New State budget leaves City and Boise Project high and dry

[Chief]

http://www.columbian.com/news/localNews/2008/02/02272008_Senate-budget-sets-up-showdown.cfm

*snip*

The new frugality left the city of Vancouver empty-handed. “The city was hoping that we would get $1 million to $2 million in the capital budget to help with infrastructure development at the old Boise Cascade site,” said Mark Brown, a lobbyist for the city. “We have to come up with $40 million for infrastructure.”

Brown said the city didn’t include the funding request in its 2008 legislative wish list last December, but the need became obvious after Gramor Development agreed three weeks ago to lead redevelopment of the 32-acre riverfront property. The project is expected to bring a mix of condominiums, shops and restaurants to the site worth up to $1.2 billion.

According to one estimate, redevelopment of the Boise Cascade site and nearby properties, combined with the reconfiguration of Interstate 5 access streets as part of theColumbia River Crossing, could eventually increase traffic in downtown Vancouver by up to 20,000 car trips per day.

“We’re disappointed but not completely surprised,” Brown said. “It’s a difficult year to get $1 million to $2 million for anything.” But he said he was working with Pridemore and Rep. Bill Fromhold, chairman of the House Capital Budget Committee, to try to get funds added.

**SCHNIPP**

The truth finally emerges!!

Just where in hell does the City of Vancouver envision raising $40 Million for their initial investment at Boise?? \

The estimate to synchronize the traffic lights on Mill Plain is only $20 Million, and the City has been tried (and failed) to fund that for at least 5 years.

The City doesn't have the $400,000 it needs right now to fund the Gang Task Force for this year, or the $1 Million they need for it next year...how can anyone justify even considering spending any public money on what is a private development at the Boise Cascade site??

And why in hell would anyone work to deliberately create the kind of traffic congestion in Downtown Vancouver, other than to eventually try to use those 20,000 additional car trips to justify even more outrageous spending in Downtown??

Do you think they might try and build a streetcar line once they gat all of those car trips?? I sure do!!

This whole project is a house of cards, and the City can't afford to pay that kind of money into Gramor's project without some sort of significant tax increase, and that means a ballot measure that wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing. Why continue this charade??

Still very much a developing debacle at Boise Cascade. This isn't about development, it's about money and power in The 'Couv.

:mad:

[Waterbuffalo]

I'll not put any further comment on this subject, since its a horse being beaten over and over again...

[Chief]

Keep this article in mind, then go read the text of the mayor's SOTC Speech today...

It's enough to make you pinch that spot on your nose between your eyes really hard.....

...because it feels so good when you stop...

8)

[Waterbuffalo]

Just finished watching the mayor commenting on the state of the city.

One can find the video here:

http://www.cityofvancouver.us/cvtv/cvtvindex.asp?catID=999&fileID=9364

I'll say I loved a lot of his commentary, especially about Portland and that Duin story. But I honestly don't agree with him that the Feds and State is going to pay for all of these pipe dreams for ever.

Several of us have commented here and watch the Seattle/Olympia media for news of the state's budget and many other things. Honestly, from what I've seen. The state has no more bargaining power. It tolled the Tacoma Narrows, the 520 and I-90 bridges could be tolled, WSF are near the same cost as a new bridge and so many other things, I'm aghast to ask where is the money for Vancouver?

I want to hear from the Mayor, Tim and many other people where is the money folks? I love pipe dreams but where is the money to pay for it all?

[Chief]

Where is the money, especially in the amounts that we already know are needed?

Let's face it, Gramor isn't going to be able to wait for the City to come up with grant money, or for the local delegation to try and get legislation passed for tne next biennial budget, especially since they want to start construction down there in early 2010...

Maybe it's just me. Maybe I expect too much, but I simply cannot see how anyone can continue to make these grand speeches talking about all of these great ideas without some rational discussion of how much money all of this would cost, and how on earth they intend to raise it. That is the one discussion that is consistently missing from these project plans including the CRCP, Boise, streetcars, Loot Rail, etc.

At RTC the other night, one fellow was telling me excidedly about what a great idea it is to "make" the Chelatchie Railroad into a commuter rail connection between Battle Ground and Downtown Vancouver.

When I started quizzing him, I found out that in order to do that, the entire railbed would have to be re-engineered, all of the old rails and wooden ties torn up and replaced with new concrete ties, and new rails. He had no idea what that would cost, nor any numbers to show me why that would be an economically feasable project.

