Overly expensive, tax-hungry Seattle

The Seattle City Council failed to sufficiently trim Mayor Greg Nickels' super-sized $1.8 billion package of road and bridge improvements. Voters, therefore, face a November ballot request that is too big and overwhelming.

The council should find some way to go back and reduce this plan, which is still an overpriced $1.6 billion after nine council members worked the proposal over. Quick, somebody issue these guys darker green eyeshades and sharper pencils. Most troubling, the transportation must-do list is presented as if in a vacuum, as if voters will not grapple with many other requests for money.

The reverse is true. Nickels, council members approving this mega-package, initiative writers and King County are shelling the voters with rapid-fire requests for tax money. The teachers union is seeking a property-tax increase this fall for smaller class sizes in Seattle. The mayor's must-have tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct is coming next. Note to voters: The expensive tunnel is not included in this November's package. That multimillion-dollar request likely will be offered a year later with the sincere hope that voters will have forgotten this pain by then.

This November, King County is expected to seek another — that's plus — more than $500 million for enhanced bus service.

Each individual request by itself might seem reasonable. Together, they compound problems faced by low- and moderate-income homeowners who are getting priced out of the city.

Many Seattleites will support roads and bridge projects such as the Spokane Street Viaduct and the South Lander Street Overpass and a backlog of other, truly necessary projects. But there is a fundamental disconnect between the enormous sums politicians are seeking and the ability of the average homeowner to keep up.

As Councilman Tom Rasmussen, who wanted a smaller package, points out, the city is working on an emergency fund for residents in danger of having their water turned off. Many citizens already are struggling to stay afloat.

Councilman David Della, who voted against the proposals, bristles at bridging a legitimate maintenance gap, then throwing in the kitchen sink. He is correct. The package includes too many extras: money to do restoration and seismic work on King Street Station, money for the Mercer Mess, money even for tree and landscape maintenance along city streets.

The transportation package is financed by a council-approved parking tax, a property-tax increase that goes to voters and a council-approved $25-per-employee head tax. The latter sends a wrong, tough-on-business message.

Our mayor and weak-willed council are living in their own world. It's not as if gas prices are plummeting. The package is too big and tries to accomplish too much in a city rapidly becoming too expensive for low- and moderate-income families.