>Congratulations to Mayor-Elect Tim "The Liar" Leavitt and the Republican cabal that elected him.

>.
Wake me when this nightmare is over.

Only in Clark County could the Republicans be moronic enough to rally around a candidate like this weasel.

The local GOP coalesced around a guy who endorsed and supported the Cancer of the United States in the White House, and who, among others, had the Clark County DEMOCRAT Chair along with a DEMOCRAT county commissioner (Steve Stuart – also wholly owned by David Barnett) and a DEMOCRAT former Clark County Commissioner (Betty Sue Morris) along with a DEMOCRAT campaign manager (from other campaigns, Heather Melton) all working on his campaign.

To the morons in the local GOP, I say “brilliant.”

They coalesced around a liar who entirely made up a bogus issue about tolls, hoping to jump on Tom Mielke’s coat tails about his GENUINE desire to kill this massive waste of money in favor of a 3rd bridge… without taking any kind of stand at all, since this slimeball will CONTINUE to support another bridge even WHEN tolls are required…. all the while, standing there and telling the stupid that at least he TRIED to get a bridge without tolls…. even though he lacks the testicles to OPPOSE the bridge when tolls are mandated.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the local GOP rallied around a scumbag who played them like the tools they are. The right wing fringe worked very hard to elect this leftist liar, and unlike the NY 23, they got it done.

I’ll be around to remind those morons about their stupidity on a frequent basis.

And Mayor-Elect?

Do yourself a favor and pass on the temptation of “dating” city employees. You’re GOING to be the Mayor, now, so keep your pants zipped up around the hired help.

Know what I mean?

>Gee… I’ve been inundated with Russell supporters crawling out from under their rocks.

>.
Jon Russell stopped by my blog this evening… or was it one of his surrogates? There’ve been an even dozen or so, but oddly, only 3 IP’s identifying the perps, so to speak.

Ahhh…. no matter. This little gift was left on my doorstep, not unlike the ubiquitous burning bag of poop.

Wow I didn’t know we wanted councilman to be reviewing all the cities expense reports. This is really one of the most pathetic ways to try to rope a candidate into the scandal. I guess if we are going to start this maybe we need to know why veterans administration had issues while Castillo was there with the hospitals and maybe we need to check to see if any of Castillos clients lost any money under his advice from Edward Jones.

I kinda believe this is Russell himself, but it could be any one of those with the flawed reasoning process that would allow them to support a political mercenary like Russell.

So, since I just finished my gym workout, what say I cool off by crushing this moron’s little anon gesture of idiocy here and now…. OK?

Let’s set the table, shall we?

The Mayor of Washougal has some problems with city credit card(s) and a little trip to Vegas. The guy running against her, who has his own issues, blew the whistle in a most timely manner to inflict maximum damage on the good mayor, all in the name of political altruism, you understand.

That, of course, is neither here nor there. What happened is that Jon Russell, loyal and good fellow that he is, tossed his mayor under the bus in RECORD time. That, of course, is his privilege.

But in his haste to avoid the splatter, he neglected to mention that he and 2 other council members for the good city of Washougal sit in DIRECT oversight of the very credit cards in question.

Now, apparently, something was said at the behest of the this little group to the good mayor to ask her to reimburse the city for the copious amounts of alcohol she apparently charged on the taxpayer dime will “conferencing” in Vegas.

Clearly, like herpes, what happens in Vegas may not, necessarily, stay in Vegas… particularly when there’s a paper trail. Right, Stacee?

All of that said, Mr. Russell, best known for his abysmal failure in ramming the humongous Port Tax increase down our throats; is, along with his two compadres, DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THESE EXPENDITURES.

Well, it would seem that this merry little band approved them all, save for the booze.

But then, our erstwhile congress-critter wannabe, having completely FAILED to do the job he was responsible for doing, spewed thusly:

“I don’t think these are cracks, they’re craters,” he said. “It looks like a pattern that is not being dealt with and that is not being brought to the attention of the council.”

