Sarah just seems to be on a rampage, rightfully so, putting certain Oregon idiocies to rest.  One of those things is the absolutely absurd fact that Oregon has no homicide type laws for motorists that haphazardly kill people with their cars.  I find this unsettling.  If someone is KILLED by an automobile, or any vehicle for that fact, even out of accidental neglect, that person does NOT need rewarded with a lenient slap on the wrist.  People aren’t even fined for this type of thing, as has been shown in several cases where a motorist has killed a pedestrian, cyclist, or other motorist.  This has to change, but I digress, this isn’t the topic I intended to bring up.

Ms. Mirk has pointed out the almost dead CRC, something I seek the death of.  The dreaded and annoying CRC.  I don’t want the $4 billion dollar bridge to Vancouver under any of the designs I have seen.  It would be a step toward pushing people like me (and there are a LOT of people like me) out of the area.  It would have been a huge step, no wait, a LEAP in the wrong direction that Portland has strived to move in.  The bridge would be a damnation of the efforts the city, and hundreds of thousands of people in Portland and Oregon have worked for, a slash of the wrist, a desecration of so many sorts.

Simply put, the CRC had been and continues to be, albeit on life support, almost dead.

I’m celebrating this at the moment, and my mere actions on a daily basis are my vote, in addition to my political vote against this abhorrent idea.  Thanks Sarah for keeping up with this, keep kicking (verbally of course) at these people that keep fighting against what Portland has worked so diligently for.  Thanks!

So this entry, I write in celebration of the CRC being near death, but also I write it in sadness that the automobile continues to be the death of many individuals at the hands of irresponsible and unaccountable people.  People wouldn’t dare hold people waving around shooting guns haphazardly into the air and irresponsibly killing people to such low punishments, why do we let people with vastly more dangerous 3000+ lbs cars do so?

Anyway, I hope to see this car penalty remedied one day as I look forward to the death of the CRC.  September 1st, 2010 is a date to watch.

In other news, everybody have a happy turkey day!!!  : ) 

It has only been a week with no car.  I've had ZERO issues getting to anywhere in Portland I need to be at, on time, by schedule, or whatever.  Neither has Jo.  We have travelled literally 10+ miles from downtown, still no problem.

Even though we have zero issues getting around almost (not everyone) every auto dependent person asks when we are planning to go somewhere, “do you need a ride?”  Not in a “I’m going do you need a ride” but a “Oh dear you don’t have a car and maybe I should provide a hand out”.  No, we don’t need a ride.  We will find out where we are meeting and we’ll probably be there before you, with your car.

So far in the car free life that has been our number one retort we’ve received since it has become official.  Jo & I have been somewhat amazed by it.  As if somehow, because we had a car before, but went everywhere on transit, bike, or walking it made us more capable of getting somewhere.  It didn’t, we never used it, it didn’t matter.  So what is different now?  I think the biggest thing is the mental hurdle, especially for most Americans, to get over the fact that someone can live a fully productive, entertaining, honest, involved life without a car.

What Else Has Changed?

That last stop gap attempt to hurry somewhere.  Before with the car, if a bus was late I didn’t pay much attention.  For some reason now, when a bus is late I actively think about the fact that if it is late, I don’t have an alternative.  Partly that is my fault, I’ve been procrastinating getting a good commuter bike for months.  But the fact there is no car to fall back on really makes me think about that.  It makes me think that a weaker and less organized individual would easily fall into the trap of relying on a car for things that are absurdly unnecessary.  Which of course, is exactly what America has become in this context.

Why Did I do it?  Why Did We do it?

Jo has kept a simple life for years.  Not wanting the headache or annoyance of a car.  She had her head on straight long before we met.  I also had the idea, but was flung into working in areas that had horrible options.  We finally moved out to Portland in 05’.  For me I was returning, for Jo it was a new city.  Within 6 months there was no way she’d ever want to leave again, and here we are years later and we have no intention of leaving.  Portland by far is one of the greatest city’s in this country.  Only the largest of cities can even give it a run for its money; Chicago, San Francisco, New York, New Orleans, and there may be one or two more I’ve missed.

When we moved up here, Jo had been car-free for a year or two already.  Even in auto-dependent Jacksonville, Florida she was car-free.  With our arrival we went immediately into a functional car-free existence.  The car I had, a Nissan Altima w/ V6, got parked in a lot and moved about once a week.  I never really used it more than that.  For a time I did use it in conjunction with the MAX for part of my commute.  It helped me get that last 2 miles, and transit covered the other 8+ miles.  Eventually I figured out where I was going and that there was a bus line, and even that usage stopped.

