Comments for votewojcik.org http://www.votewojcik.org Sun, 22 Apr 2012 01:23:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Note to Historic SW and Folwell neighbors regarding St. Mary’s park by Mary McKie http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/21/note-to-historic-sw-and-folwell-neighbors-regarding-st-marys-park/#comment-16980 Mary McKie Sun, 22 Apr 2012 01:23:21 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1757#comment-16980 Thanks Mike for your support of the park. We use it regularly and love the green space, playground, and interaction with neighbors and clinic visitors. We also like the watertower, but it is the park space that is so valuable. Please keep us posted on what we can do to voice opposition to the proposed changes. Thanks Mike for your support of the park. We use it regularly and love the green space, playground, and interaction with neighbors and clinic visitors. We also like the watertower, but it is the park space that is so valuable. Please keep us posted on what we can do to voice opposition to the proposed changes.

]]> Comment on Note to Historic SW and Folwell neighbors regarding St. Mary’s park by Christie Atwell http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/21/note-to-historic-sw-and-folwell-neighbors-regarding-st-marys-park/#comment-16953 Christie Atwell Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:13:25 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1757#comment-16953 I live behind St. Mary's and just learned of this issue via Facebook. This park is not just a gem to people that live in this neighborhood but I have met clinic visitors there. Families visiting a loved one at St. Mary's have found this park to be nice refuge. What can we do to save it? I live behind St. Mary’s and just learned of this issue via Facebook. This park is not just a gem to people that live in this neighborhood but I have met clinic visitors there. Families visiting a loved one at St. Mary’s have found this park to be nice refuge. What can we do to save it?

]]> Comment on Note to Historic SW and Folwell neighbors regarding St. Mary’s park by Paul Scott, 1140 6th St SW http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/21/note-to-historic-sw-and-folwell-neighbors-regarding-st-marys-park/#comment-16940 Paul Scott, 1140 6th St SW Sat, 21 Apr 2012 19:39:17 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1757#comment-16940 This is a horrible idea. Please oppose this whole heartedly. Also, I love the old watertower. I tell my kids it is where Rapunzel lives and it acts as a neighborhood landmark. This is a horrible idea. Please oppose this whole heartedly. Also, I love the old watertower. I tell my kids it is where Rapunzel lives and it acts as a neighborhood landmark.

]]> Comment on How the new Olmsted County map hurts Rochester by Michael McDonough http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/13/how-the-new-olmsted-county-map-hurts-rochester/#comment-16162 Michael McDonough Sat, 14 Apr 2012 03:59:49 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1707#comment-16162 Great analysis. I think courts should be making these decisions. Great analysis. I think courts should be making these decisions.

]]> Comment on What is affordable housing? by Marty Cormack http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/09/what-is-affordable-housing/#comment-15647 Marty Cormack Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:00:48 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1702#comment-15647 Thanks for concentrating on transportation and energy costs, which are so often overlooked. Thanks for concentrating on transportation and energy costs, which are so often overlooked.

]]> Comment on The future of transit in Rochester by Ray Schmitz http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/04/06/the-future-of-transit-in-rochester/#comment-15248 Ray Schmitz Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:03:40 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1696#comment-15248 Thanks for the plug. Good ideas, I still think that the time frame that you are talking about for a fixed route system will overlap with with technology, that is, the self drive vehicles that google and others are developing should be on the market by then, wouldn't it be great to call and reserve a 2 or 4 passenger vehicle, walk to the corner and there is was and it delivered you to where you needed to be quickly and safely. No expensive rails or other infrastructure needed. Your idea about multipurpose buses is already in place in Europe, no separate school buses there. Thanks for the plug.
Good ideas, I still think that the time frame that you are talking about for a fixed route system will overlap with with technology, that is, the self drive vehicles that google and others are developing should be on the market by then, wouldn’t it be great to call and reserve a 2 or 4 passenger vehicle, walk to the corner and there is was and it delivered you to where you needed to be quickly and safely. No expensive rails or other infrastructure needed.
Your idea about multipurpose buses is already in place in Europe, no separate school buses there.

