Quote:
Originally Posted by birchhaven
This also goes to my point the city is researching the economic impact the tracks have beyond just the trail. But does it actually draw people, I 100% guarantee you that with no track the city pulls in way more than 100k in additional tax revenue.
|
I missed this one
Forget the city, what does the state gain by allowing the trail in place of rail? you honestly think the state would still receive the same investment in return? My understanding of the lease agreement, is that the 10% of the railroad's revenue, is on top of a regular flat rate fee the railroad already pays. The state stands to lose a lot of money if the rail disappeared. You know as well as I do, the trail will never recover any money for the state. Does the state even get any money for the trail that exist now?