Kaine enters round three on roads

I didn't say I was on the negotiating team. I said that I believed that VB WILL use eminent domain to seize the property from NS. I don't believe that VB will give NS a fair market value for the right of way. I hope NS fights them for it if the price isn't fair. Eminent domain isn't a negotiation tactic at all, but an abuse of power. Fortunately the state legislature tightened the leash of out of control city councils that used to seize private property for the gravy trains of developers.

Sorry Keith, I did not know you were on the negotiating team. I do know that the insinuation of the use of eminent domain is a negotiation tactic.

The Beach isn't going to negotiate with Norfolk Southern. I believe that are planning to take it using eminent domain. They don't want to pay N&S what the line is worth.

Well, regretfully, you may think for yourself, but you are sadly misinformed. In the advisory referendum held on light rail, six years or so before there was ever a Yes Campaign, 46% of the voters in the referendum voted for light rail. Frankly, there was no organized campaign in support of the referendum, but despite opposition or silence from almost every political leader except Barbara Henley, it was a remarkable statement that foreshadowed the broad support that exists at the Beach for light rail. Of course, the oceanfront business leaders had been opposed to light rail; now, they have already taken a position of leadership in support of this initiatve. Any citizen who realizes that suburban sprawl is an unsustainable lifestyle must support the starter light rail system east to west down the abandoned Norfolk Southern rail line. If I am not mistaken, the Beach is in negotiations with NS on the purchase of this ROW and I certainly hope that happens very soon.

Excuse me Mr. Barrett. The YES Campaign was for the penny increase in the sales tax for transportation. This group and the ones pushing for the Light Rail between downtown Norfolk and Virginia Beach are virtually the same bunch. HRPDC, HRT, HR Chamber of Commerce, real estate developers, and the HR whatever groups. It really makes no difference. The same members and groups were all behind spending millions of dollars on light rail to move tourists between downtown Norfolk and The Virginia Beach Oceanfront with the remote possibility (my opinion)of expanding service to the Naval Base. In 2002 the same groups of gold diggers wanted to spend millions more on transportation projects that were sold to the public to relief gridlock for the ports and business, while selling it as projects to reduce traffic gridlock for those of us who would foot the bill. The MPO projects is just a repeat of 2002. I think for myself sir. I am not coached by anyone. You are so fed up that the state legislature is listening to their constituents and questioning the HR wisdom of these projects, rather than lobbyists looking for a taxpayer handout for a change. It has gotten your goat.

Well Mike, that post sure did not help your cause very much, but I appreciate that you are going to the sources instead of listening to the anti taxpayers spin. But maybe we have talked this to death. See you on another forum.

The Hampton Roads Crossing Study states that the target was a 10% reduction in congestion at the HRBT. So... if your commute is 1 hour and 30 min then you shave 9 minutes off your commute. How lovely, only 9 minutes off driving time. Now if you're going to the Naval Base you might shave only 5 minutes off your drving time.

Keith, again, reveal you ignorance for all to see. The Light Rail referendum and the Yes campaign are two separate matters separated by about five years in time. How can we all try to intelligently discuss these matters if you are so confused by the anti tax rhetoric and propaganda put out regularly by certain posters. Point is, develop your own point of view after getting some basic knowledge of the topic. Then we can talk.

Mr. Barrett, are you saying that the Light Rail referendum pushed by the YES Campaign and the HR entities are based on truth and fact? The six MPO projects pushed by you and the port folks are selling these projects as a relief to traffic gridlock and bottlenecks when in reality they only relieve it for the ports. And you are questioning the intelligence of the posters on this blog who disagree with you in regards to propaganda? And the best you can do sir is to resort to name calling? My my my. What a tangled web we weave. Sir, I have to question who you are accusing of trying to obfuscate and confuse the citizens.

Mike, please try to keep up; your lack of comprehension of the facts is astounding. Please know that a statement by the spokesman for the taxpayers organization that congestion will continue is simply not a fact. It is spin, an actual part of the taxpayers campaign of disinformation, a part of a heretofor successful strategy to obfuscate and confuse the citizens. It has clearly worked in your case, but to spout out their conclusions without looking at the facts yourself reveal a shallowness of involvement that I would not have expected of you. So if you wish to be taken seriously as a poster, check out the situation yourself before you accept the propaganda. Remember as well, that it is the anti tax zealots who have helped to elect Delegates who have signed the no tax pledge that have caused the congestion on our local roads that effects each of us most directly. The Commonwelath has cut funding for local roads by 75%, and of course the buying power has been reduced so much that most cities simply don't do new construction.

You state... "but to take that position is to accept gridlock, congestion, and paying our competitors our federal share. Simply unacceptable."

It was already stated in previous reports that the plans on the table will do nothing to take care of the congestion that we already have.

So Please, stop with the Gridlock statements because to accept the MPO plan at face value means that we also must accept Gridlock.

Well the referendum on Light Rail was a bold face lie as to it's true meaning if one were to vote yes. I don't think my point was obtuse at all as it was more the truth about how these unelected HR entities use prevarication as the ends to justify the means. I never said NEVER for Light Rail. If I am lied to about the impact of a referendum, then why should I trust what I am told by the HR entities about anything. I think citizens would like better transportation too, but the plans seem to benefit the well connected vice the folks that work at the base and shipyards as that is where most people are going to and from each day. That seems to be the case for the six MPO transportation projects as well. Then you accuse the voters of being intellectually challenged, because guys in your HR entities don't think we know what's good for us. That's pure baloney Mr. Barrett. BTW, the council sure didn't listen to the consensus when voting to join the HRTA. With any luck, everyone but Reba McClanan and Barbara Henley will lose their seats on council. It's about time too.

