Gov. Christine Gregoire isn’t getting much support in Bellevue these days for the tax on soda and bottled water she proposed to help close the state budget deficit.

That’s because the district is home to a “hulking big bottling plant,” to borrow a phrase used by Rep. Ross Hunter, of Medina.

Hunter said he won’t back the tax, in part, because of the potential impacts it would have on the Coca Cola bottling plant in Bellevue.

“There’s a lot of good family-wage jobs that will be lost,” he said. “That obviously factors in. I also just think it’s stupid.”

Hunter said he’s can understand how the governor would want “sin taxes” on items like cigarettes, which cause cancer. But he doesn’t like the idea of punishing consumers for products that can lead to obesity, like candy and soda.

There’s another reason Hunter won’t get behind Gregoire’s proposal:

“The pop guys will pour $10 million into a campaign in November to repeal it and win,” he said. “I don’t need to make those kinds of enemies.”

Coca Cola recently stepped up efforts to fight the governor’s proposal, holding a press conference at its Bellevue bottling facility on Friday to talk about how the plan would impact the regional economy.

Bob Slack, vice president of Coca Cola Bottling Company of Washington, said the tax unfairly targets one industry, and would create a wide-ranging ripple effect that impacts everyone from suppliers and bottlers to convenience store owners and consumers.

Gregoire’s proposal includes an excise tax of 5 cents for every 12 ounces of carbonated beverage with the goal of raising $93.6 million during the current biennium.

The governor’s plan would also require bottlers to pay 1 cent per ounce on bottled water, generating $34.7 million during the biennium.

Slack said the tax will increase the price of soft drinks by up to 30 percent, while raising the cost of a case of bottled water by more than 100 percent.

“This is about jobs in our state and consumers who simply cannot afford higher prices,” Slack said. “We already have a 9.5-percent unemployment rate in Washington. Let’s find ways to keep jobs in our home state.”

The beverage industry in Washington directly employs over 3,000 workers, as well as another 17,000 in affiliated businesses, according to Slack.

The industry also has a total economic impact for the state of $8.6 billion, Slack said.

The Coke bottling plant in Bellevue reduced its workforce by 10 percent in 2008, and saw a decline in volume of 4 percent last year.

In addition, Slack claims 2010 has not been as promising as his company had hoped.

“We are faced with some tough choices if the economy doesn’t turn around quickly,” he said. “If we were to have this tax imposed, we would most likely need to reduce our workforce by 25 to 30 percent.”

Coca Cola Bottling Company of Washington employs over 1,000 workers.

Joining Coca Cola in the fight against Gregoire’s proposal on Friday were Tom Cheddar, general manager for the Western Container packaging company; and Michael Chey, a member of the Korean Grocers Association and owner of two convenience stores in the Puget Sound region.

Both said they oppose the governor’s proposal.

“For many, this excise tax could just place bottled water and soda out of reach, Cheddar said. “The impact doesn’t just stop here at the bottlers, it’s going to have far-reaching effects.”

Reporters note: I’ll provide some input from the governor and other Eastside legislators on Monday, when I get a chance to talk with them – hopefully.

Blog entry:

The Bellevue School District is wrestling with how to teach math as it prepares to adopt new textbooks for that subject later this year.

At question is whether to use a more traditional math-computations system or the emerging inquiry-based approach that uses investigation and story problems to help students learn math.

The district wants new textbooks for the start of the next school year, and it’s testing two types: the Holt Algebra-Geometry series and the Discovering Mathematics curriculum.

Many parents and college professors have expressed strong opposition to the Discovering system, which uses inquiry-based methods. They say this approach leaves students unprepared for college math and is troublesome for those who don’t have a strong command of reading and writing.

The state Superintendent of Public Instruction has recommended the Holt series, as has the State Board of Education.

The district assigned a math advisory committee to review the texts and come up with a recommendation on which one to adopt.

That committee is expected to make an endorsement to the district’s instructional materials committee, which in turn reports to the Bellevue School Board.

The district claims the committee’s meetings are non-public.

No information is posted publicly about times, dates or locations for the meetings. However, the district does have a website explaining the textbook-adoption process.

The district says the adoption committee is not subject to the rules of the Open Public Meetings Act, which requires all meetings to be open except in limited circumstances.

“It’s not a public agency, it’s an advisory committee,” said Bellevue schools general counsel Ricardo Cruz. “We have committees all over the district, and not all of them are open to the public.”

The Washington State Attorney General’s Office told The Reporter it cannot give a binding legal opinion of the matter, but it did cite a precedent from 2006 in which the Puyallup School District fought the Tacoma News Tribune over whether it’s instructional materials committee meetings should be open to the public.

