Foes look to put brakes on light rail at meeting

[Chief]

http://columbian.com/news/localNews/2008/02/02212008_Foes-look-to-put-brakes-on-light-rail-at-meeting.cfm

Thursday, February 21, 2008
By LAURA McVICKER, Columbian staff writer

Would a proposed Vancouver light-rail project relieve traffic congestion, provide a cost-effective alternative to drivers traveling to Portland and decrease pollution?

Or would it burden businesses and neighbors in its path and become more costly than it is worth?

Several hundred people packed a room Wednesday night at the Water Resources Education Center to address those questions about the $4 billion-plus Columbia River Crossing project. Plans call for replacing the Interstate 5 Bridge, bringing highway improvements and extending Portland’s light-rail line into Vancouver.

Huddled in a giant circle, many fired rhetorical questions and expressed opposition to what they called a project “shoved down our throats.” The Columbia River Crossing project’s co-director, Doug Ficco, answered some questions, as did Vancouver City Councilman Tom Leavitt.

But most of the meeting consisted of residents voicing their worries.

“The cost is too high,” said Lisa Brown, who lives in the Shumway neighborhood. “It just doesn’t make any sense.”

If the light rail travels through the Main Street thoroughfare, she said, many businesses and homes could be in jeopardy — either by building over homes and businesses or by restricting vehicle travel to them.

“There’s a lot more at stake here than just losing fries at Dairy Queen,” Brown said, referring to the project’s potential threat to the venerable restaurant on Main Street.

Lisa Ghormley agreed. Owner of Fine Yarns on McLoughlin Boulevard, she doesn’t think her business would survive.

“We are a small business,” she said. “We don’t have a big enough city to subsidize us.”

But Leavitt told the crowd that council members are urging officials to avoid planning the light rail to travel through Uptown Village.

And Ficco said officials are studying its effects and use, and estimate 16,000 people would use light rail each day. The project would provide an alternative to the much-snarled Interstate 5 Bridge, and the four-mile light rail is more viable for officials than building more lanes on I-5, he added.

But is it really viable? Debbie Peterson doesn’t think so. The Vancouver resident cited an Orange County study on its light-rail project, which she said found that rider count was dismal and turned out to be more expensive to use than driving.

Others on Wednesday night asked for more community input. Stephanie Turlay of Vancouver implored officials to take a vote on the number of people who would use light rail.

“Right now, it’s conjecture. No one has the numbers for ridership. Who will pick up the costs?” Turlay said. “I want to see a lot of information we are not seeing.”

While many voiced opposition, Gary Kokstis of the Carter Park neighborhood had a different opinion. He uses TriMet’s MAX everyday to get to work in the Beaverton area.

“If I had a light-rail connection in downtown Vancouver, I would use it. I would use it every day,” he said.

The paper makes it sound very cilvilized...

[Waterbuffalo]

May be it was Chief.. Since you and I weren't there, we wouldn't know......

I saw the Orange County reference and thought immediately about Karma's past commnets on the subject.

[Chief]

As always, there's an alternate view of these things...

He's obviously parroting someone else's words on this as usual...

::)

http://www.westerndredging.org/cgi-bin/mail.cgi/archive/Local/20080222064354/

Light Rail the Gravy Train

Date: February 22nd, 2008


Although the City of Vancouver and other local politicians refused to allow CCTV to air the 15 Neighborhood Forum held at the Water Resource Center (AKA the sewer treatment plant), the Columbian’s writer’s account of the Forum, although quite good, missed a few points. They were:

1. Of the approximately 400 people present, only a handful (about 10 or 12) raised their hands when Councilman Tim Leavitt asked how many people use mass transit get to work across the river. When asked how many people used mass transit to move around Clark County, the numbers were about the same. Those number are about the same (3 percent) as the nation wide average of people who use mass transit.

2. The Columbian apparently did not pay close attention to Councilman Leavitt’s
Comment that the Federal Government had 750,000,000 dollars set aside for this project and therefore the local taxpayers would not have to contribute to the construction cost. Leavitt also neglected to remind those present that the 750, 000, 000 had already picked from our pockets by the Federal Government. Nor did Leavitt comment that the taxpayers would be on the hook for 76 percent of the operation and 100% of the maintenance cost.

