Privatized toll roads are the state abandoning inherently governmental responsibilities. Public roads are for the public. Raise taxes to pay for public roads or suffer in traffic. Privatizing roads for profit is theft of public land.

by Redline SOS on Jun 8, 2011 8:57 am • link • report

Good riddance to Transurban. If the Sliver Line gets capped and those HOT lanes killled, little Tim Kaine's transport legacy is shot.

I suspect it everything to do with money. They have some strange accouting.

The bike lane on q is not safe. I've seen far too many many people salmon down it, and just blow through lights on 16th and Q. The 15th and Q intersection is also bad.

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 9:01 am • link • report

It's impossible to say whether Arlington's lawsuit (which by itself was enough to stall the project) had any impact on the stakeholder's ability to seek new capital after it was initially put on hold.

So yeah, Arlington is not getting completely off the hook.

by Lou on Jun 8, 2011 9:31 am • link • report

Transurban would only really make money from the inside the beltway portion of the HOT lanes. So Arlington delaying and killing that portion makes them very wary of the rest of the project, which doesn't make much financial sense.

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 9:40 am • link • report

@Lou, I suspect there are other reasons why investors are not looking to buy 80 or 100 year bonds based on HOT revenue right now.

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 9:41 am • link • report

Oh, so it's considered "punishment enough" to strip Thomas of his chairmanship. As it was with Marion Barry, who used council funds to pay his paramours, not to mention his long-standing tax problems. Why is no one talking about removing these clowns from the Council entirely? I have a feeling all we're going to get is toothless "ethics" legislation.

by Paul on Jun 8, 2011 9:43 am • link • report

@Paul, in any legislative body, expelling a member is hard in that the requirements aren't as simple as being censured or failing to pay taxes. May work for appointed officeholders but not elected. Remember Bill Clinton?

by HogWash on Jun 8, 2011 9:55 am • link • report

I know some people think they really have a bead on the HOT lane situtation just because their intuition says something and a lot of state delegates with a bone to pick with Arlington have been saying it to the Examiner and Post, which never met a road project they didn't like no matter how expensive. But really, please read the article about the myths.

Lou: Arlington's suit didn't stall the project. Charlie: Actually, the inside the Beltway portion was the more expensive one, and was deleted because it's the part that couldn't pay for itself.

by David Alpert on Jun 8, 2011 9:59 am • link • report

@David Alpert; I've read differently.

"The six northern miles (10km) being excised would have converted two reversible HOV lanes into three reversible HOT lanes, providing peakhour, peak-direction capacity out from the Pentagon southwest. Added to the three (and in one stretch 4) general purpose lanes each direction this would have provided capacity of 9,000 to 10,000 versus the present 6,000 to 7,000 vehicles/hour in three GP lanes and two about half-used HOV lanes.

The segment being dropped is the busiest in the corridor and promised the most toll revenue per mile, while not requiring disproportionate new construction, so the economics of the whole are damaged.

The original Fluor-Transurban proposal highlighted the project as providing a gateway to central Washington DC with imagery of the Capitol and the Washington Monument at the end of the HOT Lanes. They don't seem to have released their traffic and revenue estimates for the project.

A project financing report from a rival team Clark-Shirley estimated 2010 toll rates as averaging 25c/mile in the peak, a shoulder toll of 20c, and 10c off-peak in a northern segment, and 20c peak, 156c shoulder, 7.5c off-peak in a southern segment.

The northern segment (I-395 inside the Beltway) was estimated to carry 25k veh/weekday, 11k toll-paying, 14k HOVs.

In the southern segment only 3k tollpayers were expected in 2010, but 9k by 2015 and over 18k by 2020.

They stated: "The northern section would generate the majority of the revenue especially in the early years of operation."

Total toll revenues for 2010 were put at around $20m. These were described as tentative estimates. New traffic and revenue forecasts are being done.

on the VA/I-95 HOT lanes"

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 10:04 am • link • report

+1 to Paul

This behavior can no longer be tolerated by ANY District resident. We ought to past the days of the public officials feeding at the teat of public monies.

