WSDOT a hellhole of road project waste? Uh, not exactly. "Nickel tax" projects completed so far (thanks to a 2003 legislative hike of the gas tax by five-cents-per-gallon) AND DOT's 349 construction projects in the 2003-2005 budget cycle tell a different story. From today's Seattle Times:
A review of the 13 nickel-tax projects completed by last June found that six came in under budget and eight ahead of schedule. Only one was over budget, another I-90 truck lane project, and one was finished late, a variable-message sign on Highway 395 in Kennewick. In all, the nickel tax will pay for 225 projects across the state over the next decade. Looking more broadly, the department has completed 349 construction projects funded by its 2003-05 budget. The work was expected to cost $123 million but came in at $109 million, 11 percent under budget.
Meanwhile, Steve Ballmer sez: Microsoft needs more roads, and better-educated students in Puget Sound. The Everett Herald editorializes that Snohomish County "has much to lose if I-912 passes," and agrees the WSDOT waste meme is a ruse.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at October 02, 2005 01:13 PM | Email ThisBut that's a poor measure of true performance. How many new lane-miles did we build? Is that keeping up with population growth? Is traffic at those project locations better or worse now? If better, how much better, and was it worth the price we paid? How much are we paying per lane-mile of new road? How much do they pay in other states?
Someone should run an initiative to give the state auditor the power to do performance audits on WSDOT so that we could get meaningful answers to all of the relevant questions... oh, good, taken care of.
Simply citing a Times article that claims that WSDOT has been estimating enough time and money so that they don't embarrass themselves, and asserting that there is no waste in WSDOT, isn't demonstrating a lot of critical thinking.
Posted by: TB on October 2, 2005 02:50 PMAnd why aren't Novelty Hill Road, Union Hill Road, Avondale Road, the real 520/202 intersection improvements, and many other area road projects made necessary because of new development funded? Concurrency laws have been part of State law for 15 years, so what's happened?
Government is the problem, and their alliance with the building industry is why developers like Weyerhaeuser can build a city the size of Woodinville, but not add any capacity to rural 2-lane roads.
Should I trust the state because they can take billions and build something with it? Should I accept that their refusal to allow outside audits of their spending isn't because we'd laugh if we really knew how much they waste of those billions?
I won't support giving them another dime, any DOT agency, until they open their books to the people and begin to work for us - for a change.
I'm completely behind I-912 and laugh at anyone who would still trust this government. There is no credibility left.
Posted by: Mike on October 2, 2005 02:51 PM
In all, the nickel tax will pay for 225 projects across the state over the next decade.
So let me understand this. The DOT has completed 13 projects from this nickel fund in the last two years, and this same fund is slated to complete 212 more in the next 8 years? I think they need to start moving a little faster to keep on schedule.
Also, the gas tax in WA is more than 5 cents. What does the *rest* of the gas tax money go towards?
Because of crap like this.
WSDOT is paying to improve a crossover on a BN line (a private company) to improve Amtrak service (a federal agency). Okay it is only 3.9 million. But a million here and a million and soon we're talking real money.
Look at the list of these types of projects and tell me with a straight face WSDOT has priorities in correct order. Explain how financing a improvements for a private railroad improving federal services benefits WA taxpayers.
Posted by: JCM on October 2, 2005 03:38 PM1. Pay for roads and other transportation projects with money (forcibly) collected from every taxpayer, including those who don't want or use the projects.
2. Pay for transportation projects with money collected from people who voluntarily purchase the good directly connected with use of those projects.
I just don't understand why some otherwise anti-taxation Republicans are opposed to a gas usage fee (it really shouldn't be called a tax). If you oppose the gas usage fee, then you support higher general taxes.
Posted by: R S on October 2, 2005 04:12 PMThen too, I don't like the idea of what I-912 is going to pay for -- why do we need the most expensive option (the tunnel) for the viaduct replacement? Building a tunnel along the waterfront in Seattle is much like building a city below sea-level on the Gulf Coast -- eventually, an earthquake hits and it gets flooded.
Why would anyone want to fund projects half-way? That's all the new tax did - it got us far enough to begin 520 but not far enough to complete them without further taxation increases.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, just because WSDOT is getting more accurate in completing projects, that doesn't mean that they're efficient in spending our money. I can be really accurate and still have a lot of waste. I can be under budget and still have a lot of waste.
It isn't about their efficency -- it's about the highest gas tax in the nation with nothing to show for it...
Posted by: sharck on October 2, 2005 04:21 PMConservatives oppose new taxes while the social engineers in Olympia and Seattle pi** away $$$ on ridiculous pet projects.
We don't need new taxes. The taxes are plenty. Get a clue. I can understand why you couldn't afford one, though. Your taxes are too high.
Posted by: Danny on October 2, 2005 04:24 PM"Gas Usage Fee"... give me a break. That is not a "usage fee". A toll on a new bridge is a "usage fee". Government adding 9.5 cents to a gallon of gas that I need to buy (busses don't run from downtown to Renton at midnight on Saturday when I get off work), all to pay for projects that I probably won't use is a tax. That is an idiotic arguement.
Dishman-
It's the same logic that holds if I raise spending 15%, and you reduce it to 5%, you just proposed a 10% "spending cut"?
