Just wanted to get a head count on who among us is voting yes and who's voting no on prop 1.

Here is the link to the previous discussion:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=522086

two more from my parents too

Not just yes, but HELL yes! ;)

I'm the outcast, and i'm damn proud of it!

Of course, yes!

ugh the prop1 opposers are so annoying. 9 times out of town they're strait up liars. or they're so cheap that paying an extra 5 cents fort every $10 they spend is too much money

ugh the prop1 opposers are so annoying. 9 times out of town they're strait up liars. or they're so cheap that paying an extra 5 cents fort every $10 they spend is too much money

Very well said! :applause:

shit my dislexia showed on my last post i think you all know what i meant to say though 9 times out of town. haha

ugh the prop1 opposers are so annoying. 9 times out of town they're strait up liars. or they're so cheap that paying an extra 5 cents fort every $10 they spend is too much money

Hey man! I don't lie and there is more to Proposition 1 than what my signature says.

i said 9 times out of 10. you'd be the 1 out of 10 that doesn't lie

I'm at least one conservative republican (And my family adds 4 more) that will voting YES on Prop 1. It's good to see a well planned transit package that also addresses some of our region's more embarrasing roadways.

Some of the major positives for me in this package are:
- I like the southern alignment of the ST2 light rail because it will allow for more capacity in the already logjammed 99 Corridor, not to mention stimulate growth in the area.
- Finishing 509 should be big. From what I hear, freight mobility will be greatly improved by connecting 509 to I-5.
- Connecting 167 to I-5 in Tacoma is also a really good idea. I'd much rather funnel large amounts of traffic onto a highway than the surface streets that currently handle the traffic.

i said 9 times out of 10. you'd be the 1 out of 10 that doesn't lie

He's just the 1 out of 10 who thinks he's a better planner than anyone else in history! But he has no plan.

Bond said it best, HELL YES!

He's just the 1 out of 10 who thinks he's a better planner than anyone else in history! But he has no plan.

Your challenge has been accepted. :)

HEEELLLLLL YEEEESSSSS, and Add 6 more from my family!

hey jason my parents are conseervatives and they're voting yes. i'm only slightly left. i think it's funny how the more fiscally coservative liberal cities like ny and san fran can get so much done but then we're always up here talking about how we're liberal just like them why can't we get anything done. it's because we take a vote for everything and then if 5 people complain we take another vote. i also don't think the city manages money very well. i am glad that the lady in the anti prop 1 commercial sounds like a paranoid robot bitch

Voted yes. Now we'll see if I mail off my absentee ballot on time.

I'm at least one conservative republican (And my family adds 4 more) that will voting YES on Prop 1. It's good to see a well planned transit package that also addresses some of our region's more embarrasing roadways.

Some of the major positives for me in this package are:
- I like the southern alignment of the ST2 light rail because it will allow for more capacity in the already logjammed 99 Corridor, not to mention stimulate growth in the area.
- Finishing 509 should be big. From what I hear, freight mobility will be greatly improved by connecting 509 to I-5.
- Connecting 167 to I-5 in Tacoma is also a really good idea. I'd much rather funnel large amounts of traffic onto a highway than the surface streets that currently handle the traffic.


Ditto.

Unfortunately, EVERY solution is expensive but doing nothing will cost our area and state MORE in the future. Case in point, in the early 1970's our area rejected a mass transit (heavy, fixed rail system) that the Federal Transit Administration through our Congressional team offered to pay 90% of the cost with our area footing 10% of the remainder. The tab at the time was around $78 million but voters rejected the proposal as too expensive! What happened to that system? That 40 mile system became the core of Atlanta's MARTA system. How much would a 40 mile HEAVY gauge system with underground stations cost today?

Hey, I hate taxes too but the alternatives are too expensive and eventually the Federal government will reduce its current 10% match to zero. Burying our heads in the ground will not make the problem disappear. This transit package will pay for more than just rail, but needed transit projects in the three most economically dominant counties in Washington state. Aside from the sizable number of transit construction jobs, the proposal aims to help meet the massive transit repair and construction costs for the next decade.

Vote YES today or pay a larger bill when the Viaduct collapses or the 520 bridge crumbles.

:soapbox:

yes, but I would have done a very different plan if I were dictator of Puget Sound.

one day...:)

yes, but I would have done a very different plan if I were dictator of Puget Sound.

We have a thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=534442) for that -do post your ideas, please.

Hey! Who else voted "no" (and it wasn't me)?

Yeah, this is accurate enough... for a forum of skyscraper/infrastructure nerds. :nuts:

Does anyone know how the figures are actually expected to turn out?

I'd vote yes if I could.

Yeah, this is accurate enough... for a forum of skyscraper/infrastructure nerds. :nuts:

Does anyone know how the figures are actually expected to turn out?
The latest poll showed 53% in favor.

The latest poll showed 53% in favor.

In the Seattle Times today, the front page:

FOR PROPOSITION 1:
- Governor Christine Gregoire
- U.S. Senator Patty Murray
- Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels
- King County Councilmember Reagan Dunn
- State Senator Ed Murray
- Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg
- State Senator Margarita Prentice
- State Representative Helen Sommers
- Former WA Governor Dan Evans
- Seattle City Councilmember Jan Drago
- Everett Mayor Ray Stephanson (i'm shocked)
- Washington Conservative Voters
- Bicycle Alliance of Washington
- Associated General Contractors of Washington
- Boeing
- Microsoft
- Puget Sound Energy
- Washington Mutual

AGAINST PROPOSITION 1:
- Seattle City Councilmember President Nick Licata
- Redmond Mayor Rosemarie Ives
- Developer Kemper Freeman
- Sierra Club Cascade Chapter chairman Michael O'Brien
- Former state senator Jim Horn
- King County Executive Ron Sims
- Sierra Club Cascade Chapter
- Cascade Bicycle Club
- Conservation Northwest

NEUTRAL towards PROPOSITION 1:
- Seattle City Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck
- Kirkland City Council
- Redmond City Council
- Kent City Council
- Shoreline City Council
- 46th District Democrats
- 36th District Democrats
- 43rd District Democrats

Just sent votes in today! +3 from this house.

Just sent votes in today! +3 from this house.

Two more in the mail from my house!

I originally posted undecided, but have made up my mind and will be voting yes. It is a tough call - I am generally anti-new tax since goverment so rarely spends money efficiently, but at the same time believe that this infrastructure, especially the light rail, is necessary for the long-term growth and health of the region.

I originally posted undecided, but have made up my mind and will be voting yes. It is a tough call - I am generally anti-new tax since goverment so rarely spends money efficiently, but at the same time believe that this infrastructure, especially the light rail, is necessary for the long-term growth and health of the region.

Hell yes it is. It's a lot more efficient than private transportation infrastructure could be today. :)

I originally posted undecided, but have made up my mind and will be voting yes. It is a tough call - I am generally anti-new tax since goverment so rarely spends money efficiently, but at the same time believe that this infrastructure, especially the light rail, is necessary for the long-term growth and health of the region.
Yes! We have a convert! :banana:

Sound Transit's bond rating upgrade and general great record bidding work on-budget (aside from the same problems even private developers are going through now) are good signs about their cost-efficiency and oversight.

Yes! We have a convert! :banana:

Lol, yes :)

I was told before on this forum to keep politics out of the threads. Why do we got this thread? Just because it's a certain view you want is it okay to have politics here now? Was it only wrong before because of the views I had compared to others?

I don't want to start an arguement or anything, I'm just pointing it out, and yes, it is an important issue, that I don't want to have to pay over 100 dollars per person for, or all the other tax increases they will do. So... I am leaning to say no, but I want the tram, so I'd say yes, but I still want to say no for many more reasons.

So I'll wait till election night. As of now, I'd say no.

This is my first time being able to vote too! :D

This isn't politics. It's about how our city will grow and function.

I hope voters think more about the greater good than about a small difference in their own pocketbooks.

(In fact, anyone who can ditch the car and start taking transit will see vast improvements in their wallet!)

Actually politics is partly involved. Several key politicians and big-name companies have gotten involved in this verocious battle and turned this into the biggest deal in Seattle since.....uh....I don't have a clue.

Don't forget that Sound Transit or some other agency is mailing billions of Roads and Transit phamlets to voters all over Puget Sound. So, I don't know whether I would classify Proposition 1 as "political" or "city growth and functions".

Can't wait till Election Day!

I was told before on this forum to keep politics out of the threads. Why do we got this thread? Just because it's a certain view you want is it okay to have politics here now? Was it only wrong before because of the views I had compared to others?

I don't want to start an arguement or anything, I'm just pointing it out, and yes, it is an important issue, that I don't want to have to pay over 100 dollars per person for, or all the other tax increases they will do. So... I am leaning to say no, but I want the tram, so I'd say yes, but I still want to say no for many more reasons.

So I'll wait till election night. As of now, I'd say no.

This is my first time being able to vote too! :D

If it's your first time being able to vote, I'd abstain. You haven't yet learned that you get what you pay for - and you'll regret that no vote.

If it's your first time being able to vote, I'd abstain. You haven't yet learned that you get what you pay for - and you'll regret that no vote.

Don't be a snob. He has the right to vote on this issue or not, it's in the law. And how can you just randomly assume USAPatriot can't make important decisions just because it's his/her first time voting? Do you actually know him/her? Or maybe you don't want USAPatriot to vote because of the "NO". Either way, this is America where you have the right to voice your opinions by voting "YES" or "NO" (or undecided).

