Tim Leavitt stops by: my post has "serious misinterpretation" and I've taken him "out of context."

.
Tim Leavitt, Vancouver City Councilman and mayoral candidate stopped by yesterday (actually, he didn't "stop by." He's actually subscribed to this blog) and left the following response to my post here: Leavitt blows it: Rabid support of an unneeded I-5 Bridge replacement cements his worthlessness as an elected official.

Tim Leavitt said...

There is some serious misinterpretation included in this piece about the newspaper quotes of my position...taken way out of context. If you're interested in scratching below the surface and learning the details, I would encourage you to read my entries about the Columbia River Crossing at my blog: http://www.leavitt4vancouver.blogspot.com/.

thanks much -
tim

I disagree.

I "misinterpreted" nothing.

I took nothing "out of context."

The newspaper quotes I used are these:

Vancouver Councilman Tim Leavitt, who represents C-Tran on the 10-member sponsors council, was the only one who spoke up in favor of a 12-lane crossing, saying that he was not interested in compromising safety, congestion and economic prosperity.

And:

“It’s frustrating to me that our Congress passed a $700 billion bailout for the financial sector and they couldn’t throw in a measly $3 billion for this immense federal asset for the West Coast,” said Tim Leavitt, a Vancouver councilman who will represent C-Tran on the 10-member sponsors council. “Please give us some money. Why do we have to beat each other up locally?”

Note the link contained in each paragraph. Clicking on the link would take the reader to the entire story as printed in the Columbian. They could then determine context for themselves... but there is nothing wrong with the context as I presented it.

That ANY politician could describe $3 billion as "measly" shows both an arrogance and tonedeafness breathtaking in it's dimensions.

As for my "serious misinterpretation," Mr. Leavitt provides nothing, save a link to his own blog (That actually tends to strengthen my conclusions upon review) to dispute what I've written here.

We're not going to get the federal money because the project is worthless on its face and even the most rank bureaucrat in DC understands immediately what we all already know: the entire purpose of replacing this bridge is to bring light rail into Vancouver... period.

Replacing this bridge will do absolutely nothing to relieve pressure in the I-5 corridor; it will do nothing to decrease congestion, nor will it do anything to improve freight mobility. Thus, it is a wasted $4 billion that a barn-headed ape should be able to see in a minute.

But not the downtown Mafia. They want what they want, and they'll waste $4 BILLION taxpayer dollars to get it.

I have yet to see or find anything that indicates that Mr. Leavitt is opposed to this colossal waste of money. I have yet to see or find anything to show where Mr. Leavitt is opposed to "No-Choice" Royce Pollard, America's Gulag Vancouver's Mayor on this massive waste of money or anything else.

Nor have I seen ANYTHING to indicate that Mr. Leavitt is demanding that the people who will bear this expense; the people who will have a $100 or more per month fee rammed down their throats to get to work should have the final say.

Nope... those with the final say will rarely use the bridge they're sticking us with and certainly will not have to pay this toll, day in, day out, to get this thing built. It's not that much different then the tribal Mafia attempting to ram their unwanted mega-casino down our throats: none of them live here or even close to here, and none of them will have to bear the negative consequences of this massive economic black hole. That tends to make it easy to support when you won't live in the community you're trying to crush.

I've indicated that there isn't a dimes' worth of difference between Mr. Leavitt and Mr. Pollard. They're so focused on superseding and ignoring the voters that the blinders they both wear makes it impossible for them to understand that they work for US, and not the other way around.

Over at clarkblog.org, the question, remaining unanswered, was asked of Mr. Leavitt:

Tim,

Are you now saying that your votes on the Hilton, The Monterey, The police station sale, the indoor farmers market. and the capitulation of the city in the Sharma payoff to name just a few were all indefensible?

And which of these votes opposed Mayor Pollard?

None.

I invite Mr. Leavitt to come back here and explain where I've got it wrong. The unimaginable waste of the CRC, a bill now exceeding $90 million vaporized and wasted dollars for a study with a pre-ordained outcome (everyone alive KNEW that the ONLY alternative the CRC was going to come up with would be "replace the bridge and slam light rail on it) that *I* could have replicated for $20 provides him with no cover.

I invite him to come back here and explain how he intends to fight for our RIGHT to have the final say on this debacle.

I invite him to come back here and explain where he has differed in the past with Mayor Pollard on the issues that matter.... like those provided by mooney over at clarkblog.org and shown above.

Show me where I'm wrong. Otherwise, if I've pegged you accurately (and I believe I have) then NEITHER you NOR Pollard should be elected to dog-catcher.

Any response to this (And I'm not holding me breath here) will be shown in it's entirety... so those issues of "misinterpretation" and being taken "out of context" won't impact.

.

I admit it, Tim Leavitt has me totally confused.

.
Fair enough.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A conversation with Pat Campbell, Vancouver City C...":

This is related to the Pat's comments. Here is Tim leavitt's comments on his own blog. I think people might be interested in leaving comments on the site.

link: http://tinyurl.com/3a7w9nm

For years now, I've been condemning the entire concept of replacing the I-5 Bridge without first building a third bridge to the area west of Portland, a much cheaper, more efficient alternative to relieve local pressure on the I-5 corridor.

When we remember that the only reason to replace the bridge right now is to bring light rail into Vancouver, we discover the cost of all of this likely exceeds $1 billion per mile, perhaps the most expensive transportation project in the history of Man and by far the most expensive light rail project ever done.

The local impacts on our economy will drag on for decades. Few of those cheerleading for this bridge will ever pay the easily-exceeding $100 per month tolls, with a ripple effect that will impact tens of thousands of families and local small businesses as this project blots up untold hundreds of millions of dollars in disposable income, and it will do so for untold decades to come... an issue still not discussed or researched by those advocating the most for this project.

Unfortunately, Tim Leavitt ran for mayor on a platform of fighting against tolls. This blog called Mr. Leavitt to task for that maneuver, since his "anti-toll" stance was an election campaign conversion, and until he ran for office, he was pretty much in lock step with his general election opponent. Further, everyone with functioning brain synapses knows/knew that there was no way the bridge/light rail project would ever be built without imposing tolls on those least likely to afford it... the commuters.

Leavitt made it clear that will he "opposed tolls," when it came right down to it, since he was not an "obstructionist," he would not oppose the construction of the bridge if tolls were required.

THAT was certainly confusing. In order to truly oppose something, shouldn't one's principles keep one from acquiescing to convenience? If you won't oppose something that has the principles you claim to be in opposition to... then how can you be opposing those same principles when you know they will be required on the project in question?

So, Mr. Leavitt comes out and tells us he's now ended his opposition to tolls.

He has a variety of reasons for that change in perspective. My response was to poiint out that as a prefaced, Mr. Leavitt never opposed tolls under any conditions from the start.

"Opposition" on principle should always trump "obstructionism." If one is possessed of honor and integrity, one should keep one's word regardless of any "new knowledge."

