Well, we can't have any dissension now can we? When you are creating a body designed to produce a foregone conclusion it just wouldn't do to add any diversity of thought.

Boyle probably thinks he should be on every subcommittee because the ego cannot be persuaded.

You know, just because you disagree with your peers on everything and manipulate the minority vote to degrees never before seen in this city, does not mean you should be on every darn subcommittee.

Gilles resigned from the TC to make room for Boyle (claimed she was moving out of town) . He served for a few months to legitimize his run for council, as a "Transportation Commissioner". So goes the game playing, credentialism.

Mike wrote:

"Well, we can't have any dissension now can we? When you are creating a body designed to produce a foregone conclusion it just wouldn't do to add any diversity of thought."

You're suffering a flashback to the previous council majority, a not uncommon occurrence for those familiar with their (reign of) tenure. Or is "Mike" merely a contraction of "Mickey"?

Finster

Leaving off Mr. Boyle is a mistake. Haywire thinks that everyone must share his opinions in order to participate.

We should be livid about this folks.

Sugar Hey Robinson does not pull his punches. The pugnacious pugilist will not tolerate any dissent. He wanted Boyle off because he thinks that Boyle will foil his plans to stop HSR. At this point the only thing that will stop HSR at this point is budgetary problems.[Portion removed; see terms of use]

This decision was very much an open book read. Unfortunately, the only guy on the council, who has been right every step of the way regarding expenditures, the budget, and cost overruns........is now being run out of a position that this town needs him to be present! This is purely a political maneuvering, and at a time where politics has got to take a back seat people! Did I just read that we are $3M+ behind in our city's budget???? Stop the petty bickering and get John Boyle, a voice with reason, on this committee!!!

John Boyle and Rich Cline should be plenty busy with the El Camino visioning process. Andy Cohen has to recuse himself from HSR, so that leaves the two who are on the HSR subcommittee. Simple. Why make it so complicated, you conspiracy theorists?

As if a small-town subcommittee has any clout to do anything at all ... get some perspective, people! It's a SUBcommittee!

I didn't realize John Boyle knew a thing about trains and he sure can't be on every single subcommittee. Since his background is in finance (best not to elaborate on that) perhaps he should be fixing the deficit. Where is that voice of reason? (Er, wasn't that Nicholas' slogan? Do I hear an echo?)

different perspective,

Richard Cline is one of the two on the HSR committee. So your argument doesn't quite work.

Menlo Park voted Yes on prop 1A by a large margin (57% to 43%). The rest of the state voted Yes on the proposition. We live in a democracy and the people have spoken rather clearly here. The city council needs to acknowledge that High Speed Rail is needed and desired by their constiuents as well as other Californians. Even though they have had reservations about the system in the past, I hope Mr. Cline and Ms. Fergusson will work to find the best way for the rail to come through Menlo Park now that the public has spoken.

The council's job is to do what is best for the city. Most people in Menlo Park were not aware of the consequences of Prop 1A for the city, but gradually, awareness is going. Our council looks prescient now--in fact, Palo Altans are complaining that their council did not look out for them the way that ours did!

Oh, and Roxie, there already is a train that goes through Menlo Park. HSR would merely duplicate the Caltrain route, so it doesn't help anyone on the peninsula one iota.

It's a huge boondoggle, just exactly what we don't need, particularly not in challenging economic times. I'm concerned that Boyle would have caved to a tiny political constituency to support HSR, so it's good to know that the subcommittee will include members that serve all the residents.

gentle concerned,

People knew what they were voting for, the issue had been discussed in all the newspapers including the Almanac.

I do know about the train that already exists. So to clarify for you: I hope Mr. Cline and Ms. Fergusson will work to find the best way for high speed rail to come through Menlo Park now that the public has spoken. They and others spoke about their reservations regarding HSR before the election, now it is time to listen to the majority.

I am against the HSR as it is too expensive in our time of economic crisis. However, the people have voiced their will. We should negotiate in good faith with the HSR so that construction can be done in a way that will have the least disruption to the residents and businesses closest to the tracks. Lawsuits won't work at this point.

If the anti rail forces really want to stop this they should start another ballot petition requesting postponement of the HSR until California has no annual budget deficits.

I understand the concern by folks who feel litigation does not mix with dialogue. I can't disagree but I feel in this case we are in good hands. I have not heard anyone aside from Cohen oppose the concept of HSR and I have asked them. I think the concerns about what results of HSR in our town are real and we should be aggressive in getting answers.

And let us be honest here. Big Train and litigation go hand in hand and have for more than a century. Big Train also doesn't respond to friendly meetings.

I think we need to see how the subcommittee progresses before we throw a bunch of stones.