All this time, from the Altima to the 350Z I was following the traditional American approach of paying a car note.  In addition I have somewhat unsightly insurance.  Those costs kept adding up and it got to a point that it didn’t really make sense to have a car sitting there that was costing me so much money.  So the decision was made, that we’d sell it.  No need to watch the car sit there and look pretty in the parking lot.  So with barely any miles on a 3 year old car we sold the Daytona Blue Nissan 350Z.

I thought I loved her, but was glad to see her go.

Jo and I are on the end of our first week without a car.  We rarely think about the fact, as it isn’t really important.  We’re doing all sorts of positive things by not having a car, but there is a more important factor here.  We’re living a more complete, simplified, easier to live, less complicated life than most Americans.  Not just a little, but by a large degree.  I’m finding more and more, as is Jo by our complete car-free lifestyle, that cars actually complicate and make life more difficult.  The novelty is slowly wearing off for millions of people in America.  I hope it isn’t too late to reverse some of the damage the change in infrastructure and political perversions to support the automobile have wrought.  It would be a grand thing for more Americans to clean up their act.  I don’t say that in an environmental sense, that’s just an extra benefit.  I’m speaking in the sense of life itself.

Well we’re off to breakfast, and a treasure hunt of modeling supplies, without a car.  So enjoy the day, cheers!

No more payments, no more oil changes, no more maintenance, no more worrying, no more wrecks, no more headache.  Total logistical freedom (yeah, feel free to argue that point with me, “I’ll pwn U” – as they say on the Internets).

Today I officially signed the title of the 2006 Nissan 350Z over to the knew owners.  May they have awesome fun with the rad little car that it is.  As for me, I just gained so much I can’t even fathom yet.

This selling of the car, has moved me from a mere transit advocate and anti-auto dependency market advocate, but now I am firmly planted 100% in that realm.  It will be an interesting place for a mostly Libertarian person as myself, who believe in the inviolate individual and property rights.  Being that transit has become the stomping grounds of so many socialists, pro-Government control advocates, it shall be an interesting discussion when that is brought up.

Anyway, any entries from hence forth will of course include my slightly altered new reality.  Being without a car may just change my mind a bit about certain things – or not.  I often have a very clear view of the world, politics, and other such things (I believe along with many people telling me the same thing, so it isn’t just my word).  So now I ponder will my perspective change much.

Anyway, it is Friday and I’m rambling through a partial blog entry.  I’m heading off to do something, not sure what, but it will definitely not be in a car!  : )

NOTE:  This entry I originally wrote and neglected to post a couple months ago.  Since I had written a substantial entry, I couldn't just leave it unpublished - so here it is available as a completely random post.

Round 1:  Destination Thief River Falls, Minnesota

I travelled to Thief River Falls, MN recently via a selection of transport modes.  I’m here on business, but that’s irrelevant to Transit Sleuth readers, but there are some other points that are relevant.

First I left the house via automobile, for the prime reason no buses run early enough to deposit me somewhere to ride the MAX Red Line to the airport.  Jo rode with me to return with the car to its parking spot where it shall sit for another dozen or more days.  We left at 4:35am heading east on Powell, turned onto I-205 north.  After a few minutes we exited the Interstate at Glisan to park at the Park & Ride at Gateway Transit Center.

After a few minutes, the next MAX Red Line arrived exactly on time, Jo and I boarded, and off we went toward the airport.  After the short 10 or so minute ride we detrained and headed into the concourse.  I picked up my flight tickets and we headed off for some grub in the main commercial area of the concourse.

We bid farewell for the trip and I struck into security with the blank stair of a downtrodden and beaten dog.  Every American should walk into the security lines of the TSA this way, because really, THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE for allowing this $8 Billion a year travesty.  It isn’t security, it’s a “customer service organization”!  I’ve seen it on TSA memos so it MUST be true!  Anyway – I’m sure you can tell I am NOT a fan of the TSA.  It’s a waste of billions, and does NOTHING more than the security did that existed before that didn’t cost a single taxpayer penny.

After I made it through the deluge of security idiocy and dehumanization I went and camped out at the terminal the plane would depart from.  After a while we started boarding in preparation for departure.  I got onto the plane in my normal way, with precision and stowed my carry on luggage.  I immediately sat down and attempted to stay out of the way.  Of course, everyone else isn’t like me and could give a crap whether they slam EVERY bag they have into me.  So I sat there in my aisle seat attempting to not get smacked in the face.  In the end I was hit 6 times; 2 to the side of the head, 3 slammed into my arm as I blocked their clumsiness, 1 by a babies foot and the bag the individual carried as she turned to apologize, and 1 more time by some drudge of an idiot just plundering through and hitting everyone on their trip to the back of the plane.

Still in one piece, boarding completed, and off we went.

