AftonAg

Yeah, what's up with that Trae? You oughta start a new thread to talk about Atlanta's drought. I hear that they've only got enough water at the current Corps of Engineers' rates of release for another three months and that they're already so short of it that nobody can water their lawns, that landscaping installations are being cancelled left and right, and that the economy is gearing up for a big hit. What happens when you can't flush your toilet?

What do you think happens? This is a rare moment when the Niche strays off topic . . . .

pretty ambiguous reporting, huh? here's the chron article. I can't figure it out: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5223782.html

_____________

2:35 Adopted! Going West: Richmond, Cummins, Westpark to Hillcroft Transit Center. Going East: Wheeler, along Ennis, North to Scott, along Elgin, and ending at the Eastwood Transit Center.

Gazing into the old crystal ball - I predict a lawsuit will be filed before the end of the year against METRO and the City of Houston that will further delay progress on the ill conceived University Line. Would any one care to wager?

How many more cameras are coming? Is there a certain goal amount of cameras that are scheduled to be added to the city?

The real purpose of the cameras is to generate more revenue with less manpower. The fact that fewer people run red lights, cause fewer accidents, etc is a happy coincidence.

Funny how the Chronicle reported that Martha Wong (anti-rail) spoke but didn't mention that Sue Lovell (pro-rail) spoke. This is especially funny since Martha Wong is no longer an elected official and Sue Lovell sits on the city council.

Funny how the Chronicle mentions that Christof Spieler was asking for specific stations (Westpark/Chimnery Rock and Westpark/Fountainview) but didn't mention he heads the Citizen'sTransportation Coalition which is VERY pro rail on Richmond. You can even find a link to his organization on the RichmondRail.Org website.

Funny how the Chronicle didn't mention that the head of the Neartown Association, a representative of Bering Omega Community Services, the president of the Midtown Management District, a University of St. Thomas professor, a current student at UH and a Montrose resident, a person from the Museum District Business Alliance, a building owner on Richmond Avenue, a salon owner on Richmond Avenue, Irving Phillips from Irving Phillips Architects, and numerous others spoke out very much in favor of rail on Richmond but they did manage to mention Daphne Scarbrough. Ms. Scarbrough is the Brass Maiden owner who filed a lawsuit to stop the rail.

Funny how the Chronicle quoted Donald Wade as saying "why not go through a business district instead of a residential area?" as if he was opposed to rail in general when he in fact started his statement by saying he is for rail but wanted the Eastern portion to go down Alabama or Elgin instead of Wheeler.

The speakers were overwhelming supportive of rail. Many stated for the record that they were pro-rail and supported rail on Richmond but then would voice some concerns (like where to place stations or to inform Metro of specific places they need to make sure emergency vehicles can turn onto side streets, or to urge Metro to save trees, etc...).

Very few people stood up and said they were against rail on Richmond. Some of the ones who did like Joan Morgenstern and John Jay Douglass (whom the Chronicle quoted) made no sense. Both claimed to be worried about things like air quality and trees and carbon dioxide but then stated that they are constantly driving on Kirby, Buffalo Speedway, Sheperd, and Dunlavy and the rail would make it much harder for them to cross Richmond Avenue. I hope both of them are members of TerraPass since they are so obviously concerned about the environment!

Conservatives claim that the Chronicle is a left leaning, biased liberal rag. I have seen and heard liberals complain that the Chronicle is a conservative newspaper. Maybe we are all wrong and it is just a crappy newspaper. Sorry for straying from the topic.

He has also stated that he'll never post again elsewhere on the forum. ...and yet here he is.

I doubt that we've seen the last of him, his alter egos, quotations out of context, ad hominems, or his flame-outs.

Thanks for confirming that Niche . . . and I agree he will likely return

I did a search for a member named Aftonowl so I could read these flame-war posts you refer to. I found nothing though. What page was this flame war on?

I believe the editor removed the "flame war posts".

The Chronicle is guilty of lazy journalism. About half of the comments they posted as being "against rail" or "against certain routes" were totally taken out of context. The only thing the anti-rail crowd did more of was clapping, which the crowd was told not to do.

Yeah that anti rail crowd is a bunch of classless rebels - always railing against authority - actually clapping even though they were told not to. Civil disobedience at its most polite. I think many may have been charter members of the SDS - Probably some Weather Underground members in the ranks too . . . Arm The Spirit - The Weather Lives!

Apparently yes. I fail to see how his remarks were at all factitious.He argued poorly. The issue is not that a corridor named in the ballot does not exist. It is that the name doesn't matter.You replied by saying "exactly," but he was inexact.

Regardless of the wording, existence of a Westpark corridor etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum - The ballot read Westpark corridor and the very instant that METRO announced that the Westpark corridor really meant Richmond a hue and cry went up immediately from the anti rail on richmond coalition, there wasn't any strategizing, no attack plan - just a cry of foul. A cry that resonates to this day and will continue to resonate to the day the first train turns south on Cummins . . . . .

