METRORail University Line

[RedScare]

so by driving by at 2 in the morning pulling them out and tossing them in a dumpster you would not be doing anything wrong

*joking*

No joke. You would be doing a public service. This applies to ALL bandit signs in public ROW, including political signs, real estate signs, and of course, anti-rail signs. They are at least as bad as grafitti, and should be pulled up.

Pull 'em up in broad daylight. When people confront you, remind them that the law applies to everyone, including them.

Who knows, you might even get to meet AftonAg!

[templehouston]

[<pinch> wake up! God I hope that was only a dream . . . . I believe that as long as Culberson is in Congress he has that seat unless he gives it up, regardless of which party is in power.

If the Republicans lose the House, the committee chairs are no longer Republicans and no new Democratic chair is going to listen to the likes of Culberson. So he can keep his seat on the subcommittee for as long as he wants, but he won't matter nearly as much. He can just warm his seat on the subcommittee and vote no all day long. He does not have a record of working well with the opposition, so I don't see him putting together an effective coalition to "protect Afton Oaks" from the terrors of light rail. I suspect Culberson has been reading the Cook Report and other neutral observers who say the chances are excellent that the Republicans will lose the House. Culberson is reported to have agreed with Metro to wait until December, but he did not wait. Wouldn't you say he's trying to get his veto in before he loses all relevance? Maybe we should be finding out what Lampson thinks (now that Sekula-Gibbs has undercut Wallace). BTW, was the University Line an issue the Republicans considered when they made their informal write-in selection?

[ricco67]

[<pinch> wake up! God I hope that was only a dream . . . . I believe that as long as Culberson is in Congress he has that seat unless he gives it up, regardless of which party is in power.

If the Republicans lose the House, the committee chairs are no longer Republicans and no new Democratic chair is going to listen to the likes of Culberson. So he can keep his seat on the subcommittee for as long as he wants, but he won't matter nearly as much. He can just warm his seat on the subcommittee and vote no all day long. He does not have a record of working well with the opposition, so I don't see him putting together an effective coalition to "protect Afton Oaks" from the terrors of light rail. I suspect Culberson has been reading the Cook Report and other neutral observers who say the chances are excellent that the Republicans will lose the House. Culberson is reported to have agreed with Metro to wait until December, but he did not wait. Wouldn't you say he's trying to get his veto in before he loses all relevance? Maybe we should be finding out what Lampson thinks (now that Sekula-Gibbs has undercut Wallace). BTW, was the University Line an issue the Republicans considered when they made their informal write-in selection?

It could very well be the reason why Metro is waiting for an annoucement (have they announced a date?) on when the proposal will be made.

I never really paid that much attention on who is decided on subcommittees or such, but I think they are selected on seniority on different levels.

Does anyone have any knowledge off hand on what it would take to knock Culberson (short of losing an election) from his losing influence on the subcommittee?

[TheNiche]

It is simple really - thr pro railroders like to cite data that may or may not apply to this case. Property values is a perfect example. You can't provide any verifiable data that will convince me that my property values will go up if Richmond is choked with a 4 year construction project called LTR. You can't provide any real data regarding higher ridership numbers for the Richmond route than the Westpark route. All of that data is speculative. So it does in fact contribute to the argument that more study is required and that maybe Richmond isn't the right place for rail.

Yeah, I am fully aware of the tactics frequently utilized by both sides. That's why, if you go back and read my original response, you'll see that I knock you off your high horse, but also preemptively make a statement to discourage the repetition of the same old stuff that has already been brought up in favor of LRT.

The only point that I have had (and I don't think that you understood this) is that neither side can decisively win the property values argument. And the intention was to keep it from being drug out for pages and pages...but evidently it didn't stop you from doing so.

You do a pretty poor job at endearing yourself to people on the fence, and come across as a self-interested obstructionist. For your own sake, I hope you realize that.

[dp2]

Actually I agree with your analysis of what could be done along that part of Wpark, except for the quotes above - the empty utility lot is also a flood retention area and I imagine there are hoops to jump through to change that to a paved over area, I think part of the L-shaped utility land is within Bellaire, which has zoning laws and an aversion to high-density development, so there may not be as much acreage available as it appears, and the likelihood that the single family residential north of Bissonnet between Edloe and Kirby to Wpark will redevelop into anything other than the pricey townhome and million$ home gentrification that is already well under way seems remote.