Even with a clear understanding of the scope of the work required, RTC can't even come up with a realistic plan for how to pay for any of their ideas either.

[Waterbuffalo]

About the CRCP and Gramor, I'll let that whole situation speak for itself as it has developed over the past two years on each project.

As to RTC, I'd say that whole process is still in the corridor phase to study RIGHT?

So that being the case, why would there be cost estimates if this is near the beginning of the study on which routes to study? Yes, this might have been a start of a longer process for many years.

But I just started attending and watching the RTC about six months ago.. So I'm not expect any one to have any firm or grand estimates. Even if there was an estimate, with the cost of construction materials and labor going up, no estimate is going to be worth its ink on paper as soon as its dried.

[Chief]

As to RTC, I'd say that whole process is still in the corridor phase to study RIGHT?

So that being the case, why would there be cost estimates if this is near the beginning of the study on which routes to study? Yes, this might have been a start of a longer process for many years.

I don't want to sound hard on RTC, but I question some of the things they are studying. the chelatchie railroad is a good example. We are decades away from needing a corridor along that old railroad. And even if we did decide to put in a passenger train, you would have to replace the entire roadbed, ties, and rails first. That's hundreds of millions of dollars worth of investment for a very questionable return.

They have the I-205 corridor as long term, and everything shortterm is feeding into Loot rail in Downtown Vancouver. It at least appears that one hand is washing the other, or at least preparing to do so.

I mean really, do you actually believe anyone cares about BRT in Battle Ground?? Think people in Yakoltistan care about the commute time on I-5??

It sounds like another pie in the sky study with no hope of landing the funding they would need to accomplish any of it.

8)

[Waterbuffalo]

I watched the BG mayor do his version of a city address.. Three things he's pushing for transportation wise, Chelatchie, 219th street interchange at I-5 and a future Highway or Road between Camas and Battle Ground.

http://www.cityofvancouver.us/cvtv/cvtvarchive2/Community_Events/2008_Events/Battle_Ground_State_of_the_City_2-21-08.wmv

This is 45 min. long..Skip 15 to 20 min. in so you skip all of the Thank yous and Bill Ganley commentary to get to the meat of what the mayor has to say..

They're focus is on I-5 because that is where they feel they can get the money to build it from the Feds and State. Along with planning for both I-5 and I-205 to expand.

But one does have to remember this is ONLY a study of what to do.. There is no numbers behind it or any thing else. Just figuring out what are the basics of what its going to take to preserve our corridors, opportunities and options into the future.

It really isn't going to tell future Clark County and other local governments *HOW* they must build or move, its just a basic study and plan on what it is possible.

[Chief]

Well hell WB! If money is no object then anything is possible!

The fact is that we don't have any sustainable way of financing any kind of transit, nor by the looks of the ridership on C-Tran is there much of a desire to do so outside of the inner circles of these study groups. These Task Forces have become the norm these days, instead of actually doing anything about the actual problems at hand.

Take a look at Don Benton's OpEd in today's paper. What do we have to show for almost $80 Million of out tax dollars here in Washington, except for a State Senator who barely understands the problem at hand.

The process down at the Columbia Crossing has been going on for 11 of the last 13 years that Don Benton has been in office, yet his demonstrated understanding of the concepts is questionable at best.

Tell me again, what it is exactly, that we have gotten for our money down at the Columbia Crossing Project, or at RTC??

ddrrii

[Waterbuffalo]

Why should I tell you if you all ready know?

Honestly, I was only speaking about the Battle Ground and company. Yes, they do have pipe dreams. Do they have the financing to pay for it?

Its the same issue that the City of Vancouver has.. They're patient enough to hook in the sugar Daddy that will pay for it all OR they will find the political connections to make it happen.

Do I think the RTC is a waste of money? Not sure how much money has been on it. When Arch was on it I never heard you speak ill of this group? Why such a sudden change of heart?

Now to the Columbia River Crossing, I'll say that I personally have my issues with the process and money that has been spent. But Honestly Chief, who is ACTUALLY pushing the process now? I'd say the Vancouver side is pushing it more than the Oregon side by a wide berth. So who do you think is lining up the financing to pay for all of the berths that have been used for meetings, paid staff, consultants and much more?

Agree with you that Oregon hasn't put up their fair share of monies to pay for all of the meetings and staff time. etc. But Honestly Chief, who is pushing this??? The people pushing it are the ones who are understanding that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

And yes, there are going to be political compromises on both sides of the river to get that bridge built.