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 04:34 PMFor those that were funded by the nickel gas tax, there was a definitive plan, so comparing the new gas tax vs. the nickel gas tax a few years ago is comparing apples vs. oranges. So more flatulence here and that's about all there is. Dino Rossi probably supports I-912 because he understands the shortcomings of this taxing scheme.
Posted by: KS on October 2, 2005 04:42 PMObviously you're new around here the argument is not against taxes.
To recap for you
30 years of waste in Olympia, going back to WPPSS.
30 years of planning that got us here. With the same crowd still running the show.
No accountability
No performance audits
We said No to RTA.
No to stadiums
No to 5 cent gas tax
5 cent gas tax anyway
90 + emergency spending bills
Now 9 1/2 cents.
Suddenly the viaduct is an "emergency" why not 4 years ago after the quake?
Major projects in the 9 1/2 cent bill not defined and partially funded.
Meaning they'll be another tax increase in the near future.
And that just the highlights off the top of my head. The discussion is about how to get this projects done, in fiscally sound manner.
Posted by: JCM on October 2, 2005 05:14 PMmost people know things cost money; truth is, we simply want want we pay for--value--not waste and "I don't know's;"
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 2, 2005 05:15 PMKeep your powder dry, Patriots.
Posted by: Jericho on October 2, 2005 05:26 PMI don't get it. What do you guys want? I get the anti-tax thing, but besides that what do you stand for?
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 05:54 PMDo you want me to keep going boon???
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 2, 2005 06:27 PMAnyway, my question is what is your strategy? Once 912 passes, then what? What will your transportation plan look like and how do you plan to get it approved? Who will lead the effort?
I'm not worried about Seattle and the Puget Sound. We have the political will and the resources to replace the viaduct and 520 and to do whatever else we need to do to continue to prosper without help from the rest of the state.
But what about all the other projects the transportation bill funds? What is your strategy there?
Thanks,
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 06:35 PMHave a nice week!
Perhaps someday when the State DOT is forced to start NOT charging Sales Tax dollars on construction materials (an 8% plus kick-back to the general fund), Not being forced to use Prevailing wage labor and Not Funding 30% of total project costs for Studies and Environmental Mitigations, we might get something done on Transportation in this state.
I am not hopeful.
Posted by: Roscoe on October 2, 2005 06:45 PMWell, quite an impressive list. I agree that the best government is the government that governs the least.
Do you support the policies of George W. Bush?
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 06:47 PMWhat is your strategy for after 912 passes? What does your transportation plan look like? How will it be implemented?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 07:14 PMWhy is it that here in Whatcom County (and perhaps every county other than King) the list of projects to be wholly (or more likely, partially) paid for with this, this...atrocity and intellectual insult...are totally different than the transportation projects that my county WANTS and NEEDS?
My family, my employees, my neighbors all are champing at the bit, anxious to vote (early, and often, like King County prefers) for I-912.
This gas tax was a crammed-down-our-throats-sham. Your false premise doesn't change that.
Other than that, my day's going fine, thanks.
Posted by: Unifliter on October 2, 2005 07:18 PMYou've told me what you're against, now tell me what you are for.
What does the pro-912 transportation plan look like? What is your strategy for after 912 passes? What will your plan cost and how will you get it implemented? Who will "lead the charge?"
Thanks
I'm surprised you are so naive.
At any rate, my issue with WSDOT is not with whether they get good bang for the buck or not. They probably do a reasonable job relative to other states.
What I don't like is the fact that Olympia pretends like there is only one possible way to fund these projects. Ear-marking taxes is a load of balony. Money is fungible. They treat the rest of the budget as holy and untouchable. I'd like to see them shut down or reduce in other areas of government - particularly social services and some of the whackier environmental programs - and put that money into roads.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on October 2, 2005 07:42 PMAnger aside, I am really and truly interested in what the Pro-912 folks would propose to replace the exisitng transportation plan.
What would it look like? How would it be funded? How much would it cost? How would it be implemented from a political angle?
I hear a lot of heated rhetoric, but no counter proposals.
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 07:51 PMEspecially when we have the Evergreen State College wasting $1.4 Million narrowing a perfectly good roadway to beautify their beloved parkway using the guise of public safety to put a planter between the bike path and the roadway.
What a joke!
Posted by: SP Fan on October 2, 2005 08:08 PMI want priorities and I want toll roads and bridges. I want a safe viaduct, if Seattle wants a beautiful tunnel with shops above the ground and along the waterfront, they can pay for it!
I want capacity, capacity and more capacity. I am tired of going to Seattle on I-5 and being stuck in traffic for 2 hours to get there crawling along at 20 miles an hour.
I live in Lacey, right next to Olympia, and there isn't anything in that bill to ease any of our traffic jams down here! I can't drive on I-5 by Olympia going south from 4 to 6pm, it's a nightmare.
I read several articles also indicating that Gov G is giving Mayor Nichols a deadline for the viaduct and I believe I read that she said she was going to order it built even if 912 passes.... It's for the kids, doncha know!
The bill that passed only half funds the viaduct and the 520.
I also object to 100 million dollars being spent on animal bridges.........
