Many have complained about Eyman 3, due to it's requirement that the entire state gets a say on Sound Transit.

Well, Seattle, having proven that it's possessed of the most inept, incompetent large city mayor in the country, sees the rest of the state as a cash pot for its little projects.

From 15 Jan Seattle Times:

"Schell said the state needs to be an active partner in the development of Sound Transit, a multibillion-dollar transportation plan that will add bus and rail service in the Puget Sound area."

"But local control was the main message yesterday."

So... what's it all mean?

"Give us hundreds of millions of dollars, and we (meaning Schell) will control how it's spent."

Yeah... it needs a vote, all right. And those who whine about a statewide vote overturning a local election... you need to get over it. If the agreement to build this thing without state money is modified by the ol' "Camel's nose under the tent-flap" approach, then of course it rates a state-wide election.

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), January 15, 2000

Answers

Sound Transit has repeatedly stated that they Will ask for money from the whole state, and on several occasions have also said that they don't think they can make Sounder work without it. From a recent Daily Journal of Commerce:

"He (Sims) is focused on regular bus service right now," said King County Executive Office spokesperson Elaine Kraft. "Light rail is a priority, but he's handling one thing at a time." Sound Transit Board Chair Dave Earling isn't worried about being left out of the state's budget. He says that just because Sound Transit may not get money from the state this year, doesn't mean the project won't get state funding in 2001. Nevertheless, he's crossing his fingers that the Legislature will allocate money for the project this year. "We are continuing to meet with legislators now, and they are definitely showing interest in partnering with us on light rail," Earling said. "But even if we don't get funding in the first year, we're working toward a long-term relationship with the Legislature." Earling said the board has proposed several funding strategies requiring legislative approval. http://www.djc.com/news/enviro/11002888.html

But I have to admit, I'm getting so tired of the self-righteous whining of all the pro-transit types that I'd just let them stew in their own juices and tax themselves to death, if they could do it QUIETLY without costing the rest of us anything.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), January 15, 2000.

The tireless squirming of the people outside the Puget Sound area trying to worm their way into a local issue is getting downright funny at times.

The FACT that most of the rest of the state syphons off about 10% of every dollar that the Puget Sound region puts into the collective transportation pot isn't enough. Now they'd like to put their grubby little hands on another $200 million a year of EXCLUSIVELY Puget Sound raised money.

The incredibly lame excuse of "but they keep asking the state for money" is completely without merit. You want the state to never give Sound Transit any money? Well you COULD lobby your legislator to keep that from happening. Nine of the twenty-one members of the Senate Transportation Committee and sixteen of the twenty-eight members of the House Transportation Committee live outside the RTA district. You would think that they could be easily convinced to keep from giving away state money to a locally funded transit system (then again, if you live in Senator Benton's district, you might not want to ask him to tell Senator Haugen not to give the RTA any funding. She'd probably include funding just because he asked her not to!)

But of course the idea of Sound Transit getting ANY funding in the forseeable future is rather slim. The legislature's main responsibility is to minimize the $1.2 billion hole in the DOT's budget. Have you seen ANY talk in the legislature towards refunding the transit losses? In fact a recent article in The Stranger attacked Seattle area legislator because NONE of them were very willing to push Sound Transit's agenda in the legislature.

Funding in 2001? Well by that time the ferry system will be in serious need of additional state funding, and any additional money will require an increase in the gas tax. Consider, for the moment, that Section 2 of 695 somehow survives the court challenge, then any gas tax increase would have to go to the voters at the November 2001 general election. Surveys already show that an increase in the gas tax is a hard sell at best, so the idea of putting a big local funding issue on the list of things the tax increase will go to pay for would not be a good thing to do. Sure, if the state were rolling in the transportation money, a handout to Sound Transit might be something the legislature would consider. But as it stands, the legislature is much more worried about finding the funds to maintain the roads it has now than finding ways to spend money that ISN'T burning a hole in its pocket.

Don't trust the legislature but still want to keep Sound Transit from obtaining state funding? Then as I said before, it's QUITE simple to run an initiative that would prohibit that from happening. In fact, Eyman 3 WOULDN'T keep Sound Transit from asking the state for money. Sound Transit and the RTA district would still exist upon the passage of the initiative. The initiative only requires that 90% of the funding source go towards building and maintaining roads. The agency would first off have about $30 million a year still available to do mass transit related items, and it could STILL go to the state to ask for money! In fact, that would probably make it MORE likely that the state would kick in some money, seeing as the ST Express bus service is already in operation and Sounder will be as well come November.