Leavitt acknowledged Friday that the state Legislature authorizes tolls and the
state Transportation Commission sets the rates. Even so, he had vowed during his
campaign against incumbent Royce Pollard that he would fight as a voice for the
estimated 60,000 Clark County residents who cross the river to work in Oregon.

I was astonished. How is it that after years of the bridge issue, Leavitt didn't seem to know this before he was elected... before he promised that he would "fight against tolls?"

Not all that many options explain it. And those that do cast Mr. Leavitt in a somehwta less favorable light.

But now my confusion has increased geometrically. We're told, from Mr. Leavitt's own blog, the following:

If We Must Have Tolls, We Must Fight to Make Them Equitable

This Bridge Must Not be Paid for on the Backs of Clark County Commuters

Citizens, colleagues and friends--

When I ran for the office of Mayor, I told you honestly and in good faith that I would fight against tolls on the CRC. Unlike others, who were determined to put tolls on the table first and foremost with no regard to the injustice they bring, I was determined to fight them.

What many voters were unaware of was that Leavitt's promise had something of a limited shelf life.

Leavitt's political betrayal of the people who supported him on this issue was complete. The only surprise of mine was it took all that long for him to toss aside his principles in ways that make me long for the days of Pollard's honesty... my many political disagreements with him aside.

Leavitt went on:

But unfortunately, not every battle can be won. It has become apparent that tolling has been widely accepted by the project partners, community advocates, business and economic leadership, and most importantly, our state legislators (who make the final decision about tolling).

The dishonesty of such a claim cannot be overstated. Has anyone suddenly embraced tolls now that were not equally enamored by that yoke around the commuter neck during the course of Leavitt's campaign for mayor?

"Our state legislators" (those with a 'd' after their names) were (and are) huge fans of tolls during the entirety of Leavitt's campaign. He knew that then as much as he suddenly seems to know it now.

You see, Leavitt knew during his campaign who was actually going to make the decision about tolling, He just never seemed to want to bring that up.

After all, to do so would tend to weaken his faux anti-toll position, wouldn't it? And we wouldn't want to let facts get in the way... would we?

In the end, that "not every battle can be won" does not mean that on principle alone, "not every battle should be fought."

Spreading the tax burden to tens of thousands of others besides those commuters forced to pay for the bridge is as unacceptable as the idea of running, and winning on a position only to abandon it out of political expediency.

All of that said, I recieved an anonymous request that the following message be provided. In the interest of fairness, I would ask the reader to click on the link provided to read Mayor Leavitt's own words, without editorial comment or analysis from me.

Fair enough.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A conversation with Pat Campbell, Vancouver City C...":

This is related to the Pat's comments. Here is Tim leavitt's comments on his own blog. I think people might be interested in leaving comments on the site.

link: http://tinyurl.com/3a7w9nm

Tim Leavitt announces for Mayor: but who cares?

.

(UPDATE: I have a large number of informational posts about Tim "The Liar" Leavitt, so please read them all.)

I've been watching Leavitt for awhile. I've been watching Pollard since he was running the show at Vancouver Barracks.

The only difference between them appears to be one of age. Leavitt is completely in the pocket of the special interests, like Pollard; totally supportive of the unwanted and unneeded I-5 Bridge replacement with loot rail, like Pollard; and completely opposed to asking us if we want this colossal waste of time, energy and/or money... like Pollard.

Mr. Leavitt, there is NO EXCUSE FOR NOT ASKING US WHAT WE WANT.

None. And because you refuse to put the question to a vote, that makes you the same kind of weasel you would propose to replace.

In this instance, the only question is this: do we want an old weasel or a young weasel?

Where has Leavitt publicly opposed Pollard? How often has Leavitt voted "no" on something Pollard wants?

Folks, there's not a dime's worth of difference between them and both of them stand as an example of the kind of government we deserve.

"Chief" over at Clarkblog.org has a few hundred well chosen words for Mr. Leavitt... and they're worth a read.

Leavitt to challenge Mayor Pollard

January 5, 2009 4:30 p.m.

Jeff Mize, The Columbian

Vancouver Councilman Tim Leavitt, who has talked about running for mayor for more than two years, made it official Monday.

Mayor Royce Pollard and mayoral candidate Tim Leavitt at an earlier event. (Files/The Columbian)

Leavitt, 37, sent out a brief statement Monday afternoon saying he wants to represent all city residents as Vancouver mayor.

He will face 14-year incumbent Royce Pollard, who said he will run again.

In his statement, Leavitt said "It's time to focus in on the welfare of citizens across all of Vancouver, returning to basics at City Hall."

"As mayor, I will fight for the security and quality of our neighborhoods, trim nonessential spending and taxation and improve the business climate to create more high-paying jobs for Vancouver."

Leavitt was appointed to the seven-person council in 2003 to replace Jim Moeller following the Vancouver Democrat's election to the Washington House.

More:

Tim "The Liar" Leave-it plays the Columbian.

While he is a lying scuzball who's political career is over, the rag's desperate efforts to rehabilitate his image have just gone over the top.

There's only one of two things going on here.

Mayor Scumbag McFly actually believes the garbage he's spewing... Or he's playing the morons at the rag like a fiddle.

Leave-it, while a confirmed lying scuz who should do the political world a favor and resign, knows in his heart that he's through.  He is not believable in any stretch of the imagination... and his lies will dog him as much as Zarelli's bogus unemployment claim will ever keep him from higher elected office.

So, when crap like this gets layered in the fishwrapper, they're either blithering idiots, or they see this as yet another in their many efforts to rehabilitate this lying punk's image.

If he was the democrat's candidate (and his bullshit, faux GOP efforts notwithstanding, he IS a democrat,) we'd have to make a choice between two liars, one more of a moron than the other.

So, save it, Tim.  We all know you're not going to run any more then your buddy Steve "The Liar" Stuart, the architect of your lie of a mayoral campaign is going to run.

Scum is as scum does, and you don't have the testicles for it.

.

Leavitt eyes pros, cons of taking on Herrera Beutler

Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt and Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler

By Andrea Damewood
Columbian Staff Reporter

Saturday, November 19, 2011

submit 0digg

More like this

What’s next for Vancouver city council?
Leaders trade bridge barbs
Letter: Can we really trust elected officials?
Be gentle on my ears … please!
‘Gavel down’ ads condemned by several politicians

What’s next for Vancouver city council?

