Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, December 22, 2009
City McGinn May Push Light-Rail Vote in 2010
Posted by Dominic Holden on Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Sitting in his transition offices in the Seattle Municipal Tower today, Mayor-elect Mike McGinn said he may try to place a light-rail expansion measure on the ballot as early as next year. During the campaign, he vowed to let voters decide if they wanted to extend the light-rail system to Ballard and West Seattle "within two years." Asked today if he was still committed to putting it on the 2011 ballot, he said, "We said we would put light-rail on the ballot within two years. The question is, can we do planning to do it in 2010? That seems aggressive but possible."
Asked how he would expect the fight to look—a proposition that would cost taxpayers hundreds of million of dollars—he said, "I don't think it will be so much of a fight." He says typically the state stops people from even voting on expanding mass transit. "Voters would support it," he said, "but we're not given that choice."
No doubt, the Seattle Times will issue an endorsement telling voters to reject any light-rail extension, which is exactly they did in 2008 (when it also rejected the parks levy, which McGinn championed). But McGinn is probably correct that persuading Seattle voters to extend light rail wouldn't be "much of a fight." He's beaten the Times' endorsement board before.
1
While this is an improvement by Seattle standards, Portland has opened up 47.4 miles of light rail in the past 10 years. Sound Transit is planning to open 3.15 miles of new light rail in the next 10 years.
Seattle should be stop being the most conservative city on the west coast in regards to transit, and at least build a regional average in the next 10 years. McGinn could lead us to become an "average city" by building light rail to, for example, Ballard, West Seattle, Admiral, Magnolia, Fremont, Wallingford, Greenlake, Wedgwood, Lake City, Central District, Madison Valley, South Beacon Hill, and Georgetown.
Of course, we could be an actual leader in transit and light rail by opening 100+ miles of new light rail in the next 10 years. We would still only have about 60% of the rail system of San Francisco, but it would be a start.
As of now, freaking Salt Lake City has about 2x the light rail as Seattle, and is planning to open their 4th line in 2011, 5th line in 2013, and 6th line by 2015. Three years ago, their voters approved a tax hike to pay for 3 new light rail lines to be built within 10 years. McGinn is only proposing one light rail line.
Seattle should be stop being the most conservative city on the west coast in regards to transit, and at least build a regional average in the next 10 years. McGinn could lead us to become an "average city" by building light rail to, for example, Ballard, West Seattle, Admiral, Magnolia, Fremont, Wallingford, Greenlake, Wedgwood, Lake City, Central District, Madison Valley, South Beacon Hill, and Georgetown.
Of course, we could be an actual leader in transit and light rail by opening 100+ miles of new light rail in the next 10 years. We would still only have about 60% of the rail system of San Francisco, but it would be a start.
As of now, freaking Salt Lake City has about 2x the light rail as Seattle, and is planning to open their 4th line in 2011, 5th line in 2013, and 6th line by 2015. Three years ago, their voters approved a tax hike to pay for 3 new light rail lines to be built within 10 years. McGinn is only proposing one light rail line.
2
I hope that McGinn won't forget the bike and pedestrian funding that so many of us hoped for when we voted for him.
3
The problem is that there is no way to discredit and stop in the public's mind the travesty that is the corporate-controlled Right wing advocacy of the Times' board. There's no unified voice or mainstream enough media presence to render them to the required level of irrelevancy, which will give them too much undeserved and unearned clout over the vote.
5
#4: San Francisco is a lot hillier than Seattle, and it has more light rail than any other city in the United States.
Seattle has less light rail than Cleveland, Trenton (New Jersey), Cleveland, Phoenix, Jersey City, San Jose, New Orleans, Oceanside (California), and about 20 other US cities.
Seattle has less light rail than Cleveland, Trenton (New Jersey), Cleveland, Phoenix, Jersey City, San Jose, New Orleans, Oceanside (California), and about 20 other US cities.
6
Our fearless champion will not be cowered!
No matter the odds -- he and his Populist Phalanx will fight on for high priced unnecessary big budget infrastructure.
