Tom Elmore responds

In hindsight I had a somewhat negative tone in a previous post regarding Tom Elmore, the fervent rail advocate himself. I've met Tom and chatted with him on the City Hall steps a few years ago, and he seemed like a nice guy, and his vision is admirable although I personally support the consensus of the MAPS3 subcommittee and its advocates, but again, that's just my personal opinion. I didn't want to slight Tom at all--I saw where he left a comment defending himself, so in the interest of fairness I thought I'd post it up here.

Howdy. Tom Elmore here (see above). Despite my appreciation for the good words (the part about "knowing my stuff"), I'd question your conclusion that "even the most ardent train enthusiasts" in OKC have "distanced themselves" from Tom Elmore (me) -- as, according to "the state's largest newspaper" Tom Elmore IS the most ardent, etc., etc. (Well, actually the description its editorial writers employed was "rail zealot" -- which is not only shorter, but would likely buy roughly the same cup of coffee...) Further, for the record, it was actually two hard-headed Normanites who persuaded the Norman Council to consider a resolution asking then-Governor Henry to appoint an independent committee to revisit ODOT's disastrous plan for the destruction of the OKC Union Station rail plant. Unfortunately, this resolution failed by one vote, apparently via some of the same influence that arguably sent Oklahoma-derived transit funding to Utah in the late 1990s.