…or well, so that was the plan.  We pulled away from the terminal air-way and sat for 20 minutes because some luggage guy left some of the cargo netting hanging out of a bay area.  After waiting 19 minutes for someone to come back and fix it, someone appeared and stowed the cargo net in the cargo bay.  Now we finally, after this show of blundering, we where off.

The flight was ok, fortunately it was a big plane.  The 757-200 lumbered through the air with a Cadillac’s ride; smooth yet clumsy.  We started our approach after the few hours of transit, and landed at Minneapolis about 25-30 minutes late!  Weeehooo!  Late planes rock!

I deplaned and met up with my coworker Gary, which we then snagged a Quiznos in one of the airport restaurants.  After that short bite we went and waited for the arrival of our next plane, which would take us to Grand Forks, North Dakota.

We made the flight and headed to Grand Forks.  After the short flight we arrived, amazingly about 10 minutes early.  So overall, we arrived at this point early.  Gary got our car which he would drive to our final destination of Thief River Falls, Minnesota.  We piled into the Toyota Camry and smoothly rolled along the highway clearing mileage at around 65 mph.  We arrived, found our place of residence for the rest of the week and grabbed some food.

Round 2:  Destination Portland, Oregon

We departed Thief River Falls and travelled to Grand Forks to board the 8:10am departure to Minneapolis.  We arrived, Gary turned in the rental car, and we boarded the plane.  A quick flight, and as we landed I jarred awake.  I had fallen asleep for the entire flight and I wasn’t complaining.

After some quick flight research, my gate was F13 for the Minneapolis to Portland leg of the trip.  But before I continue the travelling narrative I really have to add some props for Portland.

There are people, and they seem to be a small number but have grown loud lately, that incessantly complain about Portland.  Most of these people don’t seem to do a real apples to apples comparison of Portland to other cities nor take the current issues here in Portland in context of other cities.  Among all those complaints though, Portland has some awesome amenities compared to…   well I’d say about every single city in the United States.

Where do I start?  I arrived in Minneapolis, and after two days of zero amenities I was glad to be back in civilization.  The first thing I did was get a cup of coffee, from Caribou Coffee.  I don’t want to complain, it was a good cup of coffee, but it by no means is a really good cup of coffee like one expects in Portland.  As I sat with my cappuccino pondering this wire-less the Minneapolis Airport has I was guessing on 5-10 bucks for the day.  Portland’s of course is free.  I got connected and sure enough, one hour is a bloody freaking $4.95!  So much for being business friendly.  I’m all for charging, but they ought to just put a surcharge on the airport fees or something.  It’s just too much mess to be required to dump out $4.95 AFTER I’ve already gone through a dozen different charges and other mess in an airport.

Anyway, a good flight home.  A short ride on the Red Line MAX back into downtown Portland and into the Office.  From there I did a few hours of catch up and then jumped back on the bus for the trip home.  After a short #9 run across the Ross Island Bridge I arrived home.  Overall a good trip, a rare trip, but one for the books.

One major thing, I'm very happy to be back in ole’ PDX.

Well, it seems odd that I have to sell a car to someone for me to go car-free.  I'd rather help someone else go car free.  But here's the skinny.  Jo & I are tired of spending money on a car that sits and is unused, especially one of a caliber of a 350Z.  A car that should be at the track or be being enjoyed, which I just don't do anymore.  So I'm selling it.  She's a 2006 Model, V6 (VQ35DE if you want to look up the engine type), 300+ hp, with less than 15k miles.  Oh yeah, it is also a REAL sports car with a stick, none of that automatic nonsense.

Why are Jo & I doing this?  Simple.  Now that we're out of the auto-dependant life, we've really realized the excess expenditures, energy, and time we had to spend to just keep the car (mainly my insurance costs & the car just cost a monthly note is all, mechanically it is flawless).  So if you know anyone that wants a SUPER enjoyable car I have one for sale.  In addition, I'll sell it for blue book or less easily.  First to offer is first to get her, I'm not waiting around.

So if you know anyone give me a ring, e-mail, or a contact of some sort and we'll make a deal!

I despise when the media distorts the truth with statistics by misrepresenting mere correlation as causation.  It is a mistake of grand magnitude in statistics to do so, but so often the media and even worse the Government perpetuates statistically irrelevant information to the public.  Let me point out some glaring issues with the statement, “Speed Kills”.

The French TGVs are some of the fastest trains in the world, not having killed a single passenger in their entire history.  The Shikansen travels over 180mph every single day carrying hundreds of thousands of people in Japan.  In Germany the Autobahn is home to many of the fastest drivers in the world, traveling over 130mph and sometimes reaching 180-200mph while driving the system.  All of these modes of transport either have no fatalities or are vastly lower in fatalities than our Interstate System is.  Which if you take those things into account, “Speed Kills” isn’t just incorrect, it is an outright lie.

