Motley Blog

I moved to Seattle in January 1986, my first civic involvement was volunteering to help start the Broadway (Seattle) BIA, second was a group called KC 2000. (The end result would be the Metro/King County Merger per the Judge Zilly decision.) These folks would be perceived as the typical regional heavy hitter crowd. FWIW though the earlier, more modest endeavor, sits sweeter in my memory.

This was the end of the Reagan, fall of 1987 when George I was making his run. At that time the economy was tanking, and I used that as a theme for a promotional editorial I wrote in the UW Student Newspaper - The Daily.

Best thing about this event was the UW Students and Faculty I met - faculty included the Geographer/Demographer Richard Morrill and Transportation Engineer Scott Rutherford.

Two student footnotes: The Op-Ed was published by Sally Clark, currently a Seattle Councilmember, and perhaps the best home grown public career resume of my generation, locally.

Asterisk
Second was Tom Nolan. At the time he was doing his Master's Thesis on a proposed Computerized Mapping system for King County. Tom currently runs the City of Seattle Department, funded by City Light. This is his Master's thesis abstract/outline relevant to the local history of this profession, a topic I should continue to write on.

The handwriting should be his.

As a resident of Tacoma I'd make a similar argument for Pierce County. Perhaps the most important thing to think about is how Pierce and S. King coordinate their somewhat overlapping interests.

Kimberley Marlowe Hartnett is David Brewster's and Crosscut's best hope at avoiding the stereotypical Seattle limousine liberal mindset (including symptoms of xenophobia?) in his current effort to expand his voice beyond the bounds of the 36, 37, and 43rd State Legislative Districts (okay, maybe the 48th as well).

Marlowe Hartnett is a Portland resident, a city, like Seattle, that has not seen a real estate slump (of 3 total nationally) - and perhaps for better reason.

She writes whimsically about Portland's coming year - in a style that owes a bit to Crosscut Editor Knute Berger.

I was in that City over Christmas and commented on her piece at some length - albeit wandering off topic, onto the above subject.

Viewing your city through the perspective of another is important, especially those in your region. This particular 'rambling' of mine looks at the issue of planning light rail - whether it be streetcar oriented like Tacoma's LINK or a regional system like the light rail system with a 'track record' - Portland's MAX.

Having had a favorable experience riding the Sounder this year I decided to try Amtrak - at $25 one way, cheaper than my gas driving alone. All in all it was a very enjoyable, and hopefully also, productive, 'multi-modal' trip. I urge you to become familiar with Marlowe Hartnett (linked above) as well as the details of my comments - though for different reasons.

The Tacoma Tribune has an editorial today regarding light rail, noting the faster than projected ridership on the Sounder Commuter train. They imply, but do not articulate, support for Sound Transit. I've submitted a letter to the editor, which I've enclosed below. (I've thought some about delaying the publishing of items I've submitted to others - this case though seems like one okay to put out immediately - it is not like my readership competes with theirs!)

The editorial is here.

Although I was, and am, opposed to Sound Transit I do agree with the editorial board's numbers regarding demand for high capacity transit.

The crucial number to understand at this point in reaching a plan of action is 20-30 years from now - the likely completion date of South Sound Light Rail. I think the case for arguing for a delay in that decision until it actually needs to be made is compelling.

Technology changes. It may well turn out that the best solution for the region's needs in 20-30 years is actually a replacement of the successful and easy to expand commuter rail - perhaps a bullet train or some sort of maglev technology?

Providing guaranteed funding to a single source agency with no real accountability for that time frame is simply idiotic. The power network behind Sound Transit is extensive and quite capable - but are they accountable to the individuals that make up this region? Or are they perhaps responsible for creating a 'hostile' working environment for everyone who choses not to be a corporate lackey(or political party hack)?

It is essential that Pierce County works together to get our fair share of transportation funding - what WE need now, not what appears to be simplest to obtain from a menu put together by a deadbeat agency with no real planning expertise or realistic local connections.

Those items include expanding Light Rail TCC and the Sounder to Lakewood. Personally I'd also like to see the Sounder go all the way to Olympia and a spur line built to Eatonville.

And this is a planning 'philosophy' that works not only in Pierce County but also for the rest of the region - perhaps nowhere more so with our close neighbors in South King County.

Instead of building that long expensive link between Sea-Tac and Tacoma how about connecting light rail to the Sounder Station in Kent? How about doing it in less than ten years instead of 30?

Instead of building light rail across I-90 with questionable engineering compatibility why not delay the building of that crossing until 520 is built, and built right for light rail? Why not, as proposed, extend commuter rail from Renton to at least Bellevue. (and perhaps using the segment north from Bellevue for the first track/technology upgrade).

Building Sounder service to the Eastside would create nearly as much demand as that service to Seattle - and Bellevue should also follow our lead by building their own starter light rail service to provide circulator service among the different areas of that medium density employment center.

The role of the Tribune in the leadership team of the South Sound is crucial. Jumping to easy to reach conclusions motivated more by a desire to grab for the easy pork rather than doing the right thing is a sure bet to create more problems than are solved. But then in 20-30 years, will you care?

The Tacoma News Tribune has, rightly, taken up the cause of advocating for Pierce County's share of regional transportation funds - including noting the rising need for same due escalating gas costs.

Today's paper has an editorial on this objective, but one that is, perhaps, miscalculated.

