Quick reminder on the local CRC/IBR loot rail scam: By POLICY, they didn't WANT public input and completely ignored it on the CRC... just like they are now on the IBR loot rail scam.

Of course. The entire thing is a scam to infest Clark County with TriMet's loot rail.

Or so said the Oregon Supreme Court:

The answer, according to the court: The massive Interstate 5 bridge and freeway project is a "political necessity" to persuade Clark County residents to accept something they previously didn't want—a MAX light-rail line from Portland to Vancouver. (To read the Feb. 16, 2012 Oregon Supreme Court decision regarding the Columbia River Crossing Project, click here: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/or-supreme-court/1608702.html

They didn't have to "persuade" the citizenry. And they never did.

In fact, they planned to IGNORE US ALTOGETHER, EXACTLY LIKE THEY ARE NOW:

Except from the CRC Memo: Columbia River Crossing: Project Sponsors Council Roles and Responsibilities

Two Money Quotes:

1. I assume that each PSC member would be briefed in advance of the decision meetings by senior staff of their organizations. Senior staff is responsible for providing requested information and responding to questions. It is expected that each of the PSC decision meetings would result in a decision with no need for extended deliberations in future meetings. This approach would require extensive coordination among PDT members prior to the meetings.

The decision meetings would be open to the public, but only minimum legal notices would be provided and no display advertising would be placed. We would not encourage public participation. The Task Force chairs would be expected to attend and respond to PSC questions concerning the Task Force recommendations. Task Force members would be made award of the meetings. Meeting notes would be prepared and posted on the website.

and:

2. Non-decision meetings should be treated as opportunities for the PSC members to advise the PDT on key issues. No “official” decisions should be made at the meetings. No public notice would be provided and Task Force participation would not be sought. Meeting notes would be prepared but not posted on the website (the same as RPG and working group meeting notes).

Rest assured, the scum ramming this garbage down our throats no more care about public input, or the public generally now, than they did then.

And they didn't THEN by ACTUAL, WRITTEN, POLICY.

Nope. There was no more persuasion on this scam, then nor now, than the Soviets persuaded women to be assaulted when they took Berlin in World War Eleven.

All they had to do was buy the scum in Washington State and local government.

This WILL be what happens on the loot rail project masquerading as a bridge replacement.

We know that going in.

Larson provides a more local example, but you need look no further than the Sound Transit scam, where those living in the Sound Transit Concentration Camp, voluntarily walked into a gas chamber of a $53 billion dollar scam without reading the fine print (And oh, how they were shocked, SHOCKED, I TELL YA, when they discovered how they were going to PAY for that rip off (massive tab fee and property tax increases) only to discover that, once again, the budget was 10's of billions short ($30 billion? $35 billion? $40 billion?) that Sound Transit KNOWINGLY lied about when it was passed in the first place, which resulted in the State Supreme Court ruling it's perfectly OK for cities, states and candidates to engage in campaign lying)) only to find out it wasn't water coming out of those shower heads.

As sad as that outcome is, that's what THEY voted for.

No one is asking us for this. And no one's asking us because they know what the answer would be and they simply don't care that the people of this region do NOT want their crime train/loot rail project.

Larson says:

The Northwest Nonsense

If you want a quick preview of the multi-billion dollar disaster coming at us if the interstate bridge project actually goes forward
Look no further than ODOT’s Abernethy Bridge Boondoggle near Oregon City.

The Oregon Department of Transportation lied to lawmakers about the cost and the schedule.

ODOT didn’t have the money but went forward with the project anyway. (My comment: Sound familiar? That's precisely what the thugs shilling the CRC/IBR scam want to do to us under the guise of once construction starts, it MUST be finished, no matter HOW long it takes and no matter HOW much it costs!)

I know, it sounds crazy but it has worked for ODOT for a long time and no one ever gets fired.

Today, the project has spent twice the original cost…half a billion dollars…and the bridge is only 70 percent done. Like the kitchen remodel contractor from Hell…telling you your cost has now tripled but your house is already torn apart and your choice is pay up…or live in chaos

But for all that money…now about 800-million…at least it will be finished on time, right?

Wrong.

Originally, contractor Kiewit was supposed to be done by the end of LAST year…which ODOT agreed to extend to October of this year.

Now, Kiewit says they may be done by January of 28…almost two years from now.

But that’s a contractor promise…I wouldn’t exactly take it to the bank.

That’s the Rose City Rap. Join me at noon on KXL for 4 hours of Honestly provocative talk. I’m Lars Larson.
***************************************************
One does wonder why the contracts for that scam... and our own bridge replacement/loot rail scam, didn't/doesn't have contract costs/completion penalties attached.

The absence of those requirements is a license to steal.

And steal they will. And there's nothing we can do about it since government at every level, from state on down, doesn't give a rat's ass what the people of Clark County, who will bear the lion's share of the costs for this rip off, want or don't want.

If they did? We'd have a vote on it.

Like Sound Transit had a vote on their expansion.

And last I looked?

The leftist governments we're cursed with have made it clear that the people they would govern are not nearly as important as the "save them from themselves" agenda.

Clark County is going to learn a horrific lesson on loot rail.