Odd, that. Since this little committee of 3 is personally responsible for reviewing EACH of these credit card expenditures and since they DID nail Sellers for drinking the booze on the taxpayer dime….

HOW CAN THIS SLIMEBALL ALLEGE THAT THIS WASN’T BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL????

It was, of course. But the knee jerk reaction of this product of Chicago politics was and is to put as much distance as fast as possible between himself and the good mayor. So, instead of publicly admitting HE had screwed up as well, it came out deny, deny, and then, well, deny.

That leads us to these increasingly lame little comments Russell (and or his Winged Monkeys) are leaving here in blog land.

First of all, let me re-iterate: although I am a professional in politics, I have no professional relationship with any congressional candidate. I personally know both Mr. Russell and Mr. Castillo and I have had professional relationships with both of them; both while they were working for HROC.

That said… here we go.

“Wow I didn’t know we wanted councilman to be reviewing all the cities expense
reports”

Is this were I point out how utterly irrelevant what “we wanted” is? Whether you WANTED it or not, THAT IS PART OF HIS JOB. That “we” may or may not “want it” matters not one wit.

This is really one of the most pathetic ways to try to rope a candidate into the
scandal.

Perhaps. But his response to all of this is the most pathetic aspect of it. I guess he should have thought of it before he tried to dump all the responsibility on somebody else when he bears part of it himself.

If he had the guts to take some level of responsibility for this, then we wouldn’t be having this little chat. But he lacks that kind of courage and integrity.

That, of course, is why I would support Baird over Russell. Because we already HAVE someone representing us with an unethical, gutless background. Why should we replace him with somebody else?

I guess if we are going to start this maybe we need to know why veterans administration had issues while Castillo was there with the hospitals and maybe we need to check to see if any of Castillos clients lost any money under his advice from Edward Jones.

Really?

That’s the kind of stretch ol Jon is known for, but I guess the question is this:

Was Castillo elected to either a position in the VA or Edward Jones?

Was Castillo required to go over the credit card expenditures of a mayor while he was in either of those positions?

No? Then why would you so moronically bring this up?

Washougal City Councilman Jon Russell HAD A JOB TO DO. HE VERY CLEARLY DID… NOT… DO IT, AND THEN THREW THE MAYOR UNDER THE BUS TO DEFLECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS INACTION.

That you don’t happen to like that doesn’t change it one wit. The ISSUE is that it was RUSSELL’S JOB AND HE DIDN’T DO IT.

And dude (or dudette, as the case may be) if you don’t like it, that’s just too damned bad.
.

>STILL no lie that Tim "The Liar" Leavitt won’t tell?

>
.
I dunno. I simply cannot understand why Tim “The Liar” Leavitt has to live up to his name with such intensity.

It takes a genuine scumbag who supports a bridge that must have tolls to be built by attacking someone else who supports a bridge, with, well, tolls it must have to be built.

I guess this kind of crap and desperation is spewing out from Leavitt because of the dirty little secret he doesn’t want people to know:

He’s losing.

Yup, that’s right… The Liar has blown it.

Scamming the hispanic vote by manipulating them into an endorsement as if that mattered… whining like a little punk because he got busted for wanting YOU to do the very thing HE didn’t bother to do: vote… $40,000 so far in special interest, east coast union money…. lying about his position on bridge tolls (He wants the bridge and loot rail, and he’s not about to let a little thing like tolls get in the way of that, so, tolls or no, The Liar wants his bridge.) and then coming up with an utterly moronic plan to tax EVERYONE, EVEN THOSE NOT USING THE BRIDGE, to pay for HIS project…. and this simple idiot has managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

The rank hypocrisy of accusing someone ELSE of wanting tolls when YOU want tolls show the depths of scummery this low life will stoop to to win. He’s lying and attempting to manipulate people into voting for him as if he actually had the character to OPPOSE the bridge when tolls are required… even though he’s publicly stated he will NOT oppose a tolled bridge because he lacks the guts… I mean, because he doesn’t want to be an “obstructionist.”