On US roads speed isn’t the culprit, inattention and almost nonexistent training is the killer, rooted in the core cause of people not knowing, not paying attention, and being ill prepared for an incident of any sort.  US drivers don’t understand car balance, driving dynamics, weight distributions of their vehicles, all things which make driving safer or more dangerous depending on the level of knowledge.  The US, simply, has completely unskilled in incapable drivers.  Meanwhile Germany maintains a much higher skill level, a smaller amount of traffic, and provides vastly superior alternatives to driving – all which contribute to a lower fatality rate.  This same thing applies to France, Japan, and other developed nations.

So stop lying, your parents told you not to as a child and you shouldn’t now.

This is a public service announcement via the Transit Sleuth.  Please, do us all a favor and provide real information, factual correlations, and accurate causations.  Fear inducing false causes and incorrect correlations do no one any good and absolutely does NOT help provide solutions to a problem.

If you are a policy maker, stop focusing on speeds and start focusing on training, licensing, and eliminating wreckless drivers from the roadways.  A focus on ticketing speeding will do at best a minimum of good and at worst it will drive more regular people to drive and behave dangerously as the laws get more disconnected from the reality of the roads.

I decided I'd drive the first day, to get a baseline for what the commute is like.  First off, I can only imagine...  ...a really sadomasochistic person trying to commute to downtown Portland from Wilsonville.  There are a thousand other choices that have everything Wilsonville does plus some if you want to get downtown and live comfortable.

Wilsonville however does have one thing, several major corporate employment centers.  These places obviously provide an employment center here which is rather obvious.  If one lives in Wilsonville and works at one of these places, or works along the WES line somewhere and NOT in Portland proper, then I can see where it would be good choice. 

However, my main curiosity is still up for debate.  Could someone live comfortably in Wilsonville without a car?  So far I'd have to say it is rather pleasant for pedestrians, even amid the cursed massive almost impossible to cross suburban streets.  With a walk signal here and there it is possible to get around Wilsonville, however with the sprawl, it takes 20+ minutes to complete a single task walking.  Not a very intelligent design.  But I digress, the real commuting and study will begin tomorrow.

Will Wilsonville have redeeming qualities?  Will the WES be more than I understand it to be?  Has ridership increased any at all?  Will I find ways that it might increase?  Will I get some good photographs?

I'll find out in the morning.  Until then, off to some code and some ZZzzz in the silence that is the back woods of Wilsonville.

Some statistics so far.

• Car Commute from Downtown via 26 & 217:  43 minutes with very minor congestion.  This could easily be 50+ minutes if congestion was bad.  Mind you, this is me driving which means I probably completed the trip 5-8 minutes faster than I legally should have.
• Car Commute to Downtown via I-5:  38 minutes with very minor congestion.  This could also, easily be 50+ minutes.
• WES trains passed (going north and south) going toward Wilsonville in the afternoon:  2.
• Prospective WES passengers traveling during the time I drove from downtown to Wilsonville:  90 (approximately) based on currently available rider statistics.
• Fuel consumed per passenger on the WES:  Approximately 30.4 MPG per Passenger.
• Fuel consumed by me in a Nissan 350Z:  Approximately 17 MPG per me.

So far, WES wins against auto.

Traffic is so bad this morning that I waited about 15 minutes for the bus to move about 500ft toward the stop.  It still wasn’t there so I literally stopped waiting and came inside to remote connect and get some work done.

One of the serious, if not massive disadvantages of buses in regular traffic using existing infrastructure.  They’re prone to the exact same massive idiocy we’ve perpetuated in this country for decades.  Drive, drive, drive, drive.  America, please take your car culture and dispose of it appropriately, you’re wasting us productive people’s time.

Fortunately I refuse to be a part of this idiocy right now and I’m fortunate enough to have made some good career decisions.  So now, with that news report of the complete catastrophe of traffic out there, I’m going to get to work.

The annual AORTA Passenger Rail Meeting & Luncheon took place today at The Governor Hotel in downtown Portland, Oregon.  I was there for the lunch, discussion, and keynote speaker Gail Acterman.  Gail is the chair of the Oregon Transportation Commision, Director of the Institute for Natural Resources, and an Adjunct Professor of Forest Resources at OSU.  Here's the notes I took from the talks and discussions, and my commentary on the topic.

...there is a funding crisis...

Several times Gail mentioned that there is a funding crisis.  With any research of infrastructure research you can find that the entire nation at federal, state, and local levels we are short.  Roads have no maintenance funding, there is no funding to expand road systems, transit is under funded, none of the modes are self sufficient.  Even the single self sufficient mode, freight rail, is lacking the expected capitol to expand as the nation needs over the next 10, 20, or 30 years.  At least according to certain economists and Government data, but reviewing the funding trends and expenditures freight rail is actually more than capable of handling expansion, but I digress, that is another discussion.

