Am listing to the debate on this proposition. I'm definitely in favor of mass transit alternatives. But I'm concerned with the efficiency of projects that I see being done by governmental units and worry that this huge project will be run as poorly as some I've seen lately. (Westlake Avenue/parking/redo comes to mind as we watched them build, tear down to fix, rebuild - with so many people standing around watching one or two working.)

Sticking our heads in the sand on transportation improvements is not an option -- vote YES

I am a small business owner who must travel from client to client. The only way I can efficiently travel around the Greater Seattle area is by car. I agree with Kemper Freeman that Sound Transit has lied to us continually and that the proposed package will cost way too much and provide way too little!

Kemper is right on. He states facts and statistics and the proponents respond with glittering generalities. The proponents history is shaky.

What is the truth on what the Light Rail system will look like on the I-90? I'd be more in favour of a rebuilt wider 520 that makes sufficient room for two-way traffic on light rail

Here is the main thing they are overlooking. This is the fifteenth proposition and of them all we have seen nothing but more congestion and the idea that the committees put in place are corrupt. So our cost continues to go through the roof but they steal the money and our roads get worse. In 1995 we were one of the best cities in transportation and since then we have become the worst because no one could react to the growing population now we are paying for it.

Typical Bureaucracy.

They don't answer the allegations that a bus system would be in place in 3 years, cost less than 1/2, and move double the people that trains the trains will in 20 years.

or that Sound Transit One promises were never met: Pay for it over double the time, get 70% of what was promised and construction time schedules that cannot be met.

NO on this STUPID proposal!!!!!!!

Based on Sound Transit 1's performance, I seriously doubt that this money will be spent wisely nor will there be accountablity.

How about one step at a time not the all or nothing approach. Prove to the taxpayers that these projects can and will be handled correctly.

The whole project of light rail vs more roads would be a moot point if the places of employment were spread out instead of all crammed into a relative small area. As for the light rail project it will never do me any good so why should I vote for it. My taxes for light rail the answer is NO.

My wife and I have been to a number of cities that have light rail or some other form of mass transit and we have been favorably impressed. This proposal (while it may not be the best for all constituents) provides a start to a much needed improvement in our transportation problems.

Voting a strong "NO".

Sound Transit hails it's light rail system as the cure-all for Seattle's bottleneck transportation problems.

They've proven so far,with light rail construction in Rainier Valley, to be woefully wrong. Due to several budget revisions they have reduced the number of neighborhood stations thus making the average person travel over a mile to get to a loading platform. Sound Transit needs to PROVE in REALITY not PROJECTIONS that light transit is effective and cost-effective. So far, in cities like Portland, Ore. light rail has proven to be popular as a novelty for a few months, then taper off to a ridership consisting of sparcly filled rail cars.

As a property owner on MLK Way S., I can attest that to this very day, I am wrangling with them over temporary construction easement payments that are based upon 2002 property appraisals. This is not acceptable.

If this is the way Sound Transit works it's numbers. Version 2.0 will likely be an even larger fiasco.

Thanks, James Melvin

Why would we continue debating while we sit in traffic and waste time. Let's just go forward and build mass transit like other cities have!

The people's vote on light rail has been ignored since the brginning.It's cost is too much for little or nothing in return. No one has as yet factored into the equations the result of restricting population growth.( easily done with costs of expansion paid for by those new immigrants from elsewhere. The for group know that Prop 1 is flawed and will have to be fixed many times with more property taxes.

How many times can we pour money into these projects and get NOTHING for them? I'm sorry, but this smacks of more of the same. So many times people have voted funding for light rail only to have the project continously scaled back and costs skyrocket. I am done. No way I'm voting to pay a dime more on sales tax or license tabs. These government projects have already gotten enough of my money! If they figure better ways, are more honest about their spending pattern and show any kind of efficiency or financial sense, then maybe I'd vote yes. As it stands now NO!

$2,000 more a year for the average household!!

BS!!! It will end up more like $4,000 a year if the Transit history is applied.

I wouldn't even let these clowns grocery shop for me, let alone manage multi-billion $$$ projects!!!

As a King County Employee, I see on the inside how they misspend money all the time. I would NEVER trust their numbers on light rail. They haven't been trustworthy at all thus far, so what leads us to believe that they are really going to solve the traffic issue anytime soon? Most of the traffic projects they have done in my 15 years living and working in KC have all been about 20 years behind the traffic trends. Now they're trying to get 50 years behind - and put in place a tax we'll all be paying for years to come. Ever looked at your taxes when staying at a Seattle area hotel?

In Brazil, they have a bus system that operates like rail (dedicated roads, raised platforms for loading, etc.). This system is much more cost effective than lite rail. With current technology, a dedicated road system can be build around automated buses and lower the operating costs of buses. It would be cheaper to build and operate and much more flexible than lite rail.