2013 could be pivotal for Smith, Stewart, Burkman

It’s come down to decision time.
Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt — in an Aug. 11 tweet from his account floated a single question: “Leavitt for Congress?”
There’s since been little from him on the topic, but that hasn’t kept down a flood of questions about a race featuring Leavitt and freshman Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler of Camas.
What party would Leavitt run with? Does he have enough experience? Can he raise the money? Will he find enough support?
Either way, Leavitt — or whoever else may want to challenge Herrera Beutler — will likely need to step forward soon to get started trying to unseat her in 2012. Leavitt’s said he’s likely to make an announcement this week.
A rumor is floating in Democratic circles that the party has someone else in mind: someone new, someone female.
But if or until that person steps forward, Leavitt, 40, remains the most visible and well-known person to take on Herrera Beutler, 33. Another candidate, Jon Haugen, has also announced he’ll run as a conservative Democrat in the race.
It’s not a certainty that Leavitt would have a smooth time ascending the political ranks. The mayor, only two years into his first four-year term (following five years on city council), may alienate some by trying to move on too quickly.
“He was really charged to become mayor of Vancouver,” noted former Mayor Royce Pollard, whom Leavitt defeated in 2009 a
hard-fought race. That rift hasn’t healed. “People wonder here about his dedication to city of Vancouver.”

More of his babble, if you can stomach it.

Leave-it and Barbie: two politicians made for each other.

We all know the deal about Tim "The Liar" Leave-it and Ridgefield Barbie.

The Liar was elected because he, well, lied deliberately and repeatedly about his stance on ripping all of Southwest Washington with his toll scam.

Ridgefield Barbie was elected because she was parachuted in here after an 11 year absence to scam the establishment nod to run for Congress.

She was utterly worthless in the Legislature, and has lived up to that accomplishment in Congress.  She's proven herself gutless with her ongoing refusal to face her constituency unless they bring their checkbooks.

The Liar kicked her face in after a worthless letter asking for an equally worthless gerrymandered CTran tax district vote on loot rail.

The Camas Manikin has the ability to kill the entirety of this project... by herself... if her demands aren't meant.

She can end the funding for all of this at the federal level.  She has the ability to make sure this entire project is put to a countywide vote, and her worthless letter to The Liar was designed to fool people into believing she actually wants a vote.

She doesn't.

Barbie supports the entirety of the CRC project; much like, come to think of it, Marc Boldt, who was the reason Babs got the appointment in the first place to the legislature.. since he made a deal with two male democrat county commissioners from Cowlitz... one of whom, Axel Swanson, now works for Boldt at an absurd $80,000 or so a year.

She doesn't WANT her constituency to BELIEVE that, so she sent a couple of letters asking for a vote.

The Liar, who mistakenly believes himself to be all that politically, caved her ass in... publicly.

She, had she been possessed of even an idea of what testosterone is for, could have beaten him around the head and shoulder reason with a loot rail bridge piling.

Instead, she did her nails... or something.

So, today, these two, neither possessed of an ounce of integrity or courage, "met."  Now its all sweetness and light... and we, the people, are going to get screwed because of it... and her... and him.

Yup... they're made for each other, because they're exactly, precisely alike.

Worthless and a danger to our community for generations to come.

Herrera Beutler, Leavitt meet face to face

After sparring publicly, congresswoman, mayor try to bury hatchet

Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt and Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler

By Andrea Damewood
Columbian Staff Reporter

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

submit 0diggsdigg

More like this

Leavitt, Stuart urge Herrera Beutler to back bridge

Leaders trade bridge barbs

Leavitt for Congress?

Vancouver Mayor Leavitt eyes re-election bid, nixes run for Congress

Leavitt eyes pros, cons of taking on Herrera Beutler

Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler and Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt met last week to bury the hatchet — but signs say there may still be some of the blade sticking up.

The pair met Thursday in Vancouver for a one-on-one talk, Leavitt said.

“I felt it was time and it was appropriate to sit down face to face with our congresswoman and discuss details of the Columbia River Crossing, look for common ground and work to bury the hatchet on previous public interactions and correspondence,” Leavitt, 41, said.

Leavitt and Herrera Beutler, 33, have sparred publicly over the CRC, exchanging letters calling each other’s motivations into question. Herrera Beutler has called for an immediate vote in the entire service district on a C-Tran sales tax increase for light rail and bus rapid transit. Leavitt has urged the board to take its time to ensure members have all the information they need before going to voters.

Demanding a vote from such a small number of people... people who can force tens of thousands of us who weren't allowed to vote to pay their tax shows how worthless she is.

This entire project SHOULD have had a county wide vote $140 million or so.  Babs COULD have made that happen, and hasn't.

Figure that out.

Cross posted at Jaime Herrera Watch.

Of course the slime at the democratian endorsed that little worm, Leave-it.

It comes as no real surprise that the democratian would endorse Tim "the liar" Leavitt for mayor of the Taliban City of Vancouver.

This blog has been indicating, literally for years, that such would be their decision.

A candidate could be an ax murderer, as long as they endorse the democratian agendas... and they'd get the local Pravda Izvestia's endorsement.

For most, issues such as honesty, integrity, character and the like would actually play a major role in their decision as to who to support politically. Clearly, those types of character traits make no difference to the CRC scammers at the democratian.

We all know the history of Tim "the liar" Leavitt. The newspaper, naturally doesn't give a damn about this man's lack of integrity. They only care that their positions dovetail with his positions. That he is basically dishonest, and outright liar, likely a criminal when it comes to his conflict of interest folks on the sea transport, make no difference to those people who run our local cancer on the community.

This blog has literally hundreds of posts in it devoted to the lies of Tim "the liar" Leavitt. Locally, his arrogance is matched only by Jim "Molehill" Moeller. Nationally, his arrogance is matched only by his hero, the empty suited moron in the White House. Historically, his arrogance is matched only by the former fascist dictator of Italy, Mussolini.

Ever since Leavitt came out of the closet on the issue of tolls, which this blogger knew he was lying about throughout the entirety of his campaign, this newspaper has engaged in constant image rehabilitation. This endorsement is just the latest chapter in that effort.

Many of the worst political leaders in the history of the world have had with this newspaper refers to as, "vision".

From Stalin, to Hitler, to Mao, to… Well, you name it, the world's history has been replete with leaders who have with the democratian is referring to as "vision".

I admit that "the liar" has "vision". The problem has always been that the vision this slimeball has, doesn't mesh with the vision that the people of this community want.

For the past several years, the democratian has made it their policy to only endorse CRC scammers in races where the outcome is even remotely in question. No, they do not always endorse supporters of the CRC scam. But whenever the race is remotely competitive, they will in fact typically only endorse people who support the CRC ripoff.

There was never any question that the democratian would support Tim Leavitt; his lies, his arrogance, his lack of character and integrity, notwithstanding. I believe that his opponent, Bill Turley, should view it as a badge of honor that the newspaper has rejected him.  The list of those they've rejected who have been elected is both long... and distinguished. The newspaper typically rejects both winners and people who happen to put the needs and wants of the electorate ahead of the newspaper's agenda.

The filter for their endorsements naturally, includes

1.  are you a Democrat?  Leavitt arguably is that.

2. do you support the CRC scam? Leavitt arguably supports that massive ripoff.