I'd vote for higher gas taxes when the crazed politicians prove it's necessary......... they haven't!
Posted by: sgmmac on October 2, 2005 08:15 PMYou're kidding, right? A non-plan, an underfunded, over-taxed, and not-subject-to-audit sham is your idea of the perfect piece of legislation? Too funny.
Posted by: Unifliter on October 2, 2005 08:25 PMYou will always be outdebated by a lib because they ace the moot point debates in law school. When you don't believe in anything you can argue any point on any side.
Posted by: South County on October 2, 2005 08:32 PMHere's few solutions.
1) Instead of putting in a gold plated tunnel to replace the viaduct that is going to force 25% more traffic onto I-5 and cost $5 billion, I'm under the impression that a study was done showing it can be retrofitted for a half a billion that will allow it to last another 40+ years and be up to earthquake codes.
2) Instead rebuilding the SR-520 bridge with only two lanes, widen it to four from I-5 to the first exit on the Eastside. Yes it will be more expensive, but it makes more sense than doing the same work without widening the span.
3) (and related to 1) and 2) ) Require for there to actually be blueprints before money is budgeted for construction (like the viaduct and 520 projects are in last years tax plan)
4) Require performance audits of the DOT
5) Get rid of the HOV lanes.
I'm sure others here have a few ideas. Unfortunately, most of what I said go against the sacred cows in Olympia. That's the problem. The folks in Olympia are stuck on stupid in that they refuse to touch things like HOV lanes, regardless of how useless they are.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 08:36 PMAnd before anyone says this is about the state DOT and not King County, don't be a fool. King County runs this state and the bulk of gas tax money goes to the Puget Sound. The real goal here is to create more capacity that means red concurrency maps turning orange or even green. And that means dollar signs to the building industry that wants to gobble up any new capacity and MORE! If you think this is a long-term solution, don't be shocked 10 years from now when things are even worse.
King County has turned its back on roads for decades so it could keep all of its builder friends happy and now they want the taxpayers to cough up the tens of billions to subsidize the next decades growth. I'm not prepared to give them another penny until the embilical is severed between Sims, the Democrats, the Republicans and the growth industry.
Posted by: Mike on October 2, 2005 08:41 PMNow we're getting somewhere. Thanks for answering my question. A follow-up if I may: You say you'll vote for new taxes when the politicians prove it's necessary.
What will it take for the politicians to prove to you that we need higher gas taxes?
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 08:43 PMWhat about the I-5 overcrossing and exit near Dupont that was built about 8 years ago? I may have poor figures from my memory of it. But, Intel wanted an exit for the 500+/-workers they were going to have there when they built the new plant. WSDOT said it would take a couple of years before they could start it, would take about two years to build, and would cost mucho bucks. Intel asked if they could pay for it, hire a company to have it built to WSDOT specs and overseen by WSDOT personnel. WSDOT agreed, and it was done in about one-third the time WSDOT said it would take, and for less than half the cost. When there is no competition for jobs, there is no free market and prices go sky high.
Posted by: Bob in SeaTac on October 2, 2005 08:46 PMGet a clue and listen up to what you read!
Everyone down here in Olympia knows about the end of fiscal year spending sprees for the most frivolous of projects and items.
There are too many pet projects that waste tax dollars and have no accountability for when they fail. I'd say the first step in any grand plan is to clean house and get rid of half the bureaucrats and the regulations that they've created to justify their own existence.
Billions are being wasted and just think of all the roads those wasteful projects equate to. I believe it's deliberate and instead of building more car pool lanes, bus ramps and bike lanes they should focus on adding more lanes to the major highways that we taxpayers drive on.
Instead they intentionally raise gas prices in an attempt to socially engineer me to choose to ride a bus, train or monorail.
What a joke indeed!
Dino Rossi is our only hope for change in Olympia, our only hope for someone who will be accountable and produce a truly feasable plan to solve the transportation nightmare in Washington State.
Why should we just continue the 30 years of Stuck on Stupid here under the entrenched and corrupt Democratic leadership with no accountability, no plan, no results, just more taxes on we the people?
I guess you're satisfied with the job and fine transportation planning that's been done to us thus far then?
Send a message vote yes on I-912!
Posted by: SP Fan on October 2, 2005 08:46 PMIf a transportation plan was proposed that fit your criteria, how much in additional gas tax would you be willing to pay?
Thanks.
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 08:49 PMI heard Dino say on Kirby's show that he was against passage of 912. If that is true, would you still vote for him for govenor?
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 08:52 PMOne more thought: Would you require that you personally approve the blueprints for any transportation plan, or would you trust someone else to approve the blueprints for you? Who would you trust?
How do you know that blueprints for the current plan don't exist?
Where do you get the bulk of your news?
Thanks
I didn't hear that from him on the radio, even if he said it, who cares, he's not responsible for where we are today and for what's being done about it today.
In fact, I'm sure his plan would look much different than how it's currently being handled. Especially since the State is now sitting on a budget surplus, again, and also looking at a very strong economic forcast.
In 2008 I sure am going to vote for him, again. Hopefully in that election we'll get a fair contest and my vote won't be cancelled out by some illegal vote in King County.
