April Open Thread


The April 2011 open thread

To celebrate the first day of April, I’m proud to announce that the editorial staff of Portland Transport has decided to confirm that (as certain skeptics have long suspected), we really are railfans. As such, we’ve decided to rename this blog Portland Trainspot, and our new mission will be the posting of pictures of MAX, WES, and Streetcar rolling stock. To start off our new mission, here is a picture of cars 101 and 240, taken at Beaverton Transit Center (and ruthlessly cribbed from Wikipedia).

800px-Beaverton_Transit_Center_MAX_Trains_2009-05-30.jpg

Getting back to reality, a few other notes:

But of course, this is the open thread, so feel free to talk about anything transit-related that you like.


67 responses to “April Open Thread”

  1. Aww, gee, and here I was working up this whole “Returned high-speed rail funds from Florida to be used to build CRC”, and I even had a concept thrown together for “The new CRC high-speed rail component will feature an innovative new technology called Bus-Serviced Rail (BSRail) which will travel at high-speeds on rubber tires, allowing high-speed service to share conventional auto lanes”. GE was to develop the new power source. Check out the prototype.

    Oh well, there’s always next year.

  2. When I was at college the local bus operator was running an experiment to provide wireless internet aboard the buses. It wasn’t super fast, but I still worked all right, and I think that could encourage some people to switch to transit.

    Regarding trolleybuses, many buses are equipped with significant “off-wire” capability. This is mainly useful in allowing buses to detour around and obstacle, but they could also be used to make quick excursions into neighborhoods without putting up ugly overhead wires on side streets. They could reconnect to the wires once back on the major roads.

  3. I tend to agree with SP Red Electric that electric trolley busses are a good idea (anyone else find the irony in his name?), but I think McFarlane may be right. Advancements in battery and hydrogen fuel cell technology are going to make trolleys impractical unless your city already has the infrastructure. It doesn’t make sense to build an extensive trolley network this late in the game.

    http://lamodeverte.wordpress.com/2010/12/14/first-hydrogen-bus-launched-on-londons-streets/

  4. Maybe they can get that Chinese straddle-bus thingy to operate at high speed, that way it can simply ride over the traffic.

    Of course, and I think I’ve posted this one before, there’s this exciting new triple-decker bus from London, which employs novel technology (indistinguishable from magic, as Clarke once observed) for running in narrow rights-of-way; and some promising biological-based bus technology from Japan.

    And from Canada, the latest in bus livery and operator fashion; Al would look stylin’ in one of these, I think.

  5. If McFarlane is right about advances in self-contained electric/hydrogen technologies, then the same argument would hold regarding many of the claimed environmental benefits of rail. The infrastructure costs/payback times for trolley buses are much lower than those for rail systems.

    I don’t think it’s too late to get serious about using trolley bus systems for some of the most productive bus routes. Think the 14, (at least) the Jackson Park end of the 8, the 4, 15, etc.

    One operational restriction of trolley buses is that their maximum operating speeds are pretty low – generally in the 40 to 45 area – about the same as streetcar. So they’re really not appropriate on streets with speed limits more than about 35 mph.

  6. Calgary’s CTrain is turning 30 this May. While this anniversary will no doubt be met with fanfare, it is also an opportunity to examine the performance of the system. Has the CTrain delivered value for money? More importantly, does expanding the CTrain make sense for the City? Sadly, the answer to both questions is no.

    [Moderator: Copyrighted article posted in entirety removed; click the link below to read — ES]

    http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/3704

  7. AL:

    Please, if you’re going to clip and paste an article here, at least credit the author. I know you provided the link, but that’s not the same as giving credit. If I hadn’t clicked through, I would have assumed you wrote it.

    I won’t comment on the content of this article since it was written by a former Cascade Policy Institute “associate” and they have a tendency (IMO) of twisting facts to fit a predetermined political agenda. Of course, they’re entitled to their opinions, but for me, they have zero credibilty.

  8. Al,

    The group you linked to appears to be a pro-economic growth think-tank from Alberta. I wouldn’t imagine that you would agree with their views on your pay and benefits…

  9. I’m no fan of cascade, but to discount every piece of information about a subject because of its originator is a sign of a very closed mind.