So far with 85% for yes tells me this is a good example of the true election. I think the Election will be closer to 60/40 but none the less we need this package to pass.USAPatriot vote for what ever makes the most sense, its your right. Enjoy your first vote. But first read all the arguments.
Check out:
www.yesonroadsandtransit.org
www.noprop1.org
www.horsesass.org

I think it'll be 51%, and it's not clear which way.

my guess is 53% for yes. let's have a contest to see who is closest! the winner gets some posts telling them how awesome they are.

my guess is 53% for yes. let's have a contest to see who is closest! the winner gets some posts telling them how awesome they are.

50.5% yes is my guess.

52% Yes

52% No. I hope I'm wrong.

Don't be a snob. He has the right to vote on this issue or not, it's in the law. And how can you just randomly assume USAPatriot can't make important decisions just because it's his/her first time voting? Do you actually know him/her? Or maybe you don't want USAPatriot to vote because of the "NO". Either way, this is America where you have the right to voice your opinions by voting "YES" or "NO" (or undecided).

Thank you for backing me up while I was not here. :)

In another attempt to bring down UrbanBen's snobby attitude, I have a question for everyone:

Remember a long time ago, where there was a transportation package plan similar to Proposition 1 called Referendum 51? Not much has changed between then and now; freeways are still congested, politicians are unable to choose final alternatives for projects, buses are still the same, there's still no definitive light rail system, and well, everything is the same, except the population has skyrocketed. And did Referendum 51 pass?

Of course not!

And will Proposition 1 pass?

HELL NO! :lol:

^
I'm sorry, but that was just dumb.

The reason why Referendum 51 (2002) isn't doing any help to transportation today is because it was rejected. How can it be doing any good for transportation in Puget Sound if the voters turned it down? :ohno:

remember when John Kerry ran for president? Now look at us... we're still in this war... the housing market is collapsing across the country, and no one has a clue where Osama is... fuck John Kerry!

In another attempt to bring down UrbanBen's snobby attitude, I have a question for everyone:

Remember a long time ago, where there was a transportation package plan similar to Proposition 1 called Referendum 51? Not much has changed between then and now; freeways are still congested, politicians are unable to choose final alternatives for projects, buses are still the same, there's still no definitive light rail system, and well, everything is the same, except the population has skyrocketed. And did Referendum 51 pass?

Of course not!

And will Proposition 1 pass?

HELL NO! :lol:
Incidentally, if the voters reject Proposition 1, the exact same thing will happen: In 5 years, there will still be congestion on the roads, politicians will be unable to choose final alternatives for projects, buses will still be the same, and there will still be no definitive light rail system. And why will this be so? Because the voters will have REJECTED Proposition 1! Duh! If the voters tell the politicians to do nothing, that's exactly what you'll get: Nothing.

^
I'm sorry, but that was just dumb.

The reason why Referendum 51 (2002) isn't doing any help to transportation today is because it was rejected. How can it be doing any good for transportation in Puget Sound if the voters turned it down? :ohno:

The point of that posting was not about good, better, or bad transportation, it was about what the voters wanted. I was just implying that the transportation situation has not changed since 2002, and will that influence voters to approve Proposition 1? I don't think so.

The point of that posting was not about good, better, or bad transportation, it was about what the voters wanted. I was just implying that the transportation situation has not changed since 2002, and will that influence voters to approve Proposition 1? I don't think so.
Well the latest poll shows that it's ahead, so we'll have to wait and see.

Prop 51 was nothing like the current proposal, and the situation has changed significantly. That's not a valid point.

The point of that posting was not about good, better, or bad transportation, it was about what the voters wanted. I was just implying that the transportation situation has not changed since 2002, and will that influence voters to approve Proposition 1? I don't think so.

The voters don't "want" anything. In general, the votes for a project with this much information and rhetoric flying around are just a flip of the coin.

The voters don't "want" anything. In general, the votes for a project with this much information and rhetoric flying around are just a flip of the coin.

Actually I* find the information of Proposition 1 easily understandable. They basically want to build a lot of stuff by raising car-tab taxes (AGAIN!), plus sales taxes, and I probably won't get any benefit from any of those projects. What a waste....:ohno:

*If an irrational person like me can understand Proposition 1, then maybe others will.

In another attempt to bring down UrbanBen's snobby attitude, I have a question for everyone:

Remember a long time ago, where there was a transportation package plan similar to Proposition 1 called Referendum 51? Not much has changed between then and now; freeways are still congested, politicians are unable to choose final alternatives for projects, buses are still the same, there's still no definitive light rail system, and well, everything is the same, except the population has skyrocketed. And did Referendum 51 pass?

Of course not!

And will Proposition 1 pass?

HELL NO! :lol:

These are just Foolish remarks. You are telling us why we should be voting Yes on Prop 1. This is the perfect example what will happen if No Prop 1 would get through. simple foolish!

You may not remember when the car tabs were even higher than what they are proposing. A grass roots politician drafted a prop to fix the annual amount. Now look how many cars are on the road! I'm ready to go back if it means improved roads. I have mentioned before that the car tab tax funded road repairs and repaving projects that are sadly backlogged now.

That is, unless you or others would rather we go to a state income tax which Washington enjoys the absence of!!

These are just Foolish remarks. You are telling us why we should be voting Yes on Prop 1. This is the perfect example what will happen if No Prop 1 would get through. simple foolish!

Okay, you're not getting the point. "Nothing has changed."

If I remember correctly, the stuff on Referendum 51 is pretty similar to Proposition 1, basically a combination of roads and transit. I believe that the only thing people want is TRANSIT! I mean, why did we approve Sound Move in 1996? Because we want TRANSIT ONLY, NOT ROADS. It is because of that combination that partly drives "NO".

You may not remember when the car tabs were even higher than what they are proposing. A grass roots politician drafted a prop to fix the annual amount. Now look how many cars are on the road! I'm ready to go back if it means improved roads. I have mentioned before that the car tab tax funded road repairs and repaving projects that are sadly backlogged now.

That is, unless you or others would rather we go to a state income tax which Washington enjoys the absence of!!

We've tried several times to get an income tax. The problem is in the changeover, which is politically impossible to manage - too many people are going to get double-charged for things.

Okay, you're not getting the point. "Nothing has changed."

If I remember correctly, the stuff on Referendum 51 is pretty similar to Proposition 1, basically a combination of roads and transit. I believe that the only thing people want is TRANSIT! I mean, why did we approve Sound Move in 1996? Because we want TRANSIT ONLY, NOT ROADS. It is because of that combination that partly drives "NO".

You're hilarious. And in the meantime, we've gotten the 2003 nickel package, the 2005 transportation partnership, and we said NO to I-912.

You're hilarious. And in the meantime, we've gotten the 2003 nickel package, the 2005 transportation partnership, and we said NO to I-912.

Well, I don't know what happened there. Maybe it had something to do with gas prices, Sounder commuter rail, or more bus service that made people not care about gas prices (look at summer I-5 construction). Or maybe when it comes to gas prices, we don't care (remember, revenue for gas taxes are slowly decreasing because people are switching to your worst enemy, buses); but we do care about car-tab taxes (look at Tim Eyman's initiatives).

Okay, since thinking too much about Proposition 1 is really hurting my head, I am going to say this one last time:

I am not voting on Proposition 1 because:
- Will not help other/more important troublesome Snohomish County roads
- Too long to extend light rail to Lynnwood
- Even longer/no possibility of light rail to Everett in my lifetime
- Region-wide road projects will not help
- Region-wide light rail too little, too long
- Raises taxes (especially car-tabs)
- Costs too much
- Ignores other region-wide bottlenecks

Also, have you noticed the many Roads and Transit ballots being sent via mail? Well, I think Sound Transit and everyone else knows that Proposition 1 will fail, and they're spending however much amount of money to (unsuccessfully) try to convince voters to vote yes (doubt that will happen).

I think I covered most of my points.

I'm voting YES!

- Will not help other/more important troublesome Snohomish County roads

Like what? What's more important than what we're funding?

- Too long to extend light rail to Lynnwood

So accelerate it like Dallas and SLC did.

- Even longer/no possibility of light rail to Everett in my lifetime

Longer than... not funding ST2? Are you for real?

- Region-wide road projects will not help

That's bull and you know it. Congestion will get worse much faster without these projects. Did you check out that graph of travel times with and without RTID in the P-I? Come on.

- Region-wide light rail too little, too long
- Raises taxes (especially car-tabs)
- Costs too much

These are crazy when taken together. So... it doesn't do enough, but it costs too much? And what would you be saying if it did everything you wanted it to do? You would FLIP at the cost increases.

- Ignores other region-wide bottlenecks

Like...?

Also, have you noticed the many Roads and Transit ballots being sent via mail? Well, I think Sound Transit and everyone else knows that Proposition 1 will fail, and they're spending however much amount of money to (unsuccessfully) try to convince voters to vote yes (doubt that will happen).

I've noticed mailers required by the state of Washington. They're not ballots.

Why would vote NO on Prop. 1? It will only take longer to get LRT to Snohomish County by voting No.

Everyone I think taiwanesedrummer36 really is going to vote Yes. He know the truth, He is just wanting a good argument on the forum. Stir up some good discussions. Well it worked. We all basically want the same thing, Light Rail and better roads.

Voted no.

184 new miles of roads, only 16% are HOV. That's all money down the drain.


I suspect a lot of the support on this board comes from people who love to see anything built. Buildings, towers, road, light rail, bridges, etc etc. Build for building's sake! :P

^That's not my reason.

Not mine either...

Nor mine.

Voted no.

184 new miles of roads, only 16% are HOV. That's all money down the drain.


I suspect a lot of the support on this board comes from people who love to see anything built. Buildings, towers, road, light rail, bridges, etc etc. Build for building's sake! :P

Oh, good grief. And if it fails, you'll get the roads next year, but the rail won't be back for twenty.

