Rail, Yes for now, Part 3

[adamsx2_...@comcast.net]

Oh Boy. Now the other side of the ticket is suggesting a $5 tunnel fee. Mr Romer, looks like you were beat to the punch with your bill, whatever it may be. Let me guess,,,,more $ to fix the situation? At least the Colorado legislature is a little bi-partisan here. The $40M to be raised??? How long will that take to pay for alternate transportation up I70? 3, 5, or even 10 years? Maybe 20 or more? Several other posters and I have offered plausible solutions without raising taxes in the state. They would even be easy to institute and have a working plan for the future that "could" incorporate the new transportation modes suggested in the forum,,,,,,,at a later date after adequate planning. Why long term planning? Look as some of the unchecked growth here in the state. Another? Take a look at Colorado Springs. They are just now getting their transportation problems worked on (not resolved). In the 70's the place was a nightmare to drive through---it still is. Now, wit
h the $5 toll through the tunnel. I would assert that a lot of those day-trippers to Breck, Keystone, and Copper, will not go there. They'll just stop at Loveland. Hey, you Loveland hounds, think of the lift lines. Copper will have to rely on vacation packages. Breck will get their visitors via 285. Think of the traffic through Baily and the problems with Crow Hill. Then the lift lines close. This will create something similar to letting out all traffic from the Pepsi Center,,,,at one time. All you "ski-pole over the head" people. Sound in!

[adamsx2_...@comcast.net]