  10. The C-Train system in Calgary is considered one of the most successful North American LRTs; it gets about twice the ridership of MAX in a city about half the size of Portland. Like MAX, its a “cheap” design–with unmanned, spartan stations, surface running in an exclusive right-of-way outside of downtown, and exclusive-lane-on-the-street running downtown along 7th avenue. (And relevant to other discussion here, a downtown tunnel is planned, albeit a far shorter one than the RQ-Goose Hollow idea discussed and dismissed in the HCT plan).

    The secret to its success?

    • Few freeways in the city, and expensive parking downtown.
    • Rights-of-way acquired by city planners long ago, before the land was developed and expensivel
    • Under Alberta law, large cities can annex and swallow up their suburbs, thus giving the city of Calgary even more power at regional planning than Metro enjoys here

    C-Train is actually running into significant capacity issues–a big difference from TriMet, where the limiting factor on MAX service is the ability to hire and pay for operators. But their secret isn’t in transit agency management, but in planning foresight and less competitive threat from the automobile. Driving into downtown Calgary flat-out sucks–an ironic state of affairs when you consider that the city’s economy is dominated by petroleum production.

    Speaking as moderator, my comments on the proprietary of posting articles wholesale is noted above–in general, please don’t do it. (If the article is published under a Creative Commons or other free/copyleft license, and you give adequate attribution, OK; otherwise, please limit yourself to small exceprts).

    Taking off the moderator hat and speaking on the topic–I would have to agree with Aaron that the author of the cited article is hostile to public transit, and seems to be pulling the old trick of faking solidarity with poor bus riders in order to oppose mass transit. The goal is not better service for the poor, or better wages and working conditions for transit employees–but lower public expenditures on transit, period. Trust me–were there no light rail to oppose, his support for bus/BRT would evaporate.

    At any rate, Calgary already enjoys extensive bus service in addition to its light rail network.

  11. To respond to your Club Orlov link–the leeches aren’t the ones wanting to build light rail. Some projects are better than others, obviously, but LRT and other capital-intensive transit infrastructure frequently service a legitimate public purpose.

    The leeches are the ones wanting to defund transit altogether, so they can have lower tax bills; and who have been, for the past decade or so, demanding that society engage in a race to the bottom as a condition for not relocating industry elsewhere. The leeches are the ones selling a diminishing resource (petroleum products) at higher and higher prices, and then opposing any sort of infrastructure improvement which might reduce dependence on their products. The leeches are the ones who have been impoverishing your neighbors, and then demanding that you accept poverty as well out of fairness. The leeches are the ones that have our kids fighting God-knows-where for God-knows-why. The leeches are the one out there suggesting that a significant fraction of the nation’s population are not “real Americans”, in order to justify their neglect.

    The light-rail financing game, such as it exists, is small potatoes, Al. Big money isn’t interested in public transit, Al–it instead opposes it. In this case, the enemy of your enemy is decidedly NOT your friend.

  12. Well I don’t buy the theory that all “free market” theories are the enemy of the people, sorry.

    Light rail boondoggle funding is an affront to every single rider in our “world class” transit system who has to suffer overcrowding and cut services so they can put in this sort of unnecessary silliness.

    The feds themselves are nothing more than a funnel in which to take the peoples tax money and put it into the hands of the corporations.

    Government is now functioning as part of the corporate culture, it should be obvious to all of you!

  13. AL:

    I’m far from closed-minded. In fact, I agree with you that LO streetcar through Dunthorpe and its super-low-density landscape is a really bad idea, but my opinion is from a legitimate land-use planning standpoint, not an “all-government-spending-on-rail-is-bad” standpoint.

    CPI is an Ayn Rand wannabe think tank that is very clear about its anti-government stance on many issues. I can guess what they’re going to say before I even read their article, and since I think they’re wrong on just about everything, I can (and do) dimiss them. That doesn’t mean I won’t read their articles or hear what they have to say, THAT would be closed-minded. I just don’t agree with them, period. It’s a difference of opinion, that’s all.

  14. al m: The feds themselves are nothing more than a funnel in which to take the peoples tax money and put it into the hands of the corporations.

    Government is now functioning as part of the corporate culture, it should be obvious to all of you!

    It is obvious. Believe me.

    I’m not at all exaggerating when I say I’m fearful for the future of this country.