In listening to the debate, I hear 'trust us' and 'we know better' from the sound transit people, but I also hear specific facts (trains per bridge, train interval, bus alternatives) from Mr. Kemper. Some of these are very specifically fact based, not open for debate. If sound transit can't come up with information to answer this, then I have to believe that they are specifically ignoring the facts - which, to me, shows where to trust.

Additionally, defining huge, monolithic projects is a good way to have those same projects fail. Tying many different types of pieces together in one vote is the hallmark of politics - and it is also the hallmark of trying to shove bad decisions with the good.

As vague as the items I've seem from sound transit, I don't 'trust them'. As much as answers are needed in the area, spending lots mmore money in this manner is tossing good money after bad.

My vote is NO.

I have no doubt that the figures published by Sound Transit are vastly under bid. It has been my experience that the final cost of projects such as this have always been much greater than projected. This traffic proposal will be at least three times greater. I know Mr. Freeman is right in his appraisal of this issue. I will therefore be voting against this issue.

If you have not yet watched this debate - YOU NEED TO WATCH IT!!!!

A business man with stats (who will benefit by better transportation) is exposing the truths that the Sound Transit politians dodge or are hiding!

Don't just vote yes on this proposal in hopes of improvements - you WILL PAY for it!!! How do you like the thought of $200 dollar car tabs on a $20k vehicle every year?!

Sound Transit has PROVED themselves in the past to be VERY dishonest about reality and the costs of their projects! Don't let their antics fool you this time... listen to the business folks who have the most at stake here if traffic congestion isn't relieved! VOTE NO!!!!

i have 2 points to make;
1. why is the transportation package in one inititive. if the roads were to be in one package and the transit in another which would pass? we have been given a package by our elected officials thats like a fixed deck of cards. the voters want better roads for sure. that transit package they are not so sure.
2. who in their right mind detroy a perfectly good floating bridge by adding light rail to it? this bridge was never designed for these loads and stresses. the I90 bridge is one of the few corridors that actually works and now they choose to remove 3 lanes from this corridor. what is this effect on traffic? think I5 in the evening rush hour, they don't tell us these numbers. why not instead design the new 520 bridge to include lightrail and its a more direct route to redmond and bellevue.
you have to wonder what has happened to common sense in the designs of these projects!

Norm Gilbertson has said it well. Show us with some small projects that it can be done right and meet the promises.
BTW whatever happened to the money from the 9 cent gas tax increase, wasn't that supposed to pay for roads and bridges? What does this latest proposal really promise? More studies? I'm willing to pay for infrastructure but I get tired of being handed a bill of goods that never materializes as promised.

The council seems to get fixed on bad ideas with a very stubborn attitude when spending our tax dollars. They ignore our wishes about car tabs and run with very expensive programs that cost us ridiculous amounts of money. Good teaching programs for drivers and lane expansion would work much better. GET rid of all the bottle neck merge lanes. I405 needs at least 4 lanes the entire length.

I am somewhat new to this area and come from the city with number one worst traffic in the nation - Los Angeles. Use to awful traffic on the 5 and 405 freeways, I expected the same here - it is worse. Even the back roads are not sufficient. Something needs to be done but after listeing to the program this morning, I do not think this is the answer. It really does seem like it will not be used as much as the lawmakers think and it will cost us way too much. I just escaped a state where I paid $450 for my seven year old car per year and now I will have to do that again? I live too far to take advantage of this program yet I am still going to have to pay for it. It doesn't seem fair at all...

When are we going to get the FOXES OUT OF THE CHICKEN COOP!!!!! We repeatedly have people ( who are employed by government or the rail agency ) proposing old restrictive solutions that have no flexibility to future changing demographics. Busses burning hydrogen or natural gas are flexible and thousands can be purchased with the money rail will need. Get rid of the rail proposal now.

Sound Transit, we have over promised and under delivered in the past. We have not changed how we do business. Trust us now.

Sound Transit logic reminds me of the .COM folks before the bust. We loose money on every transaction, but we can make it up with volume. Sound Transit cannot even pay for its operating costs with its ridership. Approving this plan just means they will loose our money quicker.

Vote no on this goofy package and let them come up with a package that will reduce traffic by 10% or more. Let them look at buses and incentives to companies to have their employees telecommute.

Kemper Freeman is making a clear statement that appears based on fact, not emotion. His past decision making has a clear record of smart business decisions. Sound Transit does not. I just can't get behind a group that does not listen to us! I am not against a good transit program, this is not it. I Will vote NO!

I live out in Graham and how is light rail going to help me and the people in this part of the state and all over outer areas , and by the way where is the gas tax money? that we had to have for road work , this transit is a joke because wost people don't live near the transit and have to drive anyway !!!! this government is greedy and think that all of us are bill gates , vote no to this thanks

Robert, Thank you for your reports on this issue. It will effect us all for a long time.
The information that is provided for the vehicle excise tax states that it will cost an annual fee of $80 for each $10,000 dollar value of the vehicle. Have we all forgotten that the state had it own evaluation system for the value of the vehicle? When we had an excise tax before, the state said that the value of your vehicle was about 1 ½ times the blue book value. If that is the case again it will be $120 for each $10,000 annually. Maybe they will even invent a newer version of the evaluation. How do we know as it is not spelled out in the proposal? I will vote NO!