Posted by: SP Fan on October 2, 2005 09:07 PM....Who would you trust?
How do you know that blueprints for the current plan DO exist?
Where do you get the bulk of your news?
LOL
There shouldn't be hardly any additional cost according to my "plan", negating the need for a gas tax increase. Opening HOV lanes cost nothing, other than to send out crews to take down the signs. Audits should pay for themselves many times over in savings. Requiring blueprints before budgeting money for construction will probably cost a lot less budgeting money for construction before drawing up blueprints. $1/2 billion for a viaduct retrofit versus a potential Boston Big Dig? That should save a few bucks. Yes, the 520 widening should potentially cost more, even after the audits and blueprints are submitted first before budgeting. As someone who takes that bridge a few times a week, I'm not opposed to some sort of token toll system (the ramps are already metered, so the backups won't make anything worse).
Also, SP Fan has a great point. I've seen it happen before. Departments spend money on stuff they don't need because if they don't that money won't be there next year... hence performance audits.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 09:18 PMA transportation plan that fits my criteria (roughly the same as Mr. cynical's) could be done with a net decrease in the current rate of taxation......but just not by democraps....
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 2, 2005 09:19 PMNever mind the fact that taxpayers paid for the original road they tore up.
More Stuck on Stupid here in Olympia.
http://www.evergreen.edu/parkwayproject/
Posted by: SP Fan on October 2, 2005 09:29 PMforget transportation for a second and look at the big picture--take the patient's TOTAL symptoms into consideration; that's 'holisitc' for your liberal taste, right?
the people are tired of games; step forward, lead and give us value for our votes and taxes; simple; why is that lost on most elected officials? they make their own beds via their actions; taxpayers and voters are just reacting to their actions;
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 2, 2005 09:30 PMFair enough questions.
Who would I trust to approve the blueprints? Professional traffic engineers.
I don't know that the blueprints do exist. I just don't know that they don't. Do you? I don't know at what point in a large highway project it is appropriate to draw up the blueprints. Do you?
I get my news from a lot of different places. I listen to KVI, NPR, I watch the evening news, I read the newpaper and magazines.Do you?
A last question for you: When 912 passes, what will be your strategy for getting your transportation plan enacted?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:31 PMHow do you know your transportation plan could be acheived with a net decrease in taxes?
Are you talking about all state taxes or just the gas tax?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:33 PMHow about fixing congestion on I-5 through SEattle? No desire for that, either, when it comes to Dems.
How about adding more than just a carpool lane to 405? That's all they've been interested in doing. These are basic ideas, but funny how the powers that be won't do it---they just build lanes almost no one can use. How dumb is THAT??? But those are the things I would like to see, and until the Dems are out of power, we won't see common sense like that. They have no interest in doing what average joes and janes want, except for the folks in the 206 area-code who believe cars are evil and no one should be driving them.
I am under the impression that we would lose federal highway funding if we opened the carpool lanes to all traffic.
Would you support opening car pool lanes if it resulted in a net loss of money to support the Interstate?
What is your position on handicapped parking?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:37 PMIf I-912 passes, I think it will send a message to the legislature that they need a REAL plan on what is to be done, not just a lot of feel good words with notihng in concrete. And, where would a real plan come from? I guess your professionals at WSDOT will have to come up with one post haste, after the legislature directs them to make a real plan, and not waste years at it.
Posted by: Bob in SeaTac on October 2, 2005 09:37 PMThe tax plan budgets a couple of billion for the viaduct replacement, and they haven't even decided the tunnel versus bridge question. The tax plan contains billions for the SR-520 bridge replacement, and if they do have blueprints, why haven't they shown them to the public yet and instead said they don't exist?
No, I don't need to personally approve the plans, but I would trust there would at least be public hearings on them.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 09:37 PMYou say you want a real transportation plan. I guess that means you think the current plan is not satisfactory. Would you be willing to do without a 520 bridge rather than have it replaced with the bridge in the current transportation plan?
What will you be doing as an individual once 912 passes to get a transportation plan to your liking implemented?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:42 PMWhat does handicapped parking have to do with anything?
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 09:42 PMThey need to come up with a reasonable plan. They also need to tell the public the truth about OUR money. Why do all of those Ferrys need to be replaced? Are they all broken? No, they're not. Why did they try to give the contract to only one bidder for the Ferrys? They need to stop catering to the special interests and the enviro-nazi's.
100 million for bridges so animals can cross the inter-state to have sex? Gimme a damn break!
The plan for the 520 needs to expand the capacity of it..... if the biker health guys want a bike lane, let them pay for it. I read somewhere that it is delayed anyways. The HOV lanes need to disappear! They are almost always empty while everyone else is jammed in traffic. On my last trip to Seattle, a bus crossed 4 lanes of heavy traffic to get to HOV lane that didn't start for another 1/2 mile, the bus almost caused several vehicles to collide behind his lane changing non-signaling butt!
Why should taxpayers in this state fund Seattle's daydreams and visions? Sound Transit and monorail? 4 billion dollars for a tunnel with a seawall holding back the Atlantic Ocean. A tunnel that sits right next to a subduction plate that WILL create a Tsunami in the future?