For readers not keeping up with the Sound Transit light rail insanity, a brief history:

Exclusive of the fact that Seattle's freeway congestion is among the worst in the entire country after wasting billions on loot rail as it is, (as is Portland's) nine years ago, without reading the fine print on HOW they were going to pay for it (massive increases in tab fees, mainly) voters in the Sound Transit district, apparently overcome by fentanyl smoke, voted to hand the district $54 billion for a promised expansion of 62 miles.

Not long ago, the Mafia chieftain running Sound Transit, former King County Executive Dow "I never met a tax increase I didn't love" Constantine came out publicly and finally spoke the heretofore obvious and well known, but never mentioned, truth.

An additional amount of money was going to be needed to complete the promised expansion project... as much as $30 billion more.

And how do they intend to do it?

At this point, the plan is to jack up a 1% property tax increase... with an actual result of a 3.8% increase, even though they're limited to 1%.

Having used the camel's-nose-under-the-tent-flap approach to get this rip off passed by the voters... this time, there will be no vote.

Governments typically don't seek voter approval for any tax increase for fear of voters saying "no."

Now, unlike the loot rail scam being rammed down our throats here locally, Sound Transit at least asked initially. No one is asking us if we want this insanity.

The reason I mention the Sound Transit debacle is simple.

THAT will be the blueprint for how we get screwed here.

WHATEVER number the scum running the IBR ultimately come up with?

Don't believe it.

There WILL be massive budget shortfalls for this scam, as even now, Oregon has loaded that garbage up like a Christmas Tree, major improvements such as new cars they'll be running through THEIR system, paid for by mainly the tolls Washington residents have to shell out to go to work and then return.

And when those shortfalls hit?

Guess who's going to pay for it? And how?

Sound Transit is showing us. $14 billion or $17 billion for the cross river, loot rail scam or whatever the final number they claim may be?

Don't believe it.

And even now, if you do the math?

Including the most recent cost scams for light rail in Seattle?

The idiots who voted for THEIR rip off are now being shown the INTERIM true cost of this expansion.
Expect that number to continue to skyrocket.

Divide 62 miles into $54 billion. That figure will get you the cost per mile promised to get that scam approved by the voters. In short, the promised cost even then was $871 million per mile.

Add the possible $30 billion to that number, billions voters will have zero say over, and what do you get? $1.355 billion. (a number that will go much high than even the $30 billion)

Per mile.

And we all already know that getting the deadly fungus of Portland loot rail across the river is just phase one. After that, the leftists will start demanding expansion in Clark County for a system we do not want, do not need and cannot afford.

And they will do their best to expand that scam without asking us. Or if they DO ask us?

They'll use the Washington State Supreme Court method of lying to get initial approval while they dramatically understate the costs; only to, again, like Sound Transit is now, jack up the costs later and force us to pay the increases.

A conversation with Pat Campbell, Vancouver City Councilman.

I absolutely do give Pat Campbell credit for engaging with his political opponents, something rare in a politician anywhere and unheard of at the local level among those ramming the bridge and loot rail down our throats.

While I believe Campbell and those like him to be wrong on every level: the facts, the impacts, the costs and the outcomes, Campbell at least makes the effort.

And for that, he is to be congratulated.

He wrote in the comment section of my post: With the Columbian, it's perfectly OK to lie in a campaign....

I know some of you were quite upset last Tuesday thinking you had elected Leavitt. I am not so sure of that. I think it had to be more that just the anti-toll folks:

1) Ogle and Turlay were anti-toll and not elected.

2) Burkman was pointed out as being "pro-toll" and was elected.

So in my mind there was more to Leavit's election that just the tolling issue. An opinion- Pat Campbell

To which, I responded:

There may very well could have been. But isn't all that beside the point?

The man ran on a lie. This sudden awakening was a crock. I find it highly unlikely that Leavitt magically gained knowledge on tolling after the election that he didn't have before the election. And that's the trouble, Pat.... even more so then his cynical and absolute decision to use the tolling issue to gain support from the anti-toll segment of the electorate.

Of course, Leavitt also got $40,000 or so from David Barnett that didn't hurt, either.

The idea that Leavitt NOW knows what he apparently didn't know then is absurd. His position was purely electioneering; he had no intention of being opposed to tolls. He was for tolls from the very beginning; his decision to publicly abandon that issue now and let the Columbian PR arm go to work to rehab his image was a purely political decision as well.

The ONLY way to genuinely "oppose tolls" as Leavitt campaigned on is what I told him: the simple thing to do is stand up and tell those in charge: if you toll this thing I will do everything I can to kill it.

And his cowardly response to the issue of an advisory vote: how DARE he tell the public that such a vote would be meaningless. It's only "meaningless" because Leavitt is not about to risk a massive public repudiation of his pro-toll position. He doesn't want a mere thing like the will of the people to get in the way of his agenda... much like, come to think of it, you.

There is no excuse for building this without asking us. None. And Tom Mielke appears to be the only one who has tried to get this project in front of the people for our input. Leavitt doesn't want that. Stuart doesn't want that. The governor doesn't want that and frankly, it appears that you don't want it either.

In the entirety of my life I never believed that any government that governed me could possibly care so little about the will of those they would govern.... until now.