...highway funding for interstates and any other systems that are funded via the gas tax is no longer solvent.  The general budget is being used to fill the gaps for the gas taxes...

Keep in mind, the funding system based around the gas tax only funded a percentage of Interstate, Highway, and other roads around the country anyway.  Generally the gas tax rarely covers more than a percentage of Interstate, and I believe State Highway projects.  Rarely is there even a penny set aside for maintenance until it is too late.  Usually it takes a bridge falling in a river or something as insane to cause Governments to get the wheels of maintenance moving.

...climate change and peak oil...

Climate change was mentioned several times and the associated problems.  Peak oil was mentioned once.  Fortunately, even though I still believe we should be laying off of the peak oil discussion because it does some disservice to what we're trying to do.  Peak oil, based on prices and market production isn't quit here yet.  We're close, at least within a few years or maybe a decade or two from peak oil, however, most people don't understand what peak oil is and don't believe it is happening.  Almost everyone though, believes that we should be developing new energy technologies for various reasons.  Harping on peak oil or environmental this or that only enlivens and flames the arguments the contra technologists have, so needless to say I'd prefer people didn't banter on about peak oil when there is not concrete evidence we are in its throes quit yet.

...emissions...

I really get sick and tired of this charade of how clean trains are.  I love trains, I usually will ONLY take the train to various places.  They are NOT, in the United States at least, that much cleaner or even cleaner than automobiles.  This is pure absurdity.  The weight, energy, and diesel engines that are used in this country (yes, THIS country the USA) are filthy in comparison to truly clean trains like the TGV, Shikansen, or other bullet trains.  Our trains are slow and cumbersome.  The only reason freight comes out so much cleaner than trucks is because they pull 3-10x as much cargo with few emission spewing engines.  Passenger rail however, in this country, is far less efficient than it could be.  It is VASTLY less efficient then sticking a bunch of people in ULEV automobiles and hauling them around.  Gail appeared to make strong note that the Governer's Team would be making pragmatic decisions about this and thus not going straight for rail choices for everything.

What I'm saying is, we don't need to really build out our rail infrastructure until we can run honest to goodness modern, fast, advanced trains in this country.  We're using some pretty nasty trains.  Yeah, often they might be a little more efficient or a little cleaner, but rarely and usually only because the average American car gets 22mpg and is a nasty SUV or something.  So before we go passenger train crazy, no matter how pro-passenger train I am, we NEED to straighten out the FRA and the stupid and inane laws we have limiting our passenger railroading progress.

...population growth, prospectively exceeding the expected 1 million more in 25 years estimate, and we might get climate refugees...

Here's that nasty pseudo science crap again.  Scientists, real ones at least, don't think the oceans are going to rise 20-30 feet like Al Gore does.  Nor do real scientists think there are going to be vast areas of land that become non-food producing.  The extremes, yes extremes, will cause some major problems but by no means is it going to cause mass exoduses in the United States of some places.  Maybe Phoenix will get nailed, maybe Los Angeles will get really screwed up, but really, they deserve it - the stupid cities are built in places that are NOT sustainable even under the provisions of a healthy planet.  Phoenix is in the middle of a desert and Los Angeles, well it is a desert too.  Simply put, with our knowledge today we should not have cities in those places, but regardless they are there anyway.  But that doesn't mean the 7 million plus people in those places are just going to automatically relocate on or near Portland.  So let's not jump the gun just yet and freak out over illogically derived fear based projections.

...rail, bridges, ports, and other infrastructure where originally built and funded in an entirely different way than we do today...

This is very true.  Gail didn't mention how much more efficient, quick to build, faster to utilize, or the massive returns people received on these things when they were originally built.  We've removed all responsibility from the populace and all reward for building these things.  They're now in the hands of the bulky and cumbersome, and often incompetent, Government to build and maintain.  Our current bridge repair backlog is scary to look at, especially considering who's hands it is in.

My question is, with that slight admittance of how these things where historically handled, how the hell does Gail and the Governor's Cabal expect to build, expand, maintain, and operate this infrastructure if there isn't a single piece of reasonable funding in place, let alone a single entity that is capable of doing so today as there was in the past?  I don't know what they're thinking.  Maybe turning back to the market?  Getting some public private partnerships, with the private entities in charge?  Maybe providing some citizen ownership through public means?  Who knows, but they better do better than merely mentioning that things aren't funded the same.

...Every 50 years there is a technological revolution in the transportation industry, we're coming upon another one of these...

Are we Gail?  Are we really?  Who's working on this next technological revolution?

...the state & univisities are working on this breakthrough.  I'm not sure what it is but some of the best are...

