I continue to be a little vexed at those people who still try to play the class warfare card over I-695, persisting in the myth that anything that decreases WSDOT funding robs from the (presumably transit dependent) poor to give to the (evil SOV (and SUV at that) driving) rich.

The REALITY is that there is a LOT in the WS DOT budget that doesnt make sense, and a lot of things that they are pouring tax dollars into that are inefficient, serve only special interests, or are frankly little more than hobby-shop activities that enable them to amuse themselves with taxpayers money.

I would cite three particular issues that I believe typify this. If anyone believes they can defend these issues, particularly by demonstrating that it is being done for the poor, please dont hesitate:

Issue #1: The Kirkland to UW ferry proposal. WSDOT is proposing spending $10 million for two catamaran passenger ferries and $2.5 million a year to operate a ferry service for 700 people to commute between Kirkland and the UW. For those without a calculator, thats $14,000 plus in capitalization expense for the boats and $3600 a year for each person. Kirkland Zip code had a median family income in 1989 of $47,485 and a median home price of $166,000 as reported in the 1990 census, but both have gone up. For reference, the city of Seattle had a median family income in 1989 of $29,353 and median home price of $136,500 making Kirkland not exactly rich, but certainly more prosperous than the rest of Seattle. But WADOT is proposing using money raised from the state as a whole to fund a passenger ferry shuttle service between a well-off suburb and the UW. This would look like a project that could easily be given up without adverse impact to the poor.

Issue #2: The Mercer Island underground parking garage. WSDOT wants to build an underground parking garage, complete with elevator, for the Mercer Island Park N Ride. Building cost of this garage will be $29,000 PER STALL. Now Mercer Island, for those not from King County, is NOT what you would consider an economically disadvantaged area. In the 1990 census the Mercer Island Zip Code had a 1989 median family income of $71,136 and a median home price of $332,500. Of course, incomes and home prices have gone up CONSIDERABLY in the last decade. But theres no question that Mercer Islanders are well off. Even today the median family income for all of King County is only about $48 thousand. Lets face it, Mercer Island, as a community, is RICH. Basically, WSDOT is spending tax funds raised from the state as a whole to subsidize parking so that people who HAVE cars can take subsidized transit to their executive/professional positions half a bridge away in Seattle. Hard to play the class warfare card when I say this is a project that can be given up easily without hurting the poor.

Item #3. The Pacific NW Passenger Rail fiasco: WSDOT has been pouring money for years into a plan to increase intercity PASSENGER travel between Oregon and BC. Their estimate is that the states share of this could be as high as $750 million, and that only if Oregon, BC, AMTRAK, and Sound Transit each take some of the load. The plan is at http://ntl.bts.gov/ntl/data/pacnwrail3.pdf Anyone following the passenger rail situation knows that AMTRAK is massively subsidized, both for capital and operations. With the exception of the NE (NY-Boston-DC)corridor, they are losing money on all routes. Their on-time status is terrible, and even when they are on time, take longer to get from place to place than the intercity bus lines do, while costing at least three times as much. They are now under a death threat from Congress; Break even by 2002, or go into bankruptcy, with no one betting that they can break even, even with creative book-keeping practices that the GAO has called them on repeatedly. And even if WSDOT somehow pulled this off, how much passenger traffic demand is their between Eugene Oregon and Vancouver. AMTRAK ALREADY runs a route through there. It is NEVER full, takes six times as long as going by air, costs half again as much as a plane ticket, and loses money on every passenger. And its on-time record is considerably WORSE than that of the airlines. I like trains as much as the next guy, but I dont expect the taxpayers to fund my hobby. Can someone explain to me why this is a good idea? Or needed for the poor?

So lets get off this claim that taking money away from WSDOT is an attack on the poor. These projects are typical of LOTS of things that WSDOT that either is subsidizing the rich or special interest groups (Burlington Northern/Santa Fe is a BIG winner with number three, I know. Ive got stock in it.). It is time and WAY PAST TIME that someone scrubbed their budget with a critical eye. And the easiest way to do this is to privatize as many DOT functions as possible. If we need to subsidize the transit dependent, poor or otherwise, Id rather give them vouchers. At least then we can tell for sure how much the subsidy is and who it is going to.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 03, 1999

Answers

You know, BNSF is going to be the only winner with Sounder too. They are getting millions in track improvements, permission to run their (money-making) freight trains at 60 mph through the downtown of Puyallup, Auburn, and Kent, and all they have to do is let a few money-losing passenger trains use their rails, and they don't have to lose any money on passenger service themselves. I can't help but wonder if there isn't something going on between individuals in DOT and the BNSF like the people who retire from the military and go to work for defense contractors. We're making BNSF stockholders (You're one?) rich with our taxes. If they hit us for money for the Seattle rail tunnel upgrade, you'll know we've been had. Kind of like the Mariners deciding they really don't want to cover the cost over-runs on Taxpayers Stadium (AKA, Safeco field).

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), December 03, 1999.

If I may, I would like to give details on the actual cost of private ferry service for an area with which I am very familiar, as a way of indicating the level of public subsidy required to get the ticket costs down to what they are now. I speak of the several private "passenger only" ferry boats operating out of the Port of Bellingham and serving numerous islands in the San Juans, most of which don't have publicly funded ferries. Both these boats leave B'ham early in the morning, and return late in the afternoon, so there is only one round trip per day.

One of these boats charges a fixed round trip fee of $35.00 per person ($29.00 for seniors, and $27.00 for buyers of books of 6 round trips). The cost is the same whether the passenger is going to Eliza Island, a trip of roughly 30 minutes, or all the way out to Friday Harbor, a trip of about 2 hours. The other boat charges a fee of $25.00 for the trip to Eliza Island, with the cost ot tickets to the more distant islands increasing to a maximum of $50.00 for a round trip ticket to Sucia Island. I don't know what any of their discounted fares are.

If the DOT charged proportionally for their proposed Kirkland to Seattle run, this means that the Kirkland commuter (assuming he bought the discounted tickets) would pay $27 x 22 = $594 per month, or $7,128 annually. This agrees fairly well with the $3,600 per passenger subsidation costs presented in Mr. Carson's data, considering that the private company has to pay practically every tax dreamed up by man, something not required of the DOT ferries.

What I fear this indicates is that the cost of marine transportation has risen so high that, at least in the case of someone using the service on a constant schedule, you are either going to have public subsidy of ferries, or no ferry service at all. This is an unfortunate situation, but considering the huge costs of operating this type of business, a large part of which is caused by governmental regulation and by liability and property insurance premiums, one that is not to be unexpected.

-- Albert Fosha (AFosha@aol.com), December 03, 1999.

Albert- I'd refer you to the BC Ferries annual budget (http://www.bcferries.bc.ca/corporate/annual_report/consolidated_state ment_operations.html). They formed a corporation back in the 70s, told the corporation they must break even (except for a few subsidies for government mandated runs. Ther fares are roughly comparable to WA DOT on comparably long runs, and they got a $26 million Provincial subsidy on operating costs of about $390 million. They covered 96% of their operating costs out of revenues, WA ferries covers about 14%. And there's another difference between us and them. Their highest volume runs don't require subsidy. Most of our subsidies go to the high volume runs. We need to break up this monopoly.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 06, 1999.