Will this grandiose plan increase capacity of the viaduct and relieve congestion in Seattle?
I don't think so.
I've seen our roads down here in Olympia and Lacey torn up and redone in several different places since I moved here in 2000. I haven't seen much improvement in capacity. I've seen bike lanes, one ways and lots of round-abouts. The places that need it the most haven't been touched. Our commissioners have approved over 1000 new homes in the next year and we have traffic jams everywhere........ When will these democrate leaders plan for the future, instead of for the environment and for artwork?
Olympia needs to stop spending and wasting money. What exactly did Washington State gain by 56 people going on a "Trade mission" to China? How many more vacations for the Gregoire family do we have to pay for????
Did you know that 1% of all projects must be spent on artwork? Did you know that all projects are taxed, so that the money is kicked back into the general fund?
Raise taxes = depress the economy,
Lower taxes = stimulate the economy and collect more tax than you would have before you lowered taxes.
Washington State's tax structure kills the poor and the working class. Microsoft wants more roads and better education. What bloody murder they would scream if they had to pay a state income tax on those billions!
Posted by: sgmmac on October 2, 2005 09:42 PMAt what point in a major transportation program should the blueprints be done?
Thanks,
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:44 PMWill you feel better when 912 passes? What will you do as an individual to see the transportation plan you envision implemented?
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:47 PMJust wondering.
Handicapped parking takes up spaces that regular people could use. That creates a special use condition, the same as carpool lanes.
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 09:50 PMWe the people were shut out of the process and what we saw of it, we don't like because we know that they can do better but they refused to, Boon. They need to go back to the drawing board, get a complete plan for funding and explore alternative funding sources - then bring it back before the legislature, then the people. Getting rid of Davis-Bacon requirements would also help get more bang for the buck.
Posted by: KS on October 2, 2005 09:58 PM"I don't know at what point in a large highway project it is appropriate to draw up the blueprints. Do you?"
Even YOU can't get accurate, enforceable bids and contracts WITHOUT them. Enforceable contracts ARE important to you, right?
"I get my news from a lot of different places. I listen to KVI, NPR, I watch the evening news, I read the newpaper and magazines.Do you?"
15 daily newspapers. Right and left Blogs. Four radio stations. No NPR. Can't stomach their taxpayer-paid anti-American c**p.
"When 912 passes, what will be your strategy for getting your transportation plan enacted?"
I'm glad you agree 912 will pass.
Cut current gas taxes by 5 cents per gallon. End prevailing wage c**p. End art 1% abomination. Prosecute/impeach/vote out those who have been squandering our tax dollars for decades. And, oh, yeah...let the counties keep their tax collections and let them decide where to spend those dollars. Washington's crumbling transportation system is an embarrassment, considering the amount of taxes that have been confiscated from us for each gallon of gas we buy.
But that's just me (and somewhere between 55-70% of other WA voters).
Your blind allegiance to Olympia and its annual gathering of seemingly well-dressed migrant workers is most telling.
Per the blueprints, if they come up with an idea, they should design it first so they know what it's going to cost. What is currently being done is like saying "Build me a home. It only needs to be four bedrooms, two bath, and a little back yard. Here's a million up front for it no questions asked."
As per handicapped parking, if 1/4 to 1/3 of all the existing parking spaces at the local Fred Meyer were required by law to be handicapped spots, even though most of them will never be used, I'd have a problem with that too. Besides, my late grandfather had to use them because of a prosthetic leg... it had to be amputated because of cancer. That's a little different than carpooling with someone to work.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 10:13 PMIf you had read my message, I said where a real plan would come from: The professionals at SeaTac, at the request of the legislature. What was proposed by the legislature was, as I said, merely feel good words. THEY HAD NO PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION, just a plan for our money.
Posted by: Bob in SeaTac on October 2, 2005 10:15 PMOne thing though, you guys need to mellow out a little. All that anger is gonna play hell with your spleens!
Later
Posted by: Boon on October 2, 2005 10:18 PM...End art 1% abomination. -- Unifliter
I'll make that 6) on my "plan". That just redused the transportation. besides, I think those sculptures on the 520 bridge are an ugly eyesore.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 10:19 PMPersonally, I'm not angry at all... I may disagree with you, but your far more polite in your arguements than, say, Headless Lucy.
One thing though, you guys need to mellow out a little. All that anger is gonna play hell with your spleens!"
He's a funny little guy.
And I guess he went to bed without his supper.
Ooops, that should read ...the transportation budget.
Posted by: Mike H on October 2, 2005 10:41 PMSince I contributed to 912 and turned in several signed petitions for it, yes, I will feel good.
I will work real hard for any Republican down here in Thurston County who needs help getting elected!
We have 3 Democrates for County Commissioners who just took away our right to vote at the polls.
We have communists and socialists and Lord knows what else on the Olympia city council. They are busy making Olympia a nuclear free zone. And then there is Seattle with pink pigs on the streets, a statue of Lenin, and the Art Museum getting ready to put a statue of a grown man naked reaching out to a naked male child!
Then of course there is the million and a half spent to house 6 sex offenders.
