I think the Post Globe has been the best thing to rise out of the former P-I. And I generally like this piece on McGinn’s final town halls (incidentally, I’ve been making calls for McGinn, and the last time I did, we were pushing undecided voters to one of the town halls). Still, this piece of conventional wisdom repeating was a little disappointing.
Surprisingly, McGinn wasn’t asked about what Mallahan in particular has been describing as his flip flop over the viaduct.
Why are you surprised? First off, these are undecided voters. The people who are passionate about the tunnel one way or the other, who would ask that as their only question at a town hall (even in West Seattle) have made up their mind about the mayor’s race. They’ve got better things to do on a Saturday.
More important though, nobody outside of the political class thinks that the tunnel is the issue of the campaign. Sure it’s important, and it’s where one of the biggest distinctions can be drawn. But people are more concerned with, for example, crime and education than they are about a few miles of a state highway.
But of course, reporters who drive into Belltown from all across the region and leave before the crackheads come out probably put a higher emphasis on traffic on 99 than on crime in the city. And if they’re sending their children to Bellevue or Edmonds public schools, they probably don’t care as much about education as a parent worried about the quality of their neighborhood school. In fact, they’re more likely to laugh off McGinn’s education plans as unrealistic or someone else’s job.
Still, reporters, in these last few days of the campaign, please don’t be surprised that people care about more than just the tunnel. Don’t be surprised that Seattle voters care about rising crime, or that we care about the cultural institutions of the city, and dealing with the dropout problem. Please consider that whoever we support, we might care about parks and neighborhoods. Please also understand that we think transportation is more than just the Viaduct: that we want improved bike lanes, better mass transit, and a road system that works throughout the city.
this stuff on soundtransit might help you understand how stupid transit people are
shows ST revenue about $600mm/year but only $25mm of that from fares
ALL the rest taxed (stolen) from the rest of us
http://www.soundtransit.org/Do.....Report.pdf
Actually, Carl, my #1 issue is the viaduct tunnel and the reason I’m voting Mallahan. My primary motivation is desire for a better seawall and protection of the downtown electrical utilities — in time for our next earthquake. And I despise McGinn’s non-solution of dumping all that traffic into downtown.
My only concerns about re-opening the conversation about Highway 99 are that we’ll spend another five years of civic masturbation over it and the result might be the construction of another concrete monstrosity along the waterfront. At least another hole in the ground is something I won’t have to look at, and some day we might actually find a use for it more worthwhile than people schlepping themselves in and out of downtown in their gas buggies.
Either of these campaigns suggest that maybe we need to open the public mass transit business to private owner/operators and allow them to finds ways to improve the alternatives people have? There are lots of good example that work but most are overseas.
4: Actually, the Germans tried to privatise their mass transit train system, which incidentally was one of the better ones in the world. It came to a grinding halt this past summer as the government had to order most of the trains off the track because the private company operating it hadn’t put enough money into maintenance. The cars were an accident waiting to happen, with deferred maintenance being tracked back to the day when the private company took over. In the meantime, company executives took big salaries and bonuses for meeting profit goals, and the stockholders of the company got big dividends.
The comments from the German people which were recorded on the news showed pretty much universal outrage, demanding that the government take back the system and make it public again. They pointed out that when it was a public system, it ran safely and on time for a reasonable cost. Once private, costs skyrocketed, schedules were cut back, trains were often late, and as of this summer the system was barely working.
@1
No transit system has financed a major capital program out of fare box revenue.
I tell you what I’ll gladly pay the full cost of my transit use including capital costs if you pay the full costs for your driving including the capital costs. Remember you have to include the cost of providing parking even if it is “free”.
Carl
You make the case bge3tter for Mallahan than for McGinn.
McGinn rises many issues but never offers realistic plans about what he would do to address those issues. The fiasco of the Tunnel is only ne example.
If McGinn were elected, I fear we would have four years of posturing, by McGinn to make good on promises and by the4 Council and the Establiashment ot stymie him.
Mallahan, on the other hand, wants to mamanhge things. He really is not a leader. Likely, he will build alliances and get things done.
Mallahan is uninspiring but solid.
Sorry, somehow the unedit4ed text got published.
Carl
You make the case better for Mallahan.
If McGinn were elected, I fear we would have four years of posturing, by McGinn to make good on promises that have no ral plans.
Mallahan, will build alliances and get things done.
Mallahan is uninspiring but solid.
The BBB gave T Mobile an F on customer satisfaction.
The tunnel plan is built on sand, with half its proponents saying put the overruns on Seattle and the other half saying that provision is illegal; theor coalition falls apart after years of litigation over this.
If there is an l.i.d. vote to accept these overruns, do you think condo owners downtown will vote to saddle themselves with tens of thousands of possible future property taxes? It’s an insane finance “plan,” “sham” is a better description. So the Tunnel is NO solution.
And it will carry as many cars as 45th does today, woo hoo, and have no exits downtown.
Seems like billions for very little additional mobility. It’s a bad highway even if you love highways.
finally, who could support someone who like tunnel supporters spout off nonsense like “there will be no overruns”, that is the height of irresponsibility and unicorn daydreaming, total pie in the sky thinking.
It’s overselling, likely the same thing that produced T Mobile’s lousy “F” grade from the BBB.
re; #5 That may be a problem but in Helsinki and parts of Sweden they seem to be doing okay and there is always the system in Curitiba, Brazil which has been very successful.
Here’s an inteesting figure I came across recently. From the Journal of Law and Economics. “Seattle had 518 jitneys carrying 49,000 passengers per day by early February 1915”.
I wonder what could be done with today’s technology of cell phones and laptops, GPS, etc? And using a vehicle like the Dodge Sprinter which I hear gets about 25 mpg.
The tunnel plan is built on sand, with half its proponents saying put the overruns on Seattle and the other half saying that provision is illegal; theor coalition falls apart after years of litigation over this.
————–
Isn’t this the truth? People want to move ahead with the project without this critical question of liability having been resolved. The text is right there in the legislation, sure enough, but we’re told by many that it can’t be enforced. Well if that’s the case one would think that our political leadership – and taxpayers! – would be screaming to the high heavens that this train needs to stop until there is total resolution of liability.
There’s a lot of blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy surrounding the tunnel.