The anti-car lobby (e.g. Sierra Club, Transportation "Choices" Coalition and The Stranger) are criticizing the RTID/Sound Transit joint ballot proposal because it would force them to swallow $5 billion for road construction in order to get $11 billion in light rail and other "mass transit" construction. Many other people are throwing up on the proposal for the opposite reason.
This entire dispute is unnecessary. Nobody should be forced to pay for infrastructure he considers to be foolishly cost-ineffective and/or environmentally immoral. Nobody should have their desired solution held hostage for the other. Roads should be paid for only by those who want and use them. Likewise with light rail.
Let all highway construction and improvements be paid for through tolls, and let all light rail be financed 100% through the farebox.
Sometimes it really is that simple.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 18, 2007 11:11 AM | Email ThisThe best thing for Western Washington (from Vancouver to Blaine) would be for half the people to move to toher states and countries.
Posted by: Libertarian on April 18, 2007 11:07 AMThat's not fair. The elite few must be subsidized by the toiling many. That's the way it's always been with Seattle running the state of Washington, and that's the way it always should be.
Trains to nowhere? GOOD!
Freeways, highways, and roads for the common folk? BAD!
Highrise luxury condos in town with glittering views of the sound? GOOD!
Low-rent tenaments in town for the people who service the condos? BAD!
It's an easy game to play. Whatever the glitterati hate is probably the best and cheapest choice.
Posted by: steve miller on April 18, 2007 11:07 AMWould only agree to that if road/rail construction was privatized, with open bidding, sales tax free and no prevailing wage. That will never happen.
Posted by: Jeffro on April 18, 2007 11:25 AMWould only agree to that if road/rail construction was privatized, with open bidding, sales tax free and no prevailing wage. That will never happen.
Posted by: Jeffro on April 18, 2007 11:25 AMWould you refuse to pay for the road that brings medicine to your sick child? Should childless people be denied usage of the road? Planning to withold your taxes from those programs you disagree with? Sounding like the Anti-war/No Taxes crowd!
This is the voice of sanity in the Puget Sound that I've been waiting for years to hear.
11 billion for a choo-choo train that will lose money year after year and serve a few thousand people, or more money for roads that will serve 99.9% of people.
However, I seriously contend that you explore another options: Subtractive Architecture.
Many Puget Sound problems could be solved not by building or rebuilding, but by taking something away...we're simply crammed with "too much good stuff".
Examples:
1. Get rid of the viaduct. Tear it down. Just do it...and see what happens.
2. 520. Goodbye, sink it and let everyone use I-90. It's more than adequate.
3. The Sonics -- head south to Tacoma, baby! There's a great dome awaiting for you, and don't tell us it can't be done, because you played one of your best seasons ever, 94-95, there!
There is such a need to NOT do things in the Puget sound.
The one place that we need to improve is the quality of people who run our bureaucracies who can work at this level of thought. Right now the people are inadequate to the task...at every level of governance.
Posted by: John Bailo on April 18, 2007 11:55 AMWhile toll roads have their place, putting them everyplace just gets annoying.
I'd support toll roads on the condition that all other transportation taxes be eliminated.
Posted by: H Moul on April 18, 2007 01:06 PMSimple solutions are for the rational. You won't find a majority of those people in Seattle.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 18, 2007 01:14 PMStefan...good way to force the discussion of
WHAT IS THE FAIR & EQUITABLE WAY TO PAY FOR VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES.
Car users pay for roads via Tolls & Gas Tax.
Light Rails users pay for there $11 Billion project with:
1) Fares
2) Property Tax increases on Downtown Property Owners (that will go over like a lead balloon!)
3) Increase Latte taxes
4) 800% Sales Tax on the P-I and Seattle Times---Subscriptions & Advertisers. People will be reading these "fishwrappers" while commuting on the light rail!!
Any other ideas on how Light Rail can be paid for by those that utilize & directly benefit???
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on April 18, 2007 01:47 PMIt's always interesting to observe the results of a narrow (and slightly absurd) ideology combined with couch transportation planning. As if all people "choose" to live in their communities.
Ever heard of something called a "family," Stefan? Kids like to stay in the same school systems they grew up in, wives and husbands change jobs all the time, family members move to be closer to aging parents or relatives, etc.
And, as if cars pay their own way. Does that big park in your front yard also pay for itself? Should we charge you for the view? How's about a $5 charge for each run around the lake - $10 to sit on the grass for two hours ($5 if it rains)
To his credit, Stefan works out of his house; however, he also seems to possess a very myopic vision of how people get around, and why people live where they live.
Posted by: Benji on April 18, 2007 11:22 PMactually mass transit did at one time pay for it self, private companies actually ran the railroads and bus/trolly systems
Posted by: ronk on April 19, 2007 12:30 AMit's time for a change and trial of different ideas. why can't we lead the nation in this area? we seem to have good coffee & computer ideas.
sadly, not holding breath in this blue land. but--like our schools--repeating the same mistakes with different wrapppers does not work.
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on April 19, 2007 05:40 AMHere's the problem: Existing capital assets. Sure, make mass transit and roads both pay for themselves - but the private owners have to pay for the infrastructure first.
Generally, arguments that transportation infrastructure should "pay for itself" are made because the road infrastructure already exists - if you simply handed our roads to a private company, of course they could profit! They already have ROW and a user base. The only reason transit isn't the same is that we've never built the infrastructure necessary to make them equal.
Posted by: Ben Schiendelman on April 19, 2007 10:02 AMLess we forget the multiple taxes currently paid by car owners that use the roads. Gas tax, license fees, sales taxes, etc.
Toll are usually reserved - East Coast, Denver - for expressways that offer advantages. Lacking an advantage, the incentive to use the toll road would be minimized.
Regarding rail transportation - an old fashion approach.
May I remind readers that the NYC subways were owned, built and operated by private companies till 1957 (leases expired). NYC leased the right of ways to the private companies. One of the benefits to NYC as a result of this "novel" approach was the city actually made a profit from the leases (no costs to to taxpayers - what a concept- and fares were competitive. All of the history and contracts of the NYC subway system (IRT, BMT, IND )are available on the INTERNET. Bus systems were also privatized in the same manner.
If indeed citizens will use mass transit, then let private enterprise do it. Lease the right of ways. I for one don't believe that the density of Puget Sound is adequate to support rail mass transit.
Posted by: Snuffy on April 20, 2007 08:03 AM