December 23, 2006
I Agree with Liberals

Hey, it happens once in a while. As it is, I do agree with both Goldy and Ron Sims (Seattle might start electing Republicans before this happens again) on current affairs related to replacing the viaduct. Heck, for that matter, I agree with Josh Feit too. If the tunnel is really as fiscally dangerous as both a stand-alone project and to the region as a whole as many rightly say, it shouldn't even be a choice on an advisory ballot in Seattle (let alone a ballot that doesn't couple the choice of a tunnel with direct obligation for a tax increases). The choice, if one is presented to the voters in such a manner at all, should be between rebuilding the viaduct or a surface street option with enhanced transit.

One gnawing question remains based on the complaints expressed by Sims and Feit about WSDOT's failure to study the surface street option including improved transit: why has this not been studied yet? We've been brooding over assorted replacements and fixes for the viaduct for years. How does a serious option get overlooked in the dizzying cornucopia of studies and consultations this region is infamous for?

Is this the State's fault? The County's? Or perhaps the City's? After all, the City Council, famous for its excessive deliberation, expressed interest in the surface boulevard option as an alternative to the tunnel if the latter doesn't pan out. So why on God's green earth is there no study of this option to evaluate?

The more I think about it, the more ludicrous an advisory vote is, especially when the choice is between an unaffordable tunnel and a heinous rebuild of the viaduct. I originally thought such a passing of the buck by Chris Gregoire was "horrendous." If possible, I view it even worse after further reflection.

Readers are welcome to chime in with a suggestion for a word choice to top "horrendous" as an expression of total disdain. Or tell me they violently disagree with me. Whichever.

Posted by Eric Earling at December 23, 2006 07:23 AM | Email This
Comments
1. "Asinine"

1. foolish, unintelligent, or silly;
2. of or like an ass.

Either definition works for me.

Posted by: Regret on December 23, 2006 07:25 AM
2. I can see it now....after suffering delay upon delay at the onset of this project, costing STATE taxpayers billions of additional dollars (the old tunnelers adage "Murphy lives underground" comes to mind here), there's "historical artifacts" discovered at the site adding even MORE delays and costs. Still, I really could care less what happens in "Liby-Land North" till it starts costing ME tax dollars 60 miles away. Maybe the excavation will by then be deep enough to bury the politicos who vote for this future boondoggle.

Posted by: Chux on December 23, 2006 08:44 AM
3. I never knew that Gregoire was French for "incapaple of making a leadership decision"

Posted by: Bryce Allen on December 23, 2006 08:46 AM
4. I never knew that Gregoire was French for "incapable of making a leadership decision"

Posted by: Bryce Allen on December 23, 2006 08:47 AM
5. But remeber, replecing the viaduct was an "emergency" because it might fall down.

Posted by: TrueSoldier on December 23, 2006 09:12 AM
6. The legislature needs to do some prioritizing. The most important needs now on the transportation horizon are SR 520 work and something to replace the SR 99 viaduct.

This session the legislature should pass laws to put in place funding sources to do work on those two road projects. Tolls and taxes need to be established for those two. They can be state-wide because of their importance state-wide.

Variable congestion-priced tolls and gas taxes for example would raise revenue and reduce peak time roadway demands on both those highways (as well as on I-5 through Seattle and I-90).

Starting immediately Metro and ST should have a beauty contest. Each should design a transit component for the downtown SR 99 corridor. At the same time WSDOT can begin the seawall and viaduct demolition work and construction preparation (with Port financial and engineering assistance). If the transit agencies are unable to come up with good transit options, WSDOT should put in some kind of new viaduct. If there is a good transit option, the replacement roadway can be decreased in size.

The benefits of this approach include no RTID/ST2 vote in November. There are several reasons why that would be a very good thing.