This just depresses me.  Name one serious technological revolution in transportation that is the result of Government expenditures or efforts, or even a college breakthrough, that is equal to the last several MAJOR revolutions.  Automobile?  Nope.  Private enterprise.  Airplane?  Nope.  Private Enterprise.  Train?  Nope.  Private Enterprise.  Diesel or Steam Power?  Nope.  Private Enterprise.  Jet Engine?  Nope.  Again private enterprise and individual effort.  So not a single thing, not a single major advance was the result of some think tank or other oddity the Government could create.  It was all private enterprise, and one things that was evidently missing form this talk?  Private enterprise.  So how we'll get our next big breakthrough is beyond me.  If we do, it'll be decades late at best, unless, below the radar of Government, the private enterprise can again propel us into the future.

...people (ME:  the citizens) should not be concerned with funding or how roads interact with each other throughout the state...

I often hear from Metro and the city that people should be more aware of the real costs for auto based transportation.  But Gail & the Governor don't want you to think about it.  What?  This is a very mixed signal.  Am I supposed to not think cognitively about this?

...the least sustainable models of funding are for transit...

I couldn't agree more.  She hit the nail on the head with this point.

...roadway funding is also no longer sustainable with the current fuel taxes...

yup, again I totally agree without refute.

...to remedy this funding gap and create a more sustainable funding model we're pushing forward with congestion pricing (tolls) and utility pricing models.

A Real Whopper!  What?  Market pricing for congestion?  Why not say, "Market Pricing?"  Oh...    that's why...

Ok, so this just is reprehensible in my book.  So the state, or maybe city Government, knows what pricing should be for congestion.  They're going to go through all these models which basically simulate some type of market pricing.  The difference is they'll have complete control of the pricing models.  Also they'll most likely make it cheaper for poor people or whatever, diffusing any prospect that it is applied based on equality.  Because even though we're supposed to be equal under law, you know damn well that we aren't, and it won't be applied equally under law.  But that's what they want to do to even out transit funding, with congestion tolling.

Now on a non-philosophical note, what about the fluctuations in driving patterns?  What happens if the pricing drops off severely because people stop driving into downtown?  What happens then, well, logically the budget for transit and other modes would fluctuate.  There is no logical correlation between congestion pricing and transit funding.  This is one more thing that is completely unrelated to one mode being applied directly to that mode.  That's like taking fishing taxes and applying them to road construction.  That has ZERO correlation to road construction.  It is THAT ABSURD!!  But I digress, I could talk for days about how these things will NOT create a steady funding model, and only again offer a massive defrayment of actual market demand that is no analogous to what people actually want or what they actually need.

...and also we'll put in place utility pricing...

Ok, so just as I settle down in my head over the prospect of Government mandated market pricing that they refuse to say is just that.  I'm all for market pricing, but I want the market to create the prices, not the Government.  Every time they've done this it has turned out a miserable failure.  From our US Republic to the miserable death and failing of the Soviet Union, Government mandated pricing of anything is a bad idea.  Eventually the market will force a correction and the Government won't be able to fix it.

Aside form the obvious MAJOR problems with implementing this, how are they going to get it past the voter base?  I doubt anyone, now that the Government has been handling these things for decades now, will want to pay more or even pay their share of road usage.  The Government has already abhorrently screwed up the funding models, and destroyed the business models in the transportation industry.  The Government is the last entity that will be able to sell this plan.  If they do, I will be amazed.  Otherwise I expect to see it pushed under the carpet, then yanked out put in with some other save the children bill or something and passed anyway.  Then we'll get devices tagged to our vehicles and all of a sudden be paying congestion charges - without citizen input.  That's the only way I could imagine them getting this pushed through.

As for utility pricing, that's easier, the utilities still act as faux business entities.  They're allowed to price to a certain degree, and if we tie infrastructure in with it, there is no choice but to pay.  This I see as a much better model than congestion pricing, if for any other reason, just because it can be implemented without massive civil disruption.

...Nissan is bringing their electric car to Oregon...

Don't even act like that is because of the Government.  Nissan avoided the hybrids solely to work on this project.  They're doing it because the CORPORATE entity itself believes that cleaner cars are a good idea.  No one forced them down this path, they're doing it.  It just happened that the Governor got chummy with some execs and talked them into letting Oregon be one of the initial release states.  Of course, Nissan won't get the credit they deserve here in Oregon, most likely the Governor and his crew will steal as much of that as they possibly can.  But hey, I shouldn't be fussing, that's what politicians do.

...the cigerette, and other sin taxes will be used to stabilize funding...

Ok, I'm not even going to touch this one.  Anyone that has paid attention over the last 20+ years knows that sin taxes are NOT reliable funding mechanisms.  I suppose using it for nothing more than one off projects or as a minor stabilization for a few pennies here and there, it isn't such a big deal.  But seriously, why even mention this...  ???   Aggh, I just don't know.

