I was just (more or less objectively) discussing the practice of incrementalism.
The facts here seem to be (and I'm sure SOMEBODY will feel free to correct me) 1. The track and roadbed in those two spots are in rather crummy shape (Due to decades of neglect, we can't just blame this on the RGRPC). 2. It was suggested repeatedly in the last few years that the RR address the problem. 3. The work wasn't done. and 4. The Inspector decided suggestions weren't getting the desired results and decided to apply a bit more pressure to ensure that the area was looked into.
From here, admittedly way out in the cheap seats, it looks like the REAL problem is part of a larger one. The RR has been operating in "crisis mode" for over 2 years now, with people jumping to put out one brush fire after another. In the resultant confusion many people misread the importance of the inspector's "suggestions" and the improvements were not done in a timely enough (in the inspector's mind, anyway) manner.
Does the fact that the work wasn't done mean that the imspector's report was intentionally ignored? I doubt it. I would have initially assumed that money was an issue, but it seems it was not (unless the operator did not know that the commission had funds available). I suppose that inertia (or procrastination, if you will) possibly played a role, or perhaps a lack of manpower. But, at least from here, it looks like a large part of the problem is that the Friends simply underestimated (and therefore were not entirely prepared for) the immensity and complexity of the task they took on when they became the operator. BUT if you couple that with the fact that EVERY decision they have make was done inna fishbowl (and has been critiqued endlessly by self-proclaimed experts), it is truly a wonder that they have got as much done as they have.
Did someone "drop the ball" here? The FRA says the pass was incomplete, anyway.