  15. CPI is an Ayn Rand wannabe think tank that is very clear about its anti-government stance on many issues. I can guess what they’re going to say before I even read their article, and since I think they’re wrong on just about everything, I can (and do) dimiss them.

    ~~~>OK, I can accept that explanation. Personally, I can’t stand John Charles, but occasionally he does make sense!

    I’m not at all exaggerating when I say I’m fearful for the future of this country.

    ~~~> And you’d be right!

  16. AL said: “OK, I can accept that explanation. Personally, I can’t stand John Charles, but occasionally he does make sense!”

    LOL… Well, even a broken watch is correct twice a day. But I still read his stuff out of curiosity…. kinda like slowing down to see the crash on the other side of the road.

  17. Just a reminder that our rules prohibit attacking personalities rather than specific statements/assertions/conclusions, etc, whether they come from John Charles, Neil McFarlane, Al, or even me. :-)

  18. But I still read his stuff out of curiosity….

    ~~~>Well my opinions are mine, you can take em or leave me. I’m ok either way.
    I don’t seek approval, anybody that knows me is well aware of that.

    I have very strong opinions on many topics and pretty much have no fear in expressing them.

    It’s gotten me into hot water more than a few times, but I’m still out here blogging!

  19. ??? Al, I was talking about CPI’s stuff, not yours. Of course we all have strong opinions or we wouldn’t be online sharing them. But just because I’m usually 180 degrees away from anything John Charles says, doesn’t mean he’s a bad person necessarily (not knowing him personally, I can’t say one way or the other). It’s just that his policy positions are flawed. In my opinion, of course.

  20. Any comments on the first bullet point?

    http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2011/03/crime_on_portland-area_light_r.html

    20,139 verbal warnings to fare cheats and issued 5,102 citations

    Ratio need to be more like 15,000 citations imo.

    I am also blown away by how many TriMet exclusions there are (3,000+).

    Why is it so difficult for people to behave in public? How difficult is it to sit or stand respectfully? None at all.

    3,000 people is a small city, and TriMet issues that many exclusions? Good for them for handing out exclusions for bad behavior. Transit’s not a toy.

    Now, if TriMet would just hire more fare inspectors which it looks like it won’t.

  21. Does “verbal warnings” include forgiving riders who have a “good excuse” for being in violation (“the fare machine at the Elmonica stop is broken”)? Or is there another group of riders who didn’t possess valid fare but were excused by fare inspectors, and the “warning” class is for those with neither proof of fare or a good reason why, but who the inspectors declined to issue a citation?

  22. They are for fare violations:

    https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtsiMKlWupv0dDdLdUVsMkN1WlJmbl9iYnN3VzFJc1E&hl=en&ndplr=1#gid=0

    Even if one fare machine is broken, many stops have more than one machine. That excuse alone would not account for the major gap between citations and verbal warnings. It’s a partial excuse.

    TriMet needs to do better for maintaining its machines, but no way are they accounting for 20,000 verbal warnings (yes, 20,000!) being stopped by fare inspectors.

  23. Verbal warnings are just that, verbal warnings. I have known people who have received a verbal warning for not having a valid fare (knowingly).

    Even if one fare machine is broken, many stops have more than one machine. That excuse alone would not account for the major gap between citations and verbal warnings. It’s a partial excuse, really.

    TriMet needs to do better for maintaining its machines, but no way are they accounting for 20,000 verbal warnings (yes, 20,000!) being stopped by fare inspectors.

    It’s safe to assume “verbal warnings” include a wide range of circumstances, but many are people who simply do not have fare at all. I don’t need to know more about fare evasion methodology — we see it everyday.

    I believe in fare 100% of the time assuming TriMet actually checks people’s fare and has security on its trains, which they are not. I am considering not purchasing MAX fare as a means of protest to TriMet’s lacking enforcement, and I encourage other people to do the same until TriMet wakes up.

    Enough people do it and maybe TriMet will realize that people are NOT honest and will take advantage of a situation if given the opportunity. They can take the boarding rides and the lost revenue, and I’ll pad my wallet.

    A little civil disobedience here and there is a good thing.

    PS: The statistics for warning and fare evaders is understated. Fare cheats simply see when a fare inspector is on the train and get off at the next stop to avoid them.