But you have laid out a redevelopment/TOD scenario that would still result in less potential ridership and "activity centers" than already exist on Richmond (comparing all of Wpark Shepherd-610, and all of Richmond Shepherd-610). Applying your same TOD scenario to Richmond future growth there blows Wpark away. HGAC data and projections support that.

Flood retention can be dealt with in a number of ways, such as underground facilities used elsewhere in the area. Not that big a hurdle. As for Bellaire, one strategy would be to offer to buy up and convert a rundown problem complex elsewhere in the city in exchange for zoning changes to allow for new TOD multifamily in that L-shaped plot, perhaps with some sort of understanding that they will be upscale, etc. There are plenty of ways to skin a cat.

After studying the area again carefully in the last few weeks, I am increasingly underwhelmed with the claims of Richmond's 'potential'. Take out the Greenway Plaza area office complexes and it becomes inferior to the Washington corridor and likely others. And I'm not comparing Richmond to 'Westpark', I'm comparing Richmond to a hybrid that pulls in both sides of the fwy between Weslayan and Kirby and better serves the Greenway Plaza office complexes. The split platforms in the middle of a 6-lane artery is a horrid design that will slow pedestrian movement and be a negative factor that will drive off some riders. Such a lovely experience standing in the sun in the median at the crosswalks waiting to crosss 5-lanes of traffic (remember the turn lanes) with 3 at your back. In contrast climate-controlled ped corridors that don't involve crossing roads for most patrons and better station location in this area (not constrained by trying to fit into a narrow median) will increase ridership. Perhaps too much emphasis is being placed on this line being a high generator of riders, when in fact its role in long-term planning may be far more of a distributor to destinations. And without zoning it is pretty iffy to put too much faith on any single set of projections, given how just changing a few of the myriad of inputs can produce radically different result (in fact a range of near infinity.)

I'd be willing to wager that a neutral party preparing ridership estimates on the Richmond route and my proposal would find them to be roughly comparable in the short-term, and Richmond inferior by 2025 as more and more rail and express bus feeds this line, IF at least one of the services continues north up Post Oaks and connects with the NW Transit Center. This and the Main St. lines are going to be the primary ones for distributing transit users to the major employment centers, and THAT should be the primary factor in its route design. Other areas, such as Washington, Harrisburg, North, and west of 610 can focus more on residential TOD.

BTW, we shouldn't let the perceived negatives of routing down or along a freeway completely rule it out in some limited cases. Calgary's LRT has 230,000 riders daily on just 3 routes, but much (the majority?) of it is inside the median of expressways. However, these stations are served with grade-separated pedestrian connections, a key difference with locating in the median of Richmond. So a freeway isn't a barrier that dooms LRT, it just is a negative that can reduce the TOD effectiveness of stations. And again, not every section of the University line has to focus on high-density residential or cute mixed-use centers. They aren't necessarily an end to themselves, but simply options for increasing density and ridership.

this "exaggeration" as you call it is based on multiple conversations over the last 18 months with METRO planners, who admit maintaining current vehicular mobility and handling the future increased traffic from the Tollway at the nexus of the 610 feeder, Wpark, the 59 HOV entrance, and the Tollway exit while integrating LRT is a "challenge," who reiterated to me on July 18 that in fact crossing arms and lights would be a requirement if LRT has to turn across Wpark to the tunnel. If you have talked with them and they told you something different please let us know. Any "challenge" can be overcome, but even you allow for added congestion, which directly contradicts METRO's pledge to not reduce general mobility. And my posts on the UC LRT have dealt with the proposals that METRO has talked about publicly, not what they haven't, so I can't debate diesel trains with you b/c METRO says they're going to be electric.

A slight increase in congestion in a single intersection doesn't in itself reduce general mobility, but rather is just one factor to use in assessing the project as a whole. Funny how when Metro decides to push one route then the alternatives become "Sooooooo inferior" and beset with "huge challenges." But should Metro change its mind, those problems on the new preferred route shift to being simply "A few issues our engineers will adjust for." Going back to the mid-street platforms (spread out over several blocks in some cases) I appreciate the ingenuity of trying to reduce edge takings, costs, and maintain the current number of through lanes, but the end result is still a somewhat, to employ a French phrase, half-assed rail line. It meets (barely) the criteria and restraints placed upon them in this corridor, but if Culberson wants to move the goalposts, let him help find a way to pay for it and let's do this right like it should have been done.