Did anyone else attend yesterday's meeting? One of the earlier posts said that the pro-Richmond comments outnumbered the against comments by about 10 to 1, but the Chronicle said it was about even. Anyone have a 3rd point of view?I'm also surprised that I couldn't find any coverage by the 3 main TV stations. Maybe it was due to the Astros' news.

The comments were about even - perhaps a posters report was biased? No TV because there was no bloodshed, there was no violence, and all in all it was a rather calm and respectful group which translates to boring to the big 3. Don't even try it - I already said I didn't go to the meeting, but that doesn't mean that I haven't spoken to several of the anti's (people that I trust to be truthful) that were at the meeting just to get their perspective.

Thank you for the opportunity to agree. Yes, I think you are an uninformed imposter; i.e idiot-your word. Again you have choosen to prove yourself to be the fraud you introduced yourself as: someone with little or no knowledge of the neighborhood you claim to live in; woefully lacking in any facts regarding ballot process and a consistant pattern of immature lanquage that makes even the most simpleton among the HAIFarati question your verasity. The only thing more pathetic is the credibility given you by some of your enabelers.

Reply or not-I don't subscribe to forums any longer.

I must point out that Nmainguy was caught posting under the alias Aftonowl. Claiming to live in Afton Oaks and be a pro rail advocate. A rather nasty flame war ensued the details of which aren't worth repeating. I will not dignify his comments further as it might lend credibility to a real imposter.

Only AftonAg would think ELECTION RESULTS are inherently biased. Maybe you think local elections should have an electoral college too?Wow. Did his factitiousness really go that far over your head?

Election results are fact, no further discussion required. So having said that you must agree that George Bush soundly defeated Gore and won the 2000 Presidential election fair and square right? no bias, just fact. Yet you boldly state that only I would think Election Results are inherently biased. Go on with your righteous self.

I can only speak for those that I was actually in the voting booth with as to whether or not they read everything, and/or understood everything on the ballot. . . . . . those meaning me. I seriously doubt that every AO resident that voted read all of it and/or understood all of it. If that reflects poorly on my neighborhood so be it. All you have to do is read some of the posts on here (or any other forum) to realize that the number of idiots among the general population is a surprisingly high percentage. I am quite certain that Niche, Musicman and a few of the other posters on here that I respect probably feel the same way. I am also certain that there is a large number of posters on here that think I am an idiot - while they may deny it, most of them feel that way because I don't agree with the majority opinion of this post.

The ASS/U/MING is a very old joke, and slightly out of context. What it means is this - when ever one assumes they make an Ass of u or me. The point is that assumptions are always dangerous to base an argument on - if the assumption is wrong the argument is then pointless.

i was responding to jax, not you. and i agree we are entitled to our own opinions. never thought otherwise.

Sorry Musicman my mistake. That you would have thought otherwise was a surprise to me as you are one of the few on here that sees clearly the majority of the time.

Data, you want data to back up my argument? I will refer you to post # 2888 :

Not sure where you got that I was ASS/U/MING ( really what is that suppose to mean? I guess you are calling me an ASS? really not sure. Maybe I should ask my 13 year old nephew, that is around his maturity level) OK that I was assuming that every AO took time to read the ballot? I would say that you are not really putting fellow AOers in a very good light. They vote for things without knowing what they are voting for? Maybe what really happen is that your fellow AOers meant to vote NO and actually voted for Pat Buchanan. I would demand a recount. Check for pregnant chads!

I can only speak for those that I was actually in the voting booth with as to whether or not they read everything, and/or understood everything on the ballot. . . . . . those meaning me. I seriously doubt that every AO resident that voted read all of it and/or understood all of it. If that reflects poorly on my neighborhood so be it. All you have to do is read some of the posts on here (or any other forum) to realize that the number of idiots among the general population is a surprisingly high percentage. I am quite certain that Niche, Musicman and a few of the other posters on here that I respect probably feel the same way. I am also certain that there is a large number of posters on here that think I am an idiot - while they may deny it, most of them feel that way because I don't agree with the majority opinion of this post.

CTC is biased. go to a couple of their meetings and find out. disregarding.

I have been to a CTC meeting and that is where I drew my conclusion. Like it or not Musicman I am entitled to my own opinion - and sometimes it doesn't match yours

There is some interesting info about voters along Richmond - beore and after Culberson / Wong voiced their anti-rail views

here,

and here.

The links are to sites that most folks would consider biased and all of the information is less than a year old, and the referendum was in 2002 as I recall. This hardly verifies your statement Jax . . . . but at least you went to the trouble of searching for the facts and for that I applaud you.

