Four the Future - September 8

Today, an unusual bonanza of Spokesman-Review contributions: roads, roads, roads, and more roads! But, also, federal funding, affordable housing, respecting neighborhood values, and a new transportation fee.

• Federal funds advance North Side corridor
  Source: Spokesman-Review; September 8, 2010
  See Also: Obama to Call for $50 Billion Spending on Public Works
  Summary: United States Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood and Senator Patty Murray headlined a gathering of dignitaries at the site of the North Spokane Corridor to celebrate the beginning of the construction of the southbound lanes between Farwell and Francis. The funds for this construction came from the 2009 federal stimulus package. LaHood will be asking congress members about their attitude with President Obama’s $50 billion transportation investment plan. Murray isn’t ready to endorse the idea.
  Opinion: I've mentioned Secretary LaHood before (with a link to video). While this is clearly a high-profile construction project and will get all the attention, he appears to be a "livable communities" advocate, and won't concentrate just on huge freeways that don't go anywhere.
  
• More buildings in freeway's path set for removal
  Source: Spokesman-Review; September 8, 2010
  Summary: Even though no one knows where the money is coming from to complete the North Spokane Corridor's freeway, homes are being demolished in East Central adjacent to I-90. One hundred thirty buildings have already been removed. Forty-nine more will be razed under the new contracts. More than 500 will be pulled down by the time WSDOT is done. One property, however, was recently purchased by the City of Spokane for use as subsidized housing and transferred to ECCO, the East Central Community Organization. The building is being renovated, and will be moved to a city-owned lot.
  Opinion: There are an immense number of displacements occurring with the destruction of this neighborhood. It's good that some affordable housing will be preserved. However, my usual snarky comment is that it's a good thing that they’re building a freeway so that all these displaced people can travel out to the edge of town where all the new houses will be built. Did I mention that they don’t know where the $1.6 billion dollars for the construction is going to come from?
  
• Vestal: Smooth streets well worth turmoil of construction
  Source: Spokesman-Review; September 8, 2010
  Summary: Lincoln Street on Spokane's south hill has been reconstructed. It’s smoother now, and also includes new “storm gardens” which deal with rainfall more effectively. There are construction projects all over the city, and it will be worth the hassle. They are brought to you courtesy of a $117 million road bond in 2004. Local leaders are talking about a car license fee of $20 that would generate about $8 million per year, but that's only about one fifth of the annual backlog.
  
  
  
  Opinion: Now, that wasn't hard, was it? The City of Spokane experienced a change in its leadership due, in part, to its mishandling of Bernard Street. You hardly hear a peep this time, only a few blocks away, because the city worked with the neighborhood and respected its values. The silence may be reward enough for the city, but we should praise their effort. Now, if only we could have the dedicated funding. Change in federal policy from sprawl creation to neighborhood infrastructure preservation, anyone?
  
• City, Valley might back vehicle tax, Mielke says
  Source: Spokesman-Review; September 8, 2010
  Summary: County Commissioner Todd Mielke says that the Cities of Spokane and Spokane Valley may support the creation of a transportation benefit district which would charge a $20 vehicle license fee throughout the county. He also said that "all the city officials he has talk to have agreed that no tax should be levied without voter approval." Commissioner Richard was concerned that having the voters weigh in might harm the construction of a new jail.
  Opinion: The problem with a car license fee is that it charges people for owning a car, when it's using a car which causes the need for road maintenance. But, people without a plan resort to desperate, uncoordinated measures, so this should be expected. The lesson here is that every time you hear local elected officials complain that there's not enough money for road maintenance, they're arguing against the federal government's policy of funding new road construction instead of maintenance. If we were arguing about whether to charge $20 for the construction of more sprawl, this issue would be DOA.