]]> Comment on Rochester City Lines sues Rochester because they own the transit system by John Charles Wilson http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/02/16/rochester-city-lines-sues-rochester-because-they-own-the-transit-system/#comment-12445 John Charles Wilson Sat, 18 Feb 2012 18:09:34 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1620#comment-12445 I am a transit fanatic who has more than a passing interest in Rochester City Lines (I actually lived there for 7 months in 1988-9 to study its history). The unusual manner in which the City dealt with RCL is what led to the current day problems. In 1966, it was normal and usual for transit to be a city-granted monopoly franchise. No government subsidy was required; it was possible and expected for transit companies to make a profit purely from fares. That is no longer the case for many reasons. Almost all US transit systems were bought out and taken over by local government entities by the 1970s. No transit system today makes a "natural" profit, that is, one purely from fares. Instead of taking over RCL as most cities did to their city bus companies, Rochester kept RCL as a private entity and provided subsidies to keep it going. (In all fairness, many other cities did the same but usually as a short-term stepping-stone to a takeover.) Over the decades, the City started providing RCL with buses and shelters (since the City could get federal funds for it and RCL, as a private entity, couldn't), and exercising more control over fares, routes. schedules. Thus the City has gradually assumed control of Rochester City Lines without a formal takeover. This has led to the ambiguity and a legitimate dispute over whether RCL or the City own the transit system. I am *not* taking RCL's side, or the City's. I am merely saying both sides have a point and it's probably a good thing for it to be finally resolved by a court. There are other aspects of the history of the Holters' bus operations that are hilarious, but I won't get into them here. I am a transit fanatic who has more than a passing interest in Rochester City Lines (I actually lived there for 7 months in 1988-9 to study its history).
The unusual manner in which the City dealt with RCL is what led to the current day problems.
In 1966, it was normal and usual for transit to be a city-granted monopoly franchise. No government subsidy was required; it was possible and expected for transit companies to make a profit purely from fares. That is no longer the case for many reasons. Almost all US transit systems were bought out and taken over by local government entities by the 1970s. No transit system today makes a “natural” profit, that is, one purely from fares.
Instead of taking over RCL as most cities did to their city bus companies, Rochester kept RCL as a private entity and provided subsidies to keep it going. (In all fairness, many other cities did the same but usually as a short-term stepping-stone to a takeover.)
Over the decades, the City started providing RCL with buses and shelters (since the City could get federal funds for it and RCL, as a private entity, couldn’t), and exercising more control over fares, routes. schedules. Thus the City has gradually assumed control of Rochester City Lines without a formal takeover. This has led to the ambiguity and a legitimate dispute over whether RCL or the City own the transit system.
I am *not* taking RCL’s side, or the City’s. I am merely saying both sides have a point and it’s probably a good thing for it to be finally resolved by a court.
There are other aspects of the history of the Holters’ bus operations that are hilarious, but I won’t get into them here.

]]> Comment on Rochester City Lines sues Rochester because they own the transit system by b berditzman http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/02/16/rochester-city-lines-sues-rochester-because-they-own-the-transit-system/#comment-12387 b berditzman Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:01:54 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1620#comment-12387 Dan Holter is a real piece of work. His family has been given an unbelievable gift from the city. It has run RCL for over a generation and, regardless of what he claims, has made a nice profit. How many people would love the opportunity to own a business that has vast majority of it's main expenses (cost of buses) paid for by the city? It gets rent from the city for parking the city owned buses on his property - which looks like a junk yard by they way. Now that he faces competition, rather than leveraging the long term relationship his family has with the city (an very enviable position), he does the opposite - he antagonizes the city that has treated him with such generosity. His actions defy logic. It kind of reminds me of Charlie Sheen's erratic behavior to a lesser degree. He is not just acting like he is entitled, but it's more like an arrogant entitled. Dan Holter is a real piece of work. His family has been given an unbelievable gift from the city. It has run RCL for over a generation and, regardless of what he claims, has made a nice profit. How many people would love the opportunity to own a business that has vast majority of it’s main expenses (cost of buses) paid for by the city? It gets rent from the city for parking the city owned buses on his property – which looks like a junk yard by they way.

Now that he faces competition, rather than leveraging the long term relationship his family has with the city (an very enviable position), he does the opposite – he antagonizes the city that has treated him with such generosity. His actions defy logic. It kind of reminds me of Charlie Sheen’s erratic behavior to a lesser degree. He is not just acting like he is entitled, but it’s more like an arrogant entitled.

]]> Comment on Q & A: Sidewalk snow removal by Patricia Torchia http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/01/31/q-a-sidewalk-snow-removal/#comment-11790 Patricia Torchia Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:58:30 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1585#comment-11790 So you need 3 other "council members" to vote along with you? How can an ordinary citizen such as myself help to 'convince' three (and maybe all) other council members? Thanks, Tish Torchia So you need 3 other “council members” to vote along with you? How can an ordinary citizen such as myself help to ‘convince’ three (and maybe all) other council members?
Thanks,
Tish Torchia

]]> Comment on Q & A: Sidewalk snow removal by mwojcik http://www.votewojcik.org/2012/01/31/q-a-sidewalk-snow-removal/#comment-11717 mwojcik Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:58:13 +0000 http://www.votewojcik.org/?p=1585#comment-11717 There are 7 people on the city council, if four of us vote for something it will become policy. That is why I need 3 more votes. There are 7 people on the city council, if four of us vote for something it will become policy. That is why I need 3 more votes.

]]>