    I’d put the fare evasion problem on MAX much higher than these numbers.

    https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtsiMKlWupv0dDdLdUVsMkN1WlJmbl9iYnN3VzFJc1E&hl=en&ndplr=1#gid=0

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/portlandafoot/5516196562/

  24. Fare less square needs to go!
    Bring back the short hopper tickets!
    Pleading poverty and handing out service for free, well, it is typical for Trimet I guess.

  25. Bring back the short hopper tickets!

    Agreed on that one. TriMet’s fare policy is punitive to intra-city movement.

  26. What happens if someone says “I have an annual pass from my employer but I must have left it at home.”, and the inspector believes them or decides to give them a break? That’s the kind of that might be a warning, but had it been a citation money could have been wasted after it was proven that they really did have a pass in their name.

  27. Bring back the short hopper tickets!

    I’d love it. It’s not worth $2.05 to skip 15 blocks on NW 23rd, for example. Once I wait for the bus it takes almost as long as just walking.

  28. I think the ticket machines have got to go! They are just magnets for vandalism and never really worked all that well even without vandals around. Everyone should know how to buy a book of tickets and if someone were really in a dire emergency, they could just buy a ticket from someone else! And there are enough quickie marts around, couldn’t they sell tickets, too?

  29. GregT Says: “I think the ticket machines have got to go! They are just magnets for vandalism and never really worked all that well even without vandals around. Everyone should know how to buy a book of tickets and if someone were really in a dire emergency, they could just buy a ticket from someone else! And there are enough quickie marts around, couldn’t they sell tickets, too?”

    Magnets for vandalism? Every sign and bus shelter and blank wall in the city is a magnet for vandalism. You can’t get rid of things because they MIGHT be vandalized at some point. The better solution would be to catch the vandals and make them (or their parents) actually PAY to repair the damage they caused instead of just slapping them on the wrist.

    I agree that the ticket machines are prone to malfunction, but you can’t just get rid of them. They can either be replaced with more reliable (and hopefully simpler) models or Trimet can do a better job of maintenance. But going up to complete strangers and asking them to buy a ticket (which means opening up your wallet or purse and flashing lots of cash…. THEN expecting the seller or buyer to have correct change) is not only ludicrous, it’s dangerous.

  30. It would be interesting to see a report how much the ticket machines cost to buy, how much they cost to run, how much maintenance costs on them and how much each one is actually being utilized. Then go from there with my idea of scrapping them altogether.

  31. If you’re talking about scrapping ticket machines because of the high cost, why not consider going completely fare-free for the entire Trimet system. No ticket machines or validators to buy, repair and maintain, no fare inspectors, no time wasted at bus stops while people fish around for exact change. All buses could load and unload through both doors, speeding up service.

    I know it’s been proposed before, but I wonder how much all of the above would add up to, not just in equipment costs, but also in efficiency gains. Then what percentage of fares actually go towards fuel costs and driver salaries, etc. I know that fares don’t come anywhere close to funding the entire operating budget, so I would be for increasing Trimet’s regional tax to cover those funds lost from fare collection, keeping in mind that millions would be saved as a result. It would probably be a tough sell politically, but I’d be interested to see how much Trimet’s tax would need to be increased to go fare-free. It might not be as much as people think.

  32. I’d more favor ending all subsidies and allowing TriMet to be a profitable regulated private company like it used to be. For the poor and destitute they could get free tickets at the food pantry or something like that.

  33. Greg,

    Hate to burst your bubble, but very few forms of local transit can be profitable. Everyone is subsidized by local property tax dollars that build and maintain roads, even taxi companies. If Trimet had no subsidies, they might be able to operate a few routes, but most people would be without service. Oh, and you would need to create a local gas tax of $0.50 to $1.00 per gallon to “end all subsidies”.

  34. I think the ticket machines have got to go!

    I want to see more ticket machines. Maybe at Montgomery Park, the 23rd end of the streetcar, outside the Fred Meyer on Burnside (or somewhere more clearly marked inside), etc. All of those would make TriMet a little more accessible, and make things move a tiny bit faster.

  35. Regarding ticket machines, Portland Streetcar is considering adding ticket machines at select (or even all) streetcar platforms after the loop opens, as by then most streetcar stops would be outside the free rail zone. (There’s also talk of breaking with the tradition of matching TriMet’s fare structure, in which case the streetcar might be the same price no matter where you board, but that’s a separate issue.) This was discussed at a recent CAC meeting I attended (I’m a CAC member).