Integrity is a rare commodity in politics. Like it or hate it, Pollard is the one who’s got it… and Leavitt?

Well, not so much.

Vote Pollard. Of the two, he’s the best choice, hands down. And if Leavitt’s bogus mailer didn’t convince you what a lying weasel he is, I don’t know what will.
.

>Tim "The Liar" Leavitt CONTINUES to lie: Claims "75% chance bridge will not have tolls."

>.
You would have thought by now that Tim “The Liar” Leavitt would have learned his lesson.

According to Lou Brancaccio, this represents The Liar’s position on tolls:

“Then there’s my buddy, Tim Leavitt. He’s running for Vancouver mayor. And he’s trying like heck to separate himself from Mayor Royce Pollard. They’ve been hanging their hat in the same place — the Vancouver City Council — for several years now, so they’re a lot like Cheech & Chong. Same ol‘, same ol‘.

Tim realizes he had to find a difference, so he picks the new I-5 bridge. Now, both these guys appreciate the need for a new bridge. And both would accept tolls. But Royce says the tolls are inevitable. Tim says, “Not so fast, my friend.” Tim feels some magic could be worked and the bridge could be built without tolls.

In fact, he said he feels there’s a 75 percent chance of it.”

You see, this is the lying scumbag we’ve all come to know and despise.

The Liar has a better chance of winning Mega Millions then he does to get a bridge in here without tolls.

What the ENTIRE WORLD KNOWS is that tolls DON’T MATTER to Tim “The Liar” Leavitt, because WITH OT WITHOUT TOLLS, THIS LITTLE WEASEL IS GOING TO SUPPORT A BRIDGE ANYWAY.

Obviously, Leavitt is clinging to his calculation that if he just keeps lying about tolls, he’ll get enough suckers on board to become mayor.

The problem is that in his massive arrogance, this scumbag truly believes we’re stupid.

NO ONE ELSE IN GOVERNMENT ANYWHERE HAS EVER SAID THIS STEAMING CRAP PILE CAN BE BUILT WITHOUT TOLLS.

NO ONE.

In fact, EVERYONE ELSE IN GOVERNMENT HAS SAID JUST THE OPPOSITE: IF THIS THING IS BUILT, TOLLS WILL BE REQUIRED TO BUILD IT.

And taking it a step further, The Liar has already said that even WITH tolls, HE WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT BUILDING THIS BRIDGE AND LOOT RAIL.

My God, this man is a lying little weasel. He’s pathological.

He’s lying. He KNOWS he’s lying. He’s aware that anyone actually paying attention to what he says KNOWS he’s lying. He doesn’t CARE that he’s lying. BECAUSE HE WILL DO AND SAY ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED.

It’s bad enough that a rank hypocrite like Tim “The non-voting Liar” Leavitt wants YOU to vote for HIM. But to continue to lie like this in the face of common sense is to insist the world is flat, or that Obama has a clue. (Yeah, I know it’s the same Obama Leavitt endorsed, but this guy can’t use toilet paper without trying to get some sort of political advantage out of it, so what can you do?)

So, it’s up to you, Vancouver. You can vote for this lying scumbag who rarely voted himself… due to his contempt for the gift provided to us all by the sacrifices of tens of thousands who died to insure we have the franchise… or you can vote for a guy you may disagree with, but who is at least honest and honorable.

Otherwise, you’re going to get tolls anyway, along with a whiny, snivelly mayor that played you like he did the hispanics, who blathers: “We’ll, at least I tried,” when he knew all along that tolls were the ONLY way to get this done, but had to lie about it like Sam Adams lied about having sex with that teenager.
.
But that’s Tim “The Liar” Leavitt for ya.
.
.