Regardless of whatever else Leavitt ran on, he ran on this lie. And now, the question: when do we believe him? How do we know when he's lying... and when he's telling the truth?

I knew he was lying from the beginning. Said so from the beginning. Steve Stuart on his campaign? There is NO WAY Stuart would allow anyone who didn't share his perspective to win.
Leavitt defrauded the people as much as Sam Adams in Portland. And for that, he deserves everyone's condemnation, including yours. But I'm not holding my breath.

Because like all of the bridger/looters, none of you are going to have to pay for this unneeded and unwanted monstrosity. As a result, it's completely unrealistic to expect you to make any effort to hold Leavitt accountable or to do the right thing in his regard.

Thanks for stopping by, Pat.

Leading to this effort by Mr. Campbell:

I am for the bridge and light rail after coming to the conclusion that we need to get started before our current transportation system collapses. (Some would argue it already has.)

I know we have a group that is opposed to CRC and tolls. We also have an even greater group of citizens and business people who feel the project has to be completed or we will stagnate economically.

Small groups can have a big effect if the cause is supported by many others. The issue of the Port tax increase without a vote was one of those. The fizzling of Patellas petition indicates that outside of a few folks, most want CRC to move forward. - Pat Campbell

To which I reply: Pat, thanks for stopping by again. But for purposes of this discussion, what the people may or may not want is secondary to the issue of Leavitt's lies, manipulations and misrepresentations of his positions, all for a political purpose.

That Leavitt lied is irrefutable. That he received votes because he lied is also irrefutable. That such was the purpose of his lies is self-evident. That you and others similarly situated are doing nothing to hold him accountable for those lies speaks for itself.

You seem to be supporting him because, as I pointed out, it's OK to lie when the liar supports your position. You should be holding him accountable by any number of ways available to you all, and yet you're not. But then, Leavitt's now in your "pro-toll" fold publicly, instead of privately, where he's been from the very beginning.

As far as the bridger/looter project?

Pat, I will be the first to admit that I-5 here locally is a mess…. But I believe it to be a designed-in mess.

When I moved here after I got out of the Army, there were just under 200,000 people living in Clark County. Now, of course, there are over 430,000, a huge increase over the 21 plus years I’ve lived here. Next to nothing has been done to our transportation system to keep up with that growth, and now we’re faced with spending what amounts to $4 billion dollars so light rail can take the “camel’s nose under the tent flap” approach as, perhaps, THE most expensive transportation project for the number of people it will actually carry in the History of this planet… all while the true problem remains unaddressed; a lack of road miles for our increasing population.

While our transportation system is light years from “collapsing,” (after all, 65,000 commuters go over the bridge before noon, and 65,000 commuters come back after noon every business day) it is, certainly, distressed. But the distress will not be relieved by kicking the dead horse known as replacing, with the same number of through lanes, or ANY number of through lanes, a bridge in the same place.

At some point, we are going to get additional bridges. Portland, as I understand it, has 11 bridges that cross the Willamette. That we have a grand total of TWO to serve the needs of a community of a half million is absurdity wrapped in stupidity.

So, do we add a third and fourth bridge now? Or do we wait 20 or 30 years when it becomes so obvious that even a CRC supporter can believe in the need…. And it cost twice as much?

Because right now, you and your fellow travelers are talking about spending what amounts to an unlimited number of billions (Think Boston’s “Big Dig.”) on a project that will not do what you seem to think it will do; all the while disrupting life, traffic patterns, Clark College, and the budgets of tens of thousands of commuters… for a project that tends to show the net impact will be zero change by the year 2030.

You tell me:

I know we have a group that is opposed to CRC and tolls. We also have an even greater group of citizens and business people who feel the project has to be completed or we will stagnate economically.

How, precisely, do you know this to be true? And of that “group” you name, how many of them will have to pay for this?

See, Pat, it would be easy for me to make you, through force of government, pay for something that I’m not going to use… or pay for.

You have absolutely no evidence to support your contention. And when the issue was brought up, and Leavitt actually had the gall to look at his constituents and say, in effect, that such a vote wouldn’t make any difference or have any value, I almost threw up.

When Leavitt trashed the idea of an advisory vote as “meaningless,” I had to leave the school. If ever there were a display of arrogance towards the people and what they want in addition to his obvious lies about being opposed to tolls, THAT was it.

NO vote on ANYTHING should EVER be “meaningless.”

Leavitt has REPEATEDLY told people that he won’t support an advisory vote because he KNOWS the project would lose overwhelmingly. So here, you say even more people want this then don’t… but you have nothing to prove that… and you certainly have nothing that indicates support from those who would be on the hook the most to pay for it: the commuters of Clark County.

So, why don’t you people put this to bed? Find a way to hold a county wide advisory vote on this project. If you do that advisory vote and the people actually DO support this, then I will never say another word about it.

It would be cheaper and far more accurate than any poll done to date, and it would forever put this question to bed.

But Pat, we both know that you’d never make such a demand. You tell me that you support the whole package… so why would you ever risk letting a little thing like the will of the people actually get in your way? After all, it won’t be YOU paying the $1200 to $1800 per year in tolls to go to work every day, will it? And I’ve got to wonder: would you be so hot to make this thing happen if you had to pay, out of your pocket, $1500 or so a year, like you’re working to force everyone else who will have to use this bridge to pay?