Kemper Freeman's scare tactics do a good job of serving his financial purposes. People driving cars to Bellevue Square can fill their vehicles with many more packages than they can carry on a bus or train. In the meantime, cars are destroying our environment, the integrity of our neighborhoods and cause undue highway congestion. Mass transit estabished to meet the needs of our working population offers Tri-County residents a pleasant and refreshing commute. Prop 1 gets my enthusiatic vote.

My VOTE WILL BE A STRONG NO to any bill like this...
It seems to me that all the DOT trans. likes to do is spend money to their thinking, They already have transit bus's in use in the Seattle ariea, why not just expand their working ariea if they think it's neccary... One of the first things they did, is put up thoses useless walls, for (quote) SAFTY and SOUND (TOO MUCH HIGHWAY NOISE) they cost you and I way too much and are a BIG nusence, and they cost the tax payer, $2000 to $3000 per year at best guess, then they say they are puting in toll's to pay for the bridge repare's witch they could have paid for if they had spent they moneys they had instead of using the moneys elsewhere.... When are we going to WAKE UP AND MAKE THEM JUSTIFY WHERE AND WHAT THEY DO...
AGAIN MY VOTE IS A VERY STRONG NO......

Vote NO. Roads & Transit need to be decoupled. We also need answers to questions such as:
- Why is this the only solution on the ballot? Why isn't Sen. Cheryl Pflug's "Vision 21" plan on the ballot, too?
- How many trains can really cross the I90 bridge at one time? Why is this question so hard to answer?
- How will we fund road maintenance on the rest of our roads over the next 20 years?
- How does this relate to the funding of the 520 bridge and the Alaskan Way viaduct?
- How do we rank our priorities?

Christine & Mark McClure

Let’s look at one contention advocates of any mass transit system hammer at, time stuck in traffic with lost productivity and/or family time, and then compare it to the new Seattle to Tacoma Sounder trip.

Since the end of June I have experimented with the ST Express buses for trips to Sumner and Tacoma. Living in Seattle, vehicle travel to either destination averages 45 minutes, and can run to 90 depending on an occasional traffic problem. Taking the Express busses involves a minimum of 120, more closely averaging 150 minutes each way.

Now let’s examine the new Sounder schedule. The trip embarks in the 2800 block of Western Avenue and concludes in the 1000 block of Tacoma’s Center Street.

Here are the schedules:

Itinerary #1 Home to King Street Station
Walk 0.2 mile NE from 2800 WESTERN AVE to
Depart 2nd Ave & Broad St At 05:42 AM On Route MT 131 Highline Community College
Arrive 2nd Ave Ext S & S Jackson St At 05:51 AM Walk 0.1 mile S to KING STREET STATION
Depart KING STREET STATION At 06:10 AM On SOUNDER to Tacoma
Arrive TACOMA STATION At 07:10 AM

Itinerary #2 Tacoma Dome Station to Client
Depart Tacoma Dome Station - Zone D At 07:15 AM On Route PT 11 PT Defiance
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone E At 07:22 AM Walk 0.1 mile N to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:32 AM On Route PT 45 Yakima Ave
Arrive S Center St & S J St At 07:43 AM

OR

Itinerary #2 Tacoma Dome Station to Client
Depart Tacoma Dome Station - Zone D At 07:23 AM On Route PT 1 Pac/6th Ave - Dwtn/TCC via TDS
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:30 AM Transfer to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone G At 07:42 AM On Route PT 3 Lakewood
Arrive S Center St & S J St At 07:52 AM

Tacoma / Seattle
Itinerary #1 Client to Tacoma Dome Station
Depart S Center St & J St At 03:51 PM On Route PT 3 Downtown Tacoma
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone B At 04:05 PM Walk 0.1 mile S to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone C At 04:11 PM On Route PT 42 McKinley Ave
Arrive Puyallup Ave & E D St At 04:18 PM
OR
Itinerary #2 Client to Tacoma Dome Station
Depart S Center St & J St At 03:51 PM On Route PT 3 Downtown Tacoma
Arrive Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone B At 04:05 PM Walk 0.1 mile S to
Depart Commerce St Transfer Area - Zone D At 04:16 PM On Route ST 594 Seattle - Tacoma
Arrive Tacoma Dome Station - Zone B At 04:26 PM

Tacoma Dome Station to Seattle
Sounder 1510 4:45 p.m. 4:57 p.m. 5:02 p.m. 5:11 p.m. 5:19 p.m. 5:26 p.m. 5:45 p.m.

