Erica Barnett posts on a Sierra Club funded poll by a reasonably reputable pollster that examined the Roads and Transit vote.
ECB and the P-I's politics blog tout the finding that if all the voters who voted against Prop 1 because of "global warming" would have voted "yes" then the measure would have passed. Plus, the poll shows voters say they would have passed the transit only measure had they had the chance, by a 52% - 36% margin (12% unsure). Maybe, but that would have been a very different campaign and Elway's polling showed the separate measures failing as stand alone options if voters had that choice so I'm not sure the "transit only NOW!" argument is totally convincing.
Either way, 50 miles of light rail is gone. A future, likely smaller such plan is probably going to shrink that a bunch. Instead of light rail to north Lynnwood, east to Overlake, and south to Tacoma, we'll probably see a plan with light rail to Shoreline, downtown Bellevue, and maybe Federal Way. Or it could be even smaller than that. So, enviros, you can thank the Sierra Club and company for fighting tooth and nail against one of your best opportunities to expand local light rail in years.
Why do I say that?
Looking at the crosstabs by geographic region, Prop 1 voters in King County outside of Seattle, as well as in Pierce and Snohomish Counties, voting no cited "higher taxes" as their key objection by an overwhelming margin, with no other given reason within 20% of that objection. In Seattle 35% of "no" voters cited "higher taxes" for their vote, but another 31% cited "environmental/global warming" reasons for their opposition.
Examining the numbers a little differently, the choice of the roads portion by itself garnered strong plurality support outside of Seattle (51% - 33% in King outside Seattle, 45% - 39% in Pierce, and 47% - 34% in Snohomish). But in Seattle voters objected to the hypothetical 34% - 50%.
Takeway: a critical mass of Seattle voters, aka urban liberals concerned about global warming who generally don't drive on the clogged suburban roads in question, are willing to can 50 miles of light rail to say no to pavement no matter how needed in other communities it might be. Ugh.
Translation: Regional measures that depend on Seattle votes for joint transportation measures might well be done for - another hint that maybe state government should have done it's job on that score to begin with. Now, the State is going to have to deal with major projects like 520 and perhaps 509 and the Valley Freeway. Sound Transit will be back, in 2009 at the earliest, if Frank Chopp continues his strong concern with letting such a measure go on the ballot at the same time as his caucus [chew on that for a minute liberals: if Frank Chopp would let this go to a vote in a high turnout year you'd get your light rail a lot easier]. Meanwhile, Snohomish and Pierce may need to exercise the option to take their own respective roads measures to their own respective electorates.
Of all things, that potentially leaves the remaining and desperately needed 405 expansion south of Bellevue that's still $1+ billion short without Prop 1 left hanging in the breeze unless the State or King County steps up to the plate. I don't think Kemper Freeman expected that.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 08, 2007 10:16 PM | Email ThisAnd speaking of pathetic, I think everyone ought to go and read a truly deranged tirade, by clicking here.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 8, 2007 11:58 PM#2 – Let’s get sane with transit and transit funding. The light rail from Everett to Tacoma is a joke. How long would it take to go from Federal Way to Seattle, making all of those stops along the way; airport, Rainier Valley, Beacon Hill, etc.? How much does it cost? How long does the express bus take? How much does that cost? The focus should be on slowly evolving Sounder into the linear, fast, alternative to the freeways for a wide swath of area, for this liner, congested region. Over the years, we should invest in new track adjacent to the BNSF lines south of Seattle so frequency can increase and BNSF can get back to handling port freight. North of Seattle, Sounder should eventually follow the I-5 corridor. Have a future master plan so over the decades as we repair and improve I-5, we allocate space for a future line. If we add lanes to 167/405 and reroute the corridor (405 would shoot south down 167 instead of to I-5, eliminating that nasty choke point the state just poured lots of $ into, while solving little), we could get more truck and passing through traffic off of I-5 through Seattle, and in the long term future, we could probably allocate the Express Lanes for a transit corridor. Since we need a new 520 bridge, it would be a great opportunity to allocate space for a future trans-lake line. One of my ideas for transit funding is a tax on multifamily units larger than a four-plex since density and transit go together. Also, try to find a way to tap into the wealth created by new stations and zoning changes that accompany the adjacent transit line.
We need to end the car-transit war. We need to reform WSDOT. We need leadership.
A recent study showed the 27% of all commutes are within Kent.
25% are from Kent to Seattle.
The next highest was 9% to Auburn.
That means that 50% of all traffic is handled by current roads and by express buses (and Sounder) to Seattle.
And with more businesses moving to Kent in commercial areas like the Boeing Space Center and with more entertainment coming to Kent Station -- why would we ever want to leave?
And, why in the world would we Kentians want to pay for:
1. A Train from Seattle to Lynnwood
2. A highway in Bellevue
3. A replacement Viaduct we'll almost never use
4. A bridge we don't often go over.
We are now an archipelago of communities with diverse transit needs and interests.
Least of all we don't want to pay for super-transit systems that don't meet our local needs.
Posted by: John Bailo on November 9, 2007 02:17 AM50 Billion dollars is enough! It is flat enough to do all that a guvment should do.