"Economic stagnation?” What happens to our local economy when your project vacuums out $100,000,000 million per year out of our local economy, monies that will go to tolls instead of, for example, movies, pizza, newspapers, ice cream, park fees, the Clark County fair and the like because YOU and the others supporting this monstrosity will task 65,000 other families to pay for something THEY don’t want…. Money from which no government entity will see a dime in revenue that otherwise would have produced almost $9,000,000 or more in sales tax.

What impact is THAT going to have on our economy? Or is the economy of the unions who are going to be the direct beneficiaries of this project what concerns you the most?

Mr. Campbell went on:

Small groups can have a big effect if the cause is supported by many others. The issue of the Port tax increase without a vote was one of those. The fizzling of Patellas petition indicates that outside of a few folks, most want CRC to move forward.

Sorry…. But that’s nonsense.

That Patella’s effort failed is meaningless given the fact that he had no time and no money.

PLEASE don’t believe for one second that, for example, if Patella had paid signature gatherers, or the ability to go up on TV or radio that he wouldn’t have come back with 20,000 signatures.
Pat, you’ve been in politics long enough to know that there is much more to an issue than whether or not the campaign to address it was funded or handled properly.

You want to know for sure?

Then hold the vote. But that you can extrapolate what the people want from an unfunded campaign in too short of a time and divine what the rest of us want is absurd.

Hold the vote, Pat.

But then, as I said, we both know you won’t. But that you and the rest of the CRC seem to have deluded yourself into actually believing that the people truly want this waste of billions is, perhaps, the most dangerous thing of all.

In closing, let’s not lose site of the main issue: Leavitt ran a platform that was primarily based on telling people he was actually opposed to tolls. I knew all along that he actually favored tolls, and the whole thing was a political ploy. Rightly or wrongly, nothing in your response refutes that.

That Leavitt is a liar is irrefutable. And there’s no way this particular pig can be dressed up to change that.

Again, thanks for stopping by.

Cross posted at Tim Leavitt Watch.

.

Zemanta" src="http://img.zemanta.com/zemified_e.png?x-id=4a6df10d-8025-411d-bc40-32ed9dc3d20e">

Are you stunned? I'm stunned: The Columbian endorses Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.

.
Of the 3 candidates running for Mayor of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Vancouver, only one of them has failed to follow the Columbian's agenda in it's entirety: Charlie Stemper.

The other two have carried the Columbian's water like Gunga Din... and they've been suitably rewarded for their toadying by the appropriate ass-kissing from the newspaper in the form of their endorsement.

Now, the Columbian endorsement and 5 bucks will get you a latte' in any Starbucks. In the last election, for example, the local version of Pravda Izvestia endorsed ONLY democrats in ANY open seat, from the President of the United States on down to state representative. As a result, they were rewarded with a massive cut in their B&O tax hit that the rest of us have to pay, because, after all, the leftists running our state government don't want to lose such a "valuable" ability to spread their propaganda, lies and exaggerations... much like their despicable and dishonest coverage of the unwanted, unneeded and completely wasteful I-5 bridge replacement/loot rail project.

So, it's no wonder that "No Choice" Royce and Tim "The endorsement scam artist" Leavitt got the Columbian's grateful nod for the upcoming election.

Both of these clowns actively sued the voters into silence to keep them out of the way when it came to the massive fraud known as the Pollard Hilton; both these morons want the bridge replacement, loot rail AND the massive tolls this nonsense will require.

This newspaper AND Pollard AND Leavitt have a thing for OPM.... Other People's Money. Leavitt, for example, gained a small level of notoriety with his characterization of billions as... what was it, Tim... "measly," was it?

The paper will do absolutely anything they can to get this thing built, including lie, and Pollard could care less what the people want... not unlike Leavitt and the bankrupt Columbian, come to think of it.

So, it's no wonder that the Columbian wants to give Charley the boot. He isn't a member in good standing of the downtown Mafia, unlike the other two and this rag that laughingly calls itself a newspaper... so, what else could we expect?
.

I never thought I'd see the day when Bill Fromhold lied: Local Dems again push for C-Tran ability to levy tax for light rail

.
Local democrats seem particularly keen on jamming an unwanted, unneeded and massive waste of money and increased costs down our collective throats known as the I-5 Bridge Replacement/Loot rail project.

It's bad enough that they desperately want to be able to engage in their political pay backs and pay offs without asking us if we want this huge pile of crap dumped in our laps.

But our leftist legislators are so in the tank that they refuse to take any action to ASK us if WE want this garbage. And we all know why.

Bill Fromhold is a former legislator from the Soviet Socialist Republic of the 49th District. This district will act as the first stage terminus of this public policy abortion known as loot rail. Bill has had a long career in government, and left the legislature in part to administer a fund designed to, effectively, increase teaching competency in this state.

He was screwed out of that gig by the WEA, so he needed another job. Ultimately, he's landed a gig as chief liar for the Columbian River Crossing Rip off, the group who has gone through 10's of millions of taxpayer provided dollars to produce a pre-ordained outcome study that I could have provided for $20.