I'm also suggesting electric LRT, but Metro has put forth the idea of using diesel light-rail on the University Line as a cost-saving measure. Any shift from that is a recent change.

Edited August 21, 2006 by dp2

[AftonAg]

Yeah, I am fully aware of the tactics frequently utilized by both sides. That's why, if you go back and read my original response, you'll see that I knock you off your high horse, but also preemptively make a statement to discourage the repetition of the same old stuff that has already been brought up in favor of LRT.

How very arrogant of you niche, But the I've come to expect tha from you. I am just disappointed that everyone on this post hasn't made studying your discourses a priority.

The only point that I have had (and I don't think that you understood this) is that neither side can decisively win the property values argument. And the intention was to keep it from being drug out for pages and pages...but evidently it didn't stop you from doing so.

Of course if there is no way for the Niche to overcome a particular argument then the argument must be discarded as invalid. I understood perfectly, and I still understand, I will understand tomorrow, If you can't win you are going to take your argument and go home.

You do a pretty poor job at endearing yourself to people on the fence, and come across as a self-interested obstructionist. For your own sake, I hope you realize that.

In your (always less than humble) opinion. Unlike you I don't post on this forum to endear anyone, I post on hear to offer the Afton Oaks MAJORITY viewpoint. You on the otherhand seem to post on hear mainly so that you can feel superior to the other posters. It may work with some, but it does not work with me. It indicates a serious case of insecurity.

No joke. You would be doing a public service. This applies to ALL bandit signs in public ROW, including political signs, real estate signs, and of course, anti-rail signs. They are at least as bad as grafitti, and should be pulled up.

Pull 'em up in broad daylight. When people confront you, remind them that the law applies to everyone, including them.

Who knows, you might even get to meet AftonAg!

I would suggest that you follow Red's advice regarding the signs, whatever you do please forget about going through the proper channels, contacting the Police, or the homeowners association. It might even make a good defense - "redscare told me it would be a public service", call Eye Witless news and have them on the scene for your heroic effort. But alas, you probably won't get to meet me, I work for a living.

Edited August 21, 2006 by AftonAg

[TheNiche]

Of course if there is no way for the Niche to overcome a particular argument then the argument must be discarded as invalid. I understood perfectly, and I still understand, I will understand tomorrow, If you can't win you are going to take your argument and go home.

In your (always less than humble) opinion. Unlike you I don't post on this forum to endear anyone, I post on hear to offer the Afton Oaks MAJORITY viewpoint. You on the otherhand seem to post on hear mainly so that you can feel superior to the other posters. It may work with some, but it does not work with me. It indicates a serious case of insecurity.

So if I am to understand you correctly, and you "post on hear to offer the Afton Oaks MAJORITY viewpoint", there must be an underlying reason for doing so. Could it be a persuasive motive? Based upon your consistent willingness to go back and forth over the issue for hours on end, I seriously doubt that your only intention is to deliver a message on behalf of your neighbors. You are more than a simple messenger boy. To that end, you will find that developing a raport with your fellow HAIFers will get you much further than will bickering over the same details time and time again.

Despite your claims to the contrary, I still don't believe that you fully grasp what I've been trying to tell you...or if you do, you're trying to distort what I've said in order to convince yourself of your own argumentative dominance. If that's perceived by you as an arrogant statement for me to make, then so be it. But I can think of none other than these two explanations for your poor responses...unless of course you're purposefully distorting things in order to persuade by confusion. But that would require malicious intent, and I'm not about to make that kind of an accusation.

I've told other people to go back and reference my previous posts, and now it is your turn to do the same.

Edited August 21, 2006 by TheNiche

[AftonAg]

[<pinch> wake up! God I hope that was only a dream . . . . I believe that as long as Culberson is in Congress he has that seat unless he gives it up, regardless of which party is in power.

If the Republicans lose the House, the committee chairs are no longer Republicans and no new Democratic chair is going to listen to the likes of Culberson.