The state’s open public meetings ombudsman concluded that the Puyallup committee was a policy-making body of the district, and was therefore subject to the Open Public Meetings Act.

“I think the IMC is precisely the kind of important policy-making body the legislature had in mind when it broadly defined ‘public agency’ and ‘governing body,’” former ombudsman Greg Overstreet said in a letter to a Puyallup School District attorney.

Still, Cruz contends that the Bellevue School District’s adoption committee meetings “are not required to be open under the Open Public Meetings Act, although we’re not excluding people from those meetings.”

The district granted permission for The Reporter to attend a meeting of the advisory committee scheduled for Feb. 25 at a location that is yet to be announced.

The 26-member committee consists of teachers, parents, an administrator and members of the district’s curriculum-adoption staff.

That group is scheduled to review results from the district’s pilot studies during its Feb. 25 meeting.

Bellevue schools curriculum-development director Kathee Terry said the district is still wading through data – taken from around 2,000 students – and does not have a clear answer yet on which curriculum works best.

“We have contradicting results,” she said. “It’s pretty even.”

Not so according to the many parents who oppose the Discovering curriculum.

Bellevue resident Jock Mackinlay is a mentor for the FIRST robotics team at Chinook MS who also holds a bachelor’s degree in math and a PhD in computer science.

Mackinlay says Discovery fails to help students learn the basics of computation. He also says the Discovering series favors teachers with weak backgrounds in math.

“They’ve been trying the inquiry-based method for a decade now,” he said. “The fact that all the parents hate it should tell them that it’s time to try something less extreme.”

District parent Sharon Peaslee agrees with Mackinlay’s assessment of the inquiry-based approach.

“It was a failed experiment,” Peaslee said. “It’s time to move on.”

As for the Discovering series, few people aside from teachers have expressed support for the texts.

Terry said she can’t explain why more parents haven’t come forward to show support for the curriculum.

“Probably because if a parent is satisfied with their child’s education, they don’t feel a need to march for it,” she said.

The Seattle School District has grappled this year with similar issues related to a choice between the Holt and Discovering texts.

Discovering won in that case, but a King County Superior Court judge ordered the school board to reconsider its decision, saying it was arbitrary and capricious, after a group of concerned parents sued the district.

That proposal may lose momentum once it reaches the House, where Speaker Frank Chopp has joined a group of other Seattle leaders, including the city’s mayor, to oppose the state’s preferred plan for renovating 520.

The corridor makeover, which is expected to cost between $4.4 billion and $4.5 billion, will take place in separate east and west phases.

Projects on the Eastside will include adding an inside HOV lane in both directions from Medina to SR 202 in Redmond, building a new direct-access interchange for transit and HOV at 108th Ave. NE, constructing three new highway lids to connect neighborhoods divided by the corridor, and creating a bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of 520.

Tom’s bill would authorize the state to use what is now restricted tolling money to begin construction on those projects.

Supporters of the bill, including Rep. Ross Hunter, of Medina, say the state needs to take advantage of a favorable bidding climate by starting the work soon.

Chopp opposes the state’s preferred 520-renovation plan because of what it entails for the west end of the corridor. He says it lacks mitigation for local neighborhoods and would tie up transit traffic moving to the future University of Washington light rail station.

In addition, Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn has said the state should revamp its preferred plan to exchange the two carpool lanes with dedicated transit lanes.

A contingent of regional business, labor, and government leaders on Feb. 5 urged lawmakers to move forward with the plan regardless of opposition. The group included representatives from both Seattle and the Eastside.

Sen. Rodney Tom, of Medina, sponsored the senate bill that passed today by a vote of 44-3.

What to do about the 42-mile Eastside rail corridor that the Port of Seattle recently purchased from Burlington Northern Sante Fe?

There was once strong disagreement over whether to run commuter trains along the line or use it for a regional walking and biking trail.

Now the two sides are considering a hybrid system similar to California’s 70-mile Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) system.

SMART, due to open in 2014, will include both passenger rail service and a pedestrian pathway paralleling U.S. Highway 101.

Calls for a similar hybrid system along the Eastside rail corridor are gaining traction, with Cascadia Center at Discovery Institute doing most of the trumpeting. The group last week organized a dinner meeting and bus tour of the corridor to discuss the possibilities.

Bellevue Mayor Don Davidson attended the event, along with city council members Kevin Wallace and Claudia Balducci – who is also a member of the Sound Transit board.

The idea of a rails-with-trails corridor looks to be a perfect compromise on the surface, but working out the details of such a plan is proving difficult.