So let's see what we've got here. You want to keep Sound Transit from asking the state for more money. In order to do that you are willing to override a local election and redirect money THAT ISN'T YOURS in another direction. Basically making you no better than the government officials who take your money without asking and spend it on programs that you don't want. PLUS, in the end it STILL doesn't accomplish what you want it to do. Nothing like selling out your morals for nothing.

P.S. T Minus 54 days in the legislative session and counting. Did any of Benton's bills get scheduled for a hearing this week? Subtract another 8 days there. Last day to hear bills in fiscal committee is February 8. Last day to consider bills in the house of origin is February 15th. Tick, tick, tick.....

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), January 15, 2000.

" redirect money THAT ISN'T YOURS in another direction"

Hell, transit riders have been doing this for years. It's MY TURN now. I'll sign the transportation improvement initiative. If only 5% of the people use transit, the most they should get is 5% of the money......no, less than that. They are using their lousy buses on MY ROADS.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), January 15, 2000.

Gee, Patrick...

I'm surprised, since I so thoroughly trashed your "It's simple because everyone who knows ANYTHING about the makeup and the workings of the legislature know that those bills are not going to see the light of day, and that includes Roach and Benton" position, that you'd be so eager to have yopur head handed to you in a basket so soon. Oh, well!

BTW, Patrick... my exact words were: "The language of one or more of those bills will pass." Whether or not Benton's bills were scheduled this week is totally irrelevant.

While I know, given the multiple ass-whoopins I have delivered to you over all these months, you would like nothing better then to see me leave, I'm giving serious consideration to the "Fisher ploy."

If I change my mind and stay (in the unlikely event that might be necessary), that shouldn't bother you any more then Fisher's lie bothers you. In short, none. After all, "A) I consider my pledge to be made "off the cuff" and more of a personal comment to express my feelings on the issue, and. B) I am not one of your representatives in state government. You, obviously have better things to do with your time than harass some person you didn't elect nor whom is your representative," right?

Your answer is, as usual, completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. Those who sought the authority for the RTA election solemnly assured the legislature of this state that they would neither seek nor need any state money for their little poster project. However much your fantasies claim the rest of the state gets from Puget Sound money means nothing; where Members live means nothing; that the mayors, in fact, were doing that very thing "in the legislature" that you claimed "no one is talking about" (refunding the transit losses) means nothing.

Nor does the "simplicity" of the initiative to keep ST from getting state funding mean anything. Those who sought the ability to put ST to a vote made the pledge to not even ask for state money; they lied.

Now, given your party's record on veracity, and your own somewhat warped views on issues such as character and truth, it is certainly understandible as to why the lie doesn't bother you. But, the fact is, by lying, ST gave up any pretense to keeping ST an issue of local control and funding.

Piss you off, Patrick? Tooooo bad, Little Cowboy.

And of course, your increasingly delusional ideas as to what #3 will, or will not do, speak for themselves.

When 3 passes, that's it for ST. Any other request from them will, of course, be moot; and the entire legislature will treat it like the syphlitic whore it is.

By the way, given your party affiliation, Patrick... you're hardly one to discuss "selling out your morals for nothing."

Have a nice day, Tinky.

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), January 16, 2000.

Patrick states " redirect money THAT ISN'T YOURS in another direction"

If you Transit fanatics can redirect money "that isn't yours", in another direction, away from needed road projects, why the hell can't we redirect them back?

And Patrick, if the Legislature can't be bothered with those bills, rest assured, November WILL come.

Build the Roads!

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), January 16, 2000.

Wow, points go to Westin for actually successfully reading between the lines for once. Usually he is rather a doof when it comes to these matters, choosing to read something that wasn't even there in an attempt to win an argument.

I'm glad for once that I didn't overestimate your intelligence and you actually GOT the connection between your Fisher obsession and my boxing you into a corner over your rash comments on those bills passing in the legislature. Too bad it hasn't exactly broadened your horizons enough to get how boneheaded your little Fisher quest is.

You're right, it wouldn't bother me if you reneged on the bet if you lose. I mean, I might lose some respect for you, but then again, since I already have no respect for you, it's kind of hard to go into negative numbers. I'd rather enjoy it if you stuck around though. Everytime you'll do your little tantrum and question my political knowledge with your rather witless "get a refund on your AA degree" comments I'll just bash you over your thick little noggin with the sledgehammer of a FACT that in a head to head comparison of our predictions you came out totally wrong.

And as usual, you're trying to plug your ears and sing to yourself while I try to talk reason to you. You keep saying that you want to vote on the transportation initiative to basically teach Sound Transit a lesson and shut them down over lying about not going to the state for funding. As I said, this initiative really ain't gonna do it for ya.

You know, I was wrong about one thing though, I wouldn't be surprised if Sound Transit keeps a SIZABLE amount of funding even if that initiative passed. The thing says that no more than 10% of the TOTAL transportation spending can go to things other than road building and maintenance. Oh, it mentions the account that funds the RTA, but it doesn't say anything about how ONLY 10% of that fund can go towards transit. As long as the overall number stays at or below 10%, Sound Transit can pretty much remain funded. Sound far fetched? Well if the voters in the RTA district were to vote this thing down while the rest of the state passed it, how willing would the legislature be to help out the other transit districts, and how willing would the politicians in the RTA district be to let Sound Transit die if their voters basically told them to keep it?

So how would this be irrelevant? There are some major loopholes in this sucker that could/would make your entire protest vote against Sound Transit a joke. But if you want to play pretend about how this will smite your enemies, be my guest. It's not like I wouldn't enjoy another thing to poke fun at you about.

Nope Westin, I'm not pissed. I'm enjoying every minute of your tirades. It's just going to be that much more enjoyable come sine die.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), January 18, 2000.

Patrick, further attempting to avoid the proven hypocrisy of his positions, entertains us thusly:

"Wow, points go to Westin"

Careful, P. You ain't got that many to spare.

"for actually successfully reading between the lines for once."

No... there was no "reading between the lines." The lines confirming your hypocrisy don't require interpretation or spin... they're obvious for anyone who can read.

I have proven you to be a hypocrite.

Then, I have used your own words against you. Quite simple... really. But that is a necessity in communicating with you.

"Usually he is rather a doof when it comes to these matters,"

Coming from you, something of a complement with an ultimate irony, wouldn't you say?

"choosing to read something that wasn't even there in an attempt to win an argument."

Quick, Patty... back on the meds! "I'm glad for once that I didn't overestimate your intelligence and you actually GOT the connection between your Fisher obsession and my boxing you into a corner over your rash comments on those bills passing in the legislature."

Patrick, there IS no connection.

Man, you can't even squirm effectively.

Between Fisher and me, only one of us campaigned against 695. Only one of us was quoted around the state. Only one of us lied to the millions of citizens of this state. Only one of us is elected, and only one of us continues to serve with dishonor.

The connection is between YOU and Fisher. Fisher lies, as so many in your party and of your ilk do, and you give her a pass. Yet, you have no problem hypocritically attacking Benton for what he said, while you let Fisher off the hook (the fact that she's in your party and supports your position, of course, having nothing to do with that bit of situational ethics, right, Pat?)

This bit of transference simply... won't.... work.

"Too bad it hasn't exactly broadened your horizons enough to get how boneheaded your little Fisher quest is."

My good fellow, you have provided exactly NOTHING to give me cause to believe I should.

As for the bredth of my "horizons," perhaps, one of these days, when you get past your 6th grade class president election, we can discuss it. But given the number and variety of ways I've shown how little you know of politics, govenrment and the eletive process, I'd say that you're in no position to talk.

But then, you so rarely are. "You're right,"

Finally. You tell the truth for once.

"it wouldn't bother me if you reneged on the bet if you lose."

Right. Like your multiple posts on Benton, and all the verbiage you've wasted making yourself out to be a fool proved that you didn't care about Benton's position on the check.

Please.

"I mean, I might lose some respect for you, but then again, since I already have no respect for you, it's kind of hard to go into negative numbers."

Man.... THAT'S gonna make me lose 2.3 seconds of sleep tonight!

"I'd rather enjoy it if you stuck around though."

So, in addition to your other bizarre character traits, you're a masochist? Well, except for your party's talents for using cigars, you people never cease to amaze me!

"Everytime you'll do your little tantrum and question my political knowledge with your rather witless 'get a refund on your AA degree'"

I'm sorry... you haven't actually found a community college that will take you yet?

I DO apologize.

And Patrick, if you wouldn't screw up so much, and be so wrong about so many issues, I wouldn't have any grounds to question your inexperience and lack of knowledge.... would I?

"comments I'll just bash you over your thick little noggin with the sledgehammer of a FACT that in a head to head comparison of our predictions you came out totally wrong."

How about we start with one absolute FACT:

When you wrote:

"It's simple because everyone who knows ANYTHING about the makeup and the workings of the legislature know that those bills are not going to see the light of day, and that includes Roach and Benton," you were flatly wrong, as anyone who knows ANYTHING about the makeup and the workings of the legislature can tell you.

You were, of course, just as wrong about the issue of a roll-call vote on the language of one or more of these bills.

Now, these things are proven.

I've predicted that these bills will pass, or that the language in some itteration will pass, and nothing has happened yet to show otherwise. You, overdosing on estrogen or something, immediately jammed your foot into your mouth up to your knee.

I also, of course, predicted that I-695 would pass overwhelmingly, as it overwhelmingly DID pass.

I also predicted that you would have no problem with a lying democrat dishonorably continuing in a position of authority in state government.

So, when it comes to a "head to head comparison" of our predictions, you, as usual, come out dead wrong.

But then, you know that, don't you?

"And as usual, you're trying to plug your ears and sing to yourself while I try to talk reason to you."

Patrick, you have YET to "talk reason" to me, or anyone else.

You have done everything you can to ignore the will of the people of this state, and that is NOT reasonable, even if it is an additional hallmark of your party.

You continue to support those who lie, and who will do everything they can to thwart that will.

That is not reasonable.

You assume positions based on nothing but your philosophy... and that isn't reasonable either.

You have an INCREDIBLY long way to go before you arrive at "reasonable."

"You keep saying that you want to vote on the transportation initiative to basically teach Sound Transit a lesson and shut them down over lying about not going to the state for funding. As I said, this initiative really ain't gonna do it for ya."

As I have said, when the initiative passes, ST is out of business, and that's all that matters to me. This initiative will get me there; and that's all I need to know.

"You know, I was wrong about one thing though,"

Well, that's a start. Now you only have several dozen other "things" to 'fess up to, and you'll start to see reality.

"I wouldn't be surprised if Sound Transit keeps a SIZABLE amount of funding even if that initiative passed. The thing says that no more than 10% of the TOTAL transportation spending can go to things other than road building and maintenance. Oh, it mentions the account that funds the RTA, but it doesn't say anything about how ONLY 10% of that fund can go towards transit. As long as the overall number stays at or below 10%, Sound Transit can pretty much remain funded."

Uh huh. Right. I can just see the legislature shifting hundreds of millions of dollars to ST to cover the hit when this initiative passes.

In your dreams, Patrick.

If this initiative passes, ST is DOA. Any other perspective is delusional... sorta like that bogus "property tax will apply to vehicles" thing.

And, of course, since, in your world, passing the "death to Sound Transit" initiative won't make any difference, you won't have any problem supporting it, right?

And naturally, you WOULDN'T view my desire to rid the state of an entire agency that lied to the legislature as being "reasonable."

But then, from you, what else can we expect? "Sound far fetched?"

Right up there with most of what you post... I WILL admit.

"Well if the voters in the RTA district were to vote this thing down while the rest of the state passed it, how willing would the legislature be to help out the other transit districts, and how willing would the politicians in the RTA district be to let Sound Transit die if their voters basically told them to keep it?"

Answer one:

Very willing.

Answer two:

Irrelevant.

First of all, even you know that after the complete incompetence exhibited by the RTA, their chances of finding any support for their brochure photo set is equal to the Seahawks winning the next Super Bowl.

Secondly, there aren't enoough legislators in just the RTA districts, when compared to the total number around the state, to make any difference.

Yeah, I can see it now. Legislators in Bellingham, Vancouver and Spokane LEAP to the aid of their beleagered Seattle area brethern by shifting those funds... knowing that to do so would wind up taking scare transportation dollars away from their own districts.

You bet.

I would CHEERFULLY risk it. ANd in fact, I WILL.

"So how would this be irrelevant?"

See above.

"There are some major loopholes in this sucker that could/would make your entire protest vote against Sound Transit a joke. But if you want to play pretend about how this will smite your enemies, be my guest."

If your delusional view of politics in this state were anywhere near reality, I might agree. Since it isn't (strange that the only one to come up with this rather bizarre take on this thing is... well... you. And you have SO much credability.)

"It's not like I wouldn't enjoy another thing to poke fun at you about."

Patrick, I freely admit that you belong to that rare group of people that actually enjoy taking punishment. Everyone has to have SOME talent... but yours is... well... just a little unusual.

"Nope Westin, I'm not pissed. I'm enjoying every minute of your tirades."

See the above. In your case, it's sorta like being the target of an ass-kicking machine. But to each his own.

"It's just going to be that much more enjoyable come sine die."

Not to mention this November, Right, P.?

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), January 18, 2000.

Patrick,

There you go again. The Craigster has been waiting two days for your response in the thread "Is it time for transit riders to start paying their own way?" And as per your usual behavior, we find your posts on another thread attacking Westin in schoolyard fashion. What's the matter Patrick, afraid Craig will "bash you over your thick little noggin with the sledgehammer of a FACT"? Pathetic Patrick, really pathetic.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), January 18, 2000.

"When 3 passes, that's it for ST. Any other request from them will, of course, be moot; and the entire legislature will treat it like the syphlitic whore it is."

(Emphasis on "When 3 passes")

Care to make it interesting Westin?

The people have seen the error of their ways (695) and will vote against the "Swindler's Wish" (Eyeman part 3)

-- George MacVane (MacV@hotmail.com), January 18, 2000.

Yawn, another long winded post of Westin's that takes a minute to scroll through and contains nothing of substance.

As I've stated many many times before I only cared about whether you cared about Benton's check comment. But if that's too difficult of a concept for you to grasp, then I rather pity you, but I'm not going to waste bandwidth trying to teach basic logic to one who seems immune to it.

Actually, those bills of Benton and Roach aren't going going to see much light of day. Oh they may try to push them onto the Floor for a vote in some way (which they will certainly fail), but is there going to be a massive public uprising because of it? Doubtful. The attempt will be made on some other transportation bill, they will be rejected in a mostly party line vote, maybe it will receive some sort of minor mention in the papers, and that will be it. Not exactly something that will fuel the fires of revolt and hand Benton the chairmanship of Transportation come November.

As for our supposed head to head action:

Yes, nothing has happened with those bills that I said wouldn't be passed. This helps your position how?

When did I say I-695 WOULDN'T pass?

You predicted that I wouldn't have any problem with Fisher AFTER I said I didn't. Look out Sherlock!

Next you'll be predicting yesterday's weather and claim that I said it was going to rain frogs!

I keep saying that initiative does nothing to prevent Sound Transit from continuing to exist. And it doesn't. Might want to read it sometime instead of relying on Eyman who says it does (he also said that the personal property tax wouldn't be re-enacted, and Son-of 695 does what?)

By the way, there are other things in the transportation initiative BESIDES the Sound Transit non-issue. So your question as to if I'll support it since ST could continue to exist takes a rather too simplistic view of the issue.

See Westin, I don't view your posts as punishment. I view them as a textbook example of the kettle calling the pot black.

And Marsha, I work 10 hours a day, so you'll have to forgive the delay in responses, although by my own recollection I have responded to Craig at least twice today. I can't help it if the man spreads his comments over 15 threads. It does make it a little difficult to track them all. But if you are that anxious to get me to respond, my e-mail address is fully functional.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), January 19, 2000.

Patrick,

You could be excused, except that it has been 3 weeks since you failed to respond to the thread "We know LINK is a loser, but what about SOUNDER?" It can be found at the following link.

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0027Wk

Thanks for your permission to spam you. I am sure SOMEONE will take you up on it. If you can't keep track of all the threads you are participating in, maybe you should back off on the childish attacks on Westin. Pathetic. Still pathetic.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), January 19, 2000.

Just a little note. Senator Benton attempted to amend his SJR 8210 (property tax relief) onto SJR 8212 (the Democrats property tax relief bill) today. It failed in a party line vote (22-26 one excused). Benton's amendment would have basically approved the property assessment cap section in Son-of-695.

One down....

Marsha, I thought you were going to ignore me. Oh well, no bother. So if I can't pretty much dedicate my life to this board I should stop posting to it? I'll take that under advisement.

As for the spam comment, I would think that we all use real e-mail addresses here, so the spam risk should be equal. But just as a friendly note, certain types of spam are illegal under state law. As this serves as my notice that I am a WA state resident, it might be smart not to plant the suggestion to anyone. Other than that, if your comment was meant to be a threat, I'm not exactly shaking. I'm fully capable of hitting the delete button quite rapidly.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), January 19, 2000.

Patrick,

First off, I made no threats, but I did enjoy your interpretation. You spend plenty of time posting in this forum. Strange, isn't it that you can find time to post volumns to Westin here but you still won't respond to "If LINK is a loser, What about SOUNDER?"

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0027Wk

I believe it's because you took a beating and you are not capable of a face saving response.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), January 19, 2000.

Funny me, I figured "Thanks for your permission to spam you" was pretty much a threat seeing as I only gave people permission to e- mail me if they wanted to make sure I responded. Interesting interpretation you had there.

As for the thread "If LINK is a loser, What about SOUNDER" I didn't really see much to respond to. Craig offered information about the cost of the bus service vs. LINK-T and why he thought that it wasn't a good idea (interesting how he actually came to the defense of a transit system), and in my opinion it is still a good idea. I didn't see any questions posed by Craig to me after that. Both Mark and zowie made comments about my lack of a response (note that Craig didn't), but again, there really wasn't much to respond to. I am perfectly comfortable with not always having the last word, especially when I don't have anything more to say on the subject.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), January 20, 2000.