3. do you support loot rail?  Leavitt arguably supports loot rail. After all, as the Oregon Supreme Court has pointed out, that is the entirety of the reasoning to replace our current paid for and functioning I-5 bridge.

4. Is the political race we're endorsing reasonably competitive? That's entirely possible given Leavitt's reputation as a lying scumbag.

Thus the outcome of the endorsement was preordained from the very beginning. That I wouldn't let Leavitt babysit my children or run an elevator for me makes no difference to them. As long as he supports the democratian's ripoff agenda, that he's a lying little worm makes no difference to them.

It is to our community's detriment that so many of its leaders, typically appointed by those of the special interests in a position to do so, have people like Lou Brancaccio, Tim "the liar" Leavitt, Steve "Slimeball" Stuart and their ilk; and organizations like Identity Vancouver, and the Chamber of Horrors actually in a position where they can claim to be representing the people of this community when those of us who actually live here, certainly know better.

When elected government leaders actually work for the people who elected them, it's amazing what can be accomplished when the leadership represents the will of the people.

None of these are the other organizations scamming the CRC ripoff are doing that. Few of the leadership currently elected actually give a damn what the people of this community want when it comes to this project, because they see their vision is superior to that of the little people who actually were foolish enough to elect them in the first place… Much like the people foolish enough to elect the then and now lying mayor of Vancouver.

In their effort to protect Tim Leavitt while rehabilitating his image, the newspaper blows off his campaign of lies by saying the following:

From nearly the start of his time as mayor, the CRC has been an albatross for Leavitt. He ran four years ago largely on a platform of opposing tolls on a new bridge, then quickly reversed course once in office. "The reality is I got that wrong," Leavitt said. "Those positions were too set to allow me to move forward in the project without creating some animosity."

When Brancaccio wrote this, he knew he was lying.

For the many months leading up to the election where we were unfortunate enough to gain Levitt as the Soviet's mayor, I repeatedly warned that he was lying on the issue of tolls, that he was using it as a wedge issue to separate himself from Pollard, and that he had no intention of following through.

It wasn't that the liar "got it wrong" as he put it; he was lying about it from the very beginning, and it was nothing but a political ploy. Brancaccio knows that, yet like so many others who support his agenda, he doesn't care about the lies, the deceit, the falsehoods, and the fraud.

It seems odd, in the face of the continued lack of importance of the newspaper's opinions, that Lefty Lou doesn't take a step back, review, and try to figure out why, in reality, so few people give a damn what he thinks.

In large part, the problem is that his thoughts on just about any subject are run through his "does he like you" filter. In this instance, like any other conservative, Brancaccio hates Bill Turley. He hates anyone opposed to his positions, who's in anything remotely approaching a competitive electoral race.  He hates the very idea of the people having a voice about anything where the outcome of a vote might not go his way.

That's why he's opposed the charter movement so viciously: why he supported fellow democrat Marc Boldt, why he'll try and bury anyone running against Stuart next year... and why he'll support anyone kissing his ring... which are typically his fellow leftist scum...

....like Leave-it.

Which is why, if one goes back over the past several years, one would be hard-pressed to find an endorsement by the democratian of any candidate in any competitive race, if that person opposed their agenda, particularly on the CRC scam.

Well, that and Lefty Lou's hatred.

Naturally, none of the true "liar" characteristics of "the liar" are mentioned in the endorsement. This is in large part because Brancaccio does not allow reality or facts to interfere with his positions. Which explains why, even though he knows the CRC is nothing but a giant turd, he insists on continuing to support this massive theft of dollars from the people of this community that would go on long beyond his death.

The democratian's lack of relevancy at this point can be traced directly to Lou Brancaccio's own desk. He is a self-fulfilling prophecy, where not a day goes by that he personally does not do all that he can to damage what little credibility is left of the despicable rag that represents a wart on the butt of this community. This... is yet... another example of that.

(Transcribed by Dragon NaturallySpeaking version 12.5)

Democratian efforts at image rehabilitation for Leavitt and Stuart.

.
To our likely generational misfortune, we are stuck with two political liars highly placed in local government, politicians who lied to get elected.

Tim Leavitt lied repeatedly about his positions on tolling for the I-5 Bridge.  He skillfully used that lie to defeat the incumbent, Royce Pollard who quite wrongly but truthfully told anyone who would listen what his position was on the necessity of tolling as he saw it to get the I-5 bridge replaced and loot rail into Vancouver.

Steve Stuart, who was an integral part of Tim Leavitt's campaign, helped to develop the lie, since there was no way he would ever support a true-anti-toll candidate.

Like Pollard, Stuart has always supported tolls.  Like Pollard and Leavitt, Stuart knows that without tolls, this project would never be built.  That building it will enslave 65,000 plus commuters is of no consequence to either Leavitt or Stuart, since they likely will not have to commute to Portland to be mayor or county commissioner; meaning that, precisely like the baseball scam, the people of Clark County are going to get stuck with the costs of something these two want, and could easily kill, but will not have to pay for.

Stuart, realizing the success of the lie in Leavitt's campaign, utilized the same strategy in his own, promising a county wide vote  on loot rail this November; using that lie to barely get re-elected against a candidate who did very little and who had every disadvantage from a lack of name-familiarity to a lack of funding.

These lies are out there.  The blogging community keeps them alive, reminding everyone of the lack of integrity of our government leaders, leaders who lied to get elected.

The democratian is well aware of this.  So, once again, when the politician carried their water, even to the obvious detriment of our community, they do everything they can to rehabilitate their image, including crap like this from the democrat blog:

White Mayors Can't Jump

Blog: All politics is local

Subscribe

By Stephanie Rice (Columbian Staff)

May 27, 2011

A May 12 celebrity basketball game raised $20,000 for Clark County Family YMCA, said executive director Eddie White.

The game featured players from the Vancouver Volcanoes and Dan Dickau and Derek Raivio, who were standouts at Prairie High School and Mountain View High School, respectively, before each starred for Gonzaga University and played pro ball.

Then there were people not known for being ballers, including Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt.



And Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart.


Who, with his double knee braces, reminded us of a certain former Portland Trail Blazer.


Stuart said Leavitt's team won, but only because Leavitt cheated. After a practice, Leavitt complained that Stuart's team had an unfair height advantage. But instead of asking for the 6-foot-5ish Stuart, Leavitt got Jake Carlisle, a 6'8" player for the Volcanoes.

More:

One of the commenters on the blog wrote this: "Leavitt cheated? Imagine that."

Strangely appropriate.
.

Leavitt continues to lie about the bridge and tolls.

.
The slime continues to ooze out of Tim "The Liar" Leavitt as he expands his faux Pied Piper routine about not wanting tolls... but not particularly giving a damn if there ARE tolls.

This is the biggest lie of the entirety of Leavitt's campaign.

The ONLY way to "oppose" tolls is to OPPOSE THE BRIDGE WHEN THEY ARE REQUIRED.