First there’s the issue of acquiring the corridor from Burlington Northern. That part is done, with the Port of Seattle having inked an $81 million deal to buy the rail line last December.

But now there are five other entities negotiating to buy pieces of the land for rails, trails and utilities. They include King County, Sound Transit, the city of Redmond, Cascade Water Alliance and Puget Sound Energy.

Next comes the question of who pays for what. The general assumption is that King County would fund the multi-use trails while Sound Transit would fork over money to refurbish the tracks.

Where the county would get money for its end of the bargain is a mystery at this point, but the $17 billion voter-approved ST2 mass transit package includes a $50 million capital contribution toward a potential passenger rail partnership for the Eastside rail corridor.

The pressure is on to finalize an agreement, because the funds go toward HOV and bus rapid-transit along I-405 if a partnership is not in place by the end of next year.

The last issue is about fear. Rails and trails advocates are both paranoid that they’ll lose out on access to the corridor.

“I have little faith that if trains start running without a trail that we’ll ever get a trail on it,” said Chuck Ayers, Executive Director of Cascade Bicycle Club.

Likewise, rail advocates are worried about a potential outcry if a regional trail has to be removed – or even just moved – to make way for trains.

“The only way to do this is simultaneously,” said Cascadia Center fellow Tom Jones. “If one does it before the other, then there is going to be a fear of getting bumped out.”

That’s why Cascadia Center brought along some of the people who helped plan the SMART system to speak at the group’s recent bus tour and dinner. The idea was to show that it’s possible to do both rails and trails at once.

There are some who say a rails-and-trails corridor is not only possible, but could be done in a matter of years.

Doug Engle is chief financial officer for GNP, the company that the Port of Seattle tapped to operate the rail line. He says a private company could convert the corridor for hybrid use at a rate of one mile per day using a rail-renovating machine called the P811.

Engle also says the work can be done at one-tenth the cost of what a public agency would pay.

But some residents living beside the rail corridor aren’t so keen on the idea of trains running regularly near their homes. They prefer to see a quiet trail for pedestrians and cyclists only.

The state legislature in 2008 directed Sound Transit and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) to study the potential for commuter rail service along Eastside rail corridor.

That analysis, dealing with both rails and trails, showed that passenger trains along the corridor could accommodate up to 6,000 passengers per day, but would require significant capital improvements.

The study also indicated that a pedestrian/bike trail would fit on the right-of-way, although property acquisitions would be needed in some areas.

The estimated capital cost for implementing passenger rail along the corridor are estimated at between $1 billion and $1.3 billion, while estimates for a companion pedestrian/bicycle trail range from $297 million to $432 million.

Operating costs are estimated at $24 million to $32 million per year based on two-way service with trains operating every 30 minutes in each direction.

The Sound Transit/PSRC study did not identify a most cost-effective option.

For now, GNP is set to begin running excursion trains and limited freight along the corridor later this year.

The city council last week pressed Sound Transit to study a potential light-rail line crossing Mercer Slough Nature Park (see below), a proposal that’s sure to draw the ire of environmentalists.

Following that, the city made a series of moves this week aimed at establishing three new parks and open spaces.

The city’s parks department on Monday unveiled a draft master plan for a new 10-acre waterfront park featuring nearly a quarter mile of shoreline along Meydenbauer Bay.

The parks department also recommended plans for developing a new 27-acre park in the Eastgate business district, throwing “Bellevue Airfield Park” out there as a potential name.

Finally, the city council voted Monday to pay $3.3 million for nearly 12 acres of land in the Kelsey Creek and Newport Hills areas for preservation as open space. Funding for the acquisition will come from King County and the 2008 Bellevue parks levy.

More on this whole topic later as I talk to city officials and residents of the respective areas. If you want to share your thoughts, hit me by e-mail or on the Twitters @Reporter_Hicks.

For now, I’m off for what is billed as a three-hour tour of the BNSF rail corridor, followed by a discussion on passenger rail. Sounds dauntingly reminiscent of “Gilligan’s Island,” I know. It may be a few years before I return, and even then, it’s possible I’ll be a changed man.

Here’s a few polls to hold you over for awhile:

The proposed design appears to be a compromise between those who want to attract more train passengers with the highly frequented South Bellevue park-and-ride, and those who want East Link to run along the abandoned BNSF rail corridor.

The new variation would extend the park-and-ride lot on Bellevue Way SE to accommodate a light-rail station. The route would then turn east across Mercer Slough Nature Park before curving onto the BNSF right-of-way, and then toward downtown by way of 118th and 114th avenues.