If you took the number of people who would of switched there vote from yes to no because of Richmond, it would have still passed. Some how I find it hard to believe that the anti-rail people actually voted yes. Face the facts, Metro got what they wanted and you and your group help make them look like they compromised to get it. Suckers.

As long as we are talking facts I suppose you have some data to back your first statement up. I would be most interested to know how that data was gathered and by whom. I think it is just speculation or wishful thinking on your part.In your last statement you give METRO far too much credit - I doubt that anyone believes that METRO was farsighted enough to play the Houston public as you suggest. The other fallcy in that last statemnet is that you assume like so many others have that the anti rail coalition is just AO - IT IS MUCH MORE!

I'm guessing it's more about having any knife in a gunfight.

of course you are ASS/U/MING that every AO voter took the time to read every word on the ballot - I doubt that was the case.

Whether or not there is much opposition, there should still be planning, meetings, different proposals, environmental impact studies, etc. before the final route is chosen. Nobody pro-rail says it should go wherever Metro wants it. They say it should go wherever it will serve the most people and impact the least - basically where it makes the most sense. And I think we've narrowed it down.

So what your saying then Jax is that if there had been zero opposition to Railroading Richmond there would have been exactly the same number of meetings, route proposals etc. The reason METRO wanted to run down Richmond in their original plan - through Afton Oaks and under 610 etc according to METRO was ridership, numbers, butts in the seats. According to METRO transitioning to Westpark east of Sage severely affected those precious ridership numbers, or so they said in the many meetings that I went to. What you are saying is that basically the miniscule anti rail coalition had virtually no effect on the process. The only effect we had was on the final route. That is an interesting take - does everyone on your little planet see it that way?

It isn't about thinking or guessing his group is outnumbered.

His group IS outnumbered. Just check the membership rosters, petition signatures, and even just glance around the Inner Loop to look at the support for the rail signs in MANY neighborhoods with the opposition signs being almost 100% centered in Afton Oaks.

I wouldn't be so sure - the referendum was a pretty close vote - and when you consider that it included language that made many voters think the rail would be on Westpark, It makes me wonder if it would have passed if it had been called the Richmond Corridor.

If we are so vastly outnumbered as you claim Kinkaid then why was there ever any doubt that the rail would run exactly where METRO wanted it, why have there been so many townhall meetings, and so many different route proposals? Could it just be that the anti coalition is larger than any of you give it credit for? Which would mean of course that many of you are (God forbid, how could it be????) WRONG? LOL

i know AAg. a few here think you're doing it singlehandedly. the coalition is definitely larger than one person/neighborhood.

Thanks for your help in making a point that has been the subject of no less than 20 of my posts.

And as for providing Links for Highway6 I am not going to do your research - I know there are links out there, and I know how to get in touch with the people that I need to get in touch with. I know that you think that since I post regularly on this forum I owe you all of the information that I have . . . . guess again sweety.

i like how the guy from the menil spells weslayan incorrectly. makes you wonder how long he's been in houston.

request to AftonAg. are you in charge of ANY group? did you single handedly stop METRO rail in your neighborhood?

Musicman - I assume that you mean the anti Rail Coalition? Have I ever stated that I was "in charge" of any group? The answer is no I am not "in charge" of any group that is against railroading Richmond. Have I ever claimed to have singlehandedly stopped METRO Rail in my neighborhood? The answer is no, I have never made that claim as it would have been ludicrous - not to mention untrue.

Whether or not I am in charge of a group is neither here nor there - I am involved with the group that stopped METRO from trashing Afton Oaks - by the way read the chronic liar this morning - Page B2 - Metro claims they will only destroy 197 MATURE LIVE OAKS in the current plan for the Railroading of Richmond. I will bet one hundred bucks that the actual number is well over 200 if the route ends up as currently proposed. The final count needs to be done about two years after installation - it may take a while to kill some of the old trees off.

The reason I originally responded was I questioned who your interpretation of "WE" was? The make-up of your group.

Your claim was that your group was still concerned about Richmond as a whole, eventhough you had won the "going through AOaks battle"

My reply about the much less vocal presence Metro meeting was meant to imply that, No, Most of you do no longer care.. The core of your group is in fact primarily AOakers only concerned about the welfare of the stretch of Richmond through AOaks.

So, please answer to that.

Who is the WE in your above statement.. yes, the people that run the Mobility Coalition and a few others along Richmond, some biz owners, not in AOaks might still care and still not want rail on their street. But i dont think that you really do, becasue it no longer directly effects you. Your battle is won.

And as for pretending your group is in the majority along Richmond.. Im sorry man.. you're wrong. The majority of your group, a small minority of people on Richmond, got their way and no longer care. Your Mobility Coalition group has 76 signatures on their petition... RichmondRail has letters of support from 100 different organizations including pretty much every neighborhood civic group in the area.