Tunnels, light rails, bright water -- all will be fought for...funded by you, the taxpayer, but St. Mike Hisself.
Our fearless champion will not be cowered!
No matter the odds -- he and his Populist Phalanx will fight on for high priced unnecessary big budget infrastructure.
Tunnels, light rails, bright water -- all will be fought for...funded by you, the taxpayer, but St. Mike Hisself.
7
the problem is not Seattle -- its the other Sound Transit counties voting on it too. He should wait until the next Presidential election. Every mass transit won in Presidential years -- lost in other years. 2010 is going to be a tough year for Democrats. Maybe you were too young, but 1994 really sucked. And even in Seattle in 1994 every bond increase in Seattle lost too. McGinn doesn't yet realize it takes a lot of work with Sound Transit and other regional players on board to get this on the ballot. He has zero support in Olympia or with Senator Murray to get anything moving with Sound Transit and anything that he touches will be scorned by voters in the suburbs.
8
He's got my vote.
And after the state and county and ex-mayor tried to cram a Billionaire's Tunnel down our throats, he's going to have most of the votes in Seattle after that unwanted project is slaughtered at the polls they have to face, since they don't have the funding without it.
Up - transit for Seattle.
Down - Billionaire's Tunnel.
Eat shit and die, "powers that be".
And after the state and county and ex-mayor tried to cram a Billionaire's Tunnel down our throats, he's going to have most of the votes in Seattle after that unwanted project is slaughtered at the polls they have to face, since they don't have the funding without it.
Up - transit for Seattle.
Down - Billionaire's Tunnel.
Eat shit and die, "powers that be".
9
The West Seattle/Ballard line would have to be a Seattle-only vote, and would undoubtedly require enabling legislation in Olympia, given the dearth of available tax sources for First Class cities like Seattle.
Maybe we could get the Legislature to allow us the monorail tax options for a Seattle-only line like McGinn's talking about. Cost the line out, evaluate tax revenue possibilities (but accurately this time, not like the monorail company did it...) and then put it on the Seattle ballot. And if approved, Seattle contracts with Sound Transit to actually build the thing.
Bottom line, it's a Seattle-only ballot measure, not the whole ST district as a couple of commenters presumed.
Maybe we could get the Legislature to allow us the monorail tax options for a Seattle-only line like McGinn's talking about. Cost the line out, evaluate tax revenue possibilities (but accurately this time, not like the monorail company did it...) and then put it on the Seattle ballot. And if approved, Seattle contracts with Sound Transit to actually build the thing.
Bottom line, it's a Seattle-only ballot measure, not the whole ST district as a couple of commenters presumed.
10
While the more transit the better IMO, is the timing right? You've got Conlin talking about streetcar line expansion, First Hill and Capitol Hill fighting over the route of the First Hill Streetcar, and now a MASSIVE expansion of LINK being discussed.
Some time needs to be spent creating a comprehensive plan*, ensuring good coverage with little overlap (LINK being a backbone system moving people quickly! Not alot of stops) between neighborhoods, Streetcars within).
*Which due to the fucked up transportation bureaucracy means City, KC Metro, and ST all getting together.
Some time needs to be spent creating a comprehensive plan*, ensuring good coverage with little overlap (LINK being a backbone system moving people quickly! Not alot of stops) between neighborhoods, Streetcars within).
*Which due to the fucked up transportation bureaucracy means City, KC Metro, and ST all getting together.
11
Citizen R - You could do this without any new taxes authorized by Olympia. And, I agree, It would be Seattle only.
12
We elected McGinn to lead Seattle into the 21st century, and for a city that means extensive, robust transit, bike and pedestrian infrastructure development, and deemphasizing the private automobile. I think all of us who voted for Mike expect no less.
13
Ride @11, no new tax authorizations from Olympia? Which existing tax source(s) would you suggest be used to fund a Seattle-only light rail line?
14
"He's beaten the Times' endorsement board before."
Oh please, as if the McGinn lovin' couldn't get any worse. McGinn did not "beat" the Times editorial board...