First, megaprojects have proven to be nuts our local political leaders can't crack. The citizens of this region are not being well served by ST's disproportionately expensive undertakings, and the mayor is driving up costs by his threats to tie up permitting if he does not get a grossly overpriced tunnel. Seattle monorail is an example of the kind of megaproject fiasco local politicians rush to embrace, and nothing suggests they've learned any substantive lessons from it. Team Nickels' base got hundreds of millions of tax dollars and the public got shafted. The political cabal in charge considers monorail a "win."


Second, ST is just trying to rush to the ballot to get voters to lock in way more taxes than it should, given what the SR 520 and SR 99 work will cost. The voters just approved a new transit-only sales tax. We have one of the top sales tax burdens in the country. What ST wants to do is impose more sales tax on this region, to make us the most heavily taxed in that way anywhere. A sales tax is the most regressive kind of taxation. ST's planned tax grab for next November is identical to what the monorail proponents did: lock in taxes, then release the revised WAY higher real cost numbers.

Give people around here a break. Let's see how the economy and taxpayers adjust to the additional tax burdens the SR 520 and SR 99 work imposes for a couple of years before ST2 is put up for a vote. The whole idea of Sound Transit was that the region would get to try it out before deciding whether to expand light rail. Let's make sure we like light rail before diverting transportation taxes that likely would be better spent getting the SR 520 and SR 99 work done sooner.

The legislature needs to prioritize these transportation projects - not just allow self-interested proponents to rush to the ballot and spend enough to get a win.

Posted by: R. Balboa on December 23, 2006 09:47 AM
7. Because the 'all surface street' option is moronic at best.

Alaskan Way the ground street is already pretty darn full. By eliminating all of the parking and the tram, you might get to add a full lane in both directions - but you won't get to add two full lanes. The train lines aren't the property of Seattle, they're Burlington Northern IIRC. They have to be accommodated somewhere in this plan.

So, bus lanes you said? That takes the one extra lane... so now you're adding 100,000 vehicles to day to an already crowded Alaskan Way with exactly zero increase in car capacity.

Good work.

Posted by: Al on December 23, 2006 12:47 PM
8. This session the legislature should pass laws to put in place funding sources to do work on those two road projects. Tolls and taxes need to be established for those two. They can be state-wide because of their importance state-wide.

Importance state-wide? Why is it that Seattleites think that the viaduct replacement should be decided locally and funded state wide?

Dream on.

Posted by: South County on December 23, 2006 01:55 PM
9. The funding for a 99 replacement viaduct already "exists" (from the State and Port, mostly). The recent statewide gas tax increase is the primary source for that.

It is the 520 rebuild from 405 to I5 that needs funding allocated. Tolls will be a part of it. But there'll also need to be a bucketload of new taxes - for decades - from some group of people and/or businesses. Car tab tax? Per-employee head tax? Additional sales tax? Bump up the gas tax? Pick your poison.

We should only try to develop one gargantuan public infrastructure taxing package at a time. That isn't an easy thing to do. Monorail just wasted $225,000,000 in tax money over the past three years, because Nickels and his base wanted it. Sound Transit can hold off a couple of years asking for a massive new sales tax increase. Let's see if those light rail trains are "all that" first. Maybe Nickels and Sims won't be able to get them to work.

We need to get the 520 corridor project revenues set into place well before an ST2 vote for massive new sales taxes, in my humble opinion.

Posted by: R. Balboa on December 23, 2006 04:02 PM
10. Let's ask the voters several questions in April. One could be: "If the government must take an ADDITIONAL .5% sales tax from you and your neighbors in perpetuity starting next year, would you prefer it went to pay for the 520 rebuild, or Sound Transit's overpriced train concept?" That'd be a sound advisory measure.

Posted by: R. Balboa on December 23, 2006 07:46 PM
11. I am not surprised that you agree with Liberals.

After all sooner or later you are going to stab the Republican Party in the back.

After all, isn't that what all of you so called "mainstreamers" do.

Posted by: Beth on December 26, 2006 10:19 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?