But Tim "The Liar" won't do that. He wants us to BELIEVE he opposes tolls.... but the FACTS say otherwise, because this little weasel doesn't want us to hold him accountable for his failures to oppose a bridge that no one who has to pay for it wants (And, like the vast majority of rabid bridge supporters, Leavitt won't be one of those who WILL have to pay for it... he just wants US to pick up the tab) and his failures to demand that this entire sorry episode be put to a vote of the people who WILL have to pay for it.

The article in the Columbian says:

"Tolls to pay for a federal asset that provides economic commerce for the entire West Coast should not be put on the backs of the citizens of Clark County, period," Leavitt said, to cheers.

In an interview after the debate, Leavitt added that he would not try to kill the bridge project if it proved to be impossible without tolls.

Of course, as anyone within 100 miles of Vancouver knows, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THIS THING CAN BE BUILT WITHOUT TOLLS.

I have to admit, I find Pollard's failure to pound The Liar on this aspect of his campaign to be astounding. Tim "The Liar" is obviously a sniveling little worm, lacking in the testicular fortitude required to man up and take a stand, a stand that would save this community hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on an unneeded and unwanted project designed and built ONLY to get loot rail into Clark County.

Tim "The Liar" Leavitt's rank hypocrisy cannot be overlooked, either. Another snippet of the article says this:

Leavitt, meanwhile, criticized Pollard for a tax hike that prevented police layoffs, saying the city could have saved $400,000 annually by outsourcing its parking meter management.

"In December, when we were in the middle of a recession, my opponent supported a utility tax increase," Leavitt said.

In September, WHILE we're in the middle of a horrific recession, Tim "The Liar" supports a tax increase that DWARFS the mere $400,000 utility tax increase.... by, literally, a factor of a million.

But then, Tim "The Liar" is someone who doesn't think much of money when it belongs to other people.

“It’s frustrating to me that our Congress passed a $700 billion bailout for the financial sector and they couldn’t throw in a measly $3 billion for this immense federal asset for the West Coast,”said Tim Leavitt, a Vancouver councilman who will represent C-Tran on the 10-member sponsors council. “Please give us some money. Why do we have to beat each other up locally?”

That ANY politician could describe $3 billion as "measly" shows both an arrogance and tonedeafness breathtaking in it's dimensions.

So, in The Liar's twisted world, advocating a $400,000 tax increase in the midst of a recession is bad, bad... but advocating a $100,000,000 or so tax increase in the midst of a horrific recession is good..... good.

With almost every utterance, Leavitt shows himself to be a total, political scum bag. If the people elect this clown to run the city, they'll regret it.

And all along, The Liar will be saying "you knew what I was when you elected me."
.

As yet another sign that Tim "The Liar" leave-it was playing the Columbian...

THIS moronic article got put up on the web site.

Good.... God.

Given how quickly he'd be flattened and how little money the lying mayor of Vancouver would be able to raise, the idea that he'd even consider this... in his wildest dreams, dreams neither newsworthy nor worthy of mention in even this sham of a newspaper.

But, as I told the rag a few days ago... The Liar has no more intention to run against Ridgefield Barbie than he does to "Leavitate."

Their desperate efforts to rehabilitate his image as a lying scumbag aside, the rag has been getting played here.  They should know better... and so should the slimy worm in question.

Oh, and Tim?  By all means... run for re-election.  Please.  I'm begging you.

The utter humiliation and embarrassment that would result from such an effort should kick the dumb-ass idea that you have any political future out of that vacuous head.

Leavitt: I'll likely run for mayor, not Congress
Vancouver mayor won't challenge Herrera Beutler 

Zachary Kaufman/Columbian files
Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt said Monday he will not run for Congress.
By Andrea Damewood and Stephanie Rice Columbian staff writers
Originally published November 21, 2011 at 11:32 a.m., updated November 21, 2011 at 3:09 p.m.
submit 0diggsdigg

More like this

Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt said Monday he will not run against U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler in 2012, but did say it’s “very likely” he’ll run again for mayor in 2013. 

Speculation about whether Leavitt would run against Herrera Buetler, R-Camas, was the subject of a front-page story in Sunday’s Columbian. 

Leavitt, 40, made his announcement Monday in an email to members of the Vancouver City Council, City Manager Eric Holmes and city lobbyist Mark Brown. 

“I committed to making a final decision about a run for our Congress seat this past week,” Leavitt wrote. “After much conversation, advice/feedback and deliberation, I’ve decided now is not the right time for me, for our City Council and for our Community, to pursue the WA 3rd Congressional District seat.” 

Work here in Vancouver, including serious adjustments and improvements in the city’s structure, as well as community development projects, isn’t done, said Leavitt, who was elected mayor in 2009. 

“I want to see those through to completion,” he said. “I’m not sure we’ll be able to finish laying those foundations in the next two years.”  Two city councilors have also expressed interest in Leavitt’s job, Mayor Pro Tem Larry Smith and Councilor Jeanne Stewart. 

“If those council members think they can do a better job than I can, I welcome the challenge and debate in a public forum on our accomplishments and leadership style,” he said Monday. “I think it was my predecessor coined who the phrase, ‘Hey, anybody can run for mayor.’ But there’s a difference between running for mayor ... and actually handling the pressure and responsibilities.”

More Liar babble here:

When Clark County Republicans get stupid: Blowback against the Benton-Pollard endorsement and the scum email making the rounds.

.
I'm fond of saying, when asked, that I'm FROM Seattle... and it's a great place to be FROM.

I used to be a Republican. I've worked very hard on partisan races... I've had some successes and some failures. Typically, the races I picked were ALL GOP, ALL the time, because being Republican meant you weren't the political version of the anti-Christ.

I've even held paid positions in the GOP up to the state level... where my true political education began in earnest, and I discovered that it wasn't really about getting Republicans elected... far from it. It was about funneling tens of thousands out the door every month for consultants and lawyers. It was about what job could be scammed through the "Plum Book," what appointment... what "consideration."

Those increasingly smaller numbers of people who call themselves Republicans do so because they feel, in part, that it's SUPPOSED to mean something. And that's the problem: It doesn't.

I became a Republican because it was SUPPOSED to mean honor... integrity... character... and inclusiveness.

Today was yet another lesson that such is not the case.

Below is a copy of Senator Don Benton's endorsement of Royce Pollard for his re-election. I support that position as much as I despise many of Pollard's policies.

As even the Columbian has pointed out, on the policy level there is little to differentiate between Pollard and Leavitt. They've been, essentially, joined at the hip legislatively since Leavitt was appointed to the city council a few years back.

Leavitt knew that he had to differentiate himself from Pollard to get this notch on his gun belt before he ran for Congress or whatever he ultimately plans to do.

So, he contrived a hair-splitting difference on tolls, manipulated the local hispanics into committing political suicide, and attacked HIS opponent for HIS OWN failure to vote; a privilege, I might add, that BOTH Pollard and myself spent many hard years INSURING that Leavitt had available to him, only for him to ignore it... again and again and again.