Itinerary #1 King Street Station to Home
Walk 0.1 mile N from KING STREET STATION to
Depart S Jackson St & 5th Ave S At 05:56 PM On Route MT 1 Kinnear
Arrive 1st Ave & Broad St At 06:14 PM
Walk 0.1 mile S to 2800 WESTERN AVE

Let’s look at the numbers:
North-to-south travel time, excluding walking time: 122 minutes / 16.4%

Onsite client time: 479 minutes / 64.4%

South-to-north travel time, excluding walking time: 143 minutes / 19.2%

Total travel minutes 265 minutes / 35.6%

Total minutes 744 minutes / 35.6% travel / 64.4 % client

Now let’s look at it from a productivity point of view:
Onsite w/client, 479 minutes 7.98 hours

Subtracting 1 hour lunch 6.98 hours

Total time commitment, 744 minutes 12.4 hours

Billable time w/client 56.3%

Non-billable travel time 43.7%

Now let’s look at it with a liberal 60 minutes to and from travel time:
North-to-south travel time, excluding walking time: 60 minutes / 9.0%

Onsite client time: 540 minutes / 82.0%

South-to-north travel time, excluding walking time: 60 minutes / 9.0%

Total travel minutes 120 minutes / 18.0%

Total minutes 660 minutes / 18.0% travel / 82.0% client

And from a productivity point of view:
Onsite w/client, 540 minutes 9.00 hours

Subtracting 1 hour lunch 8.00 hours

Total time commitment, 660 minutes 11.0 hours

Billable time w/client 72.7%

Non-billable travel time 27.3%

By driving, I can leave later, spend more time with the client, and be home earlier. Plus, I can pick my arrival and departure time, and make side trips shopping, if desired.

Clearly, I’d be using mass transit to have less billable time available to pay the increased taxes while giving up more of my family time.

Which brings me to wonder, “Who is mass transit designed to accommodate?”

I am curious....what thought process has gone into how our community might look in 10, 15, 30 years. More and more business is conducted electronically. Our population is moving further away from the "city".

Proposition 1 does not address where most of your average citizenship lives. Has anyone taken into consideration the TOTAL commute time? The time you leave your home, travel to a park 'n ride to then maybe have to take a bus to the Tranist.... PLUS the ride time on the transit.

Make surface transportation (buses)frequent, time efficient and more convenient and I might consider public transportation.

Mr. Freeman's simple repudiation of proposals claims make total sense. I will vote NO.....

I think it is important to have a good mass transit plan for the seattle area. Anyone who has spent time in New York can appreciate what mass transit can do for the area.
I don't think that the roads and mass transit should be on the same initiative, they should be separate initiatives.
I also disagree that the license tabs and sales tax, real estate taxes should pay for this. Someone who pays more for their house, car or store goods should not pay more than someone who drives all day long with an inexpensive car. The only fair tax for transportation would be a tax on gas (a commodity that we need to eventually phase out).

Kemper Freeman has his facts correct and speaks calmly and persuasively. This is a boondoggle. I am voting no. Jim

if light rail is so good then why do I see all those train that we pay for, just sitting on the portland ave. bridge every time I go by al

As a new resident to Seattle (1 1/2 years) I am quite troubled by the traffic problems and lack of effective mass transit in the region. Where I am from, these problems were addressed a decade ago and now congestion is much reduced. It's time for Seattle to step up and make the tough decisions. Unfortunately, I won't be living here when the improvements are finally made. I am moving away from Seattle traffic congestion and absurdly high home prices. Too bad!

Dear "New to Seattle":

Stay around and pay $2,000-4,000 more per year for NO reduction in congestion!!!!!

Your Tax $$$ are sorely needed.

I note that many have said that can not support this as it does them no good as they are too far out, or is in some other manner too inconvenient for them. I understand that and think that this proposal does not nearly go far enough. We need to make car usage even more inconvenient and transit usage more attractive and wide spread.
I don't think that this proposal goes nearly far enough, but will happily vote yes. It's a step in the right direction.

I would like more options to travel to work @ UW. As single and supporting a 83 y/o mom I do n ot have any .6% to spare with a raise of only 1.6% a year and increases of 3.6 for overall tax increase from all sources it is a losing battle. The rail proposal/bus adds 2-3 hours daily to my commute (3-4 changes from No. to So.) I will see no bennefit for the money spent my car necessary for transport of my parent to Drs./Emer. only adds 45" to my commute. I cannoit support anything that will require an investment of >$30 in taxes that I cannot recover. Mom has only 900.00 Mo. from Soc Sec. and no other income or pentions. My salary barely covers medicine and other expenses for both. i drive a 92 vehicle and we share a 55 year old hame. There are few $$s left for incidentals. @ <$40,000 yearly It looks like they are asking alot. Lets go back & find out what happened to the taxes Lic tabs, mils on property, etc that was to take care of the roads/trtansit that have vaporized at the state level. I will support when they take one tax off to replace it with another taxe, but not allowed to add taxes on taxes for little or no results. It is the cheaters way oout to say 'I can't predict what that will do to the average house. They should have a breakdown by #of cars and average income based on their own stats. I will vote NO!