    The difference from what TriMet currently does is that the streetcar would retain the on-board fare machine. So if for some reason the platform machine is broken, you can still buy one onboard. This is something I’ve long recommended for TriMet (until they move to a different system).

    The streetcar folks are considering using reprogrammed parking meters as ticket machines, as they are compact and pretty reliable. (The aerial tram uses this approach.) The downside is that the machines do not take bills, but the on-board machine does for those customers who don’t have coins or cards.

  36. C-TRAN is scheduled to vote on placing a ballot measure on the November 2011 ballot tonight. I’m trying to watch this online (it’s being broadcast by CVTV), but it seems their servers are full as every media player available to me claims the stream can’t be found.

  37. Yeah, Scotty,

    That’s been in the rumor mill for years. It’s a great way for the family to have disproportionate clout in foreign affairs while keeping the peace at home.

  38. A pro-LO Streetcar flyer, published by Metro and mailed to Lake Oswego residents in advance of the LO City Council’s April 19 vote on the project, is causing some hackles, with opponents of the project accusing the involved agencies of inappropriate, taxpayer-supported propaganda.

  39. My brother sent me a link regarding Ohio’s governor that briefly references Portland (which is called a “cool” city by the blog:

    Link

    Basically Ohio wants to make themselves cool. But when asked about building a streetcar like Portland:

    What they do in Portland — we’re not living in Portland. And by the way, I don’t want to live in Portland.

  40. Re: the streetcar flyer:

    KATU bought the pro-streetcar falsehood that no-build means, in Ms. Kissee’s words, “…doing nothing at all.” This is one lie that is impossible to kill; more than understandable given the official moniker of “no-build.” Very few people who should know better seem to realize that the RTP and TIP provide for frequent service for the 35 and is included in no-build.

    The City of Lake Oswego’s staff has indeed allowed itself to become a local propaganda ministry for the project, repeating misinformation, embellishing it when necessary, and even coming up with new ones on occasion. I can only assume that this is with the acquiescence, if not approval, of the mayor and city council majority.

  41. The enhanced bus alternative is a disgrace; an opportunity squandered. The project team didn’t lift a fingertip in an effort to find ways to serve the transit riding public. Why should they?

  42. what about making the willamette shore trolley into a low-cost barebones streetcar option? for crying out loud theres already a trolley running on this very track/route carrying passengers, i feel they missed a huge opportunity to exploit this unique aspect. instead they are starting over from scratch in a huge expensive drastic fashion as if this is some long abandoned rail right of way. the WST should be gradually evolving into the modern streetcar line with incremental improvements made over a long period of time. it would be a hell of a lot more palatable than this $430+ million option which is like having a giant target symbol on the back for opponents.

  43. Jon (& everyone else),

    Please forgive me if I’m just going over what you already know.

    (Someone can update this if there is more current info) The trolleyless trolley is incredibly slow, taking about 40-45 minutes for the 6 mile trip. It uses a diesel generator towed behind the car which makes ROW neighbors exceedingly happy, especially when the engine is putting out more particulates than usual. So all it can do is the type of excursion trips that it does now where riders sort of feel that they’re getting their money’s worth the longer the trip takes.

    The $430+ million is in 2017 dollars and includes the contributed ROW. The more the ROW is appraised, the higher the cost of the project but the less the local contribution.

    To illustrate, let’s say the actual cost of the extension including construction and equipment is $300 million plus ROW. Let’s say that LPA was to run it down highway 43 entirely with no WSL ROW. In this case, the highway has no market value and the WSL ROW is irrelevant because it’s not being used. So the whole cost of the project is $300 million and the presumed federal share would be 60% of that, or $180 million leaving the local share at $120 million cash.

    Now let’s say that we’d use the entire WSL ROW and that it were appraised at $200 million. So the cost of the project becomes $500 million ($300 million + ROW) and the federal share at 60% becomes $300 million, the local share $200 million which is entirely paid for by contributing the ROW. Pretty neat, huh?

    That’s one of the reasons that many project proponents were hoping that the Macadam alignment wouldn’t gain traction and why the Riverwood Drive alignment has little chance.