This goes for those who are 'fully loaded', how have tax issues or who are otherwise simply horrible stewards of public monies, public trust and poor role models for the youth of the city.

by Andrew on Jun 8, 2011 10:06 am • link • report

Setting aside the outrage, etc, why wouldn't HTJ be subject to criminal prosecution, civil action, etc...? Don't we have embezzlement laws in DC? If not, any chance we could pass a few? Wells? Anyone?

by oboe on Jun 8, 2011 10:13 am • link • report

Ah, ok. Looks like the civil lawsuit by Nathan is in the early stages. No criminal prosecution, though? Why not?

by oboe on Jun 8, 2011 10:16 am • link • report

David, I never said the suit was the initial cause of the delay. We all know it was the funding. But do you know why the funding dried up in the first place? There are all kinds of causes, it is a complex business deal and chain of events.

My point was nobody can say whether the lawsuit contributed to a chilling effect on investors as Transurban tried to seek new investors for the remaining project.

I also have a fair bit more than intuition on this issue, but there's no way I'm dragging anybody else into this after the crap Arlington put them through with the claims of discrimination.

by Lou on Jun 8, 2011 10:17 am • link • report

charlie: Yes, the northern segment would bring in more toll revenue, sure. But it also cost much more. The idea behind the HOT lanes project is that in theory perhaps the tolls could pay for construction of the road, but as we're finding out with the Beltway lanes, that's not really true after all.

Transurban couldn't get financing in large part because their costs were too great compared to revenues for the northern part.

The delay is explained in part 2 of that series. Note that Pierce Homer (Kaine's Sec'y of Trans.) said they canceled the project because of financial conditions. That was BEFORE the Arlington suit was filed.

It seems pretty weird for everyone to go around claiming that a lawsuit is responsible for delaying a project when the project had already been put on hold before the suit!

by David Alpert on Jun 8, 2011 10:17 am • link • report

@oboe

Nathan said he had referred the matter to the US Attorney. Apparently, they were already on it.

by Alex B. on Jun 8, 2011 10:19 am • link • report

Ah, thanks Alex. Couldn't find that info anywhere. I wonder what the USAO's track record is on this kind of thing. Sending HTJ to jail for a few years would certainly go a long way towards sending a message, though.

by oboe on Jun 8, 2011 10:22 am • link • report

@DavidAlpert; honestly, I don't find that well supported in part 2. I think you are really neglecting the role of finance -- and the Global Financial Collapse - in all this.

Transurban -- as with almost all of these scheme -- hope to borrow money cheaply,and use the revenue to cover the initial years. You can build enough fat into the project -- salaries, consultants, etc - to get away with it, but it all depends on cash flow -- not profit.

So remove the largest cash flow -- especially for the first 20 years -- and the transurban model doesn't make sense.

Honestly, I don't understand your optics here. I'm glad Arlington killed the project. The one good thing the county board might have done recently. The transurban deal sucked, and I would be delighted if they go away.

If I remember, the problem is the HOV lanes were originally bus lanes, so they have to let buses on them. Doesn't make sense for HOT to have that, and so they kept tinkering with the numbers. They needed to buses for federal money as well?

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 10:27 am • link • report

@oboe:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/politics/dc-attorney-general-councils-thomas-diverted-public-funds/2011/06/06/AG1gFdKH_story.html

Nathan has asked U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Machen to consider filing criminal charges against Thomas. William Miller, Machen’s spokesman, said federal prosecutors have been investigating Thomas.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office is aware of the referral and will review the information . . . as we continue our investigation,” Miller said in a statement.

by Alex B. on Jun 8, 2011 10:36 am • link • report

I enjoy the cognitive dissonance that allows someone to say that Gehry's design is an "uncivil, brutal insult to the classical city envisioned by Pierre L'Enfant and our nation's Founders" and yet somehow THIS is just great.