I've only lived in Pierce County for four years, and am really only begining to get involved, so it is definitely not for me to have a final say on this. However I have been a regular user of the routes in question, both for work here prior to my move and work north afterwards. I was also quite active during the early days of Sound Transit during my extended college years.

Though, personally, I think Sea-Tac airport should be transferred from the Port of Seattle to the Port of Tacoma it is a fact that connecting Sea-Tac to downtown and Pierce County is among the lowest priorities in Sound Transit's list.

Rather than giving a blank check to an agency, it is most important that we start on the highest priority projects now. Planning for a single source technology more than 20 years in the future is bad engineering and bad business. The TNT's editorial does call for the purchase of right of way for this corridor, and that is a wise position. Taking small steps of prudent planning and business is a good thing. Selecting mass transit corridors is not a reversible decision, nor fiscally imprudent, action.

Though the editorial rightly raises the need for better transit in Puyallup and Lakewood it is a simple fact that light rail works best in dense areas. Sounder service is scheduled for Lakewood already. Planning for a Sounder spur to Eatonville would do much to reduce traffic pressures on Puyallup's Meridian. In addition planning for extended light rail service - perhaps a loop via the EQC and Lakewood would also be wise. Who knows, by the time TCC students can afford to buy a Puyallup home the rest of us can afford to pay for Light rail service to that City as well.

Certainly I doubt, newbie that I am, that Puyallup residents are clamoring for light rail any sooner.

The most pressing issue is dealing with the complex network of business management problems associated with Sound Transit - perhaps best evidenced recently through the closely associated Port of Seattle scandal.

As to the local politics, perhaps we should hear again from the Dome Business District folks about what THEY think about Sound Transit's current management and legal team? And on the subject of roads - how about we get our own road district for Pierce County - or perhaps a reformed DOT service district organized around the Port of Tacoma and extending as far north as Kent?

Or for that matter know what you should be doing.

This is another Sound Transit piece. Discussion is currently underway as to the components of a November submittal, if at all.

The News Tribune's Patrick O'Callahan writes on the subject in this Sunday's edition.

In my opinion, for all the so-called 'expertise' they've hired on they aren't a functional organization. I'm not dissing any individuals, save for the folks that are supposed to be coordinating it all. The conversation about what to do isn't happening - rather it is all an exercise at self-congratulation and control, not doing about what is most important to be done NOW.

O'Callahan's editorial does make a good point about obtaining rights of way for the Tacoma to Sea-Tac segment and I hear there feelings about the priority of this segment, also important to their geographic market. But even this is framed in a way unneccesarily expensive. Instead of purchasing right of way outright why not just get the rights to purchase it 20 years down the road, give or take?

In a companion editorial board piece they acknowledge the problem of people voting for something that won't happen until after they are dead, perhaps as succint a statement of a core problem with this leadership. Instead of asking us to give them a free ride for the rest of their lives why don't they go away and give us some leadership that will respect the needs of small and medium sized businesses to operate unitl they die.

Give or take.

One last comment - though Olympia 'free-riders' going to Dupont to ride the system might be viewed as a problem I'd bet that Olympians might just well vote to join a system - one, say, that was only Sounder Train and Bus?

Crosscut can put forth some of the worst seattle centric limousine liberal right wing conspirator friendly propoganda - but at the same time they also manage to occassionally publish stuff from some of the best.

Today I commented on three pieces, a great example of this profile.

A piece by Hugh Spitzer is an example of some of the worst:

Hugh Spitzer on the Constitution

An op-ed by former WSDOT Director Douglas MacDonald is an example of some of the best:

Douglas MacDonald on Transportation and Realistic Growth Management

What Crosscut will actually mean to the NW is perhaps best foreshadowed by a piece by Business Manager Yazmin Mehdi.

Yazmin Mehdi writing about business

Recently State Attorney General Rob McKenna announced that the proposed sale of the NW's largest private utility Puget Sound Energy to an Australian led international investment group would be challenged. PSE is the NW's largest privately owned utility - number two, curiously, was the former Enron holding, Portland General.

This AG action has State ramifications relevant to our largest public capital decisions, even the current gubernatorial contest.

Sound Transit makes the environmental claim that their system is environmentally friendly - because it encourages urban living.

But let's not forget that one of the reasons people have left Urban environments is because of the standard practices of urban legal 'control' (I'd use the words 'Urban Harrassment').

As such, a prediction for your consideration-

Urban living could be made more desirable than the benefits of Sound Transit at zero cost by removing Sound Transit legal counsel COMPLETELY from power.

Another Sound Transit 'antithesis', #2b.

The current Sound Transit plan is now being finalized - likely though through the same sorts of irrelevant public process that led to the failure of Prop. 1 earlier this year.

Two elements of this evolved plan merit your consideration.

The first is the environmentalists call for a vote seperate from roads. Though I am a balanced roads/transit guy, I do support this as a fair process. I would of course hope that any environmentalist of political integrity would also support the submital of a roads only package, to be fair.

This is all well and good - until you consider item number two. The current alternatives being seriously discussed are centralized Seattle-centric plans - as opposed to a distributed priortization which serves all sub-areas with 'equity'. As such the 'environmentalists' are apparently forming a coalition with the power, and cash, sucking 'people' of Downtown Seattle.

This is a lose-lose decision. On the one hand this geographic divisiveness may well kill any environmental benefits that the Sound Transit light rail plan might provide.by alienating suburban voters. On the other hand the plan might pass and we would be stuck with an environmental bully as damaging as Gregoire's gender bullys.