Now we find ourselves on a particularly despicable action on the part of Craig Pridemore, best known for cutting wholly-owned tribal/David Barnett subsidiary Commissioner Steve Stuart a huge brake back in 2005 by modifying campaign contribution legislation he was working on so that his buddy Stuart could keep massive contributions by local developers.

This is the C-Trans redux, based on the strategy those scum employed when they passed their last vote. That strategy included skillful gerrymandering that cut out as many as 51,000 voters from north and east county so that they could turn their crushing tax increase defeat at the polls into a huge victory.

What they're doing effectively amounts to drawing their boundaries around every retail center of any size within the county, so those centers would have to charge the tax increase, even to the tens of thousands who were not allowed to have any say in the vote itself.

Local legislative opposition to this iteration of stealing from the people is in large part based on the ongoing C-Trans theft that has taken place for years, and will take place in the future.

This history is easily proven. It was an entirely legal scam where democracy took a bullet in the most rotten and unjustifiable way.

Fromhold, when confronted is quoted in the Pravda Columbian thusly:

"I think we just take a different point of view in terms of the fairness issue," he said. "It's more fair in that the users of the high-capacity transit are going to be the taxpayers of the high-capacity transit."

Yeah. And the sign over the door at concentration camps used to say "Arbeit Macht Frei." (Work makes you free.)

Forcing people to pay for something when they haven't been allowed the right to vote on the project at hand is, perhaps, the LEAST fair outcome possible. And to believe or expect that C-Trans or it's minions would suddenly give a damn about "fairness" after how badly they've been screwing us for years is to believe the sun comes up in the South.

On the surface, Mr. Fromhold's response makes sense. But only on the surface.

The fact is this: no one has drawn any lines to show us as what the outlines of this extortion is going to look like. But you can rest assured that it will include every Fred Meyers; every Safeway, the Vancouver Mall, every WalMart, every QFC, every Albertsons, Every Best Buy, every Costco... every... every.

So the FACT is this: like the C-Trans scam that took place before, tens of thousands of us will not be allowed to vote. But NONE of us will be able to avoid paying the tax increase to cover this unwanted and unneeded project, because ALL of the retail centers will be magically included within the gerrymandered borders of this scam... REGARDLESS of whether or not we are "users of high-capacity transit."

Notice that Fromhold even avoids the term "light rail?" Remember the leftist outrage at Dino Rossi's decision to use the term "GOP" instead of "Republican?"

Same thing.

So, in that respect, Fromhold has agreement with the massive and unlistened-to opposition: We DO have a "different view" about "fairness." Fromhold and the people he works for absolutely don't give a damn about fairness, while the rest of us actually do.

Remember, people: there is no lie the proponents of this colossal and unimaginable waste of money will not tell to make it happen. They don't give a damn about fairness or anything else we want as long as they can get their economic black hole of a project through, regardless of our opposition.

If successful, this will be a stain on the very idea of democracy here locally that will last for decades. This despicable and inexcusable conduct is just that. And for that, there is no possibly acceptable excuse.


Local Dems again push for C-Tran ability to levy tax for light rail
But 18th District Republicans vow to fight House and Senate bill

Thursday, February 19 6:46 p.m.

BY KATHIE DURBIN
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

Democratic lawmakers from Vancouver are pushing again this year for legislation that would allow C-Tran to create a subdistrict to fund operation of light rail in Clark County.

But Republican Reps. Jaime Herrera and Ed Orcutt, who represent the 18th District, have vowed to fight the measure, saying it would require some residents of north and east Clark County to pay higher taxes where they work and shop.

Bills in both chambers would allow C-Tran to ask voters living within the subdistrict to tax themselves to pay for operation of a light rail line connecting to Tri-Met's system in the Portland metropolitan area. Voter approval would be required before either a system plan or a finance plan could be implemented.

Sen. Craig Pridemore is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 5540, which had a hearing in the Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 9. Rep. Jim Moeller is the lead sponsor of House Bill 1677, which is scheduled for action by the House Transportation Committee Thursday.

The ability to create a High-Capacity Transportation Corridor Area is key to C-Tran's strategy for connecting urban Clark County to light rail or high-capacity bus transit as part of the construction of a new Interstate 5 bridge across the Columbia River.

More:

Tim Leavitt swings by: Uncle, Uncle, UNCLE Already!

.
A few days ago, Tim Leavitt came by and left the following comment on a post I wrote on January 26. I apologize to Tim and anyone else over the delay in acting on this... I just received the email notification it had come in.

While I am puzzled at the almost three week or so delay, better late than never. Whenever Mr. Leavitt comes by, I will take the same time and effort to share his communications as I will to attack his positions that I oppose.

After all, fair is fair, and as much as I may disagree with Mr. Leavitt, I do appreciate his effort to communicate.

Thus, here is his comment, completely unedited, as I received it, followed by my response.

Tim Leavitt said...

Uncle, Uncle, UNCLE Already!Uncle, Uncle, UNCLE Already!

Again, I'll refer you to my blog...leavitt4vancouver.blogspot[sic]. for the details and accuracy of my position on the Columbia River Crossing.