Anyway, it's 184 new miles of *lanes* - and actually, I think it's less than that. Oh, and a lot of them aren't even fully funded, and a lot of them include pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and things like the cross-base highway won't even induce sprawl (you can't build sprawl in the base).

Everyone I think taiwanesedrummer36 really is going to vote Yes. He know the truth, He is just wanting a good argument on the forum. Stir up some good discussions. Well it worked. We all basically want the same thing, Light Rail and better roads.

You don't know what the [expletive] I think. I am 100% certain that come Election Day, I will vote "NO". I am completely aware of the truth. Do you think improvements to the Mercer Mess will really help? Do you think adding a bus-only direct access ramp at Industrial Way will help? Do you think SR 509 will help improve congestion when we already have a good highway like SR 599? Do you think any of these "ME" projects will help the entire region? Do you know how much more it'll cost when people start forming massive protests to cancel these projects (remember the '70s)? Do you know how much it will cost?!

No, they won't. Widening a pile of roads through current/future dense urban areas will not improve our region for the future.

Credibility also plays a role in this issue. Every government agency has bad management, REALLY bad management. In 1996, we were promised in Sound Move a bunch of transit projects and HOV lanes in a ten-year period. How many years has it been now? Yes, it's only been 11 years, but think about the delays. The Sounder North line (Seattle-Everett) was delayed so much (blame ST and BNSF), light rail was delayed and shortened, several bus projects have yet to be constructed/are delayed, project costs have risen (partly due to ST), and so much more. Back in the late 1990s, I was so excited to hear that so many transportation options would be available to me in only a couple of years. Well, that time kept getting stretched and stretched until I realized, there's no hope for us unless we think and plan realistically.

Well you know what I want?! I want efficient, cheap, and far-reaching light rail (that will be completed by the promised date UNDER budget), and I want REFURBISHED roads, not NEW roads. If, God forbid, that someone changes my ballot to "YES", may GOD strike me down this instant.

Also, NW Mike, I think you shouldn't be talking unitl you improve your absolutely horrendous English grammar. Geez, are you still in preschool?

I sent my ballot with my YES on it few days ago. I'm done! I have a feeling it will pass since I know way too many people are voting yes on it too.

Like what? What's more important than what we're funding?

[QUOTE]So accelerate it like Dallas and SLC did.
"So accerlerate it like Dallas and SLC did." Can you predict that such a vote will happen?

Longer than... not funding ST2? Are you for real?[QUOTE]
Yes, I am completely real. If R&T fails, i'm sure local agencies will step up and implement their own projects for improving their city's/county's transportation system, like Community Transit is doing.

[QUOTE]That's bull and you know it. Congestion will get worse much faster without these projects. Did you check out that graph of travel times with and without RTID in the P-I? Come on.
Is that graph REALLY accurate? I don't think I should even waste my time to study it. If we do nothing but add more gas taxes and transit, people will stop driving and take transit (remember the August I-5 construction?).

These are crazy when taken together. So... it doesn't do enough, but it costs too much? And what would you be saying if it did everything you wanted it to do? You would FLIP at the cost increases.
That doesn't make sense. Even if Prop 1 does get approved, costs will still increase anyway. But we need something that states that even if costs do increase, there is some leverage that won't significantly affect taxpayers. Also, we think of simple improvements to our transportation system, but locals affected by a project will demand for outrageous changes that will raise costs for us. I mean look at SR 520. We would have stuck with the original plan, but Montlake insisted on crazy ideas (except for the Pacific Interchange (which will cost more). And the station designs: why not build simple, boring stations now and build more elaborate ones later? I don't think that's included in the current proposal. Basically, I am disgusted by the "money" part.

Like...?
Marysville projects should be funded by developers and the Tulalips completely. They're the ones that caused the skyrocketing traffic there.

There's nothing wrong with the 41st Street bridge. It's just small and old, but still 100% functional.

US 2 and SR 9 are the state's problem, not ours. Who told them not to fix those highways earlier? I blame the Democrats in Olympia (allusion to vote for Republican Dino Rossi in 2008)

How much would it cost just to add an arterial on 35th-39th avenues? Not that much to put on our shoulders.

What happened to federal funding? If SR 522 is the nation's most dangerous highway, I think that requires federal attention.

Mercer Mess: a complete waste of money to give a gift to selfish crybaby Paul Allen.

The South Park Bridge is a complete waste. King County and Seattle should pay for it TOGETHER.

SR 509 extension will just add traffic and contribute to global warming.


I've noticed mailers required by the state of Washington. They're not ballots.

My mistake; I meant to say "phamplets", not "ballots".




Everyone I think taiwanesedrummer36 really is going to vote Yes. He know the truth, He is just wanting a good argument on the forum. Stir up some good discussions. Well it worked. We all basically want the same thing, Light Rail and better roads.

Man, I still can't get over what you said. You sir are the dumbest person in the world.

I sent my ballot with my YES on it few days ago. I'm done! I have a feeling it will pass since I know way too many people are voting yes on it too.

If so many people are voting "YES", then why is half the region and many politicians and media agencies voting "NO"? You must have drank too much to have such a crazy dream.

If so many people are voting "YES", then why is half the region and many politicians and media agencies voting "NO"? You must have drank too much to have such a crazy dream.

Half of the region? No one knows exactly the result. We usually find out the result by after election day. Many politicians support it too. Ours governor Geogire supports it too. Senator Ed Murray supports it too. Mayor Nickel support it too. Most of city council members support it too. That is a lot of politicans supporting it.

Let's wait and see the result first before you jump the gun on us. :)

If so many people are voting "YES", then why is half the region and many politicians and media agencies voting "NO"? You must have drank too much to have such a crazy dream.

Well, Ron Sims is voting no because it will make much of his little transit empire dependent upon Sound Transit.

The Seattle Times Editorial Board is voting no because Jim Vesely and Frank Blethen drive SOV from Mercer Island, and would lose their free access to the express lanes. That's also where Judy Clibborn's opposition comes from.

The Stranger and Sierra Club are simply opposed to ANY ROADS ANYWHERE. They won't really fight the legislature's funding of these same roads next year, but that's what they're opposing.

Half of the region? No one knows exactly the result. We usually find out the result by after election day. Many politicians support it too. Ours governor Geogire supports it too. Senator Ed Murray supports it too. Mayor Nickel support it too. Most of city council members support it too. That is a lot of politicans supporting it.

Let's wait and see the result first before you jump the gun on us. :)

You'd better control your feeling from jumping the gun.

Nick Licata is "NO", Kemper Freeman is "NO", plenty of politicians are/will vote "NO" come Election Day. And don't forget, Snohomish County was pissed off because of not enough money being invested to Sound Transit. Although they eventually "fixed" that problem and queers like Everett mayor Ray Stephanson and S.C. Executive Aaron Reardon are voting "yes", I am 90% positive that people in Snohomish County (mainly Everett) are still pissed off at the results and the cowardance of the mayor and county executive, and will vote "NO".

Well, Ron Sims is voting no because it will make much of his little transit empire dependent upon Sound Transit.

The Seattle Times Editorial Board is voting no because Jim Vesely and Frank Blethen drive SOV from Mercer Island, and would lose their free access to the express lanes. That's also where Judy Clibborn's opposition comes from.

The Stranger and Sierra Club are simply opposed to ANY ROADS ANYWHERE. They won't really fight the legislature's funding of these same roads next year, but that's what they're opposing.

There are plenty of other people that aren't as prominent as the one's listed above that are voting "NO".

You'd better control your feeling from jumping the gun.

Feeling? You're speaking of yourself.

I sent my ballot with my YES on it few days ago. I'm done! I have a feeling it will pass since I know way too many people are voting yes on it too.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hey, what's that?!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hey, what's that?!

You misunderstood my post. That is different type of feeling. I am talking about I have a feeling (gut) that will pass since I know a lot of people are supporting it. That is not emotion involved. You're the one who have emotions involved with this issue.

You misunderstood my post. That is different type of feeling. I am talking about I have a feeling (gut) that will pass since I know a lot of people are supporting it. That is not emotion involved. You're the one who have emotions involved with this issue.

You must have misunderstood me too: I feel that because Proposition 1 is not a good enough package for the region, many many people will vote "NO". Well, that solves everything.

You must have misunderstood me too: I feel that because Proposition 1 is not a good enough package for the region, many many people will vote "NO". Well, that solves everything.

We will see. :)

Hey Tiawanesedrummer36...Why don't you move to King County and you will stop complaining about getting light rail to snohomish county....that is not going to happen anytime soon...it will be in at least a decade. You cannot tell them to lower the prices...we do not live in a 3rd world country....always remember that we live in United States...the land of high cost of labor and materials. We have a life to move on and we will be always in debt no matter what it is.

Why are you so obessed about Snohomish County in many threads? From my views, Snohomish county is sprawl and more sprawl....Look at Marysville, Lake Stevens and some other regions. You cannot demand them to get it to Everett sooner because it costs a lot of MONEY! Why can't they just have a transit hub to feed the Sounder commuter rail and set up fenquency of every 30 minutes, too bad we cannot do it because we don't have room for a second set of rail...which cost MONEY once again.

Hey Tiawanesedrummer36...Why don't you move to King County and you will stop complaining about getting light rail to snohomish county....that is not going to happen anytime soon...it will be in at least a decade. You cannot tell them to lower the prices...we do not live in a 3rd world country....always remember that we live in United States...the land of high cost of labor and materials. We have a life to move on and we will be always in debt no matter what it is.

Why are you so obessed about Snohomish County in many threads? From my views, Snohomish county is sprawl and more sprawl....Look at Marysville, Lake Stevens and some other regions. You cannot demand them to get it to Everett sooner because it costs a lot of MONEY! Why can't they just have a transit hub to feed the Sounder commuter rail and set up fenquency of every 30 minutes, too bad we cannot do it because we don't have room for a second set of rail...which cost MONEY once again.

