Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

McGinn Proposes Property Tax for Seawall

[This was originally published this morning.]

Learn to trust the Fizz: A couple of days ago, we reported on a rumor that Mayor Mike McGinn planned to propose a ballot measure to pay for a replacement to the crumbling waterfront seawall, which is vulnerable to collapse in an earthquake.

This morning, at a press conference on the seawall’s southern end at Alaskan Way and S. Washington St., McGinn proposed a $241 million ballot measure to fund seawall replacement. The replacement, which McGinn hopes could be built on an accelerated schedule of four years, would be funded by a new property tax of 12 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value, costing the owner of a $400,000 home about $48 a year.

“We are confident, given the public safety issues associated with the seawall … that we will get support from the citizens of Seattle,” McGinn said.

“We are not waiting. We are acting now.”

The measure would have to be approved by the city council, and would require approval by 60 percent of the population. McGinn said his conversations with council members have been “encouraging.”

“The city council recognizes the public safety issues with the seawall and I hope the council wants to see this move forward.”

(The council is in retreat all day today; I’ll have more on their responses to McGinn’s proposal later this afternoon.)

Although the seawall was initially part of the larger Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project (the seawall was going to serve as one wall of the cut-and-cover tunnel), it’s been a stand-alone project ever since the city and state chose a deep-bore tunnel to replace the viaduct instead.

McGinn deflected all questions about the implications of his proposal for viaduct replacement, saying, “We’re here today to talk about the seawall.”

McGinn said the design for the new seawall would be “the same as what would be used” under the old proposal. His spokesman, Aaron Pickus, says that while “the design phase still has to happen,” there are “a lot of environmental factors that we have to take into account, and I’m sure [sea level rise] will be one of them.”

The state’s original seawall replacement proposal would be high enough to handle approximately a three-inch rise in sea level. Current projections for sea level rise in Seattle anticipate an increase of as little as six inches or as much as two feet by 2050. By the end of the century, some scientists believe seas could rise as much as seven feet. I have calls in to the city and state transportation departments to find out if their latest seawall plans are higher than the original proposal to take potential sea level rise into account.

McGinn wouldn’t speculate on the impact a May ballot measure would have on a potential November levy to pay for light rail, calling “what we might do in November” irrelevant to today’s announcement.


  • eric

    Of course, everyone knows it’s much more efficient to tear up the waterfront to replace the seawall, then tear it up again a few years later to build the viaduct replacement, rather than coordinating these two projects and doing them simultaneously.

  • eric

    Of course, everyone knows it’s much more efficient to tear up the waterfront to replace the seawall, then tear it up again a few years later to build the viaduct replacement, rather than coordinating these two projects and doing them simultaneously.

  • AGH

    This is a bad idea! You are going to ask voters to approve funding for a vital piece of city infrastructure? One that is a known and growing saftey hazard? Yeah, it needs to be done, and fast, but what if you don’t get the 60 percent needed for approval? How many of Seattle’s levys have been approved by at least 60%? I thought the city had a finance plan that included the seawall that did not require voter approval. And what election will this be? Spring? Good luck! Again, this is a bad idea!

  • AGH

    This is a bad idea! You are going to ask voters to approve funding for a vital piece of city infrastructure? One that is a known and growing saftey hazard? Yeah, it needs to be done, and fast, but what if you don’t get the 60 percent needed for approval? How many of Seattle’s levys have been approved by at least 60%? I thought the city had a finance plan that included the seawall that did not require voter approval. And what election will this be? Spring? Good luck! Again, this is a bad idea!

  • Chad Lupkes

    The Mayor needs to put out a public request for proposals for ideas on how to replace the Seawall. Put people’s minds to work on figuring out how to fix and rebuild it. What I’m afraid will happen is some mega-engineering firm with political connections will have a plan already approved, and all we poor Seattle tax-payers need to do is give them billions of dollars. Dollars they will then take to their corporate headquarters in another city, likely another state, possibly another country.

  • hoary

    How many years is the levy? I didn’t see it in the article, but might’ve missed it. 4-year? 6-year?

  • hoary

    How many years is the levy? I didn’t see it in the article, but might’ve missed it. 4-year? 6-year?

  • Guest

    And so it begins. City time and energy being used to fight “the tunnel.” Petulant politics at its finest. What’s next? Bush scare tactics?

  • Price out of Seatown

    And so it begins. City time and energy being used to fight “the tunnel.” Petulant politics at its finest. What’s next? Bush scare tactics?

  • klatu

    Can we vote on the tunnel while we’re at it?

  • klatu

    Can we vote on the tunnel while we’re at it?

  • West Seattle Waiter

    Very doubtful that a special election in May gets 60% — sounds like the McGinn/Chopp plan to go after the tunnel via the seawall. Oops seawall failed, can’t build that deep bore tunnel. Sorry guys, wasn’t me it was the people and the engineers.

    This is dropped out of the blue, with just a few months before an election, little notice or plans about it. Needing 60% which is always tough outside of Presidential election. I hope Publicola starts to ask some tough questions. I smell something fishy at the seawall.

