Why the “plan” is more than a plan for TIP

The Sammamish Review covered the Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan last Friday that included Sammamish’s repeated view that the TIP is nothing more than a “plan” and not a budget.

Technically this may be true, but the City Council raised the bar when it approved the TIP July 7.

Council Members, and the City Administration, used the moment to emphasize the plan was constructed and adopted without the assumption that bonded indebtedness would be required to fund the plan.

Some Council Members were effusive about the Staff’s work to avoid the assumption of bonds.

“There is no bonding to this, this is all future cash flow,” Deputy Mayor Huckabay remarked, during a long discussion of the funding.  There are $20m in grants assumed in the TIP, of which $5m has been approved. It was acknowledged that not all grants may be approved.

Additional impact fees expected are not included in the TIP due to timing issues, Huckabay said, but neither the amount nor the allocation to the TIP projects were discussed.

It’s this funding discussion that’s important and why subsequent attempts to dismiss financial concerns and doubts over the TIP’s funding mechanisms as just a “plan” are disingenuous.

Council Member Ramiro Valderrama has been asking for a detailed discussion throughout the year, only to be stonewalled. As Sammamish Comment reported last week, the City Manager wrote to Council Member Nancy Whitten that the discussion might happen in November. This would be after the November 3 election.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in City Council, City Staff, Sammamish, Sammamish City Council and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Why the “plan” is more than a plan for TIP

  1. Frank Blau says:

    I’m a little unclear… you say ” during a long discussion of the funding.” at one point and in another you say “Council Member Ramiro Valderrama has been asking for a detailed discussion throughout the year, only to be stonewalled”.

    Was there a detailed discussion or not?

    • cityhamilton says:

      The long discussion at the July 7 meeting was a series of self-congratulatory statements of the council patting itself and the staff on their backs. However, Valdrrama’s concerns remained unaddressed. He’s been asking all year for a study session or specific agenda item, which have been ignored.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s