I am really getting flat Pissed off at all the spending and taxes in this state.
Enough is enough! The voters said so, the courts cannot get enough, and the politicians are never getting enough. But enough is enough
enough, enough enough!
Posted by: GS on November 9, 2007 02:24 AMAnd given that light rail is such an utter, total and complete waste of money that accomplishes nothing save full employment for union builders, it's a damned good thing, to.
I'm a "no" on anything transportation that isn't devoted to congestion relief. ANd SOund Transit even admits that a fully implemented light rail system, while costing us billions and billions, will have no positive impact on congestion.
I, personally, wouldn't be saddened if not one foot of this monetary black hole ever sees the light of day.
Posted by: Hinton on November 9, 2007 05:34 AMThe point isn't light rail, where the position of the Sound Politics readership is well-documented. The point is Seattle is so significantly anti-roads now that when given the chance, they won't accept even the most urgent roads projects, even when presented with the carrot of 50 miles of light rail (which is exactly what many of those enviros want and will advocate for now after Prop 1).
Posted by: Eric Earling on November 9, 2007 07:23 AMAs with the gas tax vote- the rest of the state will clearly say yes to roads.
Seattilites would rather ban cars than build any new road.
Posted by: Al on November 9, 2007 07:50 AMI got to suffer through construction and I got to see some pretty HOV exits that most of us can't use but my commute did not get any better.
Want more of my money? Give me SOMETHING for it.
Posted by: Carl on November 9, 2007 07:54 AMFor example, when I buy a Boeing jetliner for my commute to Yakima, I don't give them the cash and then immediately get a plane. Same goes for roads.
There are environmental designs, environmental reports (oh, did I mention environmental delays), predesign reports, property acquisition, then road design, bidding and then construction. Oh, did I mention more environmental delays and community redesigns and inertia caused by same?
Posted by: swatter on November 9, 2007 08:47 AMYou just know the guys with the trains are thinking about it...
Posted by: mykela on November 9, 2007 10:09 AMWatch your rents and mortgage payments skyrocket to new levels from these actions and lack of actions on the democrats side.
I am sure Tim will have a new initiative to take action on the lack of action by this governor to this issue.
And my guess is it will be front and center in this state in a 2008 election year
Posted by: GS on November 9, 2007 10:33 AMRTID: Yes - 103914; No - 129151
ST: Yes - 103895; No - 129138
Granted it's only about 20 votes difference, but that kind of squashes the arguement that people voted it down because they wanted transit but not roads.
Maybe next time they can divide the districts in half - let the eastside only vote and pay for roads on the eastside, and let Seattle vote and foot the entire bill for a transit nightmare.
The RTID area includes the whole ST area plus a chunk of Snohomish County that is not part of the ST area.
The Legislature enacted this weird requirement that a majority was needed in both the smaller ST area and the larger RTID area. That's why the electoral authorities give out the numbers you cited.
Now that Prop. 1 did not pass, the legal challenge based on this weird requirement (violation of one person one vote rule) (and violation of the single subject rule) are moot.
Posted by: Cleve on November 9, 2007 11:29 AMI would absolutely SHOCKED if the tax limit imposed by Gregoire is even remotely close to what I-747 did. It will probably be filled with all kinds of special interest loopholes as well. But she'll claim victory during election season anyway. It'll also serve as a premptive strike against another Eyman initiative, which would be alot more effective and limiting than any tax ceiling measure she and her rubber stamp congress would pass.
Posted by: Palouse on November 9, 2007 12:16 PMWe have an emergency relating to specific roads: the Viaduct and 520 are two of them. I'm sure there are more.
These projects should be streamlined to the max. I was talking to my dad about this last night and he brought up the freeway collapse in California after the Northridge earthquake. They streamlined the permitting and bidding, gave the contractor bonuses for early completion and strict penalties for being late. What could have taken years (it took 6 years after the Loma Prieta quake) took months. And afterwards California went right back to the old permitting and process even though they had saved boatloads of money even with the bonuses (dumb).
Here's where some of this can be found: http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/13775.html
So let's start addressing this as the actual emergency it is and get moving. If we treat it as an emergency, it should cost us a lot less than what we're being told now.
This is actually a national problem as most of our major roads are the same age, so perhaps national funding for a national emergency (economic and defense) is appropriate. Just thinking out loud :)
Posted by: Jessica on November 9, 2007 12:18 PMIs the WSSC decision on I-747 even legitimate? A 5-4 decision, where the "majority" includes 2 justices pro tem?
A runaway court, intoxicated with judicial activism, is bad enough when it's legitimate.
But when that court starts trampling on the will of the voters, using "majorities" built on unelected legal temps, we are in danger of losing the rule of law.
Posted by: ewaggin on November 9, 2007 12:47 PMHeh, heh. Wouldn't that require some actual leadership from the majority party?
Posted by: ewaggin on November 9, 2007 12:52 PMYou would have a valid point if the taxes had just started being collected. It would be impossible to see immediate improvement.