Where can a 300 pound gorilla sit? Anywhere it wants to. Sound Transit is the 300 pound gorilla in Seattle. I live in the Rainier Valley and our lives have been unpleasantly disrupted now for too long. All of the arguments of our sacrifice of our quality of life for the greater good is just hype. Aside from the ugly truth of what it is really like to live with this kind of major construction every day for years on end is the simple demonstrable fact that Sound Transit's numbers are a shell game. The only thing you can be sure of is that it will cost us much more than what they are telling us. Now there is something you can count on.

I am strongly against this new idea. For me who doesn't even live over in the Seattle area. I don't think that I should have to have my state tax dollars raised or my vehicle tag taxes raised when it will not effect me or my family. So why should the entire state pay for something that most of us probably will never use. People should wake up and smell the coffee. If you keep raising the taxes on everything and the pay people make doesn't match it. More and more people will stop spending money at store other then for food and gas to get to work. The will also effect people going to movie threater and other place that spend money. Then you wonder why our ecomony is not that good. With the gas price keep raising you want us to pay more for other taxes that our not necessary. That also make you stop and think the more you charge for thing the more people are going to be turn to the state for help because they can't make it because of you mistakes in building and raising taxes that are not need. So I STRONGLY SUGGEST TO ALL YOU VOTES OUT THERE TO VOTE NO. ESPECIALLY ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIVE IN THE GREATER SEATTLE AREA OR OVER THERE ALONG THE I-5 STRETCH. mAYBE IF THEY STATE WOULD CRACK DOWN ON PEOPLE WHO CAN WORK BUT CHOOSE NOT AND GET STATE HELP WOULD GO BACK TO WORK THEN THE STATE MIGHT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO BUILD THINGS WITH OUT HAVING TO RAISE TAXES AND THAT IS A VERY TRUE POINT. SO PEOPLE PLEASE WAKE UP AND SAY NO NO NO. TO THIS IDEA

How to move people(large amounts)into and out of the city. Just look to the east coast and the large city's. They have set up trains and toll roads. The tolls pay for the upkeep and rebuilding of all bridges and road, with little or know taxes.
We are trying do this with more and more taxes and more roads, We need to look to the east coast, see what they have done and do the same, the person that uses the,road, pays for the road, bridge, train, and all of the up keep. After it is payed for, keep the system going and by the time we need to replace the road or bridge, the money well be in the system to do this with out have taxes or bonds.
One more thing, the persons out side of the area that does not come to the area, do not pay, untel he does come in then he pays just like everyone else.
we are years behind because we wanted to drive the car or truck, not good thinking.

The UnSound Transit plan fails to provide the service it is intended to. I am a sailor and have seen working mass transit systems accross Asia. This "light rail" plan is not, by any means light, at 100,000lbs per car. Light rail any where else is 40,000 per car.
20 years? One billion dollars per mile? I have made a modifacation of an existing monorail design that for the same money will build a 4 track monorail system from Vancouver B.C. to Salem Oregon down the I-5 median strip.
I want a transit plan that will actually address our regional transit problems. That region goes from Mount Vernon, soon Bellingham, to Olympia, soon Portland.
I say again UnSound Transit is not a solution.

I vote NO
I don't trust the numbers; I don’t trust the political leaders giving us the hype and numbers. They already lied to us and it seems that some have already forgotten that. I already pay enough taxes through gas, property, sales and auto. Show us where the money that is collected for roads and transit is spent now. Also when will the debate begin to collect tolls on the main line of I-5 and I-90? This would free up money for secondary roads and allow additional users who transit our highways to pay for the use and to fund the road they use. After all we tax additional for rental car for that same reason. The secondary roads are falling apart form under us. Tolls collected on I-5 and I-90 could be collected so that the commuters that are already paying taxes are not affected. I will vote NO until I see where the money is going now and we begin the toll debate

No, no, no, no, NOOOO!!!

This is a one of kind proposal. We've never had an integrated, roads and transit proposal in the history of the state. The man who posted above, James, was wrong about this being the 15th proposal. You small business owners are acting very short-sided; you are the ones who will lose the MOST . If we don't pass this it will only get worse. I think the politicians involved have done the best they can to show us the numbers. Councilmember Patterson has a history of moderate and sensible voting. If you don't choose to trust them, you choose to live with congestion. Forever.
Mass transit gives you an alternative to being stuck in traffic. It is designed, to answer the woman's question above, to accommodate everyone.
Look, no one can predict the outcome of this, but these people are knowledgeable, educated, and experienced with the transportation crisis this county is facing.

Let's cut to the quick. What will be the total cost? - - - that includes any and all interest that has to be paid on bond issues, etc. The ST2 report seems to be an attempt at a snow job. What is needed is a top level management summary. That means getting down to preferably to one or two pages with one or two summary graphs or charts depicting all (all emphasized) costs. It's important when dealing with the highest levels of management, you get to the point. I consider the voters as that highest level. Or is this another Monorail project where the true numbers are too shocking?