The city is drafting a letter to Sound Transit requesting consideration of the line, and the council is expected to discuss the matter again on Jan. 25.

In February, the council recommended a South Bellevue route along Bellevue Way SE and 112th Ave. SE. But residents from the Surrey Downs and Enatai neighborhoods oppose that plan because of its potential impacts to their communities.

The alternative idea is to run East Link along the BNSF rail corridor on its way downtown, but condo dwellers living near that route oppose the plan.

The BNSF route is less expensive, and would free up money for a potential downtown tunnel or a future expansion of the light-rail system toward Issaquah.

On the other hand, the Bellevue Way SE alternative utilizes a popular park-and-ride that could attract hordes of riders.

One drawback of the compromise proposal is that it would cross Mercer Slough Nature Park, requiring significant environmental mitigation.

The council would have to update its routing preferences by March to include them in Sound Transit’s final environmental review, which is due by year’s end.

Sound Transit’s board of directors will make a decision on final routing and station locations after that review is complete.

East Link design work is scheduled to begin in 2011, with construction slated to start by 2014.

Light rail service to Bellevue is expected to launch in 2020.

So much for the mayor playing a mere ceremonial role in Bellevue’s manager-council form of government. The charge for veteran councilmember Don Davidson is to play peacemaker during his third term – non-consecutive – as gavel wielder.

One of the first things Bellevue’s new city council did in December was vote against a property tax increase for 2010. That’s a reversal from the past two years, when the council voted for increases.

That same night, rookie councilmember Kevin Wallace made an ill-fated attempt to change the city’s recommended alternatives for light-rail routing.

That issue isn’t going away, it’s just on hold. Wallace has support from three other councilmembers: Davidson, Conrad Lee, and Jennifer Robertson.

Most recently, the city council elected the conservative-minded Davidson as its mayor.

These events suggest a new council majority for the city of Belleve.

Councilmembers don’t like to admit this sort of thing exists because it sounds too ugly for municipal politics, but it’s true nonetheless. There are four members who see eye-to-eye on the major issues, and all were either elected or re-elected in November.

The question now is whether this new council majority will force its will or play nice with the minority, consisting of former Mayor Grant Degginger, former Deputy Mayor Claudia Balducci, and John Chelminiak.

No sooner had the council elected Davidson as its mayor than King County Executive Dow Constantine appointed Balducci to the Sound Transit board.

This gave the council minority a new weapon. Balducci is now one of the final decision makers on light-rail routing, making her the last person anyone wants to snub.

Wallace has proposed a new route that would travel through South Bellevue along the BNSF right of way west of I-405, and then on 114th Ave. NE to avoid impacts to the downtown core.

The new majority is open to this idea, while members of the minority have indicated their preference for a downtown tunnel on 110th Ave. NE.

If the city can identify funding for a tunnel, the issue of downtown routing might go away.

South Bellevue is another story, as the minority prefers placing the tracks along Bellevue Way SE, rather than the BNSF right of way. There’s no clear compromise there.

Davidson said he’d like to massage the light-rail issue, saying it’s still “a bit tender.” Of all the routes being considered, that’s probably the wisest for now.

That still leaves the budget to consider. The city is looking at deficits of perhaps $17 million in the operating budget and even worse for the capital budget – no one is offering exact figures just yet.

It’s hard to fill those gaps without raising property taxes.

Davidson and Lee, who became the city’s first ethnic minority deputy mayor last week, are both budget hawks who say they would like to pull back on capital projects until the economy recovers. Robertson and Wallace, who voted for the halt on property-tax increases, are likely to agree.

The council minority, meanwhile, talks about investing while the bidding market is good – actually it’s great. They’re hoping to spur new development and continue the Bellevue boom.

Whether that’s possible in this type of market is something the councilmembers will surely debate during their annual retreat this month.

The issues discussed in that meeting – and throughout the year, for that matter – will test Davidson’s ability to shape policy while maintaining friendly relations along the dais.

Kevin Wallace

The Bellevue City Council doesn’t change its mind overnight – not even for a new majority.

Newly elected council member Kevin Wallace learned that the hard way Dec. 7, when he asked the council to pull an immediate about-face on its recommendation for East Link light-rail routing.

Talk about sprinting out of the gate.  Wallace was just sworn in the previous Monday.

The newcomer withdrew his fast motion following rebukes from veteran councilmembers John Chelminiak, Mayor Grant Degginger, and Deputy Mayor Claudia Balducci, who told him it was preposterous to expect a decision so quickly on such a big issue.

