tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post2887323097100523118..comments2023-11-22T22:04:17.326-08:00Comments on Get Whatcom Planning: Processing the Small City MayorsJean Melioushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15759730663769578269noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-28144237135189011682013-02-20T19:30:33.586-08:002013-02-20T19:30:33.586-08:00So, if the average home has 2 people, each of whom...So, if the average home has 2 people, each of whom "owes" $17,000 for grade separation improvements, the taxes from the project would pay off that amount in only 2,000 years. We'll still be exporting coal in the year 4013, right?<br /><br />I know, I know, I didn't figure in interest on the $200 million and all that. But maybe school taxes will go up. Or maybe we won't need schools any more, because everyone will learn telekinetically. <br /><br />The point is -- it just doesn't pencil, IF it were the case that Ferndale intended to pay its own way. If that were the case, Ferndale might conclude that the costs exceeded the benefits.<br /><br />Which leads us back to that initial question: who's going to pay?<br /><br />Ferndale? <br /><br />Anybody?Jean Melioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15759730663769578269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-64967499374928591542013-02-20T19:02:20.267-08:002013-02-20T19:02:20.267-08:00Unfortunately, the Gristle got his school facts wr...Unfortunately, the Gristle got his school facts wrong. He needs to re-read the article I wrote on financing. There will be ZERO increase in revenue to the school district because it is a limited levy. The tax burden is lessened by just $7 for an average home in the Ferndale School District. David Stalheimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10588880557546749656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-26632323494138140632013-02-20T14:18:23.582-08:002013-02-20T14:18:23.582-08:00Thanks, Terry. The applicants' refusal to spe...Thanks, Terry. The applicants' refusal to specify a rail route creates a huge barrier to assessing the costs and benefits of the project, as well as a barrier to figuring out where the upside and the downside will fall. That's another reason that the small city mayors' support seems premature.<br /><br />On the other hand, in today's Cascadia Weekly, "The Gristle" points out that Ferndale's school district "would receive $1.4 million annually" (presumably at full buildout of the terminal). So if the mitigation for grade separations cost $200,000,000, Ferndale would get that investment back in only around 70 years. Assuming that the terminal operates at full capacity for 70 years, of course. That wasn't the experience of the two other west coast coal terminals, which closed down when the market tanked. <br /><br />That's still better than Marysville, with its 11 at-grade crossings and $0 in increased tax revenue.<br /><br />Jean Melioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15759730663769578269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-13883175592758517722013-02-19T20:59:35.588-08:002013-02-19T20:59:35.588-08:00Actually, re Lynden not seeing the trains, Safegua...Actually, re Lynden not seeing the trains, Safeguard the South Fork has shown that maps of future infrastructure plans for the county have always indicated a planned spur at Lynden to connect the coastal route and inland route. The soil in the SF Valley may be too boggy for filled coal trains, but probably not for the empties, and that would relive the coastal route of a lot of traffic. Who'll pay for the infrastructure (DS's big question?). BNSF's suggestion (and I paraphrase, as usual): If WA wants to demonstrate to industry they're serious about attracting new business, we'll suck it up and git 'er done.Terry Wechslernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-76244513055723338392013-02-19T14:43:38.472-08:002013-02-19T14:43:38.472-08:00We can hope so. The small cities aren't simil...We can hope so. The small cities aren't similarly situated with respect to coal terminal impacts. It's too bad that the small city mayors have gotten so used to moving in lockstep in political matters that they're willing to move in lockstep on this issue, before they or their constituents have had a chance to think through the consequences. <br /><br />The tag team of Lynden's Mayor Korthuis, who has testified on behalf of all of the small cities on various occasions, and Ferndale's Mayor Gary Jensen is espcially interesting. Lynden doesn't have much at stake from rail traffic if trains come up the coast. It also has little to gain from the coal terminal -- maybe a couple of the several hundred permanent employees (at buildout) will settle in Lynden. Although Mayor Korthuis travelled all the way to the Seattle scoping hearing to act as the spokesperson for Lynden and the other small cities, indicating that he views the terminal as very important, it's hard to see that the terminal will directly affect Lynden in any major way.<br /><br />Ferndale clearly believes that it has a good deal to gain, and it also may have the most to lose. Ferndale's scoping comments, posted at http://www.eisgatewaypacificwa.gov/sites/default/files/content/files/City_of_ferndale.pdf, make this clear: <br /><br />“The City expects the EIS to analyze the impacts of rail traffic created by the Gateway Pacific Terminal on the City’s surface streets. There are currently five at-grade rail crossings within the City. . .all of which should be analyzed based on delays created by increased rail traffic. . . .mitigation measures should be identified. . .”