So, I have been hammering Leavitt like a nail. But as I pointed out below, many in the local GOP hierarchy mistakenly believe he's a Republican because Leavitt had the foresight to play both sides of the fence; apparently supporting Rossi while definitely endorsing and supporting the man who has single-handedly inflicted more damaged to our country in less time than any human being who has ever lived, Barack Hussein Obama.

Benton has endorsed Pollard. I will let that endorsement speak for itself. That the endorsement was made, however, has hurt Leavitt badly, because even though he has surrounded himself with leftists and has so far counted on $30,000 (so far) in leftist money laundered from the East Coast, he was secure in the knowledge that he had sucked most local Republicans into wrongly believing that HE, Leavitt, was one.

I also appreciate Ryan Hart's efforts to jam a shiv into Sen. Benton's back with his non-endorsement endorsement of Leavitt, below.

You know, I appreciate the passion of those in this email that is now making the rounds.

Like those circulating this filth, everyone is entitled to their opinion. And I appreciate CDR Patella's use of the axiom, of "what happens when you 'lay down with dogs'," since Pattela seems to have acquired an entire kennel.

My opinion is this:

Tim Leavitt is a democrat. His campaign has surrounded itself with democrats such as Steve Stuart, Betty Sue Morris and democrat campaign strategist Heather Mellon, who ran democrat Peter Goldmark’s successful campaign for state lands commissioner.

Leavitt claims to have supported Rossi. Well, he also endorsed and supported the blight on the land known as Obama. How come no one mentions THAT?

Does that make him any more palatable to you so-called Republicans?

While Benton obviously has a history of fighting for Republican causes and issues that extends back unbroken for the last 15 years in elective office, that does not make him blind to issues of character, integrity and courage of convictions.

The fact of the matter is that I view Leavitt as a political mercenary. He and Pollard are essentially the same on matters of policy and legislation, with very few differences over the years until Leavitt was bitten by the “mayor” bug, when he realized he had to begin to emphasize, and contrive, differences in order to separate himself from Pollard.

So, he makes up a scam about bridge tolls. He’s OPPOSED to tolls, you understand… just not enough to oppose the BRIDGE when it’s REQUIRED to have tolls. And then, we find out that he never bothered to vote. And then, we find out about his grand plan to tax EVERYONE to get the bridge replaced, a replacement that we do not need and do not want and cannot afford.

Most of you base your opposition to Pollard on what amounts to personal animus. And because Don, after much consideration, has decided what *I* consider to be, by far, the lesser of two evils, you respond like this?

For ANY of you to even REMOTELY begin to question the character and integrity of a man like Sen. Benton with a REPEATEDLY PROVEN RECORD of Republicanism is part and parcel of why I have stopped BEING a Republican… And if this is what it takes to be a part of this party, then that is why I am ashamed to call myself one.

Because if blind obedience to an unofficial party line is a requirement to be a part of your organization, then I want nothing to do with it.

Pollard has, of course, engaged in dozens of policies that I oppose…AND SO HAS LEAVITT. Why do you people seem to forget all about that? Why is there such a horrific double standard?

The difference here, at least to me, is that Pollard is HONEST about his positions, where Leavitt is a slimy weasel. EVERYONE KNOWS where Pollard stands, like it or hate it. Leavitt? Well his latest stupidity on taxing EVERYONE to pay for the bridge and light rail that HE wants says it all.

There is nothing to reconsider. I urge Benton to maintain his stance, a stance based on PRINCIPLED support, something apparently lacking in the organization that I have worked so hard, at so many levels to support… But now have come to despise because of this kind of activity on the part of its “members.”

Because someone disagrees with you, you attack him like this? You people are no different than the Obama White House. You’re no different than Axlerod, or Emanuel or Dunn.

You have BECOME the enemy because of your hatred, and your inability to understand the difference between pragmatism and selling out. You would throw a man under a bus because he may disagree with YOUR conclusion on this ONE issue.

Do you think absolutely unsupported ”talking points” will have any sway?

You express concern over how Pollard has treated Campbell. That’s DEMOCRAT Pat Campbell, who USED to be a Republican… right? The utterly INEXPLICABLE idiocy of trying to make excuses for Leavitt's non-voting record... because Pollard was an OFFICER IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY.

Are YOU telling US, "Commander," that when YOU were in the Navy in YOUR early 20's, that YOU didn't vote and then, like Leavitt, you LIED about it?

*I* voted, Commander. I bet dollars to donuts that Pollard did as well. That you didn't, and then proceed to make excuses for YOUR candidate who followed along in YOUR irresponsibility is simply beyond the pale.

I cannot and will not speak for Don. But if it were me? I would say the hell with the lot of you. I would say, “great. You don’t want to support me? THEN DON’T. Feel free to vote and provide money to whatever leftist they run against me."

And I pity you for it.

From: Local Mailing List
Date: 24 Oct 2009 09:13:11
To:
Subject: Is Don Benton a RINO?
(Mailing list information, including unsubscription instructions, is located at the end of this message.) __

Senator Benton, I have no idea what kind of a deal you made with Pollard, but what ever it was you are a great disappointment to this Conservative.

You must have forgotten what your mother said happens when you "lay down with dogs".

You may not care and you are starting to believe you own press releases, but you no longer have my support and I will do my best to convince other to no longer support you.

For all who supported Rossi and those of you who support Leavitt, Benton needs to hear from you. Please send Debbie's email to everyone on your mailing list.

L. M. Patella
CDR USN (ret

Dear Friends,

Please email to your email lists, blogs, any media outlets.

Call to Action: Please email Don Benton and let him know how disappointed you are by the Pollard endorsement. don@senatordonbenton.com .

If you need talking points, please feel free to use any or all of my letter to Don.

Dear Don,

I am stunned that you have endorsed Pollard for the following reasons:

1. Pollard is pushing the very policies that you have spoken against.

2. He is vocally rude, condescending, and often humiliating to Vancouver citizens during public comment, so much so that the city lawyer, Mr. Gathe had to come in and remind Pollard of appropriate ethics while at city council.

3. He has been degrading to both Pat Campbell and Jeanne Stewart, his own colleagues, during city council meetings.

4. After numerous requests (for removal), he still retained his campaign treasurer as chair of the Vancouver Charter. As a result of that, the review board sent us weak, useless recommendations at a time when real issues needed to be addressed, such as dispersal of public property, the purchase and rental of property, term limits, and mayoral election cycle.

After weeks of public comment as to the importance of these issues, none of them was recommended for review by the Charter Review Committee. It was disgusting,and a blatant disregard for public input.

5. He has spent this city into a position where we didn't even have enough money to pay our fire/police. If BHO hadn't had the stimulus money, we would have been down ten police positions added to the four the city lost previously. It was disheartening to see firemen begging city council to raise taxes to cover their personnel positions/expenses.