I beg to differ on that point. In congress, regardless of which party is in control, Representatives try to deliver the maximum federal dollars back to their districts. If a Representative on a committee says to his fellow committee members that his constituency does not want funding for a project, or that he is against the project, that means more $$$$ for the other committee members districts. Do you really believe that the other representatives will decide to give funding to a project that a representative on that committee does not want funded, when it means more money for the rest of the committee members to send to their districts? Historically it doesn't happen that way.

Maybe we should be finding out what Lampson thinks (now that Sekula-Gibbs has undercut Wallace). BTW, was the University Line an issue the Republicans considered when they made their informal write-in selection?

Since the decision to back Sekula-Gibbs was made in a well publicized closed door session I don't know what issues the Republicans considered, and anyone that wasn't in the session can only speculate what the deciding factor was on choosing to back her over Wallace. I also think the media is a little premature in writing off the Republican chances in that district, especially if Wallce pulls out and there is only one candidate.

[houstonmacbro]

does politics ALWAYS have to be so partisan?!? why can't people do stuff because it serves the best interest of the city (republican, democrat, green, independent or otherwise) or districts they serve?

after all, the president of the united states is not the president for the republicans in this nation. he is OUR president regardless of political affiliation.

what happened to that line of thinking?

[TheNiche]

what happened to that line of thinking?

It's a generational thing.

[AftonAg]

A sign placed on city ROW is called a bandit sign. They are illegal.

I stopped attending any meeting not sponsered by METRO. They are wholly one-sided "preach to the choir" rants that offers no "better way" regardless of your groups slogan.

Sure took you a long time to answer that question owl, but thanks for responding. I am still surprised, I would think you want to go to that meeting with all of your neighbors that are pro-rail and make a big stink. You could even call in Eye Witless news and get it on the record that there are so many of you in Afton Oaks that are pro-rail and that you want Afton Oaks to acknowledge that there are in fact pro-railroaders in the neighborhood. I think that the "silent pro-railroaders" in Afton Oaks should be heard already.

As for that sign in the Newcastle median if it is illegal why aren't you on the phone to have those bandit signs removed?

[houstonmacbro]

It's a generational thing.

older generation? or younger?

i am 40 and although not a republican, i am not totally against everything they do, simply because they are republican.

it seems like political divisions are weakening this country as opposed to strengthening it.

afterall, the freeways are clogged with republicans, dems, and others of every political stripe.

i don't care who does something, as long as something gets done to alleviate it.

[RedScare]

I would suggest that you follow Red's advice regarding the signs, whatever you do please forget about going through the proper channels, contacting the Police, or the homeowners association. It might even make a good defense - "redscare told me it would be a public service", call Eye Witless news and have them on the scene for your heroic effort. But alas, you probably won't get to meet me, I work for a living.

Here's a nice little article from NPR about collecting bandit signs from PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY that aired just a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.kuhf.org/site/News2?JServSessio...ws_iv_ctrl=1521

I may go yank those signs myself. Can you imagine the fun of watching an Afton Oaks homeowner call the police, only to receive a $500 citation for his efforts?

[AftonAg]

It's a generational thing.

It surely is a generational thing. When Jimmy Carter was President - he was MY president, as was Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and now "W". I may not agree with a President but I have always respected the office.

Regarding the post on Culberson and how things will work on the committee - do the research - it's historical fact, it has been that way for many years in both houses, and it is also a means of getting re-elected by taking care of the constituency. To make it a Democrat versus Republican thing is just plain wrong, it is pervasive in both houses.

Here's a nice little article from NPR about collecting bandit signs from PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY that aired just a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.kuhf.org/site/News2?JServSessio...ws_iv_ctrl=1521

I may go yank those signs myself. Can you imagine the fun of watching an Afton Oaks homeowner call the police, only to receive a $500 citation for his efforts?

Go for it Red but do it in broad daylight. Skulking around at 2:00 am could be dangerous, you might be mistaken for a criminal. I would also be absolutely sure that you don't trespass, as that is also a crime, and property owners have a right to protect their property. I find it amusing that you want to go create a conflict in an attempt to garner public sympathy for your cause - That sounds pretty desparate to me.

[TheNiche]

older generation? or younger?

i am 40 and although not a republican, i am not totally against everything they do, simply because they are republican.

it seems like political divisions are weakening this country as opposed to strengthening it.

afterall, the freeways are clogged with republicans, dems, and others of every political stripe.

i don't care who does something, as long as something gets done to alleviate it.