Absolute no!! I could have voted for the same money if
1) The transit money was directed to bus instead of a boondogle (again) light rail.
2)If Sound Transit didn't have a very long history of projects that never complete as planned or on time, taxes that don't "go away" as promised.
3) Today Sound Transit is saying much the same things tha we have heard in the past that prove to not be the truth.
Mark Anderson

Here we go again, more money for black hole projects that never deliver and do nothing but make contractors rich. So tell me where's all the gas tax money gone too? And Ronny boy Sims can take his damn toll roads and .........

Yeah I will be voting NO.
This is a poorly concocted plan.

I do really care about the transportation issue at hand. Accepting this cockamamy plan is not the answer to our problems.

Hasn't this area seen enough frivolousness with the stadiums and the self cleaning toilets - all the while our schools are getting budget cuts???

There has to be a better answer.

VOTE NO!

absolutly NOT our sales tax is already the highest i would vote NO

No.. Kemper makes sense. And the thing that really sounded lame by the proponent is when she said "we are human and we make mistakes"..kinda costly mistake to make and makes one wonder how the same person is allowed to make another such decision.

This debate convinced me to vote 'NO' - SoundTransit has never given us good numbers before, why should we trust them now? Ms Patterson's claim that "we're doing a much better job now" wasn't convincing. Too little, too late, I'm afraid. Show some small successes before you come to me for more money. When I see a train actually running, I might reconsider, but not until then.

Absolutly NOT
Never
No Way
Light Rail is not accepatble
Take a look in every Bus almost always they are half empty. You honestly think a SUV driver from Bellevue will use public transportation...helllooo

Sound Transit and Metro Transit... both are being mismanaged. Just take the newly refurbished transit tunnel in downtown Seattle. When it was built we were told it was ready for light rail... and guess what? Someone forgot to measure the size of the trains and that the reason for the transit tunnel closure for the past two years was to lower the roadbed 8" in the tunnel so the people and wheelchairs can exit the trains without a step down!!!!! Was anyone fired over this huge COST OVERRUN? Nope, just pass along the cost to the taxpayer, they'll never know the difference. However we do know when we are being fleeced. The Light Rail we voted on from the U District to SeaTac is now just from Downtown to a mile short of SeaTac, with a postscript that there was so much outrage that we were told there would be a bus system to take us from the Huge station on Int'l Blvd the extra mile to the airport terminal, that funds were 'found' to extend the light rail to SeaTac. Ask this question... Why the monster passenger station where there isn't a park'nRide? (That monstrous building at the exit to International Blvd)Why a monster passenger station that doesn't provide a link to anywhere else? All of the people will be at SeaTac, or already on the trains!!!!! No one is getting off there, and more importantly, no one is getting on the train there either!

Even more perplexing... not a single park 'n ride on the entire light rail system!!!!

Not to mention that probably no one would use a park 'n ride in one of the worst crime neighborhoods in the city. Just who will be serviced by a system without access. Just the tourists who will arrive at SeaTac and head to downtown hotels and cruise ships. Open up your wallets folks? Not me, I'm voting no to more taxes that allow additional missmanagement!

just watched the special tonight. after listening, i'd vote NO. we have to look at where our investments are going, and there needs to be better accountability from our bureacracy we've funded. i'm curious as to how much out of each dollar actually goes to actual transportation projects we're supposedly funding, such as with the gas taxes, etc. we've become an expensive place to live, and i fear that institution of this very expensive proposal, we'd cause more people to move out of the area. i found kemper's comments to be right on, and the reality that essentially for the "average" household, it would add a cost of a $100,000 mortgage per year! yikes.
i agree with thoughts to expand on our bus systems --heck, even microsoft has had to do this for their employess beginning this week. add tolls to major roads, which will help fund projects and upkeep. east coast turnpikes are funded this way. furthermore, with the recent I-5 work led to many people taking public transit --people change when they want to. give them more incentives to do so. in addition, they'll be more people telecommuting in the future.
and yet another question-- any studies on light rail utility in this Earthquake region? seems like it wouldn't be the best choice for this region...

let's be efficient and fiscally responsible in our decisions, and not just throw money away for the newest development or our of our current crises. otherwise, we'd end up paying a whole lot for hardly anything (gee, kind of like our high priced mariners pitchers...). let's be smart and cognizant of the impact we have on environment and traffic. carpool when you can, or use public transportation in rush-hour. expand existing services --buses, etc. it's not rocket-science.

I loved the mass transit systems I've used in large cities overseas, like Melbourne, Hong Kong. I'd certainly like to have the same experience in Seattle.

However, after watching the show, I simply can't trust these Sound Transit people. They couldn't answer any of the questions with hard facts or numbers. They've basically been dodging questions.

Had they worked in any private business, they would not be asked to participate in such an important event ever again. Where did we get all these losers to handle our tax money?

I am a Democrat and very concerned about the environment. That being said, after hearing the debate (at least so far), I cannot see supporting this proposal. I think that transportation in Seattle is a major problem, but we keep paying for and voting for solutions that don't seem to work. While I'd love to give the drafters the benefit of the doubt, the track record for light rail is dismal.