Do you know that Washington State failed an audit for Medicaid? Yep, workers wouldn't let the auditors have records and the ones they gave up were pretty ugly. I really object to tax dollars being spent on breast reductions for prisoners, sending a man to Florida for a sex change and the other two sex changes here in Washington too, and that's just the tip of that billion dollar iceberg!
Posted by: sgmmac on October 2, 2005 10:48 PM
As for Steve Ballmer's comment, it should be pointed out that Microsoft has paid for a significant amount of the traffic improvements that have been made around the Redmond campus within the past ten years, including the Transit Center, and the NE 40th St. overpass. As part of future expansion, they are also planning to put millions into building a third overpass at 31st street to allow easier access to 148th and the west campus area.
Posted by: Vexorg on October 2, 2005 11:16 PMThe only one who looks like a tool is you there boon-boy.
We gave you straight answers to your insipid questions. Is that lamer insult the best you got to offer in return?
Posted by: alphabet soup on October 2, 2005 11:20 PMWe passed a referendum in this state. Tax increases are to be submitted to the voter BEFORE IMPLIMENTATION. We, the citizens, are to have the what , why and wherefore explained to us concerning any tax increase first and then be allowed to vote on it. The legislature set aside this principle and law under the guise of an "emergency."
The point at issue is that tax increases are to be determined by the voters. This was ignored by the so-called representatives of the people in the legislature and a pseudo-governor (who promised no tax increases and lied!).
The point is the law passed by the people. If WSDOT needs the money there is a way to do it. Put it on the ballot properly. That way is not the way of a legislature that despises the people and instead regards the people of this state as a cash cow for their pet projects to get reelected.
If the rules had been followed the gas tax not I-912 would be on the ballot. It was not done this way and for that reason alone it has to go.
Do you want me to keep going boon???
Boon, please stop for a moment. You asked for my list and then glossed over it. Please comment on each of the above. Others have also brought up issues about government in Washington State.
I am particularly interested in your thoughts on privitizing freeway and bridge projects.
Thank you---
PS It's easy to keep asking questions.
It's hard to provide answers, for all of us (including you).
When I-912 passes, it will be a golden opportunity to re-examine the priorities of government.
When need to look at whether the service is necessary, the level of service, how do we most cost effectively provide it and what is the most fair and equitable way to pay for it.
Frankly, I don't trust big gobs of tax money being thrown into a melting pot of bureaucratic goo. I like individual projects...specifically & fully funded....no shell-games.
The point I was making: You all have your individual ideas about what's wrong with the present transportation plan, and you all have your individual ideas about how to fix it.
One guy wants more lanes of freeway in Lacy. Another guy wants more lanes on the new floater. Another guy wants to do away with carpool lanes, and another just wants to eliminate all democrats from government.
My last question is this: do you really believe you can accomplish these goals by repealing the current transportation plan? Does your side have the political and economical resources to reshape the state's transportation system?
What will happen when 912 passes (and yes, I'm sure it will pass). Will the legislature come up with a plan that suits all your needs? Probably not. Your demands are so disparate that it would be impossible to please you all.
Do you think you can persuade the voters of Seattle and King County to throw out all progressive lawmakers and elect all NeoConservatives to suit you? How will you go about doing this?
I am afraid that with the passage of 912, we'll simply have to do without infrastructure renewal in the areas outside of metro Puget Sound.
We in King County have the political will and economic base to take care of our transportation needs without help from the rest of the state. When 912 passes, we'll just come up with funding that excludes the rest of you.
Where will that leave you? I fear you will win the battle but lose the war.
Thanks
Posted by: Boon on October 3, 2005 08:18 AMI had to laugh when one of our legislators put a project on a list of one of the many gas tax increase proposals that would be funded. The funny thing was- the project was already done and in use.
How can we believe anything the anti-912s say?
Posted by: swatter on October 3, 2005 08:42 AMBoon keeps asking at what point we'd be willing to pay more in tax. Wrong question. Obviously, his tiny world view consists of "workers of the world unite" and "power to the people" type cra*.
Withdraw your hand, there Boon. Quit begging for $$$ and then trying to justify it.
Posted by: Danny on October 3, 2005 09:09 AMThe gas gouging gang can reach into their own damn pockets if they want to buy votes!
Posted by: pbj on October 3, 2005 09:25 AMFace it folks, we need to spend money on roads. This is not Sound Transit and not the monorail. If the price of gas wasn't already so high due to the war, the storms, and price gouging by the oil industry, I don't think this initiative would have any traction.
Carlson, et al. are fooling themselves (and listeners who can't think for themselves) with the "congestion relief" argument. You could add two more general capacity lanes on I-5 south and not gain much at all... Money needs to be spent on smart projects - like the S 317th st HOV access lane. This makes sense for everyone - buses and carpools will not have to navigae across 5 lanes of traffic to enter and exit the freeway. The current setup contributes to congestion - providing this access will reduce congestion (even if slightly, still a gain).
One only has to look at the Ship Canal bridge, 45th exit, 520 ramps, Mercer offramp to see that having traffic try and get to the other side of the freeway to exit causes lots of problems (this is why South 5 into town is ALWAYS backed up).
Projects like the viaduct and the 520 bridge MUST be done. Have you looked at the viaduct lately? Carlson would have you believe there is nothing wrong with it at all...