I have been a lifelong resident of Everett, and I don't plan to move to King County. As time has/will progress, Snohomish County will stop becoming sprawl and be home to exciting new developments. Maybe you should look at what I have recently posted on the Everett/Snohomish County Development News thread to get updated. King County is too costly, too crowded, to polluted, and filled with people like you that probably never visit Everett, Marysville, Mill Creek, Mukilteo (etc.) to appreciate what ALL OF Snohomish County has to offer. We're home to the Boeing 787, the largest building in the world, great available shopping, more trees, more parks, lower taxes, a great library system, red-light cameras, and emerging redevelopments of downtowns. Plus, Lynnwood might get an IKEA, not to mention the possibility of commercial air service at Paine Field. So as you can see, Snohomish County/Everett is going through a major transformation, and I wouldn't leave even if you paid me trillions of dollars.

By the way, LEARN HOW TO SPELL "TAIWANESE".

I have been a lifelong resident of Everett, and I don't plan to move to King County. As time has/will progress, Snohomish County will stop becoming sprawl and be home to exciting new developments. Maybe you should look at what I have recently posted on the Everett/Snohomish County Development News thread to get updated. King County is too costly, too crowded, to polluted, and filled with people like you that probably never visit Everett, Marysville, Mill Creek, Mukilteo (etc.) to appreciate what ALL OF Snohomish County has to offer. We're home to the Boeing 787, the largest building in the world, great available shopping, more trees, more parks, lower taxes, a great library system, red-light cameras, and emerging redevelopments of downtowns. Plus, Lynnwood might get an IKEA, not to mention the possibility of commercial air service at Paine Field. So as you can see, Snohomish County/Everett is going through a major transformation, and I wouldn't leave even if you paid me trillions of dollars.

By the way, LEARN HOW TO SPELL "TAIWANESE".

Dude, you won't be living there in ten years anyway. I absolutely guarantee it.

Dude, you won't be living there in ten years anyway. I absolutely guarantee it.

How much do you want to bet? I am a lifelong resident of Everett and that'll stay that way for more than twenty years and probably more.

GO EVERETT!

^^^ Umm ok well back on Topic. I am voting no. I actually don't know anyone who is voting yes on this. Well, other than on SSC.

^^^ Umm ok well back on Topic. I am voting no. I actually don't know anyone who is voting yes on this. Well, other than on SSC.

Good grief, why would you vote against it? I seriously thought all the arguments against it had pretty much been debunked as paranoid delusions.

How much do you want to bet? I am a lifelong resident of Everett and that'll stay that way for more than twenty years and probably more.

I'm guessing, since I think you said that this was your first election, that you're going to end up going to college... or I damn well hope you are.

Good grief, why would you vote against it? I seriously thought all the arguments against it had pretty much been debunked as paranoid delusions.

Seriously how many times do the people of this state have to vote NOT to have shit added to our car tab tax?

This proposal does nothing for 100s of thousands of people why the hell would they vote for it? Seriously.

I'm guessing, since I think you said that this was your first election, that you're going to end up going to college... or I damn well hope you are.

Dude, what the fuck?

I never said that this was my first time voting, that was USAPatrioit. I'm in my early 30s; now using basic math skills (if you have any), count how many times I have voted since registration at age 18. Yeah,
YOU JUST GOT ZINGED!

Good grief, why would you vote against it? I seriously thought all the arguments against it had pretty much been debunked as paranoid delusions.

Guess you're too small minded.

Dude, what the fuck?

I never said that this was my first time voting, that was USAPatrioit. I'm in my early 30s; now using basic math skills (if you have any), count how many times I have voted since registration at age 18. Yeah,
YOU JUST GOT ZINGED!

What on earth do you do for a living, then? You sound like an 18 year old.

Guess you're too small minded.

Small minded enough to plan for light rail to Everett? I guess so.

Seriously how many times do the people of this state have to vote NOT to have shit added to our car tab tax?

This proposal does nothing for 100s of thousands of people why the hell would they vote for it? Seriously.

If this proposal does nothing for those 100s of thousands of people, then by the same argument I-5, I-90 and I-405 - corridors which will become dramatically worse without this package - do nothing for those people, and those people would be no worse off without their existence.

Do you see the flaw in that reasoning? It's kind of big. :)

What on earth do you do for a living, then? You sound like an 18 year old.

I work for a development firm in Everett. If you didn't read earlier, I admit I am immature, but as time passes, I realize what mistakes I make and I admit them. And hey, what's wrong with a little joke? :lol:

However, I will not say voting "NO" on Proposition 1 is a mistake; it is the right thing to do.

Seriously how many times do the people of this state have to vote NOT to have shit added to our car tab tax?

This proposal does nothing for 100s of thousands of people why the hell would they vote for it? Seriously.

Those car tab votes have done very differently in the Seattle area compared to statewide.

It's pretty sad if a lot of people vote only in their self interest. What ever happened to patriotism for our city?

I have been a lifelong resident of Everett, and I don't plan to move to King County. As time has/will progress, Snohomish County will stop becoming sprawl and be home to exciting new developments. Maybe you should look at what I have recently posted on the Everett/Snohomish County Development News thread to get updated. King County is too costly, too crowded, to polluted, and filled with people like you that probably never visit Everett, Marysville, Mill Creek, Mukilteo (etc.) to appreciate what ALL OF Snohomish County has to offer. We're home to the Boeing 787, the largest building in the world, great available shopping, more trees, more parks, lower taxes, a great library system, red-light cameras, and emerging redevelopments of downtowns. Plus, Lynnwood might get an IKEA, not to mention the possibility of commercial air service at Paine Field. So as you can see, Snohomish County/Everett is going through a major transformation, and I wouldn't leave even if you paid me trillions of dollars.

By the way, LEARN HOW TO SPELL "TAIWANESE".

You're laughing my ass off! I don't care about spelling...what is this, a speling bee?

Tell me that in 10-20 years later when Snohomish county will become polluted, crowded and costly same as King County. I can't believe you said King county is like that....Snohomish and Pierce County will be next and you will be moving out somewhere.

You're laughing my ass off! I don't care about spelling...what is this, a speling bee?

Tell me that in 10-20 years later when Snohomish county will become polluted, crowded and costly same as King County. I can't believe you said King county is like that....Snohomish and Pierce County will be next and you will be moving out somewhere.

Okay, whatever......

I can probably see Pierce County like that, but not Snohomish County. We don't have a polluted port like Tacoma, and we aren't filled with dirty industry. If you have ever driven through Snohomish County, you can see that despite the development popping up, we're still heavily landscaped. That probably plays only a little part in this problem, but my personal feeling is that Snohomish County is still a lot cleaner, cheaper, less crowded, and there's probably less crime compared to King County. I don't know what will happen in the next 10-20 years. Maybe there will be more transit options for suburbs of Snohomish County, maybe government agencies here will enact tree-planting laws, maybe the county will stop sprawl and tell developers to build denser. Either way, I have a feeling the way of life in Snohomish County will stay pretty much the same in the next 10-20 years. :)

Small minded enough to plan for light rail to Everett? I guess so.

Light rail to Everett can be achieved in many ways. One way would be to funnel funding from another less important project towards building light rail to Everett. Another way is to build the line, but with few stations so the line will be cheaper, and then build the stations later as money becomes available.
Another way to build the line is taking the "ROADS" part of the ballot out and replacing that with more transit, like more light rail. That's the ideal plan for this region. There are plenty of other ways to get light rail to Everett, use your imagination (if you have one).

And how did Tacoma get light rail all the way to the Tacoma Dome Station (seriously, I can't remember)? I know it used to end up at Fife, but how did they get funding to extend it further?

Light rail to Everett can be achieved in many ways. One way would be to funnel funding from another less important project towards building light rail to Everett. Another way is to build the line, but with few stations so the line will be cheaper, and then build the stations later as money becomes available.
Another way to build the line is taking the "ROADS" part of the ballot out and replacing that with more transit, like more light rail. That's the ideal plan for this region. There are plenty of other ways to get light rail to Everett, use your imagination (if you have one).

And how did Tacoma get light rail all the way to the Tacoma Dome Station (seriously, I can't remember)? I know it used to end up at Fife, but how did they get funding to extend it further?

How, exactly, do you propose "funneling funding" from some other necessary project to light rail? And what? Stations might get you another mile each.

And RTID AND SOUND TRANSIT ARE NOT THE SAME AGENCY. The only reason the roads part is attached to ST2 is that the state legislature told them they had to go together.

Tacoma got light rail all the way to Tacoma Dome Station because they have twice the population of Everett. It has to do with all that "industry" that Everett doesn't have.

How, exactly, do you propose "funneling funding" from some other necessary project to light rail? And what? Stations might get you another mile each.

And RTID AND SOUND TRANSIT ARE NOT THE SAME AGENCY. The only reason the roads part is attached to ST2 is that the state legislature told them they had to go together.

Tacoma got light rail all the way to Tacoma Dome Station because they have twice the population of Everett. It has to do with all that "industry" that Everett doesn't have.

You also have to look at the surrounding areas (of Everett). I know one station you could take out is the Alderwood Station. Make people ride to Lynnwood and take the bus. Or build such a line to S. Everett. That would be good enough.

You also have to look at the surrounding areas (of Everett). I know one station you could take out is the Alderwood Station. Make people ride to Lynnwood and take the bus. Or build such a line to S. Everett. That would be good enough.

You could eliminate all the stations and you still wouldn't make it to S. Everett.