Given that history, hearing that the current proposal includes the extension of a tax that was supposed to be phased out in 2006 (Sound Transit 1), why should I believe anything they about how they will be spending the money they are asking for.

Furthermore, I am very opposed to the sales tax increase. As was pointed out, sales tax is extremely regressive and inappropriate for this type of proposal.

Finally, I would like to add that as a voter and a tax payer, I am tired of funding projects that do not have clear accountability provisions that include commitments on specific deliverables (both what and when) and the consequences if those commitments are not met.

A DEFINATE "NO".
Any longtime plan covering this long a period provides absolutely NO Flexability in future transportation needs. When you put in "tracks" you have to go where the tracks go. With Bus Mass Transit just turn the steering wheel and go where the transportation
is needed - this makes the best sense - and cars can drive on it after the bus passes.
One lady on the panel "... the weight problem on the bridge (train) in a closed issue...". "HELLO !" The "weight per person transported is much higher" with the train - and the weight does not change with less passengers or none. The passenger is the least in the "weight structure total". Trains take a lot of room - when one pax wants off - the whole stopped train blocks. Bus mass transit spreads the transportation to a wider area of trans needs.
Taxes. Obviously the "yes people" are richer and have "no overall care for those of lesser income" and don't care who or what the needs of others are. One "yesser" even drives "Drunk" - with her greater dollars she should get a non-drinker driver so her "road accident debris area" will not slow the commute and tie up needed lanes.
If the new gas taxes do not get used properly - which seems to be the case - it doesn't happen. Live with it. We can not keep fulfilling politicians delusional fancies - our money only goes so far. Thus - so does the $ (money) they extort from us in all the devious ways they create after we vote to stop them.
" NO - NO - NO ! " Go get a Latte and live with it. Carl

A DEFINATE "NO".
Any longtime plan covering this long a period provides absolutely NO Flexability in future transportation needs. When you put in "tracks" you have to go where the tracks go. With Bus Mass Transit just turn the steering wheel and go where the transportation
is needed - this makes the best sense - and cars can drive on it after the bus passes.
One lady on the panel "... the weight problem on the bridge (train) in a closed issue...". "HELLO !" The "weight per person transported is much higher" with the train - and the weight does not change with less passengers or none. The passenger is the least in the "weight structure total". Trains take a lot of room - when one pax wants off - the whole stopped train blocks. Bus mass transit spreads the transportation to a wider area of trans needs.
Taxes. Obviously the "yes people" are richer and have "no overall care for those of lesser income" and don't care who or what the needs of others are. One "yesser" even drives "Drunk" - with her greater dollars she should get a non-drinker driver so her "road accident debris area" will not slow the commute and tie up needed lanes.
If the new gas taxes do not get used properly - which seems to be the case - it doesn't happen. Live with it. We can not keep fulfilling politicians delusional fancies - our money only goes so far. Thus - so does the $ (money) they extort from us in all the devious ways they create after we vote to stop them.
" NO - NO - NO ! " Go get a Latte and live with it. Carl

It looks like a no-brainer to me... just look at the details.

First, you've got the politicians on one side, giving nothing but typically vague political answers to specific questions. Where as, on the other side you have; Either, businessmen who have to answer to their customers and board members. Or, community organizations who have to answer to their members and supporters. Both of them are stating facts, most of which are derived directly from within the proposal itself.

Secondly, you have the blatantly obvious realization that this proposal is trying to do everything for a very specific group and yet charge everyone for it. In this one package, they are claiming to take care of many different issues while only serving the I-5 corridor from Everett to Tacoma. All the while placing the burden to pay for it onto the children, and their children, of everyone who already lives in this state or will in the future.

Then, they want to take this ridiculous & inflated package and lay it at the feet of a bureaucracy called "Sound Transit" who has proven itself time and time again to be a failure. Even Ron Sims won't endorse it, although he won't vouch for it either. But, if that's not saying something itself, I don't know what could be more clear!

So as I started with, it's a no-brainer! Either the proponents think we don't have one or they are hoping that we won't use them. Vote NO!!!

I am Voting NO on this Issue!

Here are the reasons: They NEVER did anything to increase the roads while they were doing the development for the last 15 years! Another reason is that I live out of the “catch area” so why should I vote positively on this issue. I will never see anything from this issue in Southeast King County!
Now with the first one, they had over 15 years to make changes and update the roads and transit but where did that money go? My guess is that it went into their pockets! So, whey should I vote “yes” on something that is NOT going to get done or even get started for a few years (and so that the Counties can update their pet projects, including their pocketbooks, for this measure)!
So my vote still stands a solid NO!