>Leavitt has a priority problem: NO crime should be "tolerated."

>.
Sometimes, you gotta love politicians and their political opportunism.

Tim Leavitt, who I’ve jotted some thoughts down about on this blog before, hasn’t let this “me too” opportunity get by him, and now he’s directly tying his legislative agenda to his campaign.

On his website, he tells us: Hate and Bias Crimes Must NOT Be Tolerated

But other crimes should be?

This leftist pap is just that. Further, Leavitt’s “draft resolution” accomplishes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING except to provide this guy with an opportunity to politically grand stand.

“Hate” crimes are a sickening concept that somehow makes an assault based on skin color or gender or sexual proclivity or any of the many, many other segments we’ve been divided into, more worthy of greater punishment than just your average, run of the mill crime.

That is, if someone is shot because they are _____________ (fill in the blank) THAT crime is somehow more worthy of concern then someone getting shot, say, at random… or during a robbery.

And that, my friends, is pure, grade A, moronic bullshit. Fringe leftists love this kind of thing, but then, they are easily led tools anyway, or they wouldn’t be fringe leftists.

There is no excuse for this kind of crap, and Leavitt ought to be at least as ashamed of himself over this as he is his rabid support for a replacement bridge that we don’t need; loot rail that we neither need or want, and his continuing, ongoing failure to demand a vote for that entire project.
.

>Leavitt blows it again on the bridge: "feeling our pain" ain’t good enough.

>.
There’s the subtle hint of testosterone filling the political room as the young bull prepares to take on the old bull.

At the end of the day, Vancouver is a slow-motion train wreck for a variety of reasons, most of which I will avoid discussing for now, because none of them come close to the negative impacts of the biggest waste of money in the history of the Northwest.

The chief crime the City is committing against this community is their moronic insistence on wasting $4 Billion on a bridge replacement we do not need, all for the purpose of installing a light rail system we do not want.

As a part of that, this process will enslave a minimum of 60,000 commuters (although Mr. Leavitt uses the figure of 65,000) to the tune of at least $100 per month… $1200 per year… $72,000,000 per year in the aggregate.

And folks, that is $72,000,000 that will be sucked out of our economy. That is $72,000,000 that will take food out of the mouths of our children; it will take clothes off their backs; it’s going to make life, particularly for our lower income commuters, just that much more difficult.

So, what we have here is a tax on top of the horrific Oregon state income tax, demanded by a large group of people who hypocritically will not have to pay it.

The hypocrisy of this position is overarching. It dwarfs any other aspect of local government, because the imposition of this tax on a people that do not want, need or have been queried as to THEIR desire indicates that governmental arrogance is the order of the day. It also shows beyond any doubt that this is just the first in a series of projects we’re going to have to pay for that government is doing everything it can to implement without our permission… because, after all, if they can do this now, there’s no limit to the totalitarian projects they can ram down our throat and force us to pay for. After all, we’re just the people… what do we know?

I have been hammering the City and Mr. Leavitt like a nail over this issue. I haven’t been saying much about Pollard, who is the chief criminal in this enterprise; not because I don’t think he should be immediately removed from office for his selfish and unjustifiable efforts because the more simple elements of government, such as “implementing the will of the people” seem to be concepts simply beyond his ability to grasp. I haven’t been saying much about Pollard because chances of reforming Pollard are about as likely as reforming Eichman. And that ain’t happening.

Based on Mr. Leavitt’s response to the fantasy that was Pollard’s “state of the city,” there are differences between the two. But in comparison on the most important position either could take, there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them.

If there is any difference, it is limited to efforts to provide a political portrayal of difference, with nothing in substance.

That is, Pollard is a supremely arrogant clown who sees himself as politically bullet-proof. Thus, he makes no bones about his demand to shackle our local economy and enslave a huge segment of our working public with onerous tolls for a colossal waste of billions of dollars. To his credit, Pollard is out front on his idiocy; he polishes it, shines with it, revels in his utter stupidity and criminal neglect of the will of the people.