  • West Seattle Waiter

    Very doubtful that a special election in May gets 60% — sounds like the McGinn/Chopp plan to go after the tunnel via the seawall. Oops seawall failed, can’t build that deep bore tunnel. Sorry guys, wasn’t me it was the people and the engineers.

    This is dropped out of the blue, with just a few months before an election, little notice or plans about it. Needing 60% which is always tough outside of Presidential election. I hope Publicola starts to ask some tough questions. I smell something fishy at the seawall.

  • sarah68

    McGinn Proposes Property Tax for Seawallwo

    What’s a “seawallwo”?

  • sarah68

    McGinn Proposes Property Tax for Seawallwo

    What’s a “seawallwo”?

  • Cary

    Giant, raging, red flag on this play.

    Cool to get going on the seawall and fix a public safety risk, and to firmly reassert that the waterfront / seawall is Seattle’s business, independent of WSDOT’s tunnel nightmare. But not cool to jettison the goal to build a smarter, more ecologically supportive seawall. And not cool to jerk this project out of the larger waterfront visioning and planning effort just getting underway now.

    The new seawall/ shoreline system is the spine of the new waterfront. Its design determines how people will access the water, or not, and represent Seattle’s stewardship commitment to Puget Sound. We have a brilliant, 100 year opportunity to do this right, setting a new standard for all the urbanized (-ing) areas along Puget Sound, and showing what an ecologically functional, people and fish friendly water’s edge could be. To design such an innovative solution takes time, the integration of technical intelligence from several fields, and considerable creativity. To shortcut this, and stick with the prior design that pours millions of tons of concrete in the intertidal zone because we don’t have time to identify a smarter solution — where is the logic in that?
    The new seawall should be designed as part of the larger vision for the 25 acres of waterfront public land. We have the chance to do lower impact edge, functional beaches in three areas that integrate with new upland public spaces, and create a continuous salmon migration corridor. Committing to a 1950′s solution — a vertical, hard-armored concrete wall — may be exactly the opposite of what future Seattle needs.

  • Cary

    Giant, raging, red flag on this play.

    Cool to get going on the seawall and fix a public safety risk, and to firmly reassert that the waterfront / seawall is Seattle’s business, independent of WSDOT’s tunnel nightmare. But not cool to jettison the goal to build a smarter, more ecologically supportive seawall. And not cool to jerk this project out of the larger waterfront visioning and planning effort just getting underway now.

    The new seawall/ shoreline system is the spine of the new waterfront. Its design determines how people will access the water, or not, and represent Seattle’s stewardship commitment to Puget Sound. We have a brilliant, 100 year opportunity to do this right, setting a new standard for all the urbanized (-ing) areas along Puget Sound, and showing what an ecologically functional, people and fish friendly water’s edge could be. To design such an innovative solution takes time, the integration of technical intelligence from several fields, and considerable creativity. To shortcut this, and stick with the prior design that pours millions of tons of concrete in the intertidal zone because we don’t have time to identify a smarter solution — where is the logic in that?
    The new seawall should be designed as part of the larger vision for the 25 acres of waterfront public land. We have the chance to do lower impact edge, functional beaches in three areas that integrate with new upland public spaces, and create a continuous salmon migration corridor. Committing to a 1950′s solution — a vertical, hard-armored concrete wall — may be exactly the opposite of what future Seattle needs.

  • West Seattle Waiter

    Hey did you notice that McGinn called out this mysterious “all hands major announcement” media advisory major secrecy last nite..

    And did his announcement on the only day of the year that ALL of the City Council happens to be on a retreat out of town….mmmmmm usually when you announce a proposal for a major property tax increase you have any and all elected officials you can drag to the event. there is something fishy on the seawall.

  • West Seattle Waiter

    Hey did you notice that McGinn called out this mysterious “all hands major announcement” media advisory major secrecy last nite..

    And did his announcement on the only day of the year that ALL of the City Council happens to be on a retreat out of town….mmmmmm usually when you announce a proposal for a major property tax increase you have any and all elected officials you can drag to the event. there is something fishy on the seawall.

  • Guest

    Hizzoner has a new bike. And it’s not electric! He rode it to and from the big announcement this morning.

  • Price out of Seatown

    Hizzoner has a new bike. And it’s not electric! He rode it to and from the big announcement this morning.

  • Erica C. Barnett

    @10: They’re actually at the Bell Harbor Conference Center, not out of town.

  • Erica C. Barnett

    @10: They’re actually at the Bell Harbor Conference Center, not out of town.

  • tikka

    Seems to me that this means McGinn is actually moving forward and taking action. The seawall is Seattle’s responsibility and it would be irresponsible of McGinn to ignore that. What happens with the state/tunnel/viaduct is not within McGinn’s control, so it’s right to go forward with Seattle’s actual work. It does put Seattle closer to a conclusion on the AWV replacement, so if he was willing to ignore public safety (like the state is apparently willing to do) for politics, he wouldn’t be taking this