Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ELECTION: Jan Angel doesn’t look out for toll payers

Letter by George Robison, Gig Harbor on Sep. 21, 2010 at 9:20 am with 5 Comments »
September 21, 2010 9:20 am

At the Bremerton candidate forum this week, state Rep. Jan Angel attempted to justify voting against SB 6499, the bill modernizing toll collections. She said that under the bill, people who overlooked paying tolls would be fined without the right to be heard in court.

Section 3 subd (2)(b) says a civil penalty may be assessed pursuant to RCW 46.63.160, and requires that citations be processed as parking violations. It is clear from the bill that a person wanting to contest the assessment simply would fail to pay the toll and allow the citation to issue, then either pay the penalty or go to court.

Angel seems not to have read the bill or is intentionally misstating the bill as a reason for not protecting toll payers. Penalties would go into the bridge bond reserves rather than maintaining the Pierce County court system, which had been receiving $2.1 million per year from fines. It will help keep tolls down by directing more funds, including the civil penalty into bridge bond retirement.

We need to elect someone who understands what the bill does and will look out for toll payers. We need to elect Sumner Schoenike.

Leave a comment Comments → 5
  1. Why does Jan Angel hate the bridge users so much that she insists on punishing them. Under the old system when there was a failure in the Good To Go system you were given a fine and treated like a criminal. It is bad enough that some of us pay nearly $1,000 per year in tolls but she wants to treat us like criminals too. SB 6499 is an example of improving government to help the people and Jan Angel was against it because she wanted to punish people just because they have to use the Narrows Bridge.

  2. SuperSteve says:

    It’s ashamed that Jan Angel put so much effort in trying to have the TNB renamed after Bob Oke, but doesn’t take the time to look out for toll payers.

    She just doesn’t ‘get it’ when it comes to toll issues, either because

    1) she’s from Kitsap County and doesn’t think that it matters to the people she’s accustomed to representing as a Kitsap County Commissioner, or

    2) she doesn’t sit on a transportation committee in the Legislature and doesn’t feel obligated to do her homework.

    It’s also pretty obvious that this was one of those cases where she wasn’t up on the issue and, not sure of what to do, simply took the party-line vote.

  3. rhino1121 says:

    In all her years in public office Jan Angel has worked hard for the tax payers of Kitsap County first and then for her district. Of all the people who hold public office Jan Angel is one who will always respond personaly to a letter, phone call or email. While she may not always tell what you want to hear, she will listen to your side, then eplain in detail and honestly what her stance is on that issue. Jan Angel is one of the good guys and I say support her once again. No one works as hard or listens as well to the people of her district. Donald R Ransier

  4. I do not know Jan Angel well having met her only a dozen or so times and talked with her on only a couple of those. She seems, though, to misunderstand the role of a representative. A representative is to look out for the interests of all citizens, not a chosen few. I’ve gleaned that Ms. Angel does favors for individuals. That may be all well and good, but where is she on overarching issues like the one presented here?

    She clearly misread and misunderstood SB 6499, if she read it at all. Similarly, she misconstrued SB 5651 and was one of the few who voted in favor of unregulated, goliathan puppy mills. Then there is HB 2339 that merely asks automobile owners to donate $5 annually for the preservation of state parks. Again, Jan Angel voted against this measure and then lambasted it in the press; this, after stating in a mailer that she “helped to preserve 3,824 acres of parks and open space.” If her position on parks had prevailed, we would have lost 40 state parks.

    I do not know which is more distressing, that she votes poorly on measures important to her constituents, misrepresents her votes, does not understand their implications, or takes credit for what the prevailing side gets done in spite of her obstructionist votes.

  5. Rep. Angel has done precious little in her first term in the state legislature except vote. And some of her votes, as mentioned in this letter and comments, are simply incomprehensible.The 26th district doesn’t really need to support a cipher; we have a better choice, Dr. Sumner Schoenike.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0