Leavitt is much more subtle about it, but unfortunately for him, the outcome is the same because he will not take the simple step of demanding a county-wide vote on the project before we go forward and waste any more than the ten’s of millions we’ve already vaporized on this effort.

The problem for Tim is that, at the end, his position is then SAME as Pollards. And when positions are the SAME, the incumbent almost always wins.

Here’s the entirety of Leavitt’s take as written in his response to Ceaser Pollard’s Fantasy Island speech, so that there is no question concerning context. Read it… and form your own opinion:

“At the regional level, we are faced with both opportunity and challenge in a new Columbia River Crossing. Let me be perfectly clear, I am fully supportive of improving the safety and commute for our citizens and businesses by replacing the antiquated bridge, reconstructing safe interchanges and providing adequate merging lanes, and the limited extension of light rail transit into downtown Vancouver. However, on specifics of this matter, the current Mayor and I have sharply different views. He promises there will be tolls. I am gravely concerned about the burdensome effect of tolls on Clark County commuters, hard-working men and women already paying an Oregon State income tax, and on our local employers who must conduct commerce across the river as a regular partof their business. While tolling will encourage some to commute via public transit, carpooling or other options, the reality is that this fee will be an additional financial burden on the 65,000 daily commuters from Vancouver and Clark County. Ladies and gentlemen, I view tolls even for consideration only if and[sic] adequately-sized bridge design is moved forward, only after all other potential sources of federal, state, and local funding have been exhausted, and only as a measure of absolute last resort.”

As I pointed out in the title, this effort at “feeling our pain” isn’t nearly good enough.

The weakness in this style over substance self-flatulation is that first, Tim does not define “adequately sized bridge” which, of course, means it could be anything. Secondly, this means that Tim WILL advocate tolls. And he WILL advocate tolls without asking us.

It COULD have been with just a few simple words… words that could have actually won Mr. Leavitt the mayorship of the city of Vancouver… words left out that no amount of money will overcome. I’ll rewrite the section as to what would make Tim Leavitt the next mayor of Vancouver, instead of relegating him to political obscurity over what might have been.

What Leavitt wrote:

“…While tolling will encourage some to commute via public transit, carpooling or other options, the reality is that this fee will be an additional financial burden on the 65,000 daily commuters from Vancouver and Clark County. Ladies and gentlemen, I view tolls even for consideration only if and[sic] adequately-sized bridge design is moved forward, only after all other potential sources of federal, state, and local funding have been exhausted, and only as a measure of absolute last resort.”

Here is what Leavitt SHOULD have written.

While tolling MIGHT encourage some to commute via public transit, carpooling or other options, the reality is that this fee will be an additional financial burden on the 65,000 daily commuters from Vancouver and Clark County. Ladies and gentlemen, I view tolls even for consideration if only if this entire question is put to a countywide vote.

Government has a role in the lives of the people of our community. But that role does not include ignoring the concerns and desires of those we would govern in the name of some inate superiority or political arrogance. We are faced with the possibility of building the largest public works project in the history of the northwestern United States in terms of cost. Ultimately, our community generally and those 65,000 commuters specifically will be expected to pay for it.

We must not move forward with this project without discerning the public will to pay for this project. We must not move forward without determining if the public wants this project. We must not move forward without determining if the public, who has once before overwhelmingly rejected light rail, has undergone a change of heart and would now support it.

As an elected leader of our community, my job, in part, is to reflect the desires of the community which elected me. My positions will not be determined by special interests, like those who have set the agenda for my opponent. My positions will not be determined by ego or arrogance, the type of ego and arrogance that has led us to a situation where those supporting this project so rabidly turn a deaf ear to the cries of pain the implementation of this effort will inflict.