Honestly Chief, in 2 years or less if you feel this dunce cap militia is for you, I might suggest its time to see the light and move on...

[Chief]

Battle Ground can't even get School Bonds passed, which is part of the reason why the repeal of the super-majority was on the ballot last November.

A few people in BG have aspirations about light rail on the Chelatchie RR, but they are in the minority...

The sudden change of heart on RTC was directly because of the open house last week. It had nowhere near as much information about the costs as it was promoted to have, and thier pipedreams are different from the CRCP's only in that they are spread out over the whole County instead of being limited to just the Bridge Influence Area.

Who is pushing the process?? Look at who is on all of these Task Forces and Study Groups. It's the same group of people who are endlessly studying these problems until one of them finally bites us in the ass.

I keep coming back to the lessons of Minneapolis, but people are blind to the comparisons because it ain't in their backyard. The daily example of what happens when we sever I-5 is lost on everyone it seems, and those bridge lifts are a never-ending warning to what is bound to happen here some day when the right circumstances prevail.

And believe me WB, if the attempts to jack up my taxes here against my will coninue, we might just do that moving on you speak of...

8)

[Waterbuffalo]

"I keep coming back to the lessons of Minneapolis, but people are blind to the comparisons because it ain't in their backyard. The daily example of what happens when we sever I-5 is lost on everyone it seems, and those bridge lifts are a never-ending warning to what is bound to happen here some day when the right circumstances prevail."

If you need a local example that happened with in the last six months, do you remember the continuing Saga of the Chehalis River Flooding that cuts off I-5 from Seattle. Think of all of the comments our Mayor has made about the bridge influence area being a standstill.

What would happen if the I-5 bridge in that area was flooded a few weeks? The last time it was near a week or more that it was closed. The howls from state government about it being a $4m loss for every day each truck could not get a direct connection between seattle and portland. if this isn't enough of a good example, I bet there are plenty more one could find.

"The sudden change of heart on RTC was directly because of the open house last week. It had nowhere near as much information about the costs as it was promoted to have, and thier pipedreams are different from the CRCP's only in that they are spread out over the whole County instead of being limited to just the Bridge Influence Area."

I'm looking at the RTC process as trying to plan for future transit, freight access and vehicle corridor access. Not going to say which one is better or worse. I'm still personally compiling, ratcheting and understanding all the data that has been presented to me over the past two months.

I think I was the one who was making comments to you about there being more financial data than just that one small, puppet piece of paper graph they had up. I'm going to go back through my paper work and see what I can find.

[Waterbuffalo]

Battle Ground has a lot of aspirations and perspirations but they have the same problem that Vancouver has. Where's the Money? Plain and Simple...

As to moving away because of the tax burden going up. That is some thing your going to have to discuss with your wife and come to a decision. After what I heard from the Mayor, I don't think your taxes are going to go ANY lower than they are now.

I'll reference one of his comments about the $30 per month cost for police and fire as being LOW?

[Chief]

I sent out an e-mail request to several people seeking comment on this story, and I heard back from Tim, and wanted to share some of his remarks as they pertain to this subject.

For every $1 of public money invested in the infrastructure of the Boise Site, it's estimated that $30 of private money will be spent on the development.
The project will have office spaces, housing, restaurants, shops, etc., to the tune of some $1.3 billion investment by private development.

Lots of jobs (during construction and afterwards, keeping folks on our side of the river), housing (building homes where the water/sewer/etc. is in place or nearby...reducing sprawl and ultimate costs to the public), shopping (helping keep retail spending on our side of the river), and public access to the waterfront (trails, open space...presently not available because Boise is a private property on the river).

All of this bodes well for the sustainable future of our community. More jobs, more housing, more shopping opportunities, more public access...resulting in more tax $$$ to the City, C-TRAN, County, Library, State, etc.

If I recall correctly, the project at full build out will result 1 million square feet of office space, 10 acres of public space and around 2,500 residential units.

Really important to me is the approximate 2,500 new permanent jobs that will be located there.

The estimate is that at buildout, this project will generate $235 million in new state and local taxes over the following 25 years...helping future city councils pay for those police/fire/etc.

Another $150 million in taxes is estimated to go to the State.

OVERALL, a pretty good return to the public for a few million now....in my opinion.

[Chief]

For every $1 of public money invested in the infrastructure of the Boise Site, it's estimated that $30 of private money will be spent on the development.