9.5% sales tax, $80.00 for every $10,000.00 the state THINKS your vehicle is worth car tabs (what happened to $30.00 tabs... that's right the state knew whats better for the voters than the voters did... twice). Sound Tranit HAS only delivered on one promise made in 1996, and that being that they will spend the money given to them and than some. Sound Transit was given the money to built lightrail. Sound Transit said in 10 years they could complete 100% of lightrail and in 2007 has only given us 70% of the system that was suppose to be completed this year. Sound Transit now wants add more taxes for another 50 years to add to our 70% completed lightrail system and keep saying they are going do a better job with all this new money. Sound Transit does'n't even want to "give back" the tax on ST1. They just want to add, add ,add taxes so that they can spend, spend, spend.. This plan will not solve the problems for this area. A bus system that runs through the 3 counties that actually accommidates the riders will have a bigger impact on ther number of vehicles on the road, will help the enviroment and save every citizen in the state several hundred dollar a year that the Sound Transit will waste.

This is the biggest fiasco since WPPS. They are going to bankrupt the region to build a system that can't even begin to work on the problem.

This is sad that Julia Patterson has only one reason for voting for it... That we have to do SOMETHING. Well doing the wrong thing, lying to the people about how much it costs, and refusing to deal with the real problems means this thing needs to die, and die now.

This is very much like the Valley Hospital fiasco and needs to be slapped down just as bad.

We shouldn't throw our money (and 2 more generations) into a bad plan. We should DEMAND a plan that actually WORKS!

VOTE NO!

You know what, you people are basing your "no" votes on the CLIPS they played from the debate. If you had seen the whole thing, you would have heard the real and solid facts and not just the brief responses like "we're human and we make mistakes". In acuality, Councilmember Patterson had a lot of hard evidence and detailed research analysis that she mentioned before and after the edited versions of what was played. Before all of you jump on the "no" bandwagon because Mr.Kemper made it out to be some big waste of money, educate yourselves on the entire proposal - read the FINE PRINT - do the research yourselves and look at the numbers. Perhaps you should give this one a try. I certainly don't see any alternatives coming from Mr. Kemper, except some idea about more busses solving the problem - hellloooooo?! Does anyone use the bus system enough to make it the best form of mass transit?? Not here.
Too many people in this state want the solution without paying for it. We have the opportunity to solve a huge transit/traffic issue with this proposal, but everyone's comments make it sound like you want a quick fix to a long-term problem. This is going to be an investment, yes, but which would you rather do - spend the money now and have a permanent solution, or get your quick fix and pocket the extra bucks for a few years until it happens again? Come on, we're talking about the answer to the problem PERMANENTLY. A real solution takes time and patience, it costs money, and it requires adjustment. Quit complaining and put a little faith into the educated people who WE elected to solve these issues.

Erin (posted 9/28/07),

Why is it that you feel you can unequivocably state that those of us who posted a comment above have not watched the whole debate? Many of us are very interested in what is going on and are studying the topic from all aspects. This is what an educated person does!

Erin (posted 28 Sept 07)

Ok I have looked into your comments and still have found that the "educated" people that are elected are NOT doing the JOB we counted on them to do!
So we need to get better educated people in office, who might be able to do the JOB that has been about 15 years over due with the money at hand! I personally DON'T want to pay more for these people in office to spend it on themselves (which is what is going to happen). I would love to have a real answer to this problem, but to get that we need REAL people in office. So now you can see the problem. Everyone that gets into office is only after paying off those that got them elected and to stick it to the public. As you stated do some research, OK our state constitution dictates that we spend the money from taxes on the issues of the tax. Look at your property bill, and see how much you pay for schools. In King County it is about 63.2% of your tax bill on property. Now with all of that WHY ARE THE SCHOOLS SUFFERING?
With the sales tax and most other taxes they all go into the general fund, and you know who has first dibs on that one, the people we elected!
So the County is breaking the Constitution and taking the money for thier pockets!
This is why my answer still works as NO on this issue! I will not pay more for something that is already in place, and needs to be used wisely!

As a Democrat, I will be voting No.

This tax plan will burden people who can least afford cars and least afford excessive car tab fees.

And building more roads will not solve our problem. We need to expand our transit system by installing high-tech systems that control the flow of transit in high congestion areas to speed buses along.

We need to make transit more attractive to encourage people to get out of their car.

We dont need more sales taxes. The gas tax should be raised to pay for roads, and roads and transit should not be in the same package.

When will the Politicians of Washington State as well as those of King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties actually give "the Tax payers" something of what they have already promised before they collectively extend their hands out for MORE $$$ ?

Proposition 1 reminds me of another Political FARCE where the Politicians constantly went before the voters to ask for more and more money to fund something that eventually ended up being shut down!

Can anyone remember the Brunt of Jokes for Years when the Politicians sold the Voters of the State of Washington on the concept of Clean & Cheap Electrical Power? If so, you will remember how Washington Utilities and Power System became a "Woops" and construction on the multiple Nuclear Power Plants around Washington State was either halted or simply Shut Down and mothballed? Did we ever get any return on those DOLLARS or was that just another example of how this State is known for its Political Waste's of Time and Money?

I say as long as those in Charge (From the Governor on down) have not Lived up to their promises and still OWE the Tax-Payers some return on the money we have already given them. Or said a different way "Provided Results on what is already funded", they should be ashamed to stick their hands out for anything other than a friendly handshake!