Yes: Victoria is Bridge Happy

Victoria is bridge happy. In its 150 years (since the Fort Victoria days), we've gone through 4 downtown bridges. Two (Johnson St. and Point Ellice) are still standing. One bridge is critical for our infrastructure (the Point Ellice Bridge aka Bay Street Bridge) and we're not talking about it. The Bay St. Bridge funnels natural gas, electrical, communications and industrial traffic. Johnson Street Bridge is the kitschy bridge that can rise or lower. It funnels traffic between the low-rent part of town and the downtown core. With one bridge key to the functionality of our city and one that's visible when you're a tourist-- we're zeroing in on the Blue Bridge.
For a long time I have involuntarily been helping the "Yes" campaign. All of the those bus shelter ads; and flyers and media blitzes-- I paid for those. As a taxpayer, I have been obliged to pay for the tens of thousands of dollars wasted on making the "Yes" side prominent and the defacto choice.
To be clear: the "Yes" isn't for the bridge-- it's for the loan and the plan to rush ahead. Flash back a year or so ago. The Conservatives were desperate to continue running the country. They flushed billions of dollars into the country to keep things going. They largely flushed it into the ridings where they had MPs. Gary Lunn got a super expensive overpass to speed people destined for the airport. Keith Martin should have asked for an overpass on the Colwood Crawl (like his rival Troy DeSouza was pushing for); but he asked for nothing and nothing came. Victoria is the NDP nexus (home of federal Denise Savoie, provincial MLAs Rob Fleming and Carole James; and NDP-aligned mayor Dean Fortin). If any part of the country was not going to get funding, it would be Victoria. Add its political leanings and biases to the fact that we got a tonne of money for transportation overhauls in 1999 and it's clear: no money was coming.
This didn't stop Dean Fortin and his staff from rushing in a proposal to tap into all of that juicy funding.
Fortin said the bridge was in dire need of replacement. He was likely right. Starting the year that Fortin was elected to council-- during Alan Lowe's second term-- the maintenance budget for the Blue Bridge plummeted. Rainy Victoria does no favour to metal. Lamp standards in Victoria have rusted through and spontaneously fallen over not a block from the bridge. The bridge, being 86 years old, needs maintenance. If the City gives up on such maintenance, then, yes, the bridge will fall into disrepair and need to be replaced.
But the bridge maintenance neglect has only happened over the last six years. It is possible to overhaul the bridge. But that's not what the Action Plan would cover. Fortin, being an excellent grant writer, knows how to hammer a square peg into a round hole. The repair option was discounted, they found a sole source for the bridge replacement design and declared that it would only cost $50 million.
To hammer off the corners of the bridge project, they jettisoned the rail line. The best way to move a lot of commuters is rail, so this transit route (the bridge) isn't going to be available to move high density transportation.

Rail	Bus	Car	Bike
Best speed High density of passengers Available to the disabled Expensive to set-up	Mediocre speed High density of passengers Partially available to the disabled Cheap to set-up Contributes to gridlock	Okay speed Poor density of passengers Partially available to the disabled Cheap to set-up Makes gridlock	Poor speed Low density of passengers Not available to the disabled Cheap to set-up Contributes to gridlock

If we could go deep into hawk and fix all of our problems, for the budgeted amount to give us a bridge for 100 years, that would be great. To date, we have not kept a bridge for 100 years. Budgets run amok.
"YES" means that for the next 100 years (est. lifespan of the bridge) the rail line will terminate in Vic-West instead of continuing into downtown. So, the CRD's commitment to light rail as a means of moving people in the CRD will be stymied for 5 generations. "YES" doesn't give us the money needed to erect a bridge. It gives us $50 million. If the final cost is $60 or $80 million, we don't have a loan provision or a "blank cheque" checkbox on the referendum question. That additional cost will be our cost as taxpayers in the city and the region.

This has been a rushed process. Fortin and City Hall have painted themselves into a corner. They have said the sky bridge is falling, hence why they hit up the Feds for millions of dollars. They can't back down without losing face. Fortin knows how the wheels will turn. By 2012, he can try for the provincial NDP and forego re-election as mayor. When the bridge is erected and we are all burdened with the massive overruns, Fortin will have moved on up the political food chain. Should Carole James not be able to unseat the Liberal leader (aka Rich Coleman, John Furlong or Idi Amin), in 2013, a new sitting NDP MLA with leadership experience would be a front runner to take James' spot. Ida Chong is low hanging fruit and Fortin could have her seat after taking a year off from the job of running the cash strapped capital.

I am voting "NO" and I urge you to do the same.
"No" means:

• No to the loan
• No to excluding light rail in Victoria
  
• No to a blank cheque for budget overruns
• No to tearing down an 86 yr. old structure because an unproven structure could last 100 years.

"No" can also mean:

• We still want to replace the bridge with a reasonable assessment of the situation; and multiple bids from contractors.
  
• We need to ask what the role of Downtown Victoria will be in 30 years.
• We need to ask what happens when the next big expense hits.
• We need to remember that the Bay St. Bridge is even more important to the region.