The project will have office spaces, housing, restaurants, shops, etc., to the tune of some $1.3 billion investment by private development.


I am completely unclear how private money investment in that site benefits me in any way whatsoever. And since the City of Vancouver has already handed out 10-year tax exclusions to those properties, it will be at least a decade, if every unit sells, before any tax benefit will be reaped for that investment of Public money.




Lots of jobs (during construction and afterwards, keeping folks on our side of the river), housing (building homes where the water/sewer/etc. is in place or nearby...reducing sprawl and ultimate costs to the public), shopping (helping keep retail spending on our side of the river), and public access to the waterfront (trails, open space...presently not available because Boise is a private property on the river).


There are a ton of construction jobs going on right this minute up here on this end of town, and it hasn't required the City of Vancouver to match any of their spending; why should we make an exception for an empty lot Downtown??

Using the trail as an excuse not to discuss where you intend to raise the Millions that the City needs for this project is a prime motivator for people like me who are opposed to this whoe mess. Putting a waterfront trail through the Boise Site is a weak excuse to justify all of this, considering that the waterfront trail sure isn't going to continue through the Port of Vancouver property either...


All of this bodes well for the sustainable future of our community. More jobs, more housing, more shopping opportunities, more public access...resulting in more tax $$$ to the City, C-TRAN, County, Library, State, etc.

If I recall correctly, the project at full build out will result 1 million square feet of office space, 10 acres of public space and around 2,500 residential units.

The City of Vancouver has already approved the 10-year tax exemptions for these properties, so that tells me it will be at least a decade before any tax money is ever collected from these properties.

In addition, what happens if all of those condominiums don't sell?? The condo market is crashing over in Portland; why in the world does Vancouver think they will be exempt??


Really important to me is the approximate 2,500 new permanent jobs that will be located there.

The estimate is that at buildout, this project will generate $235 million in new state and local taxes over the following 25 years...helping future city councils pay for those police/fire/etc.

Another $150 million in taxes is estimated to go to the State.


I absolutely question all of those numbers. There has been nothing available that I am aware of to back up those kinds of claims. Of course, Tim's using a 25 year time frame which perhaps allows for $0 tax receipts for the first ten years...

I respect Tim Leavitt's opinion on this, and I appreciate that he's willing to go on record; but I have serious reservations about the amounts of money that are being tossed around so casually in all of this, especially when there is no rational discussion about the realities of where that money will come from.

To date, the City says it needs to lay it's hands on some $40 Million for the Boise site. That means the City has to raise taxes somehow, and that means a vote or a series of votes in the City to gain authorization for all of this.

Does anyone believe that the voters in Vancouver will be any more willing to cough up that kind of money to the City, than they were to give it to the Port of Vancouver last year??

I cannot see any benefit to me as a taxpayer at this point, and I absolutely question the numbers that are being presented on this without some very firm written proof, and I don't look for anyone to do that any time soon.

We're already in this for several million, and engineering is underway right now for the underpasses that will make any of this possible. All we can do is wait until there is a firm proposal, with a price tag attached, and see what Council recommends we do about it.

[Waterbuffalo]

I'll note that ALL of the numbers I saw in your cut and pasted email here were the same ones stated by the Mayor at the state of the city address.

Now I'm one for pie-in-the-sky ideals as long as there is money to pay for it all. AND the electorate wants it.

This may be one of the "Defining" issues that Tim will have to deal with. The other ones will be C-tran and RTC funding, Gang Task Force funding, how to pay to keep the fire and police services up to snuff.

Chief, if he runs for office, WILL you make sure to grill him on this?

I want to hear what Tim has to say publicly from his own mouth before commenting further. I don't always like to babble quote or misuse quotes from some one before they have officially said they're running for mayor?

But in my heart of hearts and deep down, I'd bet a Burgerville meal that Dan Tonkovich, Tim Leavitt and maybe one other are strong candidates for the next Mayor of Vancouver. They're both positioning themselves right now that I know of.

I want Tim to back up his comments.. Where is he getting his numbers and can they be justified? Especially when there has not even been 30 percent of the engineering done yet. This report won't come out until May or June, right after the ending of the CRCP DEIS comment period.

When you run for mayor of this community or any community, one has to justify their beliefs in projects and where they're facts, opinions and commentary.

So now I have to do more research into the DEIS of this and CRCP.. Wonder what I'm going to find...