I mean the Gehry design is pretty out there, but at least the drawings for it honestly show what it would look like in front of the building. These proposals just show a drawing of some neoclassical stuff and say "look, pretty!" without mentioning the awesome backdrop of the ED building.

by MLD on Jun 8, 2011 10:37 am • link • report

Do members of the Council even have the power to expel one of their own.

FYI -

I've heard people talking about trying to recall Thomas, but no such effort can begin before January 2012. Organizers of any such recall would need to collect petition signatures from 10 percent of the registered voters in Ward 5.

See http://www.dcboee.org/regulations/recall_process.asp.

by Todd on Jun 8, 2011 10:37 am • link • report

Oh David. I love that you pulled Secretary Homer's quote about the delay in the project, where he did not even mention the lawsuit as the cause. It would be hard for him to blame the lawsuit, since the day he gave that quote (the day the delay was announce), there was no lawsuit to comment on. Arlington did not file the suit until the next day.

Does your intuition tell you there might be a coincidence there? Unless, of course, you think that's plenty of time for lawyers to put together an entire case and filing. In that case you can continue to believe the lawsuit had nothing to do with anything.

by Lou on Jun 8, 2011 10:48 am • link • report

I enjoy the cognitive dissonance that allows someone to say that Gehry's design is an "uncivil, brutal insult to the classical city envisioned by Pierre L'Enfant and our nation's Founders" and yet somehow THIS is just great.

I'm no fan of that DoE building, but Gehry's designs do not belong in cities.

... which makes me think that the Committee of 100 types will be just fine with Gehry's buildings in DC.

by JustMe on Jun 8, 2011 10:51 am • link • report

@charlie - In my experience, the Q Street bike lane is a sub-par experience, especially compared to the R Street lane that goes in the opposite direction. The lights seem to be very poorly synced for Eastbound bike traffic (and not great for cars either).

I've seen a few salmoners (not many) and while I've never crossed 16th against a red light on bike, I've been tempted a number of times. At least in the morning, 16th Street is way larger than what seems necessary given the traffic flow. That seems to be something that retiming the traffic signals could help, but I don't know how much that impacts other traffic on 16th.

by Jacques on Jun 8, 2011 10:55 am • link • report

As much as I'm happy that any HOT lane project might be killed, Transurban is rightfully claiming that red tape is killing the project. The same is true for the Silver Line. It took 20 f-ing years to get where we are, and parts of the project are still uncertain.

Americans should be worried that complex projects (HOT lanes, metro expansion, HSR, road upgrades) take this long to get together and have so many points at which they can fail. It is a failure of the government in general that complex projects move so slowly. Basically this is a result of too many checks and balances. The problem is that with too many people involved, nobody ends up being responsible. It's Dilbert come true. Checks and balances are fine. Too many checks and balances however lead to lethargy and inefficiency.

by Jasper on Jun 8, 2011 11:02 am • link • report

I can't tell you how much I'm saddened by the current DC government. The incompetence gives critics of DC statehood lots of ammunition. This would certainly be unjustified after a couple very good majors (Williams and Fenty) but I would have to agree with the Post that we have gone back to the bad old days with the current Mayor.

by Jim on Jun 8, 2011 11:07 am • link • report

@ Jacques: In my experience, the Q Street bike lane is a sub-par experience, especially compared to the R Street lane that goes in the opposite direction. The lights seem to be very poorly synced for Eastbound bike traffic (and not great for cars either).

I've seen a few salmoners (not many) and while I've never crossed 16th against a red light on bike, I've been tempted a number of times.

I used the Q St bike lane for the first time last week during evening rush, and thought it was a pleasant experience. I got where I wanted to be pretty fast and it felt pretty good passing so many cars.

Crossing red lights is stupid. On foot, bike and in a car. Do not do it. You're on your own if you do that (but it still does not give drivers the right to kill or hurt you). Expecting the lights to be timed properly for bikers in such a grid setting is wishful thinking in itself, let alone that we're in DC here, where such a thing would end up being a SNAFU anyway.