    The prospects of the ROW contribution are driving the project. If we had to put up hard local money for our share, we wouldn’t be talking about it at all and could move onto to other projects which make much more sense.

  44. P.S. The project team is working with a net appraisal in the $90 million area. This will be reduced by the Macadam alignment and almost certainly be lowered by a new appraisal that would be required by the FTA. Frankly, I’d be surprised if the final appraisal were for more than about $40 million and expect it to be for less. The current appraisal appears to have been done on the fly by person or persons not terribly familiar with ROWs. A lot of the ROW has limited access and no real value except to the government consortium that owns it and the immediate neighbors.

    The invisible camel in the tent is the fact that we don’t own much of the alignment fee simple but have restricted easements. In other words, there is no market value for the sections involved.

    The fun part will be to watch local politician project proponents explain to constituents why it will be so great for us to come up with $10’s of millions more.

    Can’t wait.

  45. Of course, its fair to point out that many opponents of the project are hoping that the ROW assessment is as low as possible (and are engaging in political activities to support that outcome) in order to make the required local match too expensive, and kill the project.

    And if and when the project gets to the FEIS stage, expect the lawsuits to start flying.

    Right or wrong, and I have my issues with the project, it’s a lot easier to shove public infrastructure through poor neighborhoods than wealthy ones.

  46. Metro’s piece starts off that this development is “surprising.” From here, it’s Metro’s surprise that is unexpected. The Borland area has been considered a much better candidate for urban expansion than Stafford for a long time: I-205 runs right through it, it’s closer (by time and/or miles) to other urban centers, and should be a lot easier for neighboring cities (West Linn, Tualatin, and possibly Wilsonville) to service. It’s in the HCT plan and in the RTP as a Mobility Corridor.

  47. Down in Salem, Bike Portland reports that the state legislature appears to be watering down a resolution cheerleading for (and calling for federal dollars for) the CRC.

  48. Interesting Midwestern smart growth website. And no, it isn’t an endorsement of build-streetcars-and-other-yuppie-amenities style urbanism–it’s actually something that true fiscal conservatives may appreciate. (Those desiring more sprawl and highway pork, OTOH, will not.)

  49. Just want to alert Portland Transport about a few things…

    1. The #15 bus at Gordon/Thurman now has lots of signage and an automated blinker when buses make their turnaround, I know this had been talked about, now its in place and working.

    2. Rode a #15 today which had the turning warning announcement, problem is it starts warning about 3/4 of the way through the turn and keeps announcing as the bus is hundreds of feet past the intersection. I think its rather apparent it does not work as intended.

    3. The Cully cycle track and street reconstruction is wrapping up, all built and they are now paving it, I’d expect it to fully be finished in about a month. Its worth checking out if one is in the area.

  50. The Cully cycle track (as well as Cully itself) will be a featured attraction of the Northeast Sunday Parkways event in September, but of course will be open for general use well before that.

    (Currently portions of Cully are still closed and due to space constraints residents are still parking on the cycle track, so don’t go checking it out today expecting an easy ride…)

  51. 2. Rode a #15 today which had the turning warning announcement, problem is it starts warning about 3/4 of the way through the turn and keeps announcing as the bus is hundreds of feet past the intersection. I think its rather apparent it does not work as intended.

    I’ve heard a few neighbors complaining about it coming on when it’s not needed, being way too loud, not coming on when it is needed, etc. I have to wonder if the speakers have helped anyone.

  52. A few CRC items over the weekend: The Oregonian reports that the Washington Legislature has approved another $25 million to advance the Columbia River Crossing–contingent on Oregon matching the contribution. (Actually, it’s contingent, apparently, on the Oregon Legislature tossing $50 million into the kitty–$25M to match Washington’s present contribution, and another $25M to further equalize funding from the two states).

    And Steve Duin takes a few more well-paced shots at the project.

  53. If you are opposed to the CRC (and want to stop a $50 million contribution from Oregon) please contact these members on the Oregon House Transportation and Economic Development Committee.
    email example: rep.cliffbentz@state.or.us

    Cliff Bentz, Co-Chair
    Tobias Read, Co-Chair
    E. Terry Beyer, Co-Vice Chair
    Patrick Sheehan, Co-Vice Chair
    Shawn Lindsay
    Nancy Nathanson
    Jefferson Smith
    Jim Weidner

Leave a Reply to ws Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *