Another unforseen (except by me) problem resulting from I-695 involves our state's ferry system, now suffering MASSIVE cuts as a direct result of the so-called "30-dollar license tab initiative."

We have a perfectly good and FUNCTIONAL ferry system in place today, but next year we will NOT because of Tim Eyman and his blind followers.

Is this doomsday prophesy based on scare tactics? I think not. The cuts to the ferry system is happening ALREADY. . . RIGHT NOW. To wit:

--------------------------------

The ferries and I-695: all rough water ahead

Headlines forecasting life after passage of Initiative 695 are variable enough to make a reader seasick. "State ferry system faces major cuts" and "Transit layoffs loom" were followed by "Governor taps reserves to lessen blow."

Initiative 695 ushers in more contradictions and confusion than anything else. But Washington State Ferries is one place where unambiguous consequences of lost car tab revenues will be deeply felt.

Ferry service will be slashed by as much as 13 percent next summer. The ferry system's predicament is beyond finger-pointing and campaign spin: The ferries can't lose $67 million in revenue and maintain the same level of service.

As public officials and legislators grapple with I-695, it's time to turn down the rhetoric and face a few facts. Service will decline next summer when cuts in night, weekend and passenger-only service take effect. As displaced passengers pile onto other boats, there will be more crowds, longer lines and backups.

Gov. Gary Locke's supplemental budget provides $161 million for preservation and maintenance of the existing fleet. Critics will say he put the money in the wrong place. They're wrong. The average age of a ferry boat is 31 years. Maintaining and preserving boats in service is a necessary investment.

To put what is coming in perspective, consider this: The ferries will be serving 26 million passengers in 2000 at service levels in place in 1987 for 18 million passengers.

Fare increases are inevitable. Rates have not kept pace with inflation. But fare hikes have to be approved by voters in accordance with I-695. The big question is whether the vote must be statewide. The earliest any such vote could take place is next fall.

For residents of ferry-dependent communities, service cuts and fare increases are cruel reminders of choices made about where to live and work. Many people on Bainbridge and Vashon Islands lament the decline in quality of life by losing what amounts to road access to their homes.

One result of I-695 will be a debate over future management and operation of the ferry system. Some experts favor privatizing at least the operations part of the system, though significant government subsidies would likely continue.

Privatizing is no panacea. Washington ferries were privately operated until a 1948 labor strike shut down the system for a week. Ferry riders demanded that the government intervene, which it eventually did.

Next month, lawmakers from ferry-dependent communities will go to Olympia and try to find money to ease some service cuts. It's a worthy endeavor - but all of it will occur in a climate of frustration as people watch a system that works pretty well today decline before their eyes.

In the ongoing debate over what I-695 means, the ferries are where the rubber hits the road, or more precisely, where lower decks begin taking on water in rough seas.

-- shallora (shallora@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999

Answers

shallora-

Have you answered the question about the Tacoma light rail yet?

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.

"For residents of ferry-dependent communities, service cuts and fare increases are cruel reminders of CHOICES made about where to live and work. "

And herein lies the true tragedy. After luring people to make unwise CHOICES by subsidizing ferry fees 84 cents on the dollar from state funds, the politicians have learned that the voters of the state as a whole don't really think they ought to be taxed to subsidize the CHOICES of the people who could have lived closer to where they work. Isn't that what SmartGrowth is supposed to be all about? Why do we have SmartGrowth if we are going to SUBSIDIZE sprawl to Bainbridfe, Kingston, Southworth, etc., ?

So politicians have discovered there is no consensus in the state as a whole to subsidize the Puget Sound commuters, and the Puget Sound commuters have discovered that you shouldn't make otherwise bad economic decisions on the assumption that the government is going to bail you out. Good lessons for both.

Now in fairness, since we all were enablers of this economic stupidity, we probably ought to phase out these subsidies over 4-5 years rather than immediately, bringing the ferry fees up to market rates by 20-25% per year. If you want to be REAL fair to them, privatize the system so the fares will be as low as practicable, rather than artificially elevated to keep the union happy.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 28, 1999.

shallora- In case you have trouble finding the right thread, here it is....... http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg.tcl?msg_id=0022GM

Still waiting.......

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.

Privatizing is no panacea. Washington ferries were privately operated until a 1948 labor strike shut down the system for a week. Ferry riders demanded that the government intervene, which it eventually did. 

Not quite true. The workers got a raise, the state would not allow the fares to be raised to offset the increase in wages, so the company had the choice of shutting down or losing money. They shut down, and the state bought up the system at fire sale prices. From the WSFs own history site (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferries/about- wsf/about-40- years.cfm):

Labor woes played a big part in getting the state involved in the ferry business. In the late 1940s, ferry workers' unions succeeded in getting higher wages at Puget Sound Navigation, also called Black Ball, the largest provider of service on the Sound. The company then asked the State Highway Department for a 30 percent fare increase to make ends meet. The State approved only a 10 percent increase, and on March 1, 1948, the disgruntled ferry company tied up its boats, bringing much of the cross - Sound service to a halt.

State officials suddenly realized that some kind of permanent plan was needed to ensure reliable ferry service on Puget Sound. Ideas ranged from building bridges to creating a brand new ferry system to buying out Puget Sound Navigation. The latter made the most sense and for $5 million, the State was the new owner of 16&nbsb;ferries and 20&nbsb;terminals.

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 28, 1999.

Zowie,

Shallora obviously won't respond because she doesn't have the ability to think for herself.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.

And this is a problem exactly... why?

Westin

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

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), December 28, 1999.

>shallora- >Have you answered the question about the Tacoma light rail yet?

Yes. I answered it a long time ago, didn't I? Or did you simply not read back far enough? Go back and read.

Or perhaps another question was posed after I left the forum. Unlike you, I have a real life and a real job so I don't live my life through a keyboard. So if there was some discussion about Tacoma's light rail AFTER I quit posting to a certain thread, please inform me, because I was out living my life and can't search every thread on every forum looking for every question posed everywhere like you seem to do all day. Go out and live a little. You might enjoy it.

Instead of being a self-enclosed think tank starving for air, go out like I do and learn what the implications of I-695 really are. . .from a first-hand perspective. Go up to a ferry captain and listen to him tell about how he might lose his job because of I-695. As I have done, ask the mayor of a small town (like Port Angeles, Port Townsend, and Sequim) how those towns are facing major cutbacks in basic services for the year 2000 because of I-695. As I have done, listen to a disabled person in Renton complain that because of I-695, her bus service is making cutbacks and so she will no longer be able to travel independently to her evening job without paying for an expensive taxi service or inconvieniencing her neighbors and family for a ride every night. Talk to those out near Spokane about how I-695 is putting their road repair funds in peril, and it's unlikely they'll ever be able to repair the roads they originally had scheduled for next year. Talk to Seattle residents, a majority of whom favor light rail and even passed an initiative several years back to pay for light rail, how they resent other state residents telling them what they can and can't do with their own tax dollars.

BTW, your link to the alleged Tacoma question didn't work, so before you start calling me ignorant you should first learn how to cut and paste properly.

-- shallora (shallora@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

"BTW, your link to the alleged Tacoma question didn't work, so before you start calling me ignorant you should first learn how to cut and paste properly. " Gee you're right (may be a first). Must be a dynamic address rather than a static address. Tell you what you can do though. Go back to "RECENT ANSWERS" and look for the posting WITH YOUR NAME ON IT.

And I'm pleased to see you get out so much, particularly after those six grueling years studdying traffic efficiency and urban planning.

And where did I call you ignorant? (Methinks the lady doth protest too much).

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

Well now shallora, lets just take a look at one of those cases you gave, Port Townsend. They just adopted their city budget two weeks ago and, guess what, I-695 was NO BIG DEAL! But the county must have surly been devastated by it, wouldnt they? NO! No big deal for them, either! Now shallora, you wouldnt be making up FICTIONAL people you talked to, like the journalist who got canned after she won a Pulitzer with a made-up story, would you? I mean, we dont have an INTEGRITY ISSUE here, do we?

The Leader OnLine, December 15, 1999 City adopts 2000 budget No tax increases, no in-city utility hikes A budget that does not increase Port Townsend property taxes in 2000 nor water and sewer rates for the next two years was adopted unanimously by the City Council Monday. The budget, which pegs general fund spending at $17.5 million, leaves property taxes at $2.24 per $1,000 of assessed value, or $336 on a $150,000 home. It also lays out a five-year utility rate plan for in-city and Tri- Area (Chimacum, Port Hadlock, Irondale) customers. The rate structure leaves water and sewer fees as-is in 2000 and 2001, raises them by 6 percent in 2002 and 1.3 percent in 2003, and decreases them 2 percent in 2004. Rates in the Tri-Area will increase 10 percent in 2000; 3 percent in 2001; 6 percent, 2002; 1.3 percent, 2003. They will decrease 2 percent in 2004. One more step must be taken to complete the 2000 budget adoption. The City Council will conduct a public hearing at 6:30 p.m. Dec. 20 at City Hall to consider raising fees, specifically PTTV membership dues, building permit fees, and ambulance charges. However, adoption of the budget, a process which takes many months of preparation, was a welcomed action by the City Council. The budget is the first to be adopted under the new council-manager government plan, which was implemented in February. "Congratulations council," said Mayor Forrest Rambo. "First budget. Great work. Thank you, staff." Councilman Geoff Masci, who began his term in February, said the budget lays out the city's marching orders for the coming year. "I think this is a good budget and relatively sound," he said. http://www.ptleader.com/search/index.htm

The Leader OnLine, November 10, 1999 County plans tax hikes, staff cuts to blunt 695 impact By Fred Obee Leader Staff Writer

Vacant positions will go unfilled and taxes will be increased in an attempt by Jefferson County to blunt funding cuts imposed by the passage of I-695. Although decisions are still preliminary and a detailed examination of the county's proposed budget is still in the works, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Tuesday decided it would try to balance the budget with a 4 percent property tax hike. "I feel as if we're in a transitional year," said Commissioner Dan Harpole. "This is still going to require some cutbacks, but I think it's a fairly moderate proposal." Commissioner Glen Huntingford disagreed. He said voters sent a clear message when they passed I-695, a measure which cuts vehicle license fees and requires votes on all new taxes. "We should be taking a more conservative approach," Huntingford said. "This sends the wrong message to the voters. I have my doubts we're listening to the message." A 4 percent property tax hike was supported by Harpole and Commissioner Richard Wojt. Huntingford voted no. He said he would prefer an increase equal to inflation, about 1.42 percent. In setting that tax rate, however, the commissioners stopped short of the maximum they could have levied. The commissioners have the legal authority to levy a full 6 percent increase and pick up an additional 2 percent they didn't levy last year.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

Gee- Doesn't look like Clallam County is doing all that bad either. That didn't raise their property tax to the legal limit either:

Last updated Thursday, December 23, 1999 County commissioners adopt budget

By Ken Short, of The Sequim Gazette Yvette Adams showed up at the Clallam County Courthouse Thursday night looking for money to replace the dilapidated rabbit and poultry barn at the Clallam County Fairgrounds, but she was too late. County commissioners passed the budget after hearing her plea. "We've been trying to get the new barn for at least five years," the Port Angeles woman said after testifying at this year's final county commissioner budget hearing. "If we start now, maybe in a couple of years we'll get it." County commissioners adopted the county's $22.6 million budget last Thursday night, but property owners will bear the brunt of the budget's $898,458 increase over 1999. East Clallam County residents will pay an extra $10 a year on their property taxes after commissioners adopted Clallam County's 2000 budget . The amount of increase is based on a home valued at $100,000. In adopting the budget, commissioners voted to raise the property tax levy by 1.42 percent. That means owners could pay an extra $1.75 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, including fire district and road tax, said Shirley Almaden, administrative assistant. The maximum the county can charge is $1.80. "It will probably go up a little, but the state general levy might go down to compensate for it," said county assessor Linda Ownings Rosenberg. The state levies about $3.32 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, but that may decrease by about 15 cents. Gov. Gary Locke has proposed the state reduce their portion of the property tax, but state lawmakers are not expected to vote on it until next year. County taxpayers also have to fork out $184,008 for a consultant and an assistant to study whether county staff are being paid enough. According to budget documents released by the county, the study will involve an "analysis of the duties and salary of about 400 county employees and how it compares both internally and to the outside market."

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

Zowie: I just called up my Port Townsend contact whom I spoke with late last month, and. . . .Zowie! Indeed it doesn't look like I-695 will have significant negative reprecussions for either Port Townsend or Jefferson County. . . at least not in the year 2000. Beyond that is anyone's guess.

However, the Jefferson County bus system wasn't so comfortable last time I checked. I'll see if I can reach anyone over there today. . .No promises that I'll be able to post again today though: I'm going out in the field and won't be at my desk again until this time tomorrow.

-- shallora (shallora@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

PS:

If you read that section of the PT article again, it mentions that the city is taking actions (tax increases?) to thwart any negative effects of I-695. While the city might be happy with their new budget for 2000, complete with possible tax increases, I don't know how well that will sit with the residents, nor if they will be able to do the same thing next year without a revolt from PT residents.

-- shallora (shallora@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

OOps! I meant "service fee" increases, and not tax increases. sorry for the typo.

-- shallora (shallora@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

Shallora you will return at a later time and respond to the thread titled "Shallora, does this make sense to you?" right?

If you do not intend to answer Craig's question (challenge) will you at least afford us the courtesy of telling us why?

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

"While the city might be happy with their new budget for 2000, complete with possible tax increases, I don't know how well that will sit with the residents, nor if they will be able to do the same thing next year without a revolt from PT residents. " Your saying that PT residents might CHOOSE a lower level of services rather than an increase in taxes? Gee, does that tell you anything?

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

Actually Zowie, Jefferson County voters as a whole barely passed I- 695, (50.46-yes versus 49.54-no) and they approved all levies on the ballot (that I could see, the pdf document is pretty hard to read) so a case could be made that Shallora is probably wrong, a tax revolt in the future may be unlikely, and maybe Jefferson Transit won't have a problem with a higher fare structure. Just a bit more fuel for thought.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.

AHHHH Shallora, You say you have a 'real' job (at The Sign of The Times)but can you explain to all of us how you have the time to:

Get things from a first hand perspective from: A ferry captain (blaming 695 for what the GOVERNMENT IS DOING)

Ask the mayor of Port Angeles, Port Townsend and Sequim (about drastic cutbacks CHOSEN BY THE GOVERNMENT)

Ask a disabled person in Renton (whining about what the GOVERNMENT HAS CHOSEN TO DO)

Talk to Seattle residents about the boondoggle of light rail and their resentment against everybody else

I want to know how you ever find any time to work when you are traveling all over the state pestering people with your stupid questions???

Go back and make your signs and magazines and quit lying to people about your transportation engineering job..

-- maddjak (maddjak@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.