It's fun to think about transit possibilities with no consideration of broader realities, but RTID exists in the real world. They've done a good job balancing priorities, including extending light rail way north and south as well as east.

It's fun to think about transit possibilities with no consideration of broader realities

Very well put. That's why we didn't get anything done until Sound Transit 1. :)

I have more success convincing people about prop 1 if I tell them it's a "subway" to Northgate mall, Bellevue, and Tacoma. Rather than it being a light rail train...

I'm going to take my family on the bus tunnel. They've never heard of it!

This is a tough one for me but I'm voting no. At a point where global warming is a huge issue..We'd be building 182 miles of new roads vs 50 miles of new transit. The 405 expansion alone would carry 40,000 more cars a day. New roads quickly fill up and we're back where we started..they just create more sprawl..which requires more roads....This is a suburban agenda with 3 times as much road as transit. I want rail, but this comes with a BIG dose of lots of asphalt..something we need to be moving away from. A no vote would throw it back to the drawing board, with hopefully more rail.
I'm not anti-tax, though this is usually where the right-wing gets hung up. I just want my money spent more on rail and less on road.

Over half the dollars go to transit, and a large chunk of the road dollars go to replacing 520. Good luck getting a better ratio in the future.

This is a tough one for me but I'm voting no. At a point where global warming is a huge issue..We'd be building 182 miles of new roads vs 50 miles of new transit. The 405 expansion alone would carry 40,000 more cars a day. New roads quickly fill up and we're back where we started..they just create more sprawl..which requires more roads....This is a suburban agenda with 3 times as much road as transit. I want rail, but this comes with a BIG dose of lots of asphalt..something we need to be moving away from. A no vote would throw it back to the drawing board, with hopefully more rail.
I'm not anti-tax, though this is usually where the right-wing gets hung up. I just want my money spent more on rail and less on road.

THANK YOU! At least someone here understands me.

This is a tough one for me but I'm voting no. At a point where global warming is a huge issue..We'd be building 182 miles of new roads vs 50 miles of new transit. The 405 expansion alone would carry 40,000 more cars a day. New roads quickly fill up and we're back where we started..they just create more sprawl..which requires more roads....This is a suburban agenda with 3 times as much road as transit. I want rail, but this comes with a BIG dose of lots of asphalt..something we need to be moving away from. A no vote would throw it back to the drawing board, with hopefully more rail.
I'm not anti-tax, though this is usually where the right-wing gets hung up. I just want my money spent more on rail and less on road.

You're not going to get rail without roads. And these roads will be funded next year with NO rail if RTID fails. Why would you believe otherwise?

You're not going to get rail without roads. And these roads will be funded next year with NO rail if RTID fails. Why would you believe otherwise?

All I can say is:

NO is NO.

And hey, UrbanBen, is all you do criticize people for voting "NO" on Proposition 1? I haven't seen you post any interesting "factual" information on the developments of "buildings" in recent months.

And hey, UrbanBen, is all you do criticize people for voting "NO" on Proposition 1? I haven't seen you post any interesting "factual" information on the developments of "buildings" in recent months.

I daresay that's simply all you pay attention to.

You're not going to get rail without roads. And these roads will be funded next year with NO rail if RTID fails. Why would you believe otherwise?

Do you think a stand-alone, $8 billion roads package would pass in the same funding area? Or do you think the roads would be funded some other way?
the legislature is 2/3 D's, the price of gas will be, based on futures prices, over to $4.00 in 6-12 months, and the WSDOT is now coming around to the idea that we need more tolling/HOT lanes. ...I think the prognosis is gettting better for not having to expand roads to such an extent as would be the case in this bill - and have them paid for more with user fees than tabs.

With respect to light rail, I think a stand alone, slimmed down version would get passed in '09

Do you think a stand-alone, $8 billion roads package would pass in the same funding area? Or do you think the roads would be funded some other way?
the legislature is 2/3 D's, the price of gas will be, based on futures prices, over to $4.00 in 6-12 months, and the WSDOT is now coming around to the idea that we need more tolling/HOT lanes. ...I think the prognosis is gettting better for not having to expand roads to such an extent as would be the case in this bill - and have them paid for more with user fees than tabs.

With respect to light rail, I think a stand alone, slimmed down version would get passed in '09

http://www.crosscut.com/mudville/8225

Light rail will not be back on the ballot. Light rail will NOT be back on the ballot. Sound Transit will be part of the RTID by 2009, if Prop 1 fails, and you'll see yet another combined package - but it'll be more roads and less rail.

I daresay that's simply all you pay attention to.

Nope, i'm just became curious as I was paying attention to OTHER threads.

Here's an article I found in the Everett Herald regarding Proposition 1 and Snohomish County. After reading this thoroughly, I really have no comment:

Is roads and transit plan worth the price tag?

That's the question before voters as they decide the fate of the $17.8 billion package.

By Jerry Cornfield
Herald Writer

EVERETT -- Business owners Kevin Weed and Howie Bargreen want to make it easier to commute into, out of and all around Snohomish County.

They simply -- and sharply -- disagree on whether the roads-and-transit measure on the Nov. 6 ballot will get it done.

Weed, president of Everett engineering firm Perteet Inc., considers Proposition 1 necessary for overcoming transportation challenges and creating a desirable quality of life in the region.

"If we don't make the investment, we suffer," said Weed, whose firm contributed $20,000 toward its passage.

Bargreen, owner of Bargreen's Coffee Co. of Everett, contends the measure is overpriced and spends too much money expanding light rail and not enough building needed roads.

"Don't social engineer the people out of their cars," said Bargreen, of Everett, who serves on the Snohomish County Planning Commission. "People love their cars. People love the independence of them."

Voters are now deciding the fate of the 20-year, $17.8 billion package of road, bridge, light rail and transit projects proposed for Snohomish, King and Pierce counties.

Sound Transit and the Regional Transportation Investment District crafted the plan, which would be paid for with increases in the sales tax and car tab fees.

In terms of dollars, it's the costliest prescription for remedying transportation problems ever put on a ballot in the three counties.

"It may seem like a big shock to our system, but when things break down, it costs more to fix them," Weed said. "We can't get it all for free."

Bargreen said as traffic woes become a "social problem," a better answer can be found with all those dollars.

"Finding reasonable solutions to incredible problems is doable," he said. "We have to. We have to get these people home on time so they can have good family relations, otherwise the society is going to fall apart."

Breaking it down

Prop. 1 marries the county-driven roads package and a second round of Sound Transit projects.

The transportation piece would spend $7 billion on building new interchanges and bridges and paving 182 miles of new roads in the three counties. The cost is in 2006 dollars, the year the list was drafted.

Of the total, $1.5 billion is for roughly two dozen projects in Snohomish County, including work on I-5, U.S. 2 and highways 9, 522, 524 and 531. Design and construction would occur over a 20-year period.

Sound Transit's portion amounts to $10.8 billion, the bulk for extending light rail train service into Snohomish and Pierce counties and east King County.

It includes $1.45 billion for light rail service along the I-5 corridor to stations in Mountlake Terrace, near the Alderwood mall in Lynnwood and finally, by 2027, to 164th Street SW and Ash Way in south Everett.

Higher sales tax and car tab fees will pay for it all.

Sales tax will rise by 0.6 percent, equal to adding 6 cents to every $10 worth of purchase. Of the sum, 0.5 percent will go toward light rail and the remainder to roads.

Car tab fees, also known as the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax, will go up by roughly $80 for every $10,000 of value of a vehicle. This money will go toward roads.

Revenues collected in the county will be spent on local projects and not ones in King or Pierce counties, proponents said.

What people wind up paying in Snohomish County will depend on where they live and shop.

South Snohomish County sits in both taxing districts, so residents there will see a climb in prices at area shops and fees for their car tabs.

Cities such as Monroe, Marysville and Arlington are outside Sound Transit's borders and inside the transportation district. Car owners would pay more for vehicle license fees while shops in town would raise the sales tax by 0.1 percent.

Communities such as Sultan and Granite Falls that are outside both districts won't be imposing any tax or fee hikes, nor will their residents be voting on the measure.

Campaign scrabble

Throughout this electoral scrap, supporters have focused on what the measure will do while opponents target its financial and environmental costs.

Keep Washington Rolling has raised nearly $4 million to run a campaign designed to sell the benefits of Prop. 1 for every affected neighborhood.

Bankrolling the effort is a legion of big firms such as Boeing and Microsoft, as well as labor unions, trade associations and firms likely to do design and construction of some of the proposed projects.

Political support comes from a host of cities, a majority of those serving on the councils of the three counties, and leaders of the region's environmental groups and chambers of commerce.

The campaign strategy is simple: Tell people what they'll get in the deal.

In Snohomish County, radio and television ads and mailed literature extol its plans to widen Highway 9, unclog the U.S. 2 trestle and replace overloaded I-5 exit ramps.

There's talk of improving safety on U.S. 2, deploying more buses, constructing park-and-ride lots and running light rail trains to the area.

"This is about projects. This is a package that addresses the transportation needs of this region," Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon said. "I think people are tired of being stuck in traffic."

How much relief Prop. 1 can deliver is a contested point.

A recently issued audit of the state Department of Transportation suggests congestion gets worse every year in the Puget Sound region as population grows.

In 20 years, if growth continues as predicted and nothing is done to combat congestion, drivers could face twice as much time delayed by congestion.

The auditors conclude if road and light rail projects in Prop. 1 are completed, the delays won't go away, but they won't be as bad. Nothing in the audit suggests delays can be eliminated.

The other side

Critics argue the measure is a political compromise that fails to solve problems and makes some worse.

"We have a transportation crisis. If we pass this plan, it will continue to be screwed up for years and years," said Bellevue developer Kemper Freeman at a forum in Everett last month.

