone to help them pay this bill...
JSGreen wrote: CNW 6000 wrote: I'm wondering if that 'fact' is due to improper knowledge of who does what on the part of the plaintiff. That 'fact' is not the only thing in the article needing a check... Rocky Mountain News wrote:T.R. Rice, an attorney for the railway company, said it was his understanding that the engineer thought he had cleared the crossing when, in fact, he hadn't. "The guy screwed up, and he inconvenienced a lot of people, and cost my client a lot of money," Rice said.So, which is it....it Mr. Rice an attorney for the Railway Company, or the Renaissance Fair? Rocky Mountain News wrote: This is not the first time the Renaissance Festival has been embroiled in a legal battle. After former Larkspur Mayor Myrna Been accused festival owner Jim Paradise Sr. of owing $1.6 million in unpaid water and sewer fees, he threatened to move the festival out of town. A cynical person might suspect the festival organizers were looking for someone to help them pay this bill...
CNW 6000 wrote: I'm wondering if that 'fact' is due to improper knowledge of who does what on the part of the plaintiff.
Great points. I volunteer to be that cynical person.
Overall, a poorly-written article compounded by either a lazy editor not proofreading for meaning or not being edited at all. I place no currency in calling the track-walker the "engineer" unless someone confirms this.
Larkspur is a thriving metropolis of about 316 people. I'd say having an underpass or overpass would speed up the emergency vehicle response times -- but who would pay for it? On the other hand, the town could build a second fire station, too.
This whole story has an odor.
However, I would gladly wait in line for 45 minutes to see the "hucksters, jousters and magicians" if it also meant an opportunity to spend some money at the Renaissance Fair's "Punch-A-Mime-In-The-Mouth" booth.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.