And make no mistake, it will inflict pain. Taking $72,000,000 or more out of our economy every year will inflict paid on our families. Taking $72,000,000 or more out of our economy every year will inflict pain on our retail sector. And taking $72,000,000 or more our of our economy will cut revenues at every level because, ladies and gentlemen, neither city nor county coffers will see one dime of that money for use in our general funds.

My opponent and his supporters show monumental arrogance to believe that their wisdom somehow supercedes that of the people. It does not. And as a result, the least we can do is to give voice to the people; to seek out and listen to their opinions and then to apply the highest value to that opinion, expressed in that time-honored American way… the ballot box.

And I will accept no other outcome when it comes to the voice of the people on this issue.

In the past, I have been a major supporter of replacing our current bridge and bringing light rail into our community. I will continue on in that regard, but I relaize that my continued support must be tempered by the wishes of those we would govern.

YOU are the reason I am here. And with a project of this magnatude, when other options are available, to ignore YOU, or silence YOU is simply unacceptable and a concept with which I will not abide.

Is this much longer? You bet. But the very fact that Mr. Leavitt spent so little time and effort on this, the most important transportation issue in Southwest Washington, if that clown Pollard is to be believed, means that much more time SHOULD have been spent discussing this issue.

You heard it here first: Tim Leavitt will lose. His failure to seperate himself from Pollard on issues that really matter; his inability to reach our beyond city borders for campaign funding, the fact that when given the choice between a candidate and an incumbent, the people must be angered or otherwise motivated to remove that incumbent… all of those facftors doom his candidacy.

And that’s too bad. He could have been a contender.

“The Real” State of the City 2009

City of Vancouver

Vancouver City Councilmember & Mayoral Candidate

Tim Leavitt

“A New Chapter”

Times are tough right now. As a nation, we face one of the bleakest economic periods in decades. Right here in Vancouver, our local businesses are closing up shop; large employers are laying-off by the hundreds; and our cities, schools and libraries are struggling to provide services.

But the citizens of Vancouver aren’t the kind of people who look at a tough time, throw their hands in the air and walk away. Ours is a community that traditionally faces challenges head-on, that recognizes the importance of each and every citizen, and that understands we live in a fast-paced, modern world. Past mayors like Albert Angelo Sr., Jim Justin, Bruce Hagensen have contributed tremendously to our progress. And Royce Pollard’s passion and consummate cheerleading is unparalleled. These chapters in our history are well documented. Now, it is crucial that we begin a new era, revitalize City Hall and start a new chapter for our community; we know that what may have worked over the past 20 years just isn’t going to cut it anymore.

Vancouver ends the first decade of this 21st Century facing a new array of challenges. We are the fourth largest city in the state of Washington, a diverse and dynamic community of nearly 165,000. But to maintain that vitality, to propel us through this troubled time and into a prosperous future, we can’t simply rely on what has always been. The political landscape around us has shifted. Vancouver’s mayoral leadership must adjust also. Quite simply, it is time to refresh the leadership at City Hall, it’s time to restore stability in local government, and it’s time to raise expectations about how City Hall serves our community.

More: (PDF file)

>A series of youtube videos by Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard on Portland’s own Mayor Sam "If you’re 18 in PDX, you can get an" Adams.

>.
These, of course, are from the pre-possibly pedophile days before Sam Adams was outed as having had a sexual relationship that he’d repeatedly denied with a possibly-as-young-as-17-year-old boy.

They’re a series of videos by Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard with Sam Adams as the subject.

Not particularly work friendly…

Tip o’the hat to Victoria Taft, one of the few of Portland Radio’s outspoken conservative talk show hosts… and yes, she IS all that.

VICTORIA TAFT

PAINTING THE TARGETS IN THE CULTURE WAR

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

So a City of Portland Employee Was So Shocked…

about these videos here and here and here and here and here and here and thought I should see them. Sad. I’d seen them before but I keep forgetting others haven’t. Kids, these aren’t for you. They’re videos featuring your city ‘leaders,’ but they’re unfit for most people to watch.