“This is a major shift,” Chelminiak said. “To spring this on your council members – not a good start. Not a good start.”

To be fair, voters this year did elect a full slate of councilmembers who support a different route from the one council previously chose in February. And Wallace stated he was under the impression that Sound Transit’s board was taking final input on routing this week.

In actuality, Sound Transit was expecting all new routing concepts, not all input, to be submitted for consideration this week. The alignment that Bellevue’s new council majority supports is made up of existing alternatives, so there was nothing to worry about.

This, plus a desire for “more unity and support,” as Wallace put it to The Reporter, led to a retraction of the motion.

To review the alignment issue, the council voted in February to recommend a South Bellevue route that would travel along Bellevue Way SE and 112th Ave. SE. It also chose a downtown tunnel route beneath 108th Ave. NE.

Wallace, Don Davidson, Conrad Lee, and Jennifer Robertson – whom voters elected and re-elected this fall – have expressed support for a different alignment through South Bellevue: one that uses the abandoned BNSF rail corridor west of I-405.

Supporters of the BNSF alternative say their route would cause fewer impacts to residential neighborhoods – mainly Surrey Downs and Enatai – and to a congested Bellevue Way. They also say their idea would be cheaper because it uses existing right-of-way.

Those favoring the Bellevue Way/112th Ave. option say their route would attract more riders and avoid a potential traffic mess caused by cars entering and exiting a new park-and-ride near SE Eighth St. and 118th Ave. SE, an intersection that is already jammed most days. Condo dwellers near the BNSF line also want to keep light-rail trains away from their homes.

It’s only a matter of time before supporters of the BNSF route get their way, barring any change in the minds of the newly elected council members.

Still, Balducci said at the Dec. 7 meeting that Wallace’s motion should be put on the Dec. 14 agenda, so there would be time to study the issue and allow for public notice.

Wallace suggested there was little reason to rehash a familiar topic.

“We all know all the arguments,” he said. “Continued additional study and conversation really isn’t necessary to make an informed decision about this subject.”

The council will think about it anyway.

The Bellevue City Council in February recommended a line that would run along Bellevue Way Southeast and 112th Avenue Southeast on its way from South Bellevue to downtown. Sound Transit’s board of directors  chose that route as its preferred alternative in May.

But voters just appointed a cast of candidates who oppose that option in favor of a route along the abandoned BNSF rail corridor.

Conrad Lee and Don Davidson are both incumbents who won re-election, and they supported the BNSF line when the council was deliberating early this year. Lee even went so far as to testify to the Sound Transit board on behalf of the BNSF option after the city council had already made its decision to support the Bellevue Way/112th Avenue route.

Newly-elected Kevin Wallace and Jennifer Robertson support the BNSF alternative as well.  Wallace is working on plans for a new routing alternative that would place East Link along the abandoned rail corridor through South Bellevue and then on elevated tracks that hug the west side of I-405 to skirt the downtown core.

Add it all up and you have a new council majority that favors a different route through South Bellevue than the one already recommended. A switch would please folks residing in the Surrey Downs and Enatai neighborhoods near Bellevue Way and 112th Avenue Southeast, but certainly not the condo dwellers living near the abandoned BNSF corridor.

There’s also this to consider: what will the Sound Transit board think if Bellevue flip flops on its recommendation? Vicki Orrico, who challenged Lee and lost, said the city needs a unified voice on light rail.  Just how seriously will Sound Transit take a city that changes its mind deep into the East Link environmental-review process?

One thing seems certain: the debate over routing will continue, and all sides will be armed with valid arguments about which options are most cost-effective, which cause fewer impacts, which attract more riders, and which are even feasible.

Perhaps light rail becomes the laughingstock issue of Bellevue, much like the SR-99 viaduct matter in Seattle.  That was the fear Orrico expressed during her campaign.

There were other issues beyond East Link in this election.  I heard grumblings about helipad regulations, budget shortfalls, council transparency, planning for the Meydenbauer Bay Waterfront Park, displacement of businesses caused by the Bel-Red revitalization plan, and the possible installation of a controversial synthetic field at Newport Hills Park.

But the candidates glanced over most of these issues with standard campaign fare.  They talked in non-committal fashion about doing what’s best for everyone, listening, reaching consensus, and thinking about neighborhoods first.

It was East Link where at least some of the candidates took a stand.  It just so happens that all those candidates won.

Complete this poll and I’ll talk about the results on “News Talk” KIRO 97.3 FM Tuesday. I’ll be on “Northwest Nights with Dave Shiers,” probably twice between 8-11 p.m. Be sure to tune in.