We're inevitably hearing talk of a new push for regional transportation governance in the wake of Proposition 1's defeat at the polls.

Advocates include state auditor (and Pierce County resident) Brian Sonntag, who touted the idea in his TNT oped article Nov. 19.

Randy Lewis, the City of Tacoma's man in Olympia (his job title is governmental affairs director), begs to differ.

I noticed our State Auditor joining the chorus for consolidated governance on your op-ed pages recently. As with most proponents of regionalization, he trotted out that alarming statistic about there being over 100 agencies doing transportation planning.

Proponents of regionalization want to scare people into believing that is evidence of out of control bureaucracy of course so they never point out that the vast majority of those agencies are cities planning their residential and arterial streets. There are 24 cities in Pierce County, another 40 in King and a dozen more in Snohomish and Kitsap. Add four counties and there is the vast bulk of this so-called problem.

I am sure Mr. Sonntag doesn't propose turning over construction of Tacoma's streets to some regional government.

For Lewis' unabtridged remarks, click on Read More. If a thoughtul argument breaks out, we'll put some of it print.

[More:]

As the debate about what to do with transportation in our area goes forward, it could be helpful to citizens for the press to clarify some of the points all sides love to make. I noticed our State Auditor joining the chorus for consolidated governance on your op-ed pages recently.

As with most proponents of regionalization, he trotted out that alarming statistic about there being over 100 agencies doing transportation planning. Proponents of regionalization want to scare people into believing that is evidence of out of control bureaucracy of course so they never point out that the vast majority of those agencies are cities planning their residential and arterial streets.

There are 24 cities in Pierce County, another 40 in King and a dozen more in Snohomish and Kitsap. Add four counties and there is the vast bulk of this so-called problem. I am sure Mr. Sonntag doesn't propose turning over construciton of Tacoma's streets to some regional government.

And as for the idea that local governments just need to coordinate. What does he thing the purpose of the Puget Sound Regional Council is? As for transit agencies: Is there evidence that they do not coordinate?

Do you really believe that a citizen in South Tacoma with concerns about how the Pierce Transit Shuttle service works will be better served by a regionally appointed or elected official representing 70 or 80 thousand citizens (assuming some type of proportional representation) than that citizen is currently served by contacting a Tacoma City Councilmember who serves on the transit board?

Can we do even more coordination? Probably. But is that the real problem in this region. Lack of planning? I'd be far more interested in any proposals that streamline or pick up the pace of the coordination process so projects can be built before their cost exceeds the available revenue.

My theories? The Roads and Transit package failed because it was doomed from the start. The RTID was flawed by not including cities in the decision making (and that was a strictly partisan decision at the time) and by trying to spread projects all over the place without finishing much of anything.

Did Pierce County Councilmember (Shawn) Bunney really believe voters in his district would support the package because he put money for SR 164 in it? Have you seen what the vote was there? Meantime, the one Pierce County project EVERYONE supported (167) was shorted and would not have been completed.

And as for Sound Transit: I believe Joanie Earl has really turned the organization around and that it is doing a good job. Yet there is still lingering controversy over light rail and it was a bad idea to seek funding for more light rail before Phase 1 was open. Sounder, express buses and Tacoma Link are a success but none of these are as visible as the Seattle Link will be. They need to get that running, get that airport link finished, demonstrate how rail works and then seek an expansion. A major reason they wanted to push forward now was because it would be necessary to lay off some of their engineering and design staff and then refill those positions if Phase 2 came later. That may be more efficient, but given the controversy of light rail, getting Phase 1 done and proving its value is more important. And this is also how rail has been expanded in Portland and other cities.

One final thought. Sound Transit officials did give Tacoma area folks exactly what we asked for in Phase 2: light rail to the airport. Yet the criticism of the Sierra Club and Ron Sims wasn't totally off the mark. I don't know if Sims offered alternatives for Tacoma, but the Sierra Club did.

They proposed that Tacoma extend light rail further here, connecting our employment and high density neighborhood, and thus encourage more development along the rail lines. They suggested that some future phase of Sound Transit would be the time to extend light rail to the airport from here.

There is actually merit to that argument and their point that densities along most of the proposed line from SeaTac to Tacoma are not high and projected ridership would be low. This shouldn't be seen as a blow to Tacoma's ego but a way for Tacoma to have a good internal rail system that best serves our needs. Portland's system didn't go to the airport in either Phase One or Two.