>Leavitt blows it again: instead of sniveling about the size of the bridge, he should be demanding that we get to vote.

>.
Erstwhile Pollard clone Tim Leavitt, who wants to be the Soviet Socialist Republic of Vancouver’s next Commissar (Mayor), again blew the call by failing to demand that the people of Clark County get a vote on the entirety of this unwanted, unneeded and MASSIVE waste of money known as the I-5 Bridge Replacement/Loot Rail Scam.

As I pointed out before, here and here, there is no reason to elect this guy mayor, since if Royce Pollard suddenly stopped, Leavitt’s entire head would disappear from view.

Both of these clowns support a bridge replacement that will accomplish precisely and absolutely zip in the critical areas of congestion and freight mobility. Clearly, in their stilted view, no amount of Other People’s Money wasted is too much to pay for loot rail.

Leavitt has never publicly opposed Pollard on any waste of our money, and votes with him on essentially 100% of the economy-slamming scams run by Vancouver; everything from subsidizing a hotel that the city sued the voters to keep from having a voice on, to charging an idiotic, business-killing head tax… Leavitt has been there, carrying Caesar Pollard’s water.

So far, Leavitt, who is a follower of this blog, has yet to take me up on the offer I extended to him to explain where I’ve misread or misreported this situation. To that end, I extend the following offer to Mr. Leavitt: Feel free to provide your excuse for failing to demand that the entire county should determine if we want a new bridge or not; feel free to provide an explanation as to why you believe that harming the 60,000 commuters with an additional $1300 projected fee to go to work every day is a “good idea,” and feel free to explain why the hell anyone should vote to elect you mayor when the only difference between you and the one we already have is about 30 years in age.

I will provide the entirety, unedited, of your response; if any. But like last time, I doubt that I’ll be hearing from you. Like allowing the people to vote on this massive waste of our money, responding would require a level of courage you don’t possess.

Two sides clearly divided on bridge
Oregon-side officials still seeking consensus

Monday, January 26 | 9:07 p.m.

BY JEFFREY MIZE
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

PORTLAND — A high-level meeting of elected officials did little Monday to reach consensus on how many lanes should be built on a new replacement Interstate 5 bridge.

The Portland City Council and the Metro Council, in a rare joint work session, spent close to two hours in a wide-ranging discussion of the lane issue, bridge tolls and projected effects on greenhouse gas emissions and urban development.

The meeting, however, only underscored the division between Washington and Oregon on a bridge-freeway-transit project that could cost $3.5 billion or more.

There was plenty to fuel suspicions that some Oregon officials want to nail Clark County commuters by jacking up bridge tolls and slashing bridge lanes.

Bridge tolls are projected to cost $2.56 each way during rush hour, which would cost a commuter to a weekday job in Portland more than $1,000 annually.

Nevertheless, Metro Councilor Carl Hosticka questioned if such a toll would be too low.

More:

>Tim Leavitt stops by: my post has "serious misinterpretation" and I’ve taken him "out of context."

>.
Tim Leavitt, Vancouver City Councilman and mayoral candidate stopped by yesterday (actually, he didn’t “stop by.” He’s actually subscribed to this blog) and left the following response to my post here: Leavitt blows it: Rabid support of an unneeded I-5 Bridge replacement cements his worthlessness as an elected official.

Tim Leavitt said…

There is some serious misinterpretation included in this piece about the newspaper quotes of my position…taken way out of context. If you’re interested in scratching below the surface and learning the details, I would encourage you to read my entries about the Columbia River Crossing at my blog: http://www.leavitt4vancouver.blogspot.com/.

thanks much –
tim

I disagree.

I “misinterpreted” nothing.

I took nothing “out of context.”