6. Have you seen the proposed developments for downtown Vancouver? Good by to all the reasons we all moved here. It will be a concrete canyon.

Tower after tower of high rises.

7. The whole Leavitt voting record thing is absurd. I'd like to see Pollard's voting record when he was in his early 20's.

8. Lastly, please see below what your own Clark County chair has to say about Pollard, after Pollard trashed yours and my 2008 gubernatorial candidate.

Dear Republicans:

The Clark County Republican party decided earlier this year to not make any endorsements in the 2009 non-partisan races. We did send out a voter information guide for the purpose of informing our members of identified Republicans running for office. Since there were many cases of Republicans running against Republicans, and Democrats running against Democrats, we have made it clear that we as a party have taken no official position in these non-partisan races.

Today I was disappointed to see a mailer sent out by the Royce Pollard campaign attacking Mayoral Candidate and City Councilman Tim Leavitt for supporting Dino Rossi in 2008, and for introducing Rossi at his final appearance in Clark County the weekend before the 2008 election. The mail piece states, “The Leavitt-Rossi agenda will move Vancouver in the wrong direction.”

As Chairman of the Clark County Republican Party, I remain proud of Mr. Rossi and the campaigns he ran in an effort to move Washington forward.

Furthermore, it was an honor to have Councilman Tim Leavitt introduce Dino Rossi.

Mayor Pollard needs to understand that tens of thousands of Vancouver residents voted for Dino Rossi, and that Rossi won Clark County in both 2004 and 2008.

Christine Gregoire, however, now has an approval rating around 30 percent.
It is her failed policies, and those of the Democratic majority, that are hindering Washington and, more specifically, Clark County from moving forward. It is doubtful that the majority of Vancouver voters approve of Governor Gregoire’s job performance today.

Tim Leavitt was right to support Dino Rossi, and I applaud him for it.

Sincerely,

Ryan Hart
Chairman, Clark County Republican Party


Don, I urge you to reconsider your endorsement of this once effective, but now misguided mayor.
Debbie Peterson.
.

It's got to be tough when the Mayor of Vancouver is an outright liar.

It's just a damned shame, really.

A political career, soon to be snuffed out, that started with such promise.

Now, desperation is starting to sink in. Desperation that the CRC is over,.  Desperation that the bridge contractor this slimeball is working for will lay him off when the senate kills the CRC funding and he gets crushed for re-election.  Desperation that the voters will kick his ass to the curb just like he kicked his lie-from-the-beginning-tolls-scam to the curb as soon as he could.

I'm hearing that Leave-it already knows it's over... that the money ain't moving out of the Senate any time real soon and the fed window is going to slam shut on his dreams of screwing us... Leave-it wandering around the senate, BEGGING those people to move the money.

How's it feel, Timmy?

I know it ain't happening.  In fact, the best is yet to come.  Maybe you know that as well... but to lie in writing?  To lie about the positions of key senators concerning tolls?  What kind of a moron are you, anyway?

Well, THAT is just, plain, Stupid.

With a capital S.

Here's how that works:

(Mailing list information, including unsubscription instructions, is located at the end of this message.) __

Good Morning,

Below is an exchange of Emails between Hiz Honor Mayor,” I was against bridge tolls before I was for them”  Leavitt, Yours Truly, Senator’s Don Benton, and Ann Rivers.  

In response to my Did You Know #2 Exposing the True Cost of Bridge Tolls, Hiz Honor found it necessary to advise me in Capital Letters that Senator Don Benton and Senator Ann Rivers (both Republicans) supported Bridge Tolls.  It is amazing how some politicians change their spots after being elected.  The Good Mayor must have forgotten that during Governor Chris’  run for Governor Hiz Honor, clinging to the coat tails of well know Republican Dino Rossi, he was pretending to be a Republican.  I can still see him at a fund raiser introducing Dino Rossi. 

As you can see from Senator’s Benton’s email sent 2/28 at 4:24 PM and Senator River’s email sent 2/28 at 5:27 PM, they have made it quite clear that they do not support Bridge tolls or the CRC as currently proposed.

 Next Hiz Honor appeared with his email of 2/28 to chastise the senator by asking them to return some of the tax dollars Vancouver sends to Olympia.  Actually, Hiz honor would have more dollars to fix our roads and highways if he and his current Gang of 4 and his predecessor did not waste our hard earned tax dollars on boondoggles such as the financially failing Hilton Hotel and Convention Center, eight financially failing publicly owned parking garages, and outrageous property tax kickbacks to developers in the form of tax breaks.

Next in his BTW sent on 2/28 at 5:23 PM email Hiz Honor attempts to take me to the Woodshed because
a.    I am a conservative
b.    Stating that I refused to answer his question:

(a)    Would I prefer an increase in sales tax, property tax or business tax?  You’re Honor that is like asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife.  

Mayor Leavitt I am somewhat older than you and can recite chapter and verse of why Revenue Enhancement (taxes to us non-politicians) must be increased.   I can also  answer or state with certainty that Infrastructure Investment does not, has not and will not over the long haul create permanent  jobs. It has been a failure ever since FDR tried it.  Once the boondoggle is complete the jobs go away and you ‘spend and tax, to create more jobs. BTW didn't you just agreed to sell one parking garage valued at 3 million tax payer dollars for 1 Million and are planning on building 5 more if you are successful in bringing Portland’s Financially Failing Light Rail Gravy/Crime to Vancouver.   As for tolls you apparently did not read the email that started this chain of emails, the True Cost of Tolls. It will be excessive. 

Your Honor, I  think that I have answered your questions.  Would you be so kind and answer mine? 

a.    Why can’t the bridge be built without Light Rail?
b.    If congestion is a problem (it is not in my opinion) why not build a 3rd bridge?

And finally, your 2/28 5.44 PM email sent to Senator Ann Rivers (R)  thanking  her for setting me straight on her position on bridge tolls.  I knew what her position was; you apparently are the one who was unaware of her position. 

As for  three years of community engagement, technical studies, independent expert reviews, and approval from the Feds. Community engagement has not been with the people. It has been between members of the Spend and Tax Crowd.  We, the people, have been excluded from two- way conversations. Our no votes have been ignored;    Forensic information provided by Tiffany Couch has been ignored. Failure to communicate with the United States Coast Guard has been a disaster. And although Federal Funding has not yet been secured, approximately 200,000 million dollars has already been spent without proper accounting and transparency.   

And, yes, I have read Senate Bill 5502.  I have to agree with Senator Benton.  Just in case Light Rail proponents ram light rail and bridge tolls down our throats Senate Bill 5502 will at least save some money for those of us on this side of the river.  BTW your honor it would be nice if you would read our Initiative Petition, allow our petition to be placed on the ballot and “Let The People Decide”.

My sincere thanks to Senators Benton and Rivers for listening to what the people are saying.