Boomers, if I may make a sweeping generalization that will by no means apply to every single one of them.

According to arguments from the book Generations, they're disproportionately comprised of idealists, passionate about their individual political stances. They're also a pluralistically dominant group within American society, control a massive share of our aggregate wealth, and are very politically active compared to other generations, Gen X in particular.

Because they so easily get worked up about things and have so much wealth, you'll notice that the media do their best to stir up controversy. There is even kind of a media infrastructure built around them to support the partisan tendencies. Rush Limbaugh is a good example, but certainly not the only one. Compare the media of today with the media from when the Silent Generation ruled the world. Big differences...but the differences seem cyclical. Throughout American history, various idealistic generations have caused similar shifts in the way that media handles news. You can even go back to Revolutionary days following the cyclical patterns. Ben Franklin's was an idealist generation too.

[bachanon]

just thought i'd poke my head in this thread and see if you guys are still up to it...............yup, still goin' round and round like a dog chasin' its own tail. i'm just giving you guys a hard time. the discussion in this thread has been very informative and entertaining.

btw, i will be grabbing anti-rail signs (without trespassing) every chance i get.

Boomers, if I may make a sweeping generalization that will by no means apply to every single one of them.

According to arguments from the book Generations, they're disproportionately comprised of idealists, passionate about their individual political stances. They're also a pluralistically dominant group within American society, control a massive share of our aggregate wealth, and are very politically active compared to other generations, Gen X in particular.

Because they so easily get worked up about things and have so much wealth, you'll notice that the media do their best to stir up controversy. There is even kind of a media infrastructure built around them to support the partisan tendencies. Rush Limbaugh is a good example, but certainly not the only one. Compare the media of today with the media from when the Silent Generation ruled the world. Big differences...but the differences seem cyclical. Throughout American history, various idealistic generations have caused similar shifts in the way that media handles news. You can even go back to Revolutionary days following the cyclical patterns. Ben Franklin's was an idealist generation too.

are you referring to Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069?

[TheNiche]

are you referring to Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069?

Written by William Strauss and Neil Howe. I don't recall the 1584 to 2069 part of the title, but that's probably the same one.

[bachanon]

yes, that would be the authors. it happens to be on my amazon wishlist. i look forward to reading it.

Edited August 21, 2006 by bachanon

[wakester]

I like how Afton Oaks residents talk about LRT "spliting the neighborhood in half". Wouldn't a 6 lane major road do that? I would let my kids cross a LRT line but not a road like Richmond.

[zaphod]

I like how Afton Oaks residents talk about LRT "spliting the neighborhood in half". Wouldn't a 6 lane major road do that? I would let my kids cross a LRT line but not a road like Richmond.

i though afton oaks was nearly all north of richmond.not exactly half :

[Trae]

Let's take a break.

[AftonAg]

i though afton oaks was nearly all north of richmond.not exactly half :

Potatoe - Potato - the line on Richmond would divide the neighborhood further as it would make ingress / egress more difficult on both sides, but particularly on the south side of Richmond. The don't have as many options.

just thought i'd poke my head in this thread and see if you guys are still up to it...............yup, still goin' round and round like a dog chasin' its own tail. i'm just giving you guys a hard time. the discussion in this thread has been very informative and entertaining.

btw, i will be grabbing anti-rail signs (without trespassing) every chance i get.

are you referring to Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069?

now now bachanon - as I told Red be careful - some of those anti railroaders are just plain crazy. I would hate to read about any of my HAIF friends (Pro or anti) getting in trouble, or worse yet, injured over some stupid signs.

[aftowl]

As for that sign in the Newcastle median if it is illegal why aren't you on the phone to have those bandit signs removed?

AftonAg may want to have his leaders bone up on what's legal when posting signs so his sheeple don't get their collective butt any deeper in a crack than it already is.

To report bandit signs by phone, call 713.535.7800.

http://www.houstontx.gov/council/g/alerts/illegalsigns.html gives you the instructions to fill out the Sign Investigation and Complaint Form and where to email them. Make sure you have the correct address of the home the sign is placed in front of and the exact wording on the sign.

In addition, I encourage everyone to pick up a few of those Richmond signs placed on city ROW. Be sure if you confiscate them, dispose of them in a legal fashion.