<br /><br />In light of the small cities' view that BNSF should not be required to pay for mitigation, it's not clear who will pay for any mitigation measures that are "identified." If Ferndale has struck a mitigation deal with SSA, that same deal surely should be made available to the hundreds of communities down the line that will be affected. <br /><br />If not, I hope that Ferndale taxpayers are gearing up to pay the $200 million or so that such mitigation measures will cost, extrapolating from the projected $37.8 million for a single grade separation in Ferndale's own Transportation Improvement Program (see the last item on the last page, here: http://www.cityofferndale.org/publicWorks/streetsandtransportation/sixYearTransportationImprovementPlan/TIP2012-17.pdf). <br /><br />If every man, woman, and child in Ferndale (population 11,415) kicks in $17,500, that's all it would take. <br /><br />Jean Melioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15759730663769578269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-75667174575837020142013-02-18T21:13:40.021-08:002013-02-18T21:13:40.021-08:00Interesting CFR Jean. I only read the immediate se...Interesting CFR Jean. I only read the immediate section so do not know the broader context, but I noted that subsection d reads: "(d) Railroads may voluntarily contribute a greater share of project costs than is required. Also, other parties may voluntarily assume the railroad's share." I presume this means that if a project for which the railroad is actively seeking approval is required as mitigation to contribute to railroad grade improvements, the railroad might "offer" to share in this mitigation cost. Of course, a railroad corporation might determine that a project is not in its economic interest and therefore not be willing to contribute for the proportional share of the project's impacts to infrastructure such as grade separated crossings. Of course, without the installation of dozens or hundreds of grade-separated crossings, shipping coal from Wyoming to Washington is likely to have many significant unavoidable safety and traffic (aka environmental) impacts. It would stand to reason that all these impacts could be considered “environmentally horrible” (in the words of Mayor Korthuis) and thus the mayors might yet switch positions. Michael Ihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743372356807543649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2257022282747854387.post-37039899019843253532013-02-17T13:57:25.076-08:002013-02-17T13:57:25.076-08:00In a comment on the Herald web site, one "dst...In a comment on the Herald web site, one "dstalheim" (who could that be) provided this additional information about how other communities along the rail line view the increase in rail traffic:<br /><br />"The dichotomy between these Mayors and the rest of the cities and ports along the railroad line is striking.<br /> <br />"Let there be no doubt, the Gateway project as currently proposed will have a very significant negative impact on our local economy...Even the most cursory review of the Gateway proposal shows that the additional trains required to supply the new terminal with coal will further obstruct traffic, and have a negative impact on economic development in our community leading to a net loss of jobs…. The notion of "he who benefits pays" is considered fundamentally fair in America, and we believe it is fully applicable to the Gateway project's effect on our community." (Port of Skagit)<br /><br />"The Mount Vernon City Council and Mayor are greatly concerned that the additional rail traffic, proposed by GPT, will result in safety and mobility impacts within the City's most heavily traveled transportation corridors. Traffic delays and congestion have a direct economic impact that will negatively impede business development and investment at a time when the City is removing such obstacles in order to promote economic development." <br /><br />"Marysville…currently has eleven public at grade<br />crossings…and does not have any grade-separated crossings for major access…The congestion that may be caused by additional trains…show the potential for severe impacts…associated with GPT…Furthermore, the public cost to develop capital projects that would separate these at-grade crossings threatens to divert precious public transportation resources that are programmed for existing needs."<br /><br />Federal law puts the railroad on the hook for no more than 5% of any costs to remove grade separated crossings. (23 CFR, Part 646.210) Taxpayers pick up 95% of these costs. How many billions of dollars of railroad crossing improvements will be needed so that we can ship coal to China? <br /><br />You can read all the other agency comments, including the Ferndale School District's questions about delayed response for emergency medical response at eisgatewaypacific dot gov/resources/project-library."<br /><br />Not that I endorse venturing into the anonymous, vicious swamp that is the Herald website, but here's the source:<br />http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2013/02/16/2883160/small-city-mayors-of-whatcom-county.html#storylink=cpy <br /> Jean Melioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15759730663769578269noreply@blogger.com