I am not thrilled about higher taxes, but gas tax is by far the best form of tax there is.
drive more = use roads more = pay more
drive a gas hog = pay more
carpool = save
use transit = save
there is no need for tolls on individual roads - all roads benefit everyone, everyone should pay for them.
there is no need for congestion pricing or extra tax on low gas mileage vehicles, this just creates more bureaucracy to administer this.
Someone has to pay for our roads. The gas tax is the fairest tax of all.
Quit with the initiatives and start electing leader who represent our views. If half the energy that has been expended on this was put behind Rossi, there would have been no way Chris would have been able to steal the election.
Posted by: Eric on October 3, 2005 09:34 AMNo, you aren't going to be electing people with a lot of commonsense anytime in the near future. You will continue to elect people who disabuse their power by calling a desire on their part to create more taxes an "emergency". That in itself get a yes vote from me on 912.
And no, not with all those projects "floating" out there with no cost estimates (I mean "firm" here) will I vote against 912. There needs to be an accounting here.
The last gas tax increase I voted against was because we had RTA, Monorail, plus the one $10 billion project list. And then, we had the tricounty suggesting that they would pass another $10 billion project list, and then, we have the logical and sensible Freeman bypass freeway.
Posted by: swatter on October 3, 2005 10:38 AMpeople don't mind paying for things that give value and are useful; thousands of "studies" get us nowhere; to be blunt, i see no shovels;
many like me feel like shareholders of a company that does not give us a clear annual audited financial statement nor do we see useful results;
everything seems to be a "work in progress;" at some point, shareholders sell; taxpayers can't "sell their poor-performing stocks" as easily; we rely on our officials--and we know where THAT got us last election; true--"user pays" is a good idea, but we all benefit from general commerce and general infrastructure; let's just do it with a public fiduciary angle in mind and be responsible & thrifty;
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 3, 2005 11:03 AMI already pay one of the highest gas taxes in the nation. I was told this is because of the maintenence cost for the "current" infrastructure we have. So I guess we should not build anything more if we are not going to be able to maintain these "new projects".
I will vote for I-912, if this 9.5 cents is to maintain the roads we have, use the money you currently get.
The worst traffic I have seen is on I-5.
The legislators will get the point, eventually or they will get voted out of office. They rolled the dice and will lose. Gov G promised to tell the voters where the taxes go, I'm still waiting, she promised not to endorse new taxes until we found out where those taxes go, she obviously lied, she may get to it, when she is on a break from one of her overseas vacations.......
If those fools in Olympia fail to recognize that when I 912 passes that is a mandate to them, we will lose, all they need to do is step up to the plate and get a plan that is reasonable and that increases capacity instead of providing bridges we can't drive on, pretty viaducts with overhead plaza's, HOV lanes for mass transit fans and bicycle lanes for health nuts!
Posted by: sgmmac on October 3, 2005 11:29 AMIf they came up with a plan which actually does something to relieve congestion on our most crowded freeway corridors, I think people would not have have a problem with paying 9.5 cents or even more per gallon, and 912 wouldn't even be needed...
Posted by: JustSumGuy on October 3, 2005 11:41 AMSMP Board should commit to resign to distinguish the "Green Line" Plan from the Board.
Posted by: David Sucher on October 3, 2005 11:51 AMWe were told that we didn't have enough money for these safety projects, but we never received an accounting for the existing 23 (28) cents. In addition, the Feds collect 14.7 cents and supposedly we get 92% of that back. Where does that money go?
We still spend hundreds of millions of the gas tax money to environmental mitigation, "sales tax" for construction materials and "art". NONE of these millions improves congestion or transportation in general. Why should our taxes be increased to fund these? How about the legislature looking into areas where the taxes do not DIRECTLY improve our transportation and change the law to free up more of the money ALREADY collected for transportation (roads) improvements?
The socialist elites in our government have made it very clear through their actions that the growth we have experienced (and will experience) is expected to all funnel to public transportation and not single occupancy vehicles.
How about a new law (referendum or initiative) that requires ALL government workers to exclusively use public transportation? This means that, with the exception of police and fire, they ride busses and trains only. When they show how flexible and easy it is for anyone and anything, then maybe the public will be convinced.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 3, 2005 12:15 PMToo bad, Eric. The state did elect a leader who represents "our" views...Rossi. With Sims and Logan, there will always be a way to steal elections.
Posted by: Danny on October 3, 2005 12:42 PMEric, the Mercer offramp was a "quick fix" to get it done for the Worlds Fair.
So, after 45 years they have not been able to fix this "temporary" quick fix? And now you think I should pony up 9.5 cents after they have not come up with an idea in 45 years?
Posted by: Ted Bundy on October 3, 2005 02:36 PMDo you want me to keep going boon???
Boon, please stop for a moment. You asked for my list and then glossed over it. Please comment on each of the above. Others have also brought up issues about government in Washington State.
I am particularly interested in your thoughts on privitizing freeway and bridge projects.
Thank you---
PS It's easy to keep asking questions.
It's hard to provide answers, for all of us (including you).
When I-912 passes, it will be a golden opportunity to re-examine the priorities of government.
