This is an email that I sent to both Cities and the USFS today:
Hello,
I am confused about the process conducted by the Manitou Incline Task Force.
In 2010 the Incline was a disaster. Many ties were out of place or very loose. According to Kurt Schroeder the Task Force not explore the cause of this. That is unimaginable.
Surely they investigated why the Incline was in such a condition, and how they could prevent it from happening again after it was repaired.
Mr Schroeder told me that the long term stability of the Incline was not compromised when the rails were removed. Where did he get this information? Was this the determination of the Task Force, or an analysis commissioned by the City? I am sure that this statement is false.
Before the rails were removed the Incline, its rails, and its ties were one piece.
Did the Cog Railway ever have to reset any ties?
Once the rails were removed the Incline became 2744 pieces, each having a new found ability to move independently of the others.
The public was led to believe that the Task Force did an exhaustive study of all aspects of the Incline. At the onset there were not sure if legalizing the Incline was possible or desirable. Mr Schroeder is telling us that they did not investigate why the Incline was in such terrible condition, or if it was possible to prevent that condition from returning.
The cost estimates for repairs stated in the Management Plan do not come close to the $5 million price tag. Was the Task Force really this clueless or incompetent? Or did the deceive the public?
I am still waiting for an answer concerning the legality of the trail that connects the top of then Incline to the Barr Trail. Was a NEPA process ever conducted? Does our City Attorney claim that this trail has been legitimately legalized by the Special Use Permit?
I am also waiting for a legal opinion from the city on the issue of the steps required before the legal opening of the Incline. #10 which includes tie stabilization was not substantially completed. Does this not render the Special Use Permit invalid? On the date that this Permit was issued the legally required steps had not been completed. This is made clear in the Management Plan and the IGA.
The two cities that created the Task Force did not adhere to the requirements that they defined before legally opening the Incline.
Had the Cities wanted a variance in these requirements would they have not been legally required to go back to public comment?
Thank you, Carl Strow