Tim Eyman is arguing that I-1053 means state transportation agencies no longer have authority to set tolls. From the Seattle Times:
Eyman testified Tuesday that the commission lost the power to set toll rates when his I-1053 passed this month. The initiative says all legislative action raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds of the Legislature, and any new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.
That sounds right to me. I’m no fan of 1053, but the plain reading of the initiative is consistent with Eyman’s claim. Tolling rates seems to be considered a “fee” that will require a majority vote of the legislature to implement or change, which means that the funding for the new 520 bridge replacement is now, suddenly, uncertain.
It also means that the already-rocky funding for Seattle’s deep-bore tunnel is uncertain. Currently, the tunnel’s construction depends crucially on fully $400 million of toll fee funding (see page 2), which could require tolls set at more than $8 for roundtrip travel (see page 4). Now, with the passage of 1053, that $400 million cannot be guaranteed unless the legislature reconsiders and votes on the matter, presumably during the upcoming session if plans are to proceed on schedule. (They may also need to take a look at the $300 million promised from the Port of Seattle that I’m told has not yet materialized.)
None of this may sound too awful except for one thing: it will require state lawmakers to re-open the huge can of worms that is the funding package for the tunnel. [Cue the “Jaws” music.] In other words, whether they like it or not, they will once again face the infamous “cost overruns” provision—the backstop measure that saddles “Seattle area property owners” with unforeseen construction bills — and that the authors now say was just an unenforceable hoodwinking of their fellow legislators.
To say that the cost overruns provision is controversial is like saying that it’s uncomfortably warm in hell. I can’t really imagine how the legislature will deal with it this time around. So while Eyman didn’t outright kill the deep-bore tunnel project, he certainly made life more difficult for it.
VeloBusDriver
You gotta hand it to the guy, he is the master of unintended consequences.Now, if we can just keep Olympia from raiding general fund revenues to pay for transportation projects. I suspect that’s what Eyman’s real motive is here.
Lose-Lose
I shudder to think I’m on his side, but you know what they say about politics and bedfellows. Anything to kill the tunnel…
Rian Murnen
Will this impact the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) too?
Matt the Engineer
And 520? Might he single handedly slow down road construction in our state?
Eric de Place
It could have a huge impact on 520. That project is currently short $2 billion of the roughly $4 billion needed. Of that half that’s funded about $1 billion is to come from tolls. So I’d say the 520 project is in some kind of fairly serious jeopardy.I’m less clear about the impact on CRC. Obviously, tolls are a significant part of the funding package there too, but I don’t fully understand all the legal dynamics since it’s a federal highway that crosses state borders.
David Sucher
You know about silver linings?I certainly hope your take on 1053 is correct.
Scott Marlow
When will politicians learn to work within constraints. There’s nothing wrong with a balanced budget, and everything wrong with our current debt situation.Good riddance to the world’s largest deep bore Tunnel, an exercise rooted in idealism and vanity.
Wells
I’ll weigh in on the CRC question. The current LPA Concept ‘D’ is “poorly engineered” like the DBT and I must add Mercer West as highly questionable engineering. My CRC “Alternative” is a combination of the smaller Southbound I-5 Bridge circa 2008 -plus- Old Bridges left 20-30 years as Northbound Lanes. Combine this with 2010 Concept#1 ‘off-island access’ to Hayden Island. Concept#1 can be called an elegant solution, but for no good reason is off the table after minimal public review. Request Concept#1 documents from committee, city or metro before they disappear.Tolls are often necessary and acceptable. The real problem is when engineering fails. Engineers are certainly vain, but its not their idealism at fault for their failures as much as their incurious rejection of actually ideal solutions.
MicheLynne
Long live public transit.
Bill Bradburd
I still think that “Seattle area property owners [who benefit]” means the downtown property owners. They’re the ones that want the tunnel – let them pay for the overruns…
Dan Bentler
I think the most practical thing to do with the viaduct given the Seattle mentality is to copy the Spokane street bridge. Argue and survey ad infinitum ad nauseum until all construction money is gone. Have a puget sound pilot ram it with a freighter.AbracadabraNew viaduct in two years.
Twee
Hate to admit that while I dislike Eyman, I voted in favor of passing this initiative. We voted against the stadium, they built it. We voted No on both the tunnel and the elevated roadway replacement, and they are trying to build the tunnel. 520 needs bike lanes bolted on, that’s it. Seattle didn’t learn its lesson post-dotcom bust, and continues to behave like it has to grow into being a world-class city.World class cities understand budgeting, and patience. WA and Seattle appear to have never learned that lesson.
RegionalGuy
Eyman’s Initiative 1053 hands over control to the minority. A travesty,… and a Trojan Horse in the long term. We will not like the [unintended!?] consequences of this one.
EngineerScotty
A bit of advice from the Beaver State. We had our local anti-tax advocates trying to play the super-majority game as well. So in Oregon, we got an amendment passed which prohibits any initiative/referendum amending the state Constitution from imposing any super-majority for future legislation unless the initiative itself receives that same super-majority. The notion that a simple majority of voters ought to be able to require greater than that to overturn their decisions is profoundly undemocratic.What the anti-tax crowd down here has tried in response, is passing laws restricting taxes which state “whatever ratio of the voters pass this measure, that same ratio is required to raise taxes”. AFAIK, no measure containing such language has passed, and whether that will stand up in court or not should such a measure do pass, I don’t know—the Oregon Supreme Court has not been shy at smacking down the worst excesses of Bill Sizemore (our local version of Emmer) and his friends.
Georgie Bright Kunkel
For years this city and state has never had a comprehensiveplan for regional traffic. So we are paying the price for thisbigtime. Studies are done and then we don’t pay attention to the recommendation. Eiman is making money off this region’s neurotic way of dealing with traffic patterns. So be it.