Anyone have contacts at 2, 11, 13 or FOX? I think it would be informative to show the disregard of city ordinances by a few miss-guided Afton Oaks residents.

Edited August 21, 2006 by aftowl

[aftowl]

Does anyone have any knowledge off hand on what it would take to knock Culberson (short of losing an election) from his losing influence on the subcommittee?

All it will take is for House Democrats to win a majority in November. Culberson will be relegated to minority status and be as powerless as the Democrats are at present. The new chair of the transportation sub-committee would probably be Dave Obey, D-Wisconsin-depending on rotation. Nancy Pelosi would have final word as Speaker of the House.

[AftonAg]

AftonAg may want to have his leaders bone up on what's legal when posting signs so his sheeple don't get their collective butt any deeper in a crack than it already is.

To report bandit signs by phone, call 713.535.7800.

http://www.houstontx.gov/council/g/alerts/illegalsigns.html gives you the instructions to fill out the Sign Investigation and Complaint Form and where to email them. Make sure you have the correct address of the home the sign is placed in front of and the exact wording on the sign.

In addition, I encourage everyone to pick up a few of those Richmond signs placed on city ROW. Be sure if you confiscate them, dispose of them in a legal fashion.

Anyone have contacts at 2, 11, 13 or FOX? I think it would be informative to show the disregard of city ordinances by a few miss-guided Afton Oaks residents.

Owl I have to hand it to you - you have fooled the majority of the people on the forum. That the MAJORITY of Afton Oaks residents are against railroading Richmond, and have made their position known hardly makes us SHEEPLE, no you see sheeple tend to just follow the wishes of the majority which is exactly what you have done on this forum. The meeting that you missed last Thursday was in fact an Afton Oaks neighborhood meeting. Were you truly a resident you would have known about it and answered my question easily the first time it was posed, only after asking you many times did you try to provide an answer and a lame one at that. The purpose of that meeting was to poll residents of Afton Oaks on their preference for Rail or against Rail on Richmond - The Perfect Venue for you to state your case, and see how many pro rail people really live in Afton Oaks. You sir are a fraud.

[aftowl]

AftonAg:

I've been clear since I began posting that in effect, you as well as your group miss the interconnectedness of everything about you.Your lack of knowledge of your surroundings-no speed bumps in Afton Oaks?; Highstreet is a bridge or is it a multi-million dollar, high density development facing Kettering?; planting signs on city ROW is OK?- informs us that you really are unaware of your surroundings or simply don't care. Niche took the words right out of my mouth:

You do a pretty poor job at endearing yourself to people on the fence, and come across as a self-interested obstructionist. For your own sake, I hope you realize that.

Is it any wonder why pro-rail residents have given up on your "Better Way" meetings which have shown no "Way" at all?

[AftonAg]

AftonAg:

I've been clear since I began posting that in effect, you as well as your group miss the interconnectedness of everything about you.Your lack of knowledge of your surroundings-no speed bumps in Afton Oaks?; Highstreet is a bridge or is it a multi-million dollar, high density development facing Kettering?; planting signs on city ROW is OK?- informs us that you really are unaware of your surroundings or simply don't care. Niche took the words right out of my mouth:

Is it any wonder why pro-rail residents have given up on your "Better Way" meetings which have shown no "Way" at all?

Note Aftowl does not refute my allegation that he is not a resident of Afton Oaks. Has anyone seen any posts from Nmainguy lately? Hmmmmm

[ricco67]

Note Aftowl does not refute my allegation that he is not a resident of Afton Oaks. Has anyone seen any posts from Nmainguy lately? Hmmmmm

that's ok. we feel the same way when you overlook our points or questions.

you'll get used to it.

[Highway6]

This thread has gotten kinda stale lately... and its going to stay that way until Metro announces something new.

Every morning i check the Houston section in the Chronicle and Metro Solutions page... when are they going to announce a new date for when they plan to announce their position...

[templehouston]

Every morning i check the Houston section in the Chronicle and Metro Solutions page... when are they going to announce a new date for when they plan to announce their position...

Good question. Does anyone know when they must make an announcement? I don't mean a deadline set arbitrarily by Culberson for his own benefit, but is there a legitimate deadline for submitting plans for obtaining funding approval? From what I recall, they did not need to do anything before December.