Well then that settles that. I find it hard to believe that you are that naive, but apparently you are. What do you expect me to do provide you with a membership roster complete with names and addresses? Sorry sweetheart but that ain't gonna happen. We have a robust membership, and we know who we are by our list of donators - perhaps even some that you think are for rail . . . . alack poor Yorick.

No Afton... I had posted (#2849) about my previous post (#2825) being two part, and that you only responded (#2847) to the 2nd less important personal part, and ignored the first part which dealt with your group and was a response to one of your previous posts (#2822).

You chose to answer half of what i said and went off out in left field ranting about being an adult and having other things to do and other pointless crap.

You ignored the part where I was responding to the make-up and actions of your group.

I guess thats my fault, for giving you to much to read.

I sent it... I read and realized you were just going to get confused and my original response was never going to be addressed by you anyways.. so i gave up and deleted it.

Well all righty then . . . .

You were at the meeting and I wasn't - so there wasn't much for me to say on the "first part" of your post. It was your observation that the MoCo as it has been called by IHB2 wasnt there in mass and wasn't as vocal. Ok I believe you. Does that mean we are done? Hardly we still have a war chest full of money to spend - and we intend to spend it to keep rail off of Richmond.

I must admit that your last post was even more confusing than some of trae's

the Mobility Coalition (Aftonag's antirail group) ran a full-page ad in the Chron's neighborhood sections yesterday. that had to cost a lot of $$. the timing, a few days before the big METRO public meeting on Monday, indicates the MoCo still has a plan and they're sticking to it.so I don't think they're done yet.besides, the METRO DEIS meetings last week were a poor venue for a vocal protest to get media attention, since METRO provided only old maps/renderings and a few consultants to explain some of the more arcane data in the DEIS.

Well Done IHB2 - I was wondering if anyone was paying attention and obviously you were! You are correct we aren't done yet . . . . . . actually it is just starting to get interesting again - stay tuned film at 11

.

Finally proof that Highway6 is female.

You hardly had a big presence at the Metro meeting last week.. I saw a few familiar faces from your group, and a few pins.. but there was nowhere near the organized vocal anti-richmond presence that there has been in meetings past.

Nor have you been as vocal on here since through Afton Oaks was taken off the table... you only show up in brief spurts now.. not that I mind.

The difference between me and many of the posters on here is that I have a business to run, and real projects to complete - I don't just sit on my but and carp about what's wrong with Houston . . . . I am sure you didn't mind me being away for awhile because frankly you just don't know how to deal with someone that doesn't blindly accept everything you hear or see on the liberal media as gospel.

Sure, they COULD decide to do that. But I can say with near certainty that such a route isn't being studied AT ALL and to change the route to include Richmond west of Cummins would require yet ANOTHER study. At this point, METRO just wants to get the rails in the ground. Trust me, your neighborhood is so far off the table, it's not even in the dining room.

Please. You're too smart to actually still believe in that, so stop trying to sell it here.

Thank you for the compliment - I referred to the ballot language for a reason - to demonstrate that METRO is not above board and honest in their dealings with Houstonians. The anti rail on Richmond coalition is still active, and still against placing rail anywhere on Richmond - You will hear more from us in the very near future regarding the current configuration for the University line.

I recall being chastised severely for stating that if the rail ran through Afton Oaks and there was a stop nearby it would bring an undesirable element to our neighborhood . . . I was also chastised for a comment I made regarding people that had had too much too drink getting off the rail at an AO stop and creating a problem . . . . In browsing some of the recent posts today I saw one where someone mentioned the seats smelling like urine . . . . there was another post that mentioned that another plus for rail was that you could get really drunk and not have to worry about a DUI . . . . given those two posts I rest my case on the undesirable element comment. While an intoxicated train rider wouldn't get a DUI they might get arrested for Public Intoxication. I hope that you are right and the rail does not go through AO - but then I hope it doesn't get put on Richmond anywhere east of Beltway 8.

It's not going through Afton Oaks.

yes I know that is the current configuration but with Metro they may decide to change it once construction starts - after some of the other crap they have pulled how could anyone think they are trying to do what is right for Houston - I have said too many times to count that the anti rail coalition is more than just Afton Oaks but y'all just don't get that - the businesses helped keep the rail from going through Afton Oaks, and AO is still commited to keeping the rail off of Richmond and on Westpark - that was the route approved by the electorate you know - "The Westpark Corridor" remember that?

Afton Oaks propoerty prices will rise with the LRT. The areas around Dallas' [expansive] light rail property prices rose, too, so the same would most likely happen in AO.And thank you.

Trae -Please provide some relevant evidence that the LRT will cause the property values in AO to rise. In Dallas those property values rose because of retail developments, there is absolutely no evidence that the rail had anything to do with the property values in Dallas going up.