My remark about a 'measly $3 billion" was a comment of sarcasm as related to the hundereds[sic] of billions the Feds are spending on financial bailouts...as accurately quoted (yes) in The Columbian article! Of course I know that $3 billion is a lot of money! Come on, now...

I'll remind you that I was Chair of the CTRAN Board of Directors who chose a CRC Locally Preferred Alternative that included #1) a restriction on the cost of light rail into Clark County (to be limited to what the Feds pay for...no additional local money from you, me and our neighbors to pay for construction cost); and #2) the voters of CTRAN will have the opportunity to decide on funding operations and maintenance of any high capacity transit coming into Clark County. Eight of the nine electeds on that Board (including the likes of Betty Sue Morris, Marc Boldt, and Jeanne Stewart). Again, details on my blog.

Lastly, if it's important for the blog to maintain some integrity, facts should be checked before statements made...

The current Mayor and I have both agreed and disagreed on many issues over the past 6+ years of my tenure on the Vancouver City Council. That is bound to happen, no?!?

I'll just point out some issues of recent difference in opionion.[sic] These noted below are related to fiscal matters of the City:

For example, three months ago, I voiced quite clearly my opposition to raising utility taxes on our citizens and businesses, imploring the Council to consider further trimming expenses in city government during this time when we are all 'tightening our belt'.

For example, six months ago, I offered an amendment to the CRC City Council resolution to remove an assumption of tolling on the proposed bridge project. Everbody[sic] but the Mayor supported that amendment.

For example, some year+ ago, I opposed an increase in sales taxes, imploring the Council to remain patient with all of the development occurring, as the City will get it's revenues on 'the back side' as retail sales increase.

These are but three of the more recent fiscal-related issues where the Mayor and I have not seen eye-to-eye.

There may be dislike for what we have agreed upon, but to suggest that we've never been in disagreement on issues is not factual.

I appreciate the dialogue, the opportunity to correct 'the record' and provide more clarity to my positions.

thanks much --

tim

3:56 PM

I appreciate any elected official taking the time out of their day to communicate. He's a busy man and clearly, he views this ability as important.

What set me off initially was Mr. Leavitt's remark that I had engaged in "serious misinterpretation" and that I had "taken (him) way out of context."

Upon reflection, I continue to disagree. In providing both quotes and links to the actual article that was the basis for my post, I should have removed any question or doubt concerning either "misinterpretation" OR "context."

Mr. Leavitt's comment (above) provides a perspective, but not what I would consider to be a response to the issues either I raised, or a poster over at clarkblog.org brought up that addressed specific issues that Mr. Leavitt has failed to respond to.

I have alleged that Mr. Leavitt is, in effect, "Pollard Light." I have indicated that there is nothing in record or outlook of any substance to separate the two. I have indicated that I believe that Mr. Leavitt has rarely disagreed with Mayor Pollard on his votes or his views. I am ready to be persuaded that I am wrong.

I have some specific questions to ask that might make that possible. Hopefully, Mr. Leavitt will review these questions and provide answers that will disprove my theory.

1. In what way do you differ from Mayor Pollard on the following:

a. The construction of a replacement I-5 Bridge.

b. The inclusion of light rail.

c. Our right to vote on those two issues as to whether, or if, we actually want either one.

d. The purchase of the Columbian Building.

In what way DID you differ from the mayor on your votes concerning:

a. The Hilton.

b. The Monterrey.

c. The police station sale.

d. The indoor farmers market.

e. The Sharma vote.

f. The so-called "head tax."

g. The imposition of a city B&O tax.

That is not to say, Mr. Leavitt, that I do not appreciate your efforts to point out where you have, in fact, differed with the mayor on your respective votes in the past.

You went to some trouble to provide instances where you did, in fact, differ with the mayor. And I thank you for that.

I would ask you, however, to specify:

As a percentage of votes, is it safe to say that you've voted with Mayor Pollard, say, 95% of the time?

Is the number greater... or lower?

And Mr. Leavitt, I would point out that your votes on the CTran Board miss the point: Before you voted for ANY of this, I believe that we should have had the opportunity to vote on if we wanted ANY of this.

Your votes seem to make the best of a bad situation-type result. And that's not what we hire you for.

The only question you ask us seems to be this: will we pay for operations and maintenance of light rail?

A series of MUCH better questions to ask us all are these:

a. Do you want to pay tolls?

b. Do you want another bridge?

c. Do you want light rail?

You see, Mr. Leavitt, you ain't asking us those questions.

Why?

Do you see that by your actions, you're increasing the already unfair burden on as many as 60,000 commuters or more a day by at least $1200 yearly?

Why is it that such an action seems to mean so little to you?

You are giving us precisely zero choice. In your world, the goal is to replace a bridge that we do not want replaced, making sure that the bridge has light rail; and only THEN ask us if we want to pay for the operation of said light rail IN ADDITION to the HUGE tax increase tolls represent. You're not giving us a voice that matters.

This is as unfair and unethical as that despicable C-Trans vote where 50,000 or more voters were excluded from voting for a tax increase, but none of us have been excluded from PAYING it.

Did you support THAT theft?