...will not use general budget monies for roads anymore...

THANK YOU GOVERNOR!!!!  Do NOT use general budget monies for roadways.  This drives me nuts.  That money is for schools, police, and fire, not for extended auto based infrastructure.

...commuter rail, separate form Amtrak...

I'm not sure why she made the note that commuter rail is separate form Amtrak.  This of course in context of WES.  Amtrak isn't even supposed to run commuter rail, I'm not sure how they manage to sometimes.  Often times they cost 3-5x as much as other commuter rail operators, and they cost far more than BNSF, UP, or other existing railroads do to operate commuter rail.

summary

Overall the meeting went well.  I support passenger rail, but the fact that most of the solutions are no better than the solutions that put roads in as our primary mode of transportation does not sit well with me.  When we received our balance infrastructure and multi-model systems of the late 19th and early 20th century via private means, that means is completely ignored by today's policy makers.  The continual application of band aid on top of band aid to fix the infrastructure without trying to bring it forward to the public for real enterprise investment, for real interest from the citizenry really bugs me.  It is as though all the special interests, including NARP and others, just want the public to cater to a cause, but not to actually physically do anything more than to petition the Government for a redress of grievances that it isn't 100% the way they want it.

My question is, and still remains, why can't WE build OUR transportation system?  What was wrong with the way it was done in the past?  We could retrofit it for today's needs, so why not do it?  The answers are yet to be provided.

Ok, for a few years I've been heavily involved in my sleuthing of the transit, transportation, and general logistics industry and the respective history.  Freight is fairly independent in its own right, and if it received zero subsidies tomorrow, it would still continue and probably grow right along with the market.

Passenger transportation; auto, airline, rail, bus, or whatever, would shrivel and die within a few months.  The simple fact is, nobody ever seems to actually want to pay for it.  Continually shoving off the cost to some other segment of people or some other bucket of money for something else.  In America now, it seems we've moved away from sustainable passenger business models and into the realm of unknown, non-market base, non-choice based, monopolistic transportation entities that aren't companies, but instead authorities.  Some of course, like TriMet, are much more responsive and act more like a business and work as though they truly have a vested interest in their riders.  Many, if not most, do not act like that.  Even TriMet, who I just bragged about, sinks into the bottomless pit of begging for funds and such as is needed.

Thus people don't really pay for their rides, whatever the mode.

Why Is This a Problem?

Besides the moral lapse of outright theft from one entity to another (auto people stealing from transit people or both of them stealing from general budgets) there are a ton of other less obvious issues.  Many people don't understand how the funding process works, and then they're confused when increased ridership doesn't equate to increased service.  Throughout the country ridership has soared to astonishing levels, seeing rises amounting to increases not seen since the auto took off in the 50s and 60s, then again in the 80s.  If this continues we'll be forced to come up with solutions to handle the increases.  For now though, we have massive failures.

We Can't Handle the Increases Because...

The root of this problem is there is zero market relation to actual service.  In other words, transit has not met an actual market demand for over 30 years.  The sole purpose of transit has been relegated to a strange stop gap measure against 100% auto dependency (We seem to have gotten to at least 96% auto dependency).  In turn of staving off transit's destruction we Americans nationwide have come up with really oddball funding scenarios.

Income Taxes Pay for Services Scenario

This is a common transit funding mechanism.  Income taxes cover some part of Amtrak & many transit agencies service or capitol expansion.  The same for roadways.  Income taxes, and I might repeat this a few times, income taxes have absolutely NO CORRELATION AT ALL to corridor demands!  If anything it is the reverse.  So how can we expect income taxes to pay for our demanded services?  How can we put the cart before the horse and expect it to pull the cart?

As Home Simpson would say, "Duh!" We can't...

So what is a solution?  How do we draw parity to funding and demand instead of demand to funding?  Right now agencies are pained, they need funds to increase service, but fares are but a mere pittance, and the more service the more funding is needed.  We can't continue to rely on income taxes and general budget monies for this.  At the same time somehow, and in some way real prices have to be levied (not in a tax sense) against all modes; auto, transit, Segway, bicycle or any other mode that uses the primary arterials.  Somehow we all have to put in a more reasonable fare or fee related to the demand in service.

One Solution Idea

I however, as always, have some random ideas.  I know tomorrow, I can't expect a truly open, fair, and free market to be available for transportation.  It would be, as currently is, impossible to get the Government out of it all.  Their rules and fingers are stuck so deeply into the pie it is disgraceful.  So what can we do?

Remove infrastructure from the cost picture.