Freeman and Seattle high-tech investor Mark Baerwaldt are financing NotoProp1.org, a group that's tried to portray this election as a referendum on Sound Transit.

Voters in 1996 approved funding for Sound Transit to construct an extensive link light rail system in the three counties within 10 years. It didn't happen and cost overruns forced scaling back on the plan.

Sound Transit leaders say the agency turned itself around by hiring new leaders and employing better project management practices. This package, they have said, will be carried out as promised.

"Why would we believe anything these people tell us?" Freeman said to the crowd of Everett of business owners.

Bargreen said he doesn't mind paying taxes, just not on light rail.

"We've got a very thin supply of money, and we need to spend it the most effective way we can," he said.

Baerwaldt's fixed a spotlight on the numbers. He said the $17.8 billion figure is vastly understated and argues that years from now the amount could reach $157 billion should such things as inflation and interest rates rise faster than predicted.

The Sierra Club leads a second flank of opposition. Members like light rail but are dead set against building roads.

Auto emissions are a major contributor to global warming, and paving all those new miles of road will only increase the damage inflicted on the environment, said chapter president Mike O'Brien.

And he's frustrated some of those pushing Prop. 1 say they want their communities to be leaders in the fight against climate change.

"There is disconnect between leaders who say they want to do something about global warming and then don't do anything," he said.

Snohomish County Councilmen John Koster and Gary Nelson are among a handful of elected leaders opposed to Prop. 1.

They want more money spent on roads and a shorter time frame to get the work done.

"I'm not saying we don't need to do something, but this (measure) is not one of them," said Koster, who lives outside the districts.

Weed gets frustrated hearing such talk.

"We can go around and around in this dialogue to find the perfect plan," he said. "This is a great plan. Nobody will ever reach the perfect plan."

drummer you're the one that's always talking about making all these hideous 8 lane arterieals all over everett. now you're jumping on the global warming band wagon and saying you don't like prop 1 becausee it has too much roads in the package. a lot of them being hov lanes. if you are against it because of global warming then that's fine (i disagree though) but several of your previous posts lead me to believe that you could care less about global warming and really what it comes down to is that paying an extra $0.50 for every $100.00 you spend is just too much. this package is gonna cost me $30 a year i don't think that's gonna break anyone

drummer you're the one that's always talking about making all these hideous 8 lane arterieals all over everett. now you're jumping on the global warming band wagon and saying you don't like prop 1 becausee it has too much roads in the package. a lot of them being hov lanes. if you are against it because of global warming then that's fine (i disagree though) but several of your previous posts lead me to believe that you could care less about global warming and really what it comes down to is that paying an extra $0.50 for every $100.00 you spend is just too much. this package is gonna cost me $30 a year i don't think that's gonna break anyone

Actually, it was six lanes and I gave up on that when everyone screamed at me. And, I NEVER said anything about eight-lane arterials in Everett, Washington. I expressed my idea that an ultimate-capacity designation for arterials like 128th-132nd streets and 164th Street is not a good idea, especially since new subdivisions are popping up all over Mill Creek, Bothell, etc. Also, 132nd Street is a major arterial since it connects Boeing, Paine Field, SR 99, I-5, and SR 9; all major destinantions. Most of what you said about me above is absolute bullshit. I'm still in favor of six-lane arterials that CONNECT to park and rides located at freeway interchanges, so drivers can easily drive on local roads to a park and ride and use transit. You have to look at the details of what I say. For example, I don't think it's a good idea to build the SR 509 extension because SR 599 is still a good freeway. I mean, how many freeways do we need connecting the Port of Seattle? What i'm trying to say is to stick to widening arterials and leave freeways the same. Light rail will eventually complement freeways all over the region, and we need effective six-lane arterials to connect those who live in the suburbs to the future transit network. Example: Someone lives in Mill Creek. That person drives on a six-lane 164th Street without hassle to the Ash Way Park and Ride to take a bus to Seattle.

As for the cost, I don't mind the sales tax (which is why i've barely mentioned "sales tax"), but I do care about the car tabs. Do they really think increasing the car tab fee year after year is going to help? If Proposition 1 passes, i'm going to sell my car and bike to work. It's like the current gas tax situation: less people are filling up because of high gas prices, so now there could be less gas tax revenue for transportation projects all over the state. The same could happen with car tabs.

So let's get this straight:
I am FOR:
- Light rail (cheap, easy to construct, effective)
- Refurbished freeways (no expansion at all)
- Improved arterials (no more than six-lanes)
- Transit
- Tolls

I am against:
- (Completely) new freeways/roads
- Higher taxes (excluding sales tax)
- Proposition 1

And please don't twist my words.

UrbanBen, quit lying about Sound Transit just vanishing in a puff of smoke if Prop 1 fails. That's disingenuous BS.

if you anti prop 1 people ruin it for the people here who actually want to live in a decent somewhat functional city that has stuff a city should have such as transit that's better then pathetic. i'm going to be very pissed and move to a city where more then 50% of the people care about something other then what affects them and only them when they want it to. it's a shame america has to listen to its citizens i wish we could be like europe and just fuckin do it

if you anti prop 1 people ruin it for the people here who actually want to live in a decent somewhat functional city that has stuff a city should have such as transit that's better then pathetic. i'm going to be very pissed and move to a city where more then 50% of the people care about something other then what affects them and only them when they want it to. it's a shame america has to listen to its citizens i wish we could be like europe and just fuckin do it

You do that. Less people like you in this region; maybe you should move to China where the government does whatever it wants and ignores people like you. See if you're happier there....

You do that. Less people like you in this region; maybe you should move to China where the government does whatever it wants and ignores people like you. See if you're happier there....

Excuse me... the entire transportation problem our country has was due to a strong central government using eminent domain to build highways. I really don't think you realize that. Look at cities where highways weren't built through the core or expansion is strongly constrained by geography, and you see rail. And don't try to tell me Seattle is constrained - 90 and 520 should make it obvious that's not true.

Excuse me... the entire transportation problem our country has was due to a strong central government using eminent domain to build highways. I really don't think you realize that. Look at cities where highways weren't built through the core or expansion is strongly constrained by geography, and you see rail. And don't try to tell me Seattle is constrained - 90 and 520 should make it obvious that's not true.

Man, you're a really bad mind reader. Why would I say Seattle is constrained? We've managed to bore a tunnel through Beacon Hill, bridge the Tacoma Narrows three times, and we're going to bore a 3-4 mile tunnel (University Link), we're going to build an interchange completely above water (Pacific Interchange), and maybe, just maybe, we're going to tear up the Seattle waterfront to build a tunnel.

And I don't really care how the Interstate Freeway system was constructed. What's done is done. But because anything is possible, we can undo the damage what freeways did back in the '60s (for example, lids!).

I think that no new Park and Rides should be built. Many parts of urban King County have a dense be network, and more people could walk or bike several blocks to a bus stop, instead of driving to a park and ride. There are already about 100 park and rides in King County, about 25 in Pierce County, and I am not sure about Snohomish, but I will estimate 50. A few of these are quite large, Eastgate, Issaquah, Tacoma Dome, Federal Way, Mercer Island, etc. New ones are still being built, like the new South Everett Freeway Station, that includes a park and ride in the median of I-5. The freeway stations are underutilised. ST Express buses could connect with shuttles all day. I also am not sure about how much TOD is developed in the Seattle area, but new Transit Stations should be integrated with retail, parks, theaters, etc. Also the trolleybus network should be expanded, and some could possibly become streetcar lines.

if you anti prop 1 people ruin it for the people here who actually want to live in a decent somewhat functional city that has stuff a city should have such as transit that's better then pathetic. i'm going to be very pissed and move to a city where more then 50% of the people care about something other then what affects them and only them when they want it to. it's a shame america has to listen to its citizens i wish we could be like europe and just fuckin do it

easy champ. I'm agnostic, just looking for some insight, as I'm sure others are as well. this is a big, big 0.5% sales tax that has no expiration date and not a whole lot of oversight as to what the $ must be spent on. Its not something to take lightly, even for a big transit advocate like myself. My bonafides are that I've worked for Metro and gone to grad school in public affairs and planning and work in real estate - and I'm still on the fence on this one.

My main concerns:
-Its a regressive tax that will by and large serve those who can afford to live near the rail line.
-No plans for tolling as revenue source except for the bridges. I think tolling would negate the need for much of the highway expansion proposed
-Size; there's a lot of pork in here - designed to garner regional needs.

Light rail along I-5 to Lynwood when we've just built all the direct access ramps to park and rides? If we want TOD, the lie should be along 99 and not 5.

Light rail to Federal Way? didn't we just pass the Transit Now for BRT??

Also not sold on Light rail to Bellevue given the physical challenges imposed by Lake Washington and the carrying capacity of the bridges. Given the travel time projected, I see this as primarily a commute corridor that could be better served by BRT. I prefer light rail in corridors that will be used 24-7. I'm concerned that people won't take LRT to Bellevue/Redmond from Seattle off-peak if they can drive in less than 1/2 the time. Even if ridership is high between the two points, the line obviously will not be well-used in between the two because there is a lake. Could $5 billion be used more efficiently in some other manner?

-Oversight and expiration, or lack thereof, mentioned above

easy champ. I'm agnostic, just looking for some insight, as I'm sure others are as well. this is a big, big 0.5% sales tax that has no expiration date and not a whole lot of oversight as to what the $ must be spent on. Its not something to take lightly, even for a big transit advocate like myself. My bonafides are that I've worked for Metro and gone to grad school in public affairs and planning and work in real estate - and I'm still on the fence on this one.