"Integrity" is an interesting concept when you and those like you are willing to slam us with a huge additional tax just to go to work... a tax that I believe the vast majority of the elected officials supporting this effort WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY TO GO TO WORK.

How EASY it is for YOU to impose a tax on US that YOU won't have to pay on a daily basis, day in, day out, for years. What about YOUR "integrity?"

What about ASKING US FIRST?

As always, I will blog your response, presuming you provide one.

Just remember, Mr. Leavitt: "integrity" is a dual-edged sword... and it cuts both ways.

Thank you for your time.
.

The idiocy and lies of the Columbian continue: No, a new bridge will NOT "ease chronic congestion."

Is there NO lie the Columbian won't tell as they continue their efforts to ram light rail that we don't want, along with horrific tolls that we don't want, to get loot rail into Clark County?

The story, below, entitled "2009: Year of the bottom line?" contains some predictions about next year. Anyone may, of course, predict anything they like, but when this rag does it... hold on to your wallets.

One of the moronic observations include the following about the bridge replacement debacle, shilled like no other ignorant project (save for the Hilton) in this moronic paper's existence, includes this:

Last year was a big milestone for the multiyear process toward easing chronic congestion for trucks and commuters, with local governments on both sides of the Columbia River signing onto a plan to replace the aging I-5 Bridge and bring light rail to Vancouver.

There are several idiotic elements to this not-needed, not wanted, bridge-replacement... starting with the lie that replacing this bridge will impact congestion in any way.

But first and foremost of the dozen or so idiotic pronouncements by this excuse for a newspaper in support of the nonsensical idea that IS replacing the I-5 Bridge, is the observation that replacing this perfectly good bridge will "ease congestion."

It will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to "ease congestion." Nothing.

Even the experts tell us that, optimistically, "Congestion on new I-5 bridge back to today's level by 2030," but the fact is that even with the minor modification of Delta Park, replacing the three through-lanes we have now with, well, the three-through lanes envisioned by the loot rail idjits will accomplish nothing but to blow a $4 Billion hole in the taxpayer's pockets. Well, that and enriching the unions and other special interests demanding this garbage project.

At the end of the day, with this article, The Bankrupt Columbian has ignored the basic tenets of journalism. They are engaging in campaigning for something that essentially meets the agenda of the Vancouver Mafia, while ignoring common sense and what most of the rest of us would want: a 3rd... and then a 4th... bridge across the Columbia River.

The I-5 Bridge is old. But that, in and of itself, is no excuse for replacing it. For those who believe that replacing what appears to be a perfectly serviceable and functional bridge because of it's age... well, lets take a look at our local Newspaper.

We should apply the same reasoning. The bridge is old... the newspaper is old. The bridge, to hear them tell it, fails to meet our needs. The newspaper is circling the drain of bankruptcy, and wouldn't be terribly missed if it were to disappear tomorrow... thus meeting the same observation that it, to, fails to meet our needs.

There are things that can be done to upgrade the bridge without replacing it. The technology exists to increase it's survivability in the event of one of those world-ending earthquakes the Columbian incessantly whines about.

Of course, upgrading the bridge isn't a concern the fishwrapper shares. The newspaper's ONLY concern is to get loot rail over here. Everything else, including the horrific, massive waste of money to replace this serviceable bridge, is secondary.

There are things that can be done to save the newspaper without replacing it. Fire the entire idiocy of an editorial staff. Get rid of that idiot Laird... and Brancaccio. Revert to the true purpose of journalism: start just writing the news without making the news and lying to get what you want.

In this instance, the newspaper engages in the Goebbelian practice of telling a lie long enough, often enough and loud enough until the numbed minds of the masses actually believe it.

There is absolutely no excuse for pumping out this garbage.... none. Yet this paper insists on publishing lie after lie as if it were God's Own Truth. Perhaps a little journalistic introspection might be the order of the day... if they're interested in surviving, that is.

Email Print Local News
2009: Year of bottom line?
Money will be the common denominator for major issues

Wednesday, December 31 8:15 p.m.
BY JEFFREY MIZECOLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

Work continues on “Michaelsen,” a housing development being built by Manor Homes off Northwest 116th Street. Construction started after 10 of the 14 homes in the development were sold. (Zachary Kaufman/The Columbian)

One common denominator will shape Clark County’s top stories for 2009: money.

-- Housing markets will struggle to rebound from the worst year in memory.

-- State agencies, schools and cities will cope with the sting of budget cuts.

-- Big-ticket projects, including the Columbia River Crossing, will scramble to refine financial plans.

With unemployment and foreclosures rising and credit markets and consumer spending tanking, the pursuit of the almighty dollar will be front and center in 2009.

Many of these big stories will continue to unfold in 2009 without final resolution. For example, work on replacing the Interstate 5 Bridge has been under way for much of this decade, but no one expects a final plan, complete with dedicated funding, to be sewn up by the end of this year.

With that in mind, here’s a look at what to expect in 2009:

Housing market

Real estate agents, homeowners with adjustable mortgages and others would just as soon forget 2008. Will 2009 bring a rebound or more misery? Is the worst is still to come?

Home sales fell 33.3 percent in 2008, a year when prices dropped and foreclosures increased. But some real estate experts say there is hope for home sellers as buyers begin whittling away at the housing stockpile.

