Search

Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Fuck You, Bald Boy Babies | Cocoa (or Coffee?) Clash »

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Olympia Rail to Eastside in Jeopardy

Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:56 PM

As Seattle Transit Blog reported Monday (sorry, it's been a busy couple of days), the state House transportation budget has even worse news for light rail than the (also problematic) senate transportation budget: It would prohibit a voter-approved light rail line over I-90 to Bellevue and Redmond until the state can complete a completely unnecessary "asset assessment study" to determine how much the state can charge Sound Transit to use the bridge for light rail. This morning, senate transportation committee member and King County Executive candidate Fred Jarrett inserted language into the senate version of the bill that would block the house move to preempt Eastside light rail. However, the house version still includes the rail-blocking language. And the senate version would still postpone the release of the state's contribution to light rail across Lake Washington, delaying Eastside light rail until 2024 or later.

Sound Transit has already doubled its contribution to light rail across I-90, to $90 million, and the state has already agreed to kick in the remaining $27 million. Key state transportation leaders, including House transportation chair Judy Clibborn (D-41) and Senate transportation chair Mary Margaret Haugen (D-10) have been staunch opponents of light-rail expansion.

County exec candidates Larry Phillips and Dow Constantine blasted out dueling press releases yesterday demanding that state legislators support the voter-approved system. “The ... transportation budget is out of touch with the priorities of regional voters who five months ago overwhelmingly supported building light rail between Seattle, Bellevue and Redmond," said Phillips, who also noted that the house budget also precludes two-way HOV lanes on I-90, which are part of the light-rail proposal.

Share via

Comments (15) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

I hear that Pam Roach announced she will kill the light rail system just because someone stole some flowers from her garden this morning.

That's who's behind this.

Posted by Will in DC (formerly Seattle) on April 1, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Erica, you have a typo in the title; should be "jeopardy."

This news is really frustrating. This Fred Jarrett guy is such a two-faced douchenozzle.

Also, Will, nobody is falling for your jokes.

Posted by lily on April 1, 2009 at 2:08 PM

If there's one thing we should have learned from the monorail experience, it's that in the Seattle area the time to celebrate a new mass transit system is not when the voters approve the system and its funding; it's the day the mass transit system actually opens for revenue service.

I'm afraid the landslide victory by Proposition 1 isn't going to change the minds of those legislators who've always opposed light rail. They have their reasons, and those reasons have nothing to do with the will of the people. Now they can hunker down and settle into a strategy of obstructing and delaying at all costs to raise costs. It's the death by a thousand cuts approach, and the Eastside is fertile grounds for this to work.

Posted by cressona on April 1, 2009 at 2:19 PM

What's really sucks about this is that it would also compromise plans to build a density-minded Bel-Red community in the area on the Eastside near the 520/I-405 interchange that has largely housed grocery distribution centers. The Bel-Red plan is a transit-oriented development plan that assumes a light rail presence, and killing or severely delaying the Sound Transit light rail reach into the heart of the Eastside would compromise what it stands for in the first place.

Not to mention that it would only encourage more people to use their cars on the Eastside. Oh, but wait - Gregoire allocated $341 million to make improvements to I-405 congestion:

http://www.seattlepi.com/transportation/…

She says that the I-405 project would create jobs. But so would a major light rail expansion to the Eastside. Two lane additions to I-405 is only going to encourage more people to drive. Light rail will encourage more people to get out of their cars. I don't understand this logic.

Posted by loganlorelai on April 1, 2009 at 2:28 PM

@2 - what jokes? are you saying they didn't do that? you know, some of us have serious work to do here ... you need to stop putting all these fake things in your newspapers - I can't tell the difference from here in the beltway.

Posted by Will in DC (formerly Seattle) on April 1, 2009 at 2:38 PM

When it was the monorail the city leaders made sure to charge it to the max just for the right to use city right of way. Some of those same leaders were and are on ST board.
Now, they see the State doing to them, what they did to the monorail.

So, boo fucking hoo.

"they ha[d] their reasons and those reasons ha[d] nothing to do with the will of the people."

that was true then and it's true now.

The outcome will be the same. The state legislators out in Walla Walla and even in Montlake Terrace don't give a shit who voted for what. They are going to hold light rail ransom because they CAN. If they make it pay fine. If they make it fail fine.

but no other politicians have a moral leg to stand on; they all do the same thing, which is maximize their own power.

Posted by Diogenes on April 1, 2009 at 2:40 PM

Be sure to email your legislators about this: http://seattletransitblog.com/2009/04/01…

Posted by John Jensen on April 1, 2009 at 2:57 PM

@6, I agree that it would almost make sense for those in MLT or Walla Walla to hold ransom/screw over light rail to the eastside--what would they care, right--as long as they don't have to pay? But Fred Jarrett and Judy Clibborn are both east King County legislators! They are screwing over their own constituents (along with anyone else who would benefit from a job helping to build the light rail, or would ever ride it, or ever drives across 520 or I-90).

Posted by lily on April 1, 2009 at 2:59 PM

Diogenes @6, you're absolutely right that Greg Nickels for one has no moral leg to stand on when it comes to elected officials' obstructionism of mass transit projects. He would be the hypocrite supreme.

But let's not make this sound righteous. Two wrongs don't make a right. And "an eye for an eye" is not exactly a sign of a morally advanced civilization or a mature democracy.

If the satisfaction of sticking it to Greg Nickels can only come at the price of killing Eastside light rail, then sorry, that's a little too high a price for me.

Posted by cressona on April 1, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Ummm 6 and 9, let's not have selective memories, please, on the monorail history. When the history of that sad project is written (Tim Egan... please), I'm confident that most all of the responsibility/blame will lay at the feet of the monorail organizers and their executives (and boardmembers who declined to exercise oversight). Remember, they went out of their way to keep their project OUT of the hands of City Hall, and turned to the City for a rescue package only after sitting on bad news for 10 months. By that time, it was just too late.

There's no doubt a lot of fair shots that can be taken at Mayor Greg Nickels, but the demise of the monorail is just not one of them.

Posted by Imperfect Voter on April 1, 2009 at 4:45 PM

I hear the WA Senate just voted out the new version of the transportation bill.

Any news there?

Man, I miss you guys all so much, I'm coming home.

Posted by Will in DC (moving back to Seattle) on April 1, 2009 at 5:00 PM

What the fuck is going on down in Olympia? Jesus fucking christ.

Dems in this state are turning into Dems-only-in-name... ;asldkfjasl;kdjfl;kj

Posted by lame on April 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Has anyone (or group of folks) thought about running a slate of "new & improved" (read: younger-generation-without-Chopp-baggage) Democrats in one of the coming legislative primaries? Say, in the next 10 years?

That might be one way to shake things up.

Posted by lame on April 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM

The delay may well be just a politically prudent way to delay the project until engineering issues of the light rail crossing resolve themselves.

If you have not read the engineering work so far, please do so. It is a superb example of planning for a cost overrun. If rail is in fact feasible, let's see the plan with budget and keep the blank check off the table.

Posted by Douglas Tooley on April 2, 2009 at 10:33 AM

@14
Huh, engineering wise rail on I-90 is no problem. "Planning for a cost overrun" is actually a responsible way to do large capital projects. In any case any cost overruns will need to be paid for by Sound Transit and what the hell does the State care if Sound Transit busts it's budget.

Posted by Chris Stefan on April 2, 2009 at 4:30 PM