My main concerns:
-Its a regressive tax that will by and large serve those who can afford to live near the rail line.
-No plans for tolling as revenue source except for the bridges. I think tolling would negate the need for much of the highway expansion proposed
-Size; there's a lot of pork in here - designed to garner regional needs.

Light rail along I-5 to Lynwood when we've just built all the direct access ramps to park and rides? If we want TOD, the lie should be along 99 and not 5.

Light rail to Federal Way? didn't we just pass the Transit Now for BRT??

Also not sold on Light rail to Bellevue given the physical challenges imposed by Lake Washington and the carrying capacity of the bridges. Given the travel time projected, I see this as primarily a commute corridor that could be better served by BRT. I prefer light rail in corridors that will be used 24-7. I'm concerned that people won't take LRT to Bellevue/Redmond from Seattle off-peak if they can drive in less than 1/2 the time. Even if ridership is high between the two points, the line obviously will not be well-used in between the two because there is a lake. Could $5 billion be used more efficiently in some other manner?

-Oversight and expiration, or lack thereof, mentioned above

I think you bring up a couple of fantastic points. I voted for prop 1, but I'm not terribly enthusiastic either. I think congestion tolling is the most logical solution to the transportation problem. From an economic point of view, because someone getting on a congested road is slowing everyone else down, the public cost is higher than the private cost to get on that road. Therefore there should be a toll to bring it to equilibrium. But let's say for arguments sake that tolling isn't fair to lower income drivers, then I think a partial solution would be HOT lanes. You could probably generate a lot of revenue with those, and it might help to maximize the use of those lanes designated for HOV that are underutilized during times of congestion.

Also I agree with the assessment on where the LRT is going, it is redundant. Should be on 99 in north county and I'm just skeptical of the cost/ridership of south county. Also kind of worried how the weight of LRT on the I90 bridge just barely worked, maybe they should work on BRT/HOV for I90 and wait for a rebuilt 520 to run a dedicated rail line through.

my only concern from st2 was the sales tax. i wish washington had a slightly less regressive tax structure (ie payroll taxes) but we don't. and i don't see how it's fair to slap a gas tax or tolling taxes so that only the people who don't use it are paying for it. that REALLY doesn't make sense.

however, i am for tolling to keep congestion/emissions down and to pay for maintenance costs.

And I don't really care how the Interstate Freeway system was constructed. What's done is done. But because anything is possible, we can undo the damage what freeways did back in the '60s (for example, lids!).

The damage the freeways have done can't be fixed with lids. Lack of lids didn't cause sprawl.

The RapidRide seems like it offers a local service, because it stops ever 1/2-1 mile along Pac Hwy. The LRT will stop at SeaTac, 200th, Kent-DesMoines, 272nd, and 320th. There still needs to be some local service. Also, I am wondering why doesnt the Pac Hwy BRT go all the way to Seattle? It is slower to transfer to LRT.

The damage the freeways have done can't be fixed with lids. Lack of lids didn't cause sprawl.

yeah, but we COULD have retail/parks on lids.

The damage the freeways have done can't be fixed with lids. Lack of lids didn't cause sprawl.

I'm afraid I didn't finish: we can undo some damage done by, for example I-5, by building lids. As for sprawl, that was about to happen whether we built freeways or not. I doubt that if we didn't have I-5, Seattle would be filled with millions of condo towers. Freeways are somewhat of a blessing, and a curse. With freeways, we had opprotunities for economic growth, but along with that came congestion. Maybe if we had built a mass transit system after WWII, we probably wouldn't have AS MUCH sprawl, but then we would have problems upgrading our mass transit system up to modern safety standards.

The RapidRide seems like it offers a local service, because it stops ever 1/2-1 mile along Pac Hwy. The LRT will stop at SeaTac, 200th, Kent-DesMoines, 272nd, and 320th. There still needs to be some local service. Also, I am wondering why doesnt the Pac Hwy BRT go all the way to Seattle? It is slower to transfer to LRT.

Probably on Pacific Highway north of SR 518, there aren't HOV lanes or any special provisions for buses; that could be a factor. Or Metro officials are helping Sound Transit increase ridership on the Central Link.

my only concern from st2 was the sales tax. i wish washington had a slightly less regressive tax structure (ie payroll taxes) but we don't. and i don't see how it's fair to slap a gas tax or tolling taxes so that only the people who don't use it are paying for it. that REALLY doesn't make sense.

however, i am for tolling to keep congestion/emissions down and to pay for maintenance costs.

[Disregard]


I think that no new Park and Rides should be built. Many parts of urban King County have a dense be network, and more people could walk or bike several blocks to a bus stop, instead of driving to a park and ride. There are already about 100 park and rides in King County, about 25 in Pierce County, and I am not sure about Snohomish, but I will estimate 50. A few of these are quite large, Eastgate, Issaquah, Tacoma Dome, Federal Way, Mercer Island, etc. New ones are still being built, like the new South Everett Freeway Station, that includes a park and ride in the median of I-5. The freeway stations are underutilised. ST Express buses could connect with shuttles all day. I also am not sure about how much TOD is developed in the Seattle area, but new Transit Stations should be integrated with retail, parks, theaters, etc. Also the trolleybus network should be expanded, and some could possibly become streetcar lines.

Snohomish County has quite a few. The major ones are Ash Way, Lynnwood Transit Center, Swamp Creek, Mountlake Terrace, Everett Station, Canyon Park, Lake Stevens, and plenty in Marysville, Arlington, Monroe, and all over the place.

I'm a little confused when you say freeway stations are underutilized. I depends on how a freeway station is used. For example, the future South Everett Freeway Station and the future expanded Mountlake Terrace Freeway Station and park and ride will be heavily used because park and ride spaces are located right next to bus bays, so users don't have to walk a long way to catch the bus; plus, there are covered walkways. In addition, future freeway stations will be built in the median of freeways, so transit users should enjoy the fact that they don't have to ride the bus for an extra 5 minutes because of traffic signals and surface streets (as with Everett's Eastgate Park and Ride). But then look at the freeway stations at NE 145th Street and NE 45th Street; buses have to move four lanes over to exit with regular traffic and after waiting through traffic signals and congested ramps, they pick people up (sometimes not), and get back on the freeway by moving four lanes over into the HOV lane.

It just depends on how a freeway station is constructed and whether it is easily accessible.

Geez, and people criticize me for my idea of "funding".


look, i've been avoiding the personal atttacks on you like so many other people on this forum have been doing, but that comment really gets on my nerves.

if you have a problem with my ideas back up your claims and avoid snide comments like that

look, i've been avoiding the personal atttacks on you like so many other people on this forum have been doing, but that comment really gets on my nerves.

if you have a problem with my ideas back up your claims and avoid snide comments like that

Hey, I wasn't criticizing you or anything; I actually agree with you!

I was simply saying that earlier in this thread people attacked me when I said the funding plan for Proposition 1 wasn't to my liking, and people called me "cheap" because they thought I hated the idea of paying an extra cent or something on my purchases and thought I was an irrational dumbass.

Well, that's not the case!

I don't mind the sales tax. Increasing sales tax isn't going to affect me because up here in Everett, our sales tax is incredibly low, and gets lower as you head away from Seattle. So if I go to Marysville, the tax is incredibly lower than if I shop in Seattle.

Second, I hate the idea of continually raising car-tabs every fucking year (read my earlier posts).

Third, I absolutely love the idea of tolling. People who actually use our region's freeways should pay for it, not senior citizens who can barely get around (example).

Fourth, don't even try to twist my words...

oh, it's hard to tell on the intertubes sometimes. i don't mean to twist your words around but generally when you put something in quotations in a context like that, it means you are belittling it.

Snohomish County has quite a few. The major ones are Ash Way, Lynnwood Transit Center, Swamp Creek, Mountlake Terrace, Everett Station, Canyon Park, Lake Stevens, and plenty in Marysville, Arlington, Monroe, and all over the place.

I'm a little confused when you say freeway stations are underutilized. I depends on how a freeway station is used. For example, the future South Everett Freeway Station and the future expanded Mountlake Terrace Freeway Station and park and ride will be heavily used because park and ride spaces are located right next to bus bays, so users don't have to walk a long way to catch the bus; plus, there are covered walkways. In addition, future freeway stations will be built in the median of freeways, so transit users should enjoy the fact that they don't have to ride the bus for an extra 5 minutes because of traffic signals and surface streets (as with Everett's Eastgate Park and Ride). But then look at the freeway stations at NE 145th Street and NE 45th Street; buses have to move four lanes over to exit with regular traffic and after waiting through traffic signals and congested ramps, they pick people up (sometimes not), and get back on the freeway by moving four lanes over into the HOV lane.

It just depends on how a freeway station is constructed and whether it is easily accessible.

I meant that some of thses stations have parking problems, and they could be reduced by adding neighborhood shuttles that connect to express routes during rush hour. The expresses are so frequent during rush hour, that you don't even need to worry about waiting for a bus to Seattle. One thing I've also heard people complain about is the lack of crosstown expresses. A good route, IMO, is Ballard-Fremont-Wallingford-U District-Bellevue-Redmond Express.

I meant that some of thses stations have parking problems, and they could be reduced by adding neighborhood shuttles that connect to express routes during rush hour. The expresses are so frequent during rush hour, that you don't even need to worry about waiting for a bus to Seattle. One thing I've also heard people complain about is the lack of crosstown expresses. A good route, IMO, is Ballard-Fremont-Wallingford-U District-Bellevue-Redmond Express.