The newspaper quotes I used are these:

Vancouver Councilman Tim Leavitt, who represents C-Tran on the 10-member sponsors council, was the only one who spoke up in favor of a 12-lane crossing, saying that he was not interested in compromising safety, congestion and economic prosperity.

And:

“It’s frustrating to me that our Congress passed a $700 billion bailout for the financial sector and they couldn’t throw in a measly $3 billion for this immense federal asset for the West Coast,” said Tim Leavitt, a Vancouver councilman who will represent C-Tran on the 10-member sponsors council. “Please give us some money. Why do we have to beat each other up locally?”

Note the link contained in each paragraph. Clicking on the link would take the reader to the entire story as printed in the Columbian. They could then determine context for themselves… but there is nothing wrong with the context as I presented it.

That ANY politician could describe $3 billion as “measly” shows both an arrogance and tonedeafness breathtaking in it’s dimensions.

As for my “serious misinterpretation,” Mr. Leavitt provides nothing, save a link to his own blog (That actually tends to strengthen my conclusions upon review) to dispute what I’ve written here.

We’re not going to get the federal money because the project is worthless on its face and even the most rank bureaucrat in DC understands immediately what we all already know: the entire purpose of replacing this bridge is to bring light rail into Vancouver… period.

Replacing this bridge will do absolutely nothing to relieve pressure in the I-5 corridor; it will do nothing to decrease congestion, nor will it do anything to improve freight mobility. Thus, it is a wasted $4 billion that a barn-headed ape should be able to see in a minute.

But not the downtown Mafia. They want what they want, and they’ll waste $4 BILLION taxpayer dollars to get it.

I have yet to see or find anything that indicates that Mr. Leavitt is opposed to this colossal waste of money. I have yet to see or find anything to show where Mr. Leavitt is opposed to “No-Choice” Royce Pollard, America’s Gulag Vancouver’s Mayor on this massive waste of money or anything else.

Nor have I seen ANYTHING to indicate that Mr. Leavitt is demanding that the people who will bear this expense; the people who will have a $100 or more per month fee rammed down their throats to get to work should have the final say.

Nope… those with the final say will rarely use the bridge they’re sticking us with and certainly will not have to pay this toll, day in, day out, to get this thing built. It’s not that much different then the tribal Mafia attempting to ram their unwanted mega-casino down our throats: none of them live here or even close to here, and none of them will have to bear the negative consequences of this massive economic black hole. That tends to make it easy to support when you won’t live in the community you’re trying to crush.

I’ve indicated that there isn’t a dimes’ worth of difference between Mr. Leavitt and Mr. Pollard. They’re so focused on superseding and ignoring the voters that the blinders they both wear makes it impossible for them to understand that they work for US, and not the other way around.

Over at clarkblog.org, the question, remaining unanswered, was asked of Mr. Leavitt:

Tim,

Are you now saying that your votes on the Hilton, The Monterey, The police station sale, the indoor farmers market. and the capitulation of the city in the Sharma payoff to name just a few were all indefensible?

And which of these votes opposed Mayor Pollard?

None.

I invite Mr. Leavitt to come back here and explain where I’ve got it wrong. The unimaginable waste of the CRC, a bill now exceeding $90 million vaporized and wasted dollars for a study with a pre-ordained outcome (everyone alive KNEW that the ONLY alternative the CRC was going to come up with would be “replace the bridge and slam light rail on it) that *I* could have replicated for $20 provides him with no cover.

I invite him to come back here and explain how he intends to fight for our RIGHT to have the final say on this debacle.

I invite him to come back here and explain where he has differed in the past with Mayor Pollard on the issues that matter…. like those provided by mooney over at clarkblog.org and shown above.

Show me where I’m wrong. Otherwise, if I’ve pegged you accurately (and I believe I have) then NEITHER you NOR Pollard should be elected to dog-catcher.

Any response to this (And I’m not holding me breath here) will be shown in it’s entirety… so those issues of “misinterpretation” and being taken “out of context” won’t impact.

.