But since we have been paying gas taxes, tab fees, etc. for as long as I can remember- why is it that we STILL don't have improvement? How long has Highway 2 been a disaster? How long has rush-hour traffic into and out of Seattle been a mess? How long has DOT been WASTING our taxes on stuff that not only doesn't improve the situation, it actually makes it worse in some instances?
The same thing goes for the arguement that we (those who oppose Prop1) are making the situation worse by not rubber-stamping any and all taxes they want passed. If they had been spending the money where we the people wanted it (roads), we wouldn't be in the situation we currently find ourselves in!
Posted by: David on November 9, 2007 01:34 PMThere indeed were plans for a Monroe Bypass and some of the Right of Way obtained. There were plans for a widening of 522 from Woodinville to Monroe.
But, you just can't get those major projects off the ground that was approved with the gas tax increase in under 4 years. I have nothing to back my time frames up, but it just seems that way.
Do you think we should go back to in-house designs or keep the designs in the private sector where more gold is added to the plate?
Posted by: swatter on November 9, 2007 02:01 PMI don't know what it is about Puget Sound, but Jeff B is right. Seattle can't seem to get anything done. Portland's got light rail, and so does San Jose, and it's fantastic, and people ride it.
We can't get the basics done around here.
1. Studded tires. Our roads are so expensive to maintain because we are the ONLY STATE IN THE US left that has not outlawed studded tires on cars and light trucks. Politicians here won't touch it.
2. You can't get a commercial flight out of Paine Field in Everett. That means all air-based trucked freight, including UPS and the rest, comes in from SeaTac, and that's just the beginning of the mitigation that could be had by being able to fly to Chicago or Denver from Everett.
We can't do the simple, obvious things because of all the NIMBY BS the region is embroiled in. Stewing in your own filth seems to be a very Seattle sort of thing. Traffic here is only worse in LA (No light rail).
Posted by: Matt Kelly on November 9, 2007 03:22 PMI don't know what it is about Puget Sound, but Jeff B is right. Seattle can't seem to get anything done. Portland's got light rail, and so does San Jose, and it's fantastic, and people ride it.
We can't get the basics done around here.
1. Studded tires. Our roads are so expensive to maintain because we are the ONLY STATE IN THE US left that has not outlawed studded tires on cars and light trucks. Politicians here won't touch it.
2. You can't get a commercial flight out of Paine Field in Everett. That means all air-based trucked freight, including UPS and the rest, comes in from SeaTac, and that's just the beginning of the mitigation that could be had by being able to fly to Chicago or Denver from Everett.
We can't do the simple, obvious things because of all the NIMBY BS the region is embroiled in. Stewing in your own filth seems to be a very Seattle sort of thing. Traffic here is only worse in LA (No light rail).
Posted by: Matt Kelly on November 9, 2007 03:23 PMI don't know what it is about Puget Sound, but Jeff B is right. Seattle can't seem to get anything done. Portland's got light rail, and so does San Jose, and it's fantastic, and people ride it.
We can't get the basics done around here.
1. Studded tires. Our roads are so expensive to maintain because we are the ONLY STATE IN THE US left that has not outlawed studded tires on cars and light trucks. Politicians here won't touch it.
2. You can't get a commercial flight out of Paine Field in Everett. That means all air-based trucked freight, including UPS and the rest, comes in from SeaTac, and that's just the beginning of the mitigation that could be had by being able to fly to Chicago or Denver from Everett.
We can't do the simple, obvious things because of all the NIMBY BS the region is embroiled in. Stewing in your own filth seems to be a very Seattle sort of thing. Traffic here is only worse in LA (No light rail).
Posted by: Matt Kelly on November 9, 2007 03:25 PMAnd if you think rail is cost effective or efficient. Do some more reading.
Posted by: Palouse on November 9, 2007 03:52 PMI am mad as heck!!!
I just sent Tim Eyman (my hero) another $100, and I hope he can help us restore 747!
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 9, 2007 05:05 PMIt was a set up. Same as the 30 dollar Car tab.
2 justices pro tem, did they hear the the original case?
The Govenors want the last say. The public don't know what their doing went the VOTE.
Posted by: George on November 9, 2007 05:29 PMSeattle needs to grow up and stop agonizing over the 1% of things that don't matter and fix the 99% of things that do. I've never seen so many folks willing to take the status quo and settle for what we call "leaders". To think that a few years ago, this region was entertaining ideas of hosting the Olympics - haha, they can't even take care of basic governmental responsibilities - infrastructure (yes, roads), education, crime (WTO anyone?) and other basic services.
I think it's time to turn Seattle into the 51st state and let the rest of us get on with it.
Posted by: Orson Buggy on November 9, 2007 05:47 PMThis was great, plowing through 36 posts wherein many "conservatives" complained about Seattle residents voting down a massive new tax-and-spend proposition!
And hearing road-loving-socialists talk about how entitled they feel to having government provide them with roads--regardless of whether the tax has any market integrity to it--i.e. whether or not it's a user fee.
No wonder people are looking for a new direction for conservatism.
Best wishes all,
new left conservative #1
You are no conservative.
Posted by: Liberal_Crusher on November 11, 2007 02:21 AMI am disinclined to give the same agency even more money to poorly spend.