ANDREWS'

REVERSIBLE

270 LANES:

BRILLIANT, OR

GOING THE

WRONG WAY?

It's often hard to find out what is going on in our county government. This is partly because the Powers-that-Be don't want you to know what's going on. (That's why you tend to hear about things after the public hearings are over, and the council has voted). And it is partly because the Washington Post has essentially ceased to cover county politics, with the exception of recapping a press release.

One item of business we've heard a little about is Council President Phil Andrews' proposal for reversible lanes for I-270. As you would imagine, these lanes would be southbound in the morning, and northbound in the evening.

But not much has been clarified beyond that in the media.

If this proposal is to add 2 reversible lanes either in the middle of, or to the sides of, the existing lanes, this would be an excellent idea. But only if they are completely toll-free, and open to all vehicles.

However, if these are "HOT" lanes, for which taxpayers will pay again for the roads they funded, that would be unacceptable. Converting 2 existing lanes into reversible lanes would be equally unacceptable. This would not only be insufficient volume-wise - and potentially dangerous like the Bay Bridge - but it would also make the fairly quick use of 270 southbound in the evening into another traffic jam. Which is total hypocrisy from those who talk non-stop about "alternative working schedules" and telecommuting. (When lawyers can telecommute into the courtroom, and janitors can wax floors over the internet, that just might work. Until that day... probably not).

270 has to increase capacity. There is no way around it. Toll lanes are for the rich, a solution to the intentional fouling of our transportation system by the Powers-that-Be for a variety of motivations. HOT lanes will keep the rich moving, so they can keep funding the politicians that carry out their business. Isn't that grand?

Join me in not letting this happen.