I think it also depends on the density of a neighborhood, and where in Puget Sound you're talking about. For example, a neighborhood shuttle would only be profitable in denser residential communities in Seattle or Bellevue, but in sprawl cities, neighborhood shuttles wouldn't be cost-effective because everything is more spread out in suburbs (as i'm sure everyone knows), so people would still prefer to drive to a freeway station/park and ride. For example, I live near Everett Transit route 8, and that route only has one-hour frequencies. Plus it takes too long to reach the nearest transit center either because the route is too long or I have to make many transfers. I'd rather drive to the future South Everett Freeway Station and catch a bus there.

Disclaimer: that's just my experience.

I think it also depends on the density of a neighborhood, and where in Puget Sound you're talking about. For example, a neighborhood shuttle would only be profitable in denser residential communities in Seattle or Bellevue, but in sprawl cities, neighborhood shuttles wouldn't be cost-effective because everything is more spread out in suburbs (as i'm sure everyone knows), so people would still prefer to drive to a freeway station/park and ride. For example, I live near Everett Transit route 8, and that route only has one-hour frequencies. Plus it takes too long to reach the nearest transit center either because the route is too long or I have to make many transfers. I'd rather drive to the future South Everett Freeway Station and catch a bus there.

Disclaimer: that's just my experience.

You know, we will have higher density in the ST2 corridor *even without ST2* than the BART corridor has now.

Over half the dollars go to transit, and a large chunk of the road dollars go to replacing 520. Good luck getting a better ratio in the future.

I checked this out and in the end...I voted YES. There's alot I don't like here, but there's an old adage about not passing up the good in search of the perfect that finally pursuaded me. Sigh...

I don't think there is a Forumer here who agrees 100% with this plan, but at the same time I truly believe that costs will only increase as something should be STARTED as soon as possible. Fixes and tweaks will be needed - case in point the current Light Rail Line. But you can't fix something that isn't built.

My goodness. Have you even read any of the plan?? Most of the projects won't even start for 5 to 7 years!

My goodness. Have you even read any of the plan?? Most of the projects won't even start for 5 to 7 years!

what is your point?

and i'd assume most people here have read at least a good portion of the plan.

Oh, sorry I thought it was clear. The comment above mentioned getting started as soon as possible. Well that ain't gonna happen.

and how will voting no get us started any sooner?

It might make them come up with a plan, in the next few years, that will actually be useful to the majority. Not one that taxes everyone for the benefit of a very few. (transitwise)

It might make them come up with a plan, in the next few years, that will actually be useful to the majority. Not one that taxes everyone for the benefit of a very few. (transitwise)

The fact is, when we last shot down a regional system in 1970 - NINETEEN SEVENTY - it looked exactly like this one. Why, you ask? Because an entire new generation of people agrees that these are actually the most important projects to do first.

I suppose you don't want your gas tax money to go to I-90, either?

The fact is, when we last shot down a regional system in 1970 - NINETEEN SEVENTY - it looked exactly like this one. Why, you ask? Because an entire new generation of people agrees that these are actually the most important projects to do first.

I suppose you don't want your gas tax money to go to I-90, either?

Well, back then, we didn't have the kind of explosive growth we have now. And plus back then, freeways probably weren't that crowded (i'm not certain on that one, it's just a guess).

I suppose you don't want your gas tax money to go to I-90, either?

You would suppose wrong.

You would suppose wrong.

Then you're being pretty inconsistent, eh? You only think you should pay for something only a tiny percentage of the population uses when it's not transit? Because (drumroll) that light rail's percentage of daily trips will be higher than 90's.

I'm just curious, when will construction begin if we vote NO? I have yet to hear from the NO Campaign just how they are going to do more for less money faster. Help me out folks! What have I missed?

Then you're being pretty inconsistent, eh? You only think you should pay for something only a tiny percentage of the population uses when it's not transit? Because (drumroll) that light rail's percentage of daily trips will be higher than 90's.

Not at all. Again you transit people don't get it. This Transit package doesn't go everywhere. It just doesn't. Plus the gas tax, at least I think you mean the existing one, Doesn't have anything to do with prop 1. With no plan for traffic relief?? WTH?? Oh a million more people are going to move here they say.....and so they are all going to take transit?? Not gonna happen! They are going to have cars whether you want them to take a train along a very narrow corridor or not. Where are they going to live? Not all in DT Seattle, or along LRT routes that's for sure. They are going to live in suburbs where this transit package doesn't do anything.

If anything this should be 2 measures. Not the single bundle that they are trying to force down peoples throats. And yes getting a huge proposal to satisfy most of the voters is going to be tough. SO WHY DO IT THAT WAY????? These mega deals keep failing because they are MEGA. Why not break them down into multiple props?? Lazy thinking, scare tactics and plain greed seem to be all they can come up with. Sorry, other cities can come up with light rail that doesn't cost tens of billions of Dollars. But Washington never can. Why is that?? Don't cite construction costs, enviornmental impacts or topography either. San Diego has done it far cheaper and with hilly terrain and NIMBY litigation from hell, and at California prices.

This deal is like a pile of crap and it stinks mightily.

San Diegos light rail system (used loosely as it is really a trolley system) is no cheaper than what is being proposed here. The most recent 5 miles (theirs is a little over 50 miles total coverage) cost almost 90 million/mile. The difference is that they have the support of voters, I guess. By the way, did I mention that almost the entire system is at grade? At least in our congestion choke points it is below grade.

Not at all. Again you transit people don't get it. This Transit package doesn't go everywhere. It just doesn't. Plus the gas tax, at least I think you mean the existing one, Doesn't have anything to do with prop 1. With no plan for traffic relief?? WTH?? Oh a million more people are going to move here they say.....and so they are all going to take transit?? Not gonna happen! They are going to have cars whether you want them to take a train along a very narrow corridor or not. Where are they going to live? Not all in DT Seattle, or along LRT routes that's for sure. They are going to live in suburbs where this transit package doesn't do anything.

If anything this should be 2 measures. Not the single bundle that they are trying to force down peoples throats. And yes getting a huge proposal to satisfy most of the voters is going to be tough. SO WHY DO IT THAT WAY????? These mega deals keep failing because they are MEGA. Why not break them down into multiple props?? Lazy thinking, scare tactics and plain greed seem to be all they can come up with. Sorry, other cities can come up with light rail that doesn't cost tens of billions of Dollars. But Washington never can. Why is that?? Don't cite construction costs, enviornmental impacts or topography either. San Diego has done it far cheaper and with hilly terrain and NIMBY litigation from hell, and at California prices.

This deal is like a pile of crap and it stinks mightily.

Oh yeah, it should be two measures. Talk to the state legislature about that.

I think, honestly, that your grasp of human settlement patterns is poor at best. I really don't want to take the time to argue with you, so let's leave it at this:

- your ad hominem attacks are totally meaningless
- the state auditor and FTA both agree that Sound Transit's doing a great job with the money. You can't just will something to be cheaper.
- Yes, actually, a large proportion of new residents will live in LRT corridors, because that's the only area that has job accessibility and room for expansion. You can't build more housing where you aren't zoned for it, and the cities on the lines are upzoning near stations. People only live out in the boonies because we've had these restrictive zoning policies in the core for a long time, and those are changing relatively quickly (although the parking requirements, shared-wall restrictions, and setbacks are still holding real density down around the cores). The subprime meltdown has also effectively stopped new suburban housing starts in their tracks.
- LRT alone will carry 300,000 daily trips, most of which aren't on transit today. Do realize that a "trip" by the opposition's count includes walking to the corner store - and a larger percentage of trips by both existing and new residents will be by foot in 2030 if we keep upzoning.

I already took apart your silly "small percentage" argument. It's ridiculous to complain about particular projects because you won't personally use them. I'm sure you don't use elementary schools either. If your neighbors can't get to work, the employers you have access to move out of the region, and you're pretty doomed.

If you want a clue, let me know.

San Diegos light rail system (used loosely as it is really a trolley system) is no cheaper than what is being proposed here. The most recent 5 miles (theirs is a little over 50 miles total coverage) cost almost 90 million/mile. The difference is that they have the support of voters, I guess. By the way, did I mention that almost the entire system is at grade? At least in our congestion choke points it is below grade.

Royal Brougham is being moved to a viaduct like Atlantic was, which will keep more game traffic away from light rail. Most of the new work will be fully separated - Rainier valley is only at grade because of the construction price clusterf***, and ST has planned for the worst with ST2.

Voted YES on my mail-in ballot.

I hate new taxes but this Prop makes economic sense for the entire region, and will likely cost me LESS in the long-run versus a do-nothing approach.

:banana:

Mark me down for a YES vote today! I wonder what impact low voter turnout will have.

among likely voters, prop 1 is doing quite well, so i think it actually might be better for our cause.

Doubt that. So I turned in my ballot today at my local QFC/ballot drop-off location, with a big, dark pen line across "NO" for Proposition 1, and i'm damn proud of it!

Vote NO!

Doubt that. So I turned in my ballot today at my local QFC/ballot drop-off location, with a big, dark pen line across "NO" for Proposition 1, and i'm damn proud of it!

Vote NO!

That's interesting, if you mark a pen line *across* the item in King County, it doesn't count.

That's interesting, if you mark a pen line *across* the item in King County, it doesn't count.

Maybe it was a pencil; either way, vote NO.

Maybe it was a pencil; either way, vote NO.

No, it's the line that's the issue. You didn't fill in the bubble?

This is so amazing...haha

I hate to say guys, but I heard that if you just as Taiwanesedrummer did that they actually count your vote twice! Gosh, I hope no one else did that. Clever, effective, and detrimental to our cause. Yikes!

I guess we better prepare for the NO campaigners version of traffic relief. Oh wait - THEY DON'T HAVE ONE YET!!!!!!!!

OK, since it's election night I don't think we need 2 threads on this topic anymore. We'll use the other thread to discuss election results. If you've got any issues from this thread you still want to talk about, just copy it over into the other one.