And so it goes,

Larry Patella
CDR USN (ret)

Please Read the Email exchange:
  
From: Leavitt, Tim [mailto:Tim.Leavitt@cityofvancouver.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 12:51 PM
To: Local Mailing List
Subject: Re: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

Larry -

DID YOU KNOW...that Senator Don Benton and Senator Ann Rivers (both Republicans), support tolling?

Sincerely,
Tim


Local Mailing List <lmpatella@comcast.net> wrote:
(Mailing list information, including unsubscription instructions, is located at the end of this message.) __

Good Morning,

DID YOU KNOW #2

The TRUE COST OF BRIDGE TOLLS!!!!


Although we are repeatedly told that the CRC's Light Rail Platform will cost us 3.5 Billion Dollars, CRC already has a plan in place to pay for the 5.5 Billion in tolls. Below you will see a list of components, like State Contributions and Federal Dollars, but note that their own tolling revenue schedules are planning for 3.3 billion in toll collections.  

CONSTRUCTION COST:

Total Capital Cost (Cost to Construct)                $3. 507, 000, 000
Total additional Cost (Interest, Repairs, etc.)      $2, 032, 305, 306

Total Anticipated Project Cost                            $5, 539, 305, 396 (total over 30 years)


PLANNED FUNDING SOURCES:

State of Washington                                          $   450, 000, 000.00
State of Oregon                                                $   450, 000, 000.00
New Start Grant                                                $   850, 000, 000.00
Federal Discretionary                                        $   400, 000, 000.00   (Non-existing program)
TOLLING REVENUES                                          $3, 353, 969, 345. 00 (Per CRC Finance Plan)

Total Anticipated Funding Sources                       $5, 503, 969, 345.00 

To give you some idea as to how much Bridge Tolls will INCREASE OVER THE YEARS, you need to take a look at the CRC Debt Service Schedule. 

Starting in 2019 when tolls are expected to begin, the Net Yearly Tolling Starting at $62, 373, 695 .00 will, without voter approval and annual increases, grow to $109, 676, 530. 00 being picked from your and or your children's/grandchildren's pockets in the year of 2054. 

Over that period of time the spend and tax pocket pickers will have picked $3,353,969.345 Billion dollars out of your pockets.

It could get worse.  With Historical Cost Overruns of 30 to 200 % it is my personal opinion that total cost of the CRC could reach $10 billion or more dollars

with your help we can stop the wasteful spending of your hard earned tax dollars to build a Multi-Billion Dollar Light Rail Platform.  You can help us get your Stop Light Rail Initiative Petition of the Ballot. 

Currently Our Stop Light Rail Petition is under review by the Kelso, Washington Superior Court. We need your help in getting it through the court systems. 

If you want to keep the Pocket Pickers out of your pockets and keep down town Vancouver from being destroyed Please send a donation to your Legal defense fund. 

Make your check Payable to:
“Legal Defense For Stop Light Rail Initiative (Stephen Pidgeon), and mail it to Debbie Peterson, P.O. Box 872204, Vancouver WA 98687.

And so it goes,

Larry Patella
CDR USN (ret)


From: LM Patella [mailto:lmpatella@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 1:52 PM
To: 'Leavitt, Tim'
Cc: 'don.benton@leg.wa.gov'; ann.rivers@leg.wa.gov
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

Tim,

NO I did not, I will personally with this email ask them.   But I don’t.  As  most people in Clark County do not.  But that is not the issue,  the issue is why are the people being lied to?  There is a lot of difference between 3.5 billion and 5.3 billion along plus Cost Over runs.  Why are you afraid to  let the people decide?
Also I am certain that this boondoggle is going to pick billions out of our pockets and either destroy downtown or force business to move out so that the developers can take over with huge Agenda 21 property tax breaks.

Look forward to seeing you on Monday.

Respectfully,

Larry Patella


From: Abbott, Karmen [mailto:Karmen.Abbott@leg.wa.gov] On Behalf Of Benton, Sen. Don
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:24 PM
To: lmpatella@comcast.net; 'Leavitt, Tim'
Cc: Rivers, Sen. Ann
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

Tim,

I have no idea what gave you the idea that I support tolling for the CRC.  I DO NOT support the CRC, which means I DO NOT support tolling of a bridge that has already been tolled, and paid for.

Sincerely,

Don

PS – If there has been any communication from me or my office that has lead you to believe that I support tolling, please indicate which communication that was so that I may correct the error.

Senator Don Benton
Deputy Majority Leader
17th Legislative District


From: Rivers, Sen. Ann [mailto:Ann.Rivers@leg.wa.gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 5:27 PM
To: 'Leavitt, Tim'; lmpatella@comcast.net
Cc: Benton, Sen. Don
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

For the record Larry, I am not opposed to tolls.  I was raised in an area where tolling was a way of life.  I am, however, opposed to the CRC and tolling of this project since it has become a nightmarish story that continues to unravel. This project does nothing to reduce congestion or increase freight mobility while shunting growth of upriver economic development. I feel that I have taken on the role of protecting my constituency from this project.   There are too many concerns to list here – I believe we need a project – but this isn’t it.  ~ Ann


From: Leavitt, Tim [mailto:Tim.Leavitt@cityofvancouver.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 5:27 PM
To: lmpatella@comcast.net
Cc: Don Benton; Ann Rivers
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

Ohhh...almost forgot...

And, we've been sending a lot of tax $$$ to Olympia. It's about time some of those $$$ come back too SW WA to fix our highway and interchanges and support more efficient transit!

Go get 'em Senators!

Best, Tim


From: Leavitt, Tim [mailto:Tim.Leavitt@cityofvancouver.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 5:23 PM
To: lmpatella@comcast.net
Cc: Don Benton; Ann Rivers
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

BTW, I certainly don't take issue with their positions about sooty of tolling, in general, because it is a "conservative" philosophy of governance....those who use will pay part of the cost; those who don't use don't pay. And, in my research, tolling is the least costly alternative for the local share. I've asked you before if you'd prefer an increase in sales tax, property tax our business taxes...and smartly, you've refused to answer. Why? I hope it's because you understand that a) infrastructure investment creates opportunities for jobs growth from the private sector, and b) tolling is indeed less costly to Clark County residents than all the other options, and c) employers are unlikely to expand and create more jobs as traffic congestion mounts, and d) your grandchildren deserve to live in a Vancouver that is investing in their livelihoods.

Best, Tim

From: Leavitt, Tim [mailto:Tim.Leavitt@cityofvancouver.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 5:44 PM
To: Rivers, Sen. Ann
Cc: Local Mailing List; Don Benton
Subject: RE: Stop Light Rail the Gravy/Crime Train

Senator, thank you for setting the record straight regarding your position on tolling with Mr. Patella.

We'll disagree about the merits and value and need for this project. I'll simply stand by three years of community engagement, technical studies, independent expert reviews, and approval from the Feds.

Larry, I encourage you to review Senate Bill 5502 for details.

Best to all,

Tim