The one message I have consistently posted is that I simply will not substitute my judgement for that of the experts. I know that the criteria by which the feds judge these projects is the opposite of common sense; that is, since it is mostly federal dollars that get put into these projects, they have set criteria for the performance of the system that must be met. I do not presume to comprehend these performance criteria nor to have the qualifications to criticize their judgement. For me, I appreciate the data gathering and analysis that went into the selection of the six projects, and I appreciate the coordination among the sixteen political jurisdictions in sticking with the consensus on the plan adopted by the MPO. I thoroughly disdain those who appear as is they could offer a better plan when in fact upon simple reading it is clear they simply do not want taxes to increase. Again, fine, but to take that position is to accept gridlock, congestion, and paying our competitors our federal share. Simply unacceptable.

That if the Port Expansion happens the study done said it would do nothing for the HRBT. This means that it will still be a long commute in the morning and evening. But you use this as a reason to approve the project, even though all studies done have stated this project WILL NOT relieve this congestion.

Additional Capacity is what is needed. 6 lanes to Richmond and more lanes at the HRBT. This would relieve a ton of the problems at Newport News, Norfolk, and VB. And until this is done I continue to fight the issue.

You've opined before about the expansion west and used this to justify the projects, but in your last post you state the Urban Sprawl is not what is needed. So why build the projects for projected growth west? It seems you want more then your cake and you want to eat it to. Make up your mind Mike? You can't have it both ways.

Well Keith, I think your point is obtuse, but I think you are suggesting that the vote should have been conclusive and it should have bound the city forever not to reconsider light rail again. To me, that is preposterous to think that a vote in 1996 on an advisory referendum could bind future citizens and city council forever. Further, I would consider that to be downright undemocratic. At the time, even though the vote was quite close, the council rescinded any support it had shown to HRT for light rail and indicated that they would not support it at that time. Certainly, that is and was their prerogative, and while I thought that was a bad decision, that is what what they did. A decade later, the folly of that decision is becoming ever more obvious, and now most citizens want better public transit, and if Council does not listen to that consensus, they will be subject to defeat at the polls.

Mr. Barret writes "it was the opponents like the taxpayers association that put our inaccurate and emotional information designed to defeat both initiatives."

Notice the phrase inaccurate emotional information. So it proves my point that it was a lie.

From The Pilot Oct 31, 1999.

The Virginia Beach Referendum Question:
"Should the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the development and financing of the proposed Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Naval Base Light Rail transit project?
What "YES" means is Light Rail remains an OPTION.

Nowhere in that referendum that the project remains an option, but for Virginia Beach to approve it and pay for it. I rest my case.

Well, I was involved in both of the campaigns to which you refer, and clearly I have a different view. In both cases, it was the opponents like the taxpayers association that put our inaccurate and emotional information designed to defeat both initiatives. Light rail still almost won, despite almost universal silence or oppostion from elected officials. If that referendum were held today, I believe it would win as it has become increasingly clear that outward, suburban sprawl is simply not a sustainable method to provide affordable housing for our citizenry. Transit oriented redevelopment is a product needed now, not in ten years, and Norfolk has shown regional leadership and forward thinking that is sorely lacking in the political leadership of this town. The taxpayers association simply need villains to win their battles, and their vilification of public officials, regional organizations, business leaders, and elected officials has now alienated them and marginalized their views. About time.

You're right, I have no "real evidence" as such that it was a back room deal. However, based upon the past evidence, for example, the lie that was fed to Virginia Beach by HRT and The YES Campaign, that the referendum for light rail was to continue "the study" of light rail even though the word "study" never appeared in the referendum yet words like approving development and financing did, I have come to the conclusion that these unelected entities will lean the arguments in favor to what benefits their own business interests. I don't believe the MPO and the HR entities deserve the credit and intelligence you think they deserve. I believe the political jurisdictions were conned into approving them. The GA approved HB3202 and they got spanked for it and they deserved it. Especially the republicans which I think cost some of them their seats. A flawed plan is still flawed no matter who approved it. I trust someday that I will drive on an expanded HRBT and that there will be a plan that will actually relieve traffic gridlock and choke points in Tidewater rather than a plan that pretends to.

Well clearly, you have decided even after presentation of facts to the contrary that the six projects were the product of "back room deals" even though you have presented absolutely no evidence of such, and I and others have shown that the projects are based upon extensive analysis, that they meet federal and state funding criteria, that all Hampton Roads political jurisdictions unanimously approved them, the Commonwealth Transportation Board approved them, the General Assembly approved them, and the FHA approved them. Clearly, you simply are closed minded on this issue, and no facts or evidence will convince you to the contrary. So enjoy your conclusion, and realize that the people's representatives designed and adopted our MPO Plan, the Governor has come down here in the last month and stated his support for our MPO's Plan, and when he calls for a special session in May or June, our MPO's plan will be a cornerstone of his recommendation. I trust someday I will drive on one or more of the projects.

I don't think that I am missing the basic point at all Mr. Barrett. These six projects were back room deals and I believe they were a one sided argument with the feds and VDOT. The folks in your industry poo-pooed the idea of expanding the HRBT because they wanted to relieve the port authority of gridlock while selling the transportation projects to relieve gridlock for those of us who are expected to bear the grunt of additional taxes and fees to support it. Granted I never claimed to be traffic engineer, however, I, mikedlong, pierre, and others who opine on this blog have been stuck out here in traffic long enough to recognize that the same choke points will still be here after these projects are built and those who paid will be $9Billion poorer. You give me the impression that you will roll over and play dead on whatever government says without question. All of us reserve the right to question decisions, logic and wisdom of government including the feds and VDOT. And especially unelected and appointed ones such as the MPO, The HRPDC, HRT, HTRA, and any other HR entity. The opinion of "what is in the public's best interest" is very broad and often one sided.