When need to look at whether the service is necessary, the level of service, how do we most cost effectively provide it and what is the most fair and equitable way to pay for it.
Frankly, I don't trust big gobs of tax money being thrown into a melting pot of bureaucratic goo. I like individual projects...specifically & fully funded....no shell-games.
Posted by Mr. Cynical at October 3, 2005 06:28 AM
Talk about the trough- Davis-Bacon? Think you can pull it off? Maybe we can hope for some modifications, anyway?
Isn't L&I about 5-10 benjamins/hour? Let's start here, too.
Posted by: swatter on October 3, 2005 04:50 PMUnfortunately, this childish act really doesn't solve the transportation needs of the region. The key issue is that the transportation problems are really a regional issue and not a state wide issue. If you take I-5 from Olympia to Longview out of the equation, which improvements should come from Federal funding and not state funding, then the main transportation issues deal with Puget Sound Traffic congestion.
Part of the congestion issue is geography, but the real problem is a classic queuing theory/throughput issue. I have heard many that state we should get rid of carpool lanes, or add more lanes to I-5 and/or 405. There you have the problem. No matter how many lanes you add, either by eliminating HOV lanes or adding lanes, you still are running a single path of failure. The key in any throughput issue is parallel paths, so that if one is blocked, flow can continue on alternate paths. I work in the computer industry and it is well demonstrated that parallel processing produces the highest throughput. It is the same in industry. Having several low cost, low capacity parallel assemply paths produces higher throughput than one expensive high capacity machine. Eli Golbratt highlighted this theory in his infamous book "The Goal." The same principles can be applied to our traffic mess.
My recommendation is to vote against 912, only because we will not see the money anyway. Even if we voted for it, the gas companies would keep the money (i.e., not lower the cost of gas). Therefore, it is better to fund projects than not, and there are a lot of decent projects on the list that do add parallel paths for transportation of individuals. I would also put the hammer on Olympia and local politicians to come up with a regional plan that promotes parallel methods of moving people so we are not soley reliant on a few key highways. This means more ferry funding (including cross-lake ferry service), building up and expanding alternative routes and eliminating single points of failure (520 and Viaduct). We can shore up the Viaduct and 520 to last us 10-20 more years while we get the rest of the parallel infrastructure in place and then evaluate whether we need these expensive albatrosses (sp?). If we do decide to replace them because it is the most cost effective solution, then they should be toll based. Make the people who use the path pay for the cost, not the whole state.
This is just my two cents worth.
TC
TC, you make some good points, but don't assume that what works in one system (computer hardware) makes sense in another system (transportation). For example, if it costs 10 times as much to add a lane-mile on a new road than an existing one, are you sure it would still be more cost-effective?
Posted by: Bruce on October 3, 2005 10:01 PMNo, no, no. It is the responsibility of the peole who currently hold public office (mostly Democrats, last I looked) who are responsible to us for producing a responsible transportation plan.
Last I looked, none loomed on the horizon. Only the tax to fund still more non-substantive and non-essential projects that benefit nobody but the people whose pockets are lined with our money- worthless union punk-thugs, the KC and Seattle City councils, and the DOT.
The constituents aren't the ones putting forward the lame-ass excuses for why billions more should be drained from our pockets to fund puffs of smoke. But we are, however, sending a message to the political whores who claim to be acting in the interest of the little guy while they continue "servicing" the union big guys in the backs of their publically-funded limos.
It's very simple. I'll even write it in crayon for you illiterate liberal pukes. Business as usual is over. Government answers to the public. It is up to THEM to start coming up with the ideas. That is, after all, what WE pay THEM for.
Posted by: ERNurse on October 3, 2005 10:42 PMBruce-
Good intentions is no excuse for p**s poor law. A bad transportation package isn't neccessarily better than nothing. With nothing, nothing changes. With this package, nothing changes, but I pay even more money at the pump, and have less to spend on trivial things like my mortgage and phone bill. And taking a bus isn't an option, not with my work schedule.
Posted by: Mike H on October 4, 2005 12:05 AMSokala: Steel wrapped in concrete is the strongest building structure. It is used for strength purposes. To make the equivalent (strength) structure with just steel, one would need a lot more steel. Steel is more prone to corrosion (more upkeep costs). Steel can be effected by the temperature more (expansion/contraction). In buildings, steel is worse than massive wood in regards to fire. When steel gets hot, it looses some of its strength and resistance and can bend or collapse (e.g., the Twin-Towers were a steel based building where a main contributor to the collapse was the heat from the fire of the exploded planes).
Posted by: tc on October 4, 2005 06:10 AMRegarding building out roads and bridges/overpasses, I couldn't agree more. This is one of the reasons why we in Gig Harbor are upset with the new Narrows Bridge. We spend all this money and will have to pay tolls for years, to get two HOV lanes and potentially a lower transit deck on the new bridge that will not be open to regular vehicles.
Cheers,
TC
Is there anything in particular wrong with this transportation law? It seems like we're getting at least close to the most bang for our buck, building structures that will last longer than the ones they replace, and expanding roads where it is most needed.
Posted by: Ben Schiendelman on October 5, 2005 10:11 AM