My main issue with bike lanes in general on streets like Q (and R) is that many car drivers do not respect the bike lane properly. They still ride in the middle of the street between the parked cars. While that puts them just out of the bike lane, many still hug the lane way too close. They are not nearly in the middle of "their" lane. DC metro drivers also still need to learn to check for bikes when turning right.

Still riding in a bike lane is better than the few blocks I did without a bike lane, where the same car cut me off way too lose twice. Does DC have a 3 foot passing law?

by Jasper on Jun 8, 2011 11:13 am • link • report

@ Jacques; the biggest problem I have with the Q st lanes is the damn metrobus that likes to idle right at the Dupont metrostop.

16th and Q is often quiet enough to cross against the light. Plenty of pedestrians do. 15th, however, you do need the light.

I agree with Jasper that some cars don't "respect' the bike lane - or don't know how to use it. I also think the protocol of making a right turn isn't well thought out. For example, at 16th and Q you know have cars backing up while before they get and make a right hand turn.

Plenty of bike lane salmons on Q. A real menace -- to other bikers. I glare at them but they probably just think I'm crazy.

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 11:22 am • link • report

@Jim:we have gone back to the bad old days with the current Mayor.

Simple curiosity here but what does that mean? The old days when gov't officials would hire people campaign contributers, friends, and relatives?

by HogWash on Jun 8, 2011 11:54 am • link • report

@HogWash

Let me rephrase what you just wrote so it reflects reality:

Simple curiosity here but what does that mean? The old days when gov't officials would hire unqualified campaign contributers, friends, and relatives at higher salaries than their predecessors?

by MLD on Jun 8, 2011 12:14 pm • link • report

@ HogWash; let me translate for you: The bad old days are when you people Over the River ruled the city. Or Marion Barry. Or back before DC became cool. Or something like that.

And exactly how the mayor is responsible for various council indiscretions. I'll give you Gray has been, well, charisma free, but that seems like a minor indiscretion. The hiccups involving him seem very minor. But the backlash is amazing.

by charlie on Jun 8, 2011 12:17 pm • link • report

@charlie You're too nice. I usually comment to the bike salmoners (when I'm on my bike) that it's a one way street, sometimes followed by a question of their intelligence ("One way, idiot!").

by Moose on Jun 8, 2011 12:45 pm • link • report

@MLD...unqualified and higher salaries you say?

Can't speak to the unqualified one but according to Neiubauer of the Examiner, Fenty's team received salaries higher than those under Williams tenure. Also, I believe Kaya Henderson's salary was lowered from 275k (less than her predecessor) to about 175-80.

So are you rephrasing that to say the most accurate thing? Seems as if the salaries keep going up and the "old days" must really refer to the last administration..

Charlie..well I didn't say it - you did. Even though it's a silly thought, people probably do believe that. And yes, it's something that Gray's infractions are severly "minor" but he is getting a lot of backlash..mostly based on untruths that people have attached to him. It's a perception problem.

by HogWash on Jun 8, 2011 1:12 pm • link • report

@hog, i'll try my hand at rephrasing, but it's a bit longer than 1 sentence:

"we have gone back to the bad old days"

we have gone back to the (pre- Tony Willliams) days when many dc residents question the honesty, honor and integrity of their elected officials, from Council Members to the Mayor.

Those pre-Williams days when we wonder if our tax money is being used appropriately or if it is funnelled to family, friends or personal uses of those same elected officials.

The pre-Williams days when the rest of the country points at us and laughs at the (real or percieved) way our elected officials operate.

Not to say I believe it, but perhaps that clears up what the phrase means? And I don't buy it, because I don't believe much in the council or mayors office has changed since the Tony Williams days.

by greent on Jun 8, 2011 1:47 pm • link • report

@HogWash:

Gray came into office on an (among other things) "clean government" agenda. Whether fair or not, "dirty government" reflects back on him.