Remove infrastructure funding from the picture for freight & passenger services across the board and make it a public funding process.  The freight railroads pay for their own infrastructure, but they're the only entity in transportation that does this in the current climate.  Mind you, it isn't easy for them to do this either, especially with all the hateful and absurd calls for re-regulation and all that mess.  They barely are paying for expansion as needed under the current burden of taxes, regulatory nightmares of the FRA, and struggling to deal with each state and various structures that exist (just look up New York State's regulations and taxes versus the other states, and you'll see why I say it is so unbelievably complicated).  Now mind you, think of the prices of things if we could get publicly supported and democratically voted in infrastructure?  Imagine the price reductions on freight rail shipping!  Imagine the price reduction on passenger rail and airlines!  Imagine the price reduction on automobiles - oh wait, that wouldn't happen.  But anyway, back on track here.

Remove the infrastructure costs; roads, rail, air, and other pieces and setup a democratically voted for and supported infrastructure fund.  Keep in mind, we wouldn't stop entities, such as freight rail or buses or passenger rail from funding their own infrastructure if they wanted to expand ahead of demand.  What would be setup is a general infrastructure fund that citizens, not a representative, but citizens would vote on in national elections every 2-4 years.  Just like the President, Congress, and the whole lot.  But this would give us our choices back to us to some degree, and put the cost picture back on us as a society.  We'd have to vote in whatever actually gave us the most bang for our buck.  Urban areas would most likely vote heavily toward rail and transit infrastructure while urban areas would want their roads.  This of course, makes sense.

Democratic infrastructure voting.

This should be a two phase process.  First, we should have representatives of industry and citizen representatives get together and figure out some large scale proposals for urban, suburban, and rural areas.  Once the primary projects are laid out, with choices between modes and corridors, people should vote on these proposals.  Similarly to how it is done in Portland, except this should happen on a large scale at a national level.

Once this is done, a secondary vote on the three choices should be brought up.  The vote should be on order of priorities; quality, time to completion, and cost.  The order would dictate what would be most important.

The Secondary Vote on Quality, Time to Completion, and Cost

If quality was the highest, the focus would be on amenities, speed, frequency, and the overall ideal of high level luxury service infrastructure.  This would include grand stations (think Grand Central in New York, Penn Central, or other massive and grand stations), with space for amenities, high throughput access, secure style access to facilities.  Of course with rail this would also mean 200+ mph high speed service.  For roadways it would mean rest stops with more secure and beautiful accommodations of service, safer roads that are built to last longer and be smoother, and allow for higher speed traffic in the 120-180mph range.  This however would also mean that certain people would obviously have to maintain a higher level of licensing, attain a higher skill for operation or probably pay a larger cost for luxury high speed service.

If time to completion was the highest rating, the infrastructure would probably be simpler stations with basic amenities, simpler roadways probably made of basic black top, and things like airports that where not much more than simple concourses.  Shops and rest stops would be limited to either private funding or outright eliminated from infrastructure designs.  However the extensiveness, in destination to destination, would be much greater.  More point to point and available connections and travel points would be available.  Think along the lines of our current road system, get anywhere, but you'll hit a few speed bumps along the way.

If cost was the main criteria, minimal infrastructure extensiveness would be available, lower speeds would be required, but we'd maintain a higher percentage of our budget for other things like schools, military, or whatever else might come up.  Speeds would have to decline, probably similar to what we experience now on roads and rails.  Airlines would have to limit even further their small puddle jumper type routes.  Only the routes that really covered most of their costs would be viable under this priority.

Solved

With infrastructure costs removed from the picture, such as they are with auto usage, modes could grow and expand much easier based off of demand.  With fares and other operational costs growing in relation to actual usage it would be vastly easier to expand services to meet demands, growth, and desires of various communities.  In addition other fare business models could be utilized to offer express, luxury, or streetcar like services in many cities.  In rural areas long distance rail, short hopper bus services, or other types of services could easily spring up to offer other mobility options.

It really could be just that simple.

Why This Solution?

First off, if infrastructure is removed from the picture, entities like Amtrak, BNSF, Greyhound, auto users, transit users, and others can go about their preferred method based primarily on fares, the cost of the automobile by itself, fuel costs, and other above road expenditures.  This is in essence, exactly how auto usage currently is, except now by voting, the auto mode would have to become responsible and its patrons would become aware of the costs.  The same goes for all modes, and the playing field would be drastically evened out.  Under this mechanism almost all modes become independent and sustainable, with service purchased were service is demanded by the people, versus Governmental Politics.

In addition to what I've just mentioned, it seems like the most reasonable scenario that might be put into place, especially under a Democrat controlled Federal Government.  We might not gain the democratically held elections to vote for our infrastructure, but it would be great to force the representatives to actually make an objective decision and show what we're paying for in an even and distributed sense.

So anyone else rolling in some ideas out there?  Post a comment, I'd love to read some other opinions on other solutions.