Oh please, as if the McGinn lovin' couldn't get any worse. McGinn did not "beat" the Times editorial board...
15
Citizen R, the legislature this year approved new tax authority for transit. From the Seattle Times, 9/24/2009
"One way to fund a rail line could be to form a "transportation benefit district" as authorized by the Legislature, McGinn said.
With voter approval, state law allows a city district to enact a yearly car-tab fee of up to $100; sales taxes of two-tenths of 1 percent; or charge tolls on city arterials. Such a district could charge developer fees, or neighborhood-approved property taxes near the projects.
The city is eligible to form a district, and the law allows Seattle to transfer a new rail project to Sound Transit, a legislative staffer in Olympia said Wednesday.
"One way to fund a rail line could be to form a "transportation benefit district" as authorized by the Legislature, McGinn said.
With voter approval, state law allows a city district to enact a yearly car-tab fee of up to $100; sales taxes of two-tenths of 1 percent; or charge tolls on city arterials. Such a district could charge developer fees, or neighborhood-approved property taxes near the projects.
The city is eligible to form a district, and the law allows Seattle to transfer a new rail project to Sound Transit, a legislative staffer in Olympia said Wednesday.
16
I hate to add a dose of pessimism 'cause I think light rail to Ballard and West Seattle would be great, but how likely is it the Legislature will provide new transit taxing authority for a project like this anytime soon? McGinn has been blowing raspberries at the state over the viaduct replacement and Metro service is hanging on by a thread, even with the recent County Council stopgaps. Even if the Legislature was interested in transit (which they haven't been for some time), shouldn't the first priority be to save what's out there now? Looking to Sound Transit to make Ballard-West Seattle light rail happen would be naive. With a major recession-created hole blown in their own long-term finances, they're going to have their hands full in the next 15 years delivering the 35 mile regional LRT expansion voters already approved. Even if Seattle could come up with its own money to pay for it, would Sound Transit be able to reasonably add another 10 miles to its plate anytime soon? Translating this McGinn campaign promise to reality will be tough.
17
Here is what he would need to make this work--
1. Agreement from the Sound Transit Board to collaborate
2. Robust cost estimates that can stand up to the test of time
3. Robust revenue sources to cover the costs
4. An integrated operating plan that won't undermine current planned service
5. A financial plan that a) does not erode Sound Transit funding capacity for a third regional phase; b) covers operating costs, and c) covers long term capital replacement.
6. Consent of the Federal Transit Administration that proceeding will not undermine any of its grant commitments to ST.
7. An economy capable of producing enough contractors and workers after accounting for those who will be busy at the same time building funded ST and WSDOT projects.
8. See #2 and 3 above, including affordable means of crossing the Ship Canal and Duwamish waterways.
Good Luck, Mayor.
1. Agreement from the Sound Transit Board to collaborate
2. Robust cost estimates that can stand up to the test of time
3. Robust revenue sources to cover the costs
4. An integrated operating plan that won't undermine current planned service
5. A financial plan that a) does not erode Sound Transit funding capacity for a third regional phase; b) covers operating costs, and c) covers long term capital replacement.
6. Consent of the Federal Transit Administration that proceeding will not undermine any of its grant commitments to ST.
7. An economy capable of producing enough contractors and workers after accounting for those who will be busy at the same time building funded ST and WSDOT projects.
8. See #2 and 3 above, including affordable means of crossing the Ship Canal and Duwamish waterways.
Good Luck, Mayor.
18
@Seattle - build a LOT more light rail, FAST: We started much later than Portland, but it is more expensive and slower because we're building a qualitatively better, higher capacity system; because we're hillier; and because of how ST is funded.
19
There is some precedence for this approach in Portland, when they decided to kill the Mt. Hood Freeway in favor of light rail. Google "Removing Freeways - Restoring Cities"
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Liveblogging the Washington State House Debate and Vote
onIN FAVOR OF GAY MARRIAGE by Eli Sanders -
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Jeff Bezos' Racist, Pro-Life, Anti-Evolution, Rape-Apologist Search Engine by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
-
"The law at the time required a prosecution." by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (19) RSS