3. The Columbian reporter must also have missed the comments, (they were not Answers to anything) made by Doug Ficco, Columbia River Crossing Co-Chair who attempted to defuse a list of facts presented by a representative of the Washington Policy Center. That articulate gentleman stated:

a. LIGHT RAIL DEMAND IS LOW: Light rail system on he west coast served only 1.97 % of all workers in 2005

b. LIGHT RAIL DOES NOT REDUCE CONGESTION: On average Light rail the gravy train only removes between 0.39 % and 1.1% of cars from the roadway.

c. LIGHT RAIL REQUIRES LARGE PUBLIC SUBSIDIES (TAXES). On average West Coast light rail systems, require taxpayer subsidies to pay for 76% of operation and 100%of capital improvements per year. In the ten years between 1996 and 2005, the public subsidy (Operation cost only taxes) for all light rail systems in the U.S. grew from $250 million to $729 million. An increase of 191%.


d. PER RIDER COST IS HIGH: The average cost to add one additional rider to the light rail systems on the west coast is between $82, 285 and $242,014 per rider.

e. LIGHT RAIL IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN BUS SERVICE: When accounting for Passenger demand, light rail on the West Coast is 12% more expensive to operate than bus service.

f. EXCESS CAPACITY IS A FISCAL DRAIN: Nationally, the supply of light rail is greater than passenger demand. This means that since 2001 2.1 billion dollars per year has been spent on unused capacity (No Riders).

Strange isn’t it, Tax and Spend Politicians at both the state and federal level, have with their stimulus Packages, told us, the taxpayers, that money left in the taxpayer’s pockets and spent by the taxpayers creates a strong economy. It creates more jobs and higher paychecks. Yet they continue to pick our pockets to fund boondoggle schemes that only benefit private contractors, developers and of course themselves.

Makes one think they, the Politicians, would rather exercise more control over us, the taxpayer, and how and why our hard-earned tax dollars are spent, than having a strong economy.

The one question that was asked at the forum, which was not answered, is:

ARE WE GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THIS MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OR AS SOME AT THE FORUM SAID, “IT WILL BE RAMMED DOWN OUR THROATS”?

Light Rail has not, cannot and will not get people out of their Automobiles. Light Rail Proponents need to do two things:

1. Learn how to spell Automobile: it is spelled F R E E D O M.

2. Conduct a poll of high school graduates asking them if:

"They would rather have a lifetime light rail pass or an automobile".

And so it goes.

L. M. Patella
CDR USN (ret)

[Waterbuffalo]

So what do you all think?

Ive said all along I want a sustainable, effective and efficient system that crosses the river. Since day one, nothing has come up proving to me that this system can be that for us here in Clark County. We're mostly a suburban style county except in southern and southwestern parts of our county.

Will Light Rail be effective and efficient enough to cover our community over the next 30 years and into 50+ that it might be with us? I don't think that answer is so definable..

[Waterbuffalo]

Cave in Members finally stop mumbling and whining or move out of the community if its finally voted up and is put into place?

I'm not saying I'm a fortune teller but this belly aching is getting old.

[Chief]

There will be at least 2 votes on this as i understnad it right now, if and when someone finally gets around to recommending exactly what it is they want to build.

I figure both of the votes will go down in flames in Clark County and in the city.

[Waterbuffalo]

Remind me which two votes are those?

[Chief]

There would have to be a vote in the C-Tran District (essentially the whole County) to approve expanding service.

Then there has to be an Operation and Maintenance Levy of some nature, either Property Taxes or Sales Tax based in the City of Vancouver.

I've heard all kinds of estimates on the O&M costs, from $50 Million annually to operate the full-blown system that was first proposed, down to $3.5 Million in the first year, for the Minimal Operating Segment that crosses the bridge and terminates at a parking lot somewhere near Clark College.

Again, until there is some firm proposal put forward by someone, it's hard to know exactly what we're talking about here. This is the proverbial moving target...

[Waterbuffalo]

"Again, until there is some firm proposal put forward by someone, it's hard to know exactly what we're talking about here. This is the proverbial moving target..."

I like this position greatly. Don't take a full position UNTIL the REAL numbers come out..