“I am hopeful that by mid-2009, we’ll see some definite signs of improvement,” said Sandy Hendrick, executive director of the Clark County Association of Realtors.

Hendrick expects softening home prices and abundant selection to rev up the local home-selling scene, a jump start that others say will be helped along by low interest rates on mortgages and a $7,500 federal tax write-off being offered to first-time buyers who purchase homes before July 1, 2009.

“It looks like the government is going to stimulate refinancing and purchasing,” said Kerry Greenwald, owner of Creekside Mortgage in Vancouver.

“If you can borrow money at 4.5 percent and get the government incentive, buying begins to look attractive,” Greenwald said. He also expects 2009 to be a banner year for mortgage refinancing.

National reports caution that the optimism of real estate experts could be premature, given the country’s deepening recession and mounting job losses.

Bridge planning

Last year was a big milestone for the multiyear process toward easing chronic congestion for trucks and commuters, with local governments on both sides of the Columbia River signing onto a plan to replace the aging I-5 Bridge and bring light rail to Vancouver.

More:

The organized crime of loot rail: Latest Portland light rail project 25% over budget.

.

My guess is that this will never see the light of day in the Columbian, so I'm sticking it up here as yet another example of the organized crime that is loot rail.

From the AntiPlanner

Portland Commuter Rail 25% Over Budget

posted in Transportation, Urban areas

Portland’s Westside commuter rail is $33 million over its planned budget of $133. Although just $8 million of that is due to the cost of the commuter rail cars, a recent article in The Oregonian blames the manufacturer of those cars for having “cost TriMet millions.”

The Westside commuter rail line goes from nowhere to nowhere. Actually, it goes from Wilsonville to Beaverton, but neither endpoint is a major job center. That means commuters who use the commuter rail will probably change in Beaverton to a light rail train. Faithful Antiplanner ally John Charles says this line is a loser. It is so bad that Oregon’s congressional delegation had to pass a law exempting it from Federal Transit Administration cost-effectiveness criteria restricting funding to projects that only waste a lot of money instead of a whole lot of money.

Colorado Railcar’s original demonstrator unit.

Flickr photo by AaverageJoe.

Engineering, design, construction, right of way, and signals for the project cost about $22 million more than expected, which The Oregonian mentions only in a tiny chart. Instead, the story focuses on Colorado Railcar, a company that has been promoting the idea of Diesel multiple units (DMUs), which more or less means a light-rail-like car powered by a Diesel engine powerful enough to also tow one or two unpowered cars.

I’ve never met Tom Rader, the owner of Colorado Railcar, but as a railfan I’ve known some of his associates and products. Under the name Rader Railcar, he rebuilt old passenger cars into some interesting cars for various tourist rail lines in Alaska, Canada, and elsewhere. Some of these cars were great, but others were late and overbudget, leading to financial problems for both his customers and his own company.

Due to these problems, Rader was forced to reincorporate under a different name. He then decided to jump into the transit business and actively promoted Diesel commuter cars as a cross between conventional commuter rail (which typically operates only during rush hours) and light rail (which operates all day long but in shorter trains than commuter rail).

More:

Light rail fans: more proof that light rail is a waste of money.

.
So, we get a little snow. What else do we get? Almost the entirely of Portland's loot rail system down and being replaced with.... buses.

Imagine what Portland COULD have done with the wasted hundreds of millions they've blown on this unnecessary and unwanted pig.

oregoncatalyst.com is reporting that most of Max is down and so's AmTrak.

Man, that kind of thing just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about the $4 BILLION waste the Downtown Mafia want to ram down our throats to get their light rail across the river... even though they know we don't want it.

Fast, efficient, COST EFFECTIVE transportation systems would be welcomed. Since light rail is none of those, then we shouldn't add to the stupidity inherent in replacing a bridge that doesn't need replacing so special interests deaf to the pleas of the people can get what they want over our objections.
.

Update: So, light rail fans... you see what a joke the system is in this kind of weather?

.

From the fine folks over at oregoncatalyst.com.

Terrible 24 hours for Tri-met

by In the news Monday, December 15. 2008

First, the Sunday Oregonian reported that Tri-met is $33 million over-budget on their Westside commuter rail for which the agency knowingly dumped millions into a one-bid company that has a stark history of problems. Instead of clamping down on the failed business Tri-met kept sending more advanced funds ahead of schedule.

Second, during the snow yesterday Tri-met’s light rail switches froze causing big delays with some passengers waiting three hours for it to move. Another light rail failure happened this morning as well. Everyone understands bad weather creates problems, but light rail’s inflexible structure means they have to depend on flexible buses to bail them out.

Posted by In the news at 10:06 | Comments (11)

Karma for this article: ++ | + | 0 | - | --
Current karma: 0, 0 vote(s)
.

So, light rail fans... you see what a joke the system is in this kind of weather?

.
Max trains at a stand-still in Portland. Hundreds of millions spent... and what are they doing?

Bringing in busses and evacuating the light rail trains because of frozen switches.

People have been stuck in the same place for, in some case, 2.5 hours.

Billions of dollars for this?

I think not.
.