Obama may not be responsible for the length and depth of the current recession, but you can bet he'll pay for it at the ballot box in 2012 if things don't show an improvement.

by oboe on Jun 8, 2011 2:43 pm • link • report

Just to add: the fact that we're a city of one-party rule only exacerbates the issue. Gray's the head of the DC government. If it's corrupt, he'll get the lion's share of the blame.

by oboe on Jun 8, 2011 2:44 pm • link • report

@Greent, so we have gone back to the days where DC residents who largely didn't vote for Gray are now questioning DC gov't. Considering the accusations launched against Fenty (truckgate/skinnergate et al), I don't think it's appropriate to say that DC residents have now begun to question DC gov't. We did it w/the last election as well. Now nothing you presented is backed up by the truth but it is backed up back perception.

@Oboe, as part of Gray's "clean agenda" did he pledge that he would ban the longstanding practice in which gov't officials would hire friends/relatives/campaign contributers and the like? I don't recall that. And I think I pointed out that this is a perception problem, fair or not. But perception ain't reality. It's not fair to accuse everyone in the GGW community AND those who voted for Fenty as myopic twits who are only concerned about bike lanes and dog parks. But that perception is there, fair or not.

And Obama does not control congress. He does control the budget. Gray does not control the council. He does control DC gov't hires.

by HogWash on Jun 8, 2011 3:06 pm • link • report

@charlie

Inside the beltway may have generated the most money for Transurban, but it is not even close to being the busiest part of the 95/395 corridor today and because of that I find it a little hard to swallow. Per VDOT's own traffic counts, the busiest segment of the HOV lanes by far is between the Occoquan and Springfield. For the corridor as a whole, it's the section of 95 outside the Beltway and south to Newington.

If Transurban was expecting to make more money for the inside the Beltway stretch, I'd hazard a bet the higher tolls were the factor and not more traffic would be the factor. The only other way it possibly could would be more traffic growth inside the Beltway than outside the Beltway, something I find highly unlikely.

by Froggie on Jun 8, 2011 3:06 pm • link • report

@ Moose:bike salmoners

Thanks for explaining that term. I had no clue...

And I've seen them too. Good idea to yell at them. We all know that yelling has solved plenty of problems.

by Jasper on Jun 8, 2011 3:32 pm • link • report

@Hog: i honestly have no idea what it is you just said to me, as I said nothing relative to what you reponded to, and you may have missed the last line of my post whre I said that may be a translation, but not one I buy into.

so we have gone back to the days where DC residents who largely didn't vote for Gray are now questioning DC gov't.
Nope. Your Yay Gray is showing. I never mentioned who voted for who. It was a one-city analogy - many people are questioning many elected officials: Council and Mayor. This was a recurring theme before Anthony Williams - trust in the govt was very low in the Pratt/Barry Round2 days. Recall that? I do. When our govt was basically removed from us, our financial control was totally removed from us? Do you remember what people thought of the council and mayor then? Do you recall what people thought of Tony Williams when he came to DC as the CFO.

Considering the accusations launched against Fenty (truckgate/skinnergate et al), I don't think it's appropriate to say that DC residents have now begun to question DC gov't.
That's good, because I didn't say that. strawman.

We did it w/the last election as well.
WE do this every election, from Barry to Pratt to Barry to Williams to Fenty to Gray. That is what voting is. WE ALL DO IT.

Now nothing you presented is backed up by the truth but it is backed up back perception.

As I presented a possible translation of a phrase, I presented no facts, so this statement is quite true.

YAY DC.

by greent on Jun 8, 2011 4:21 pm • link • report

Its rich to see the Post lament the current state of DC governance, after all the hard work Nikita Stewart and Mike DeBonis put in making sure Mayor Fenty didn't get re-elected. Too bad that editorial board can't control the rampant bias that is so prevalent among its "reporters." And big "thank you" to Che for stabbing the Mayor in the back as well. I can't wait to vote against her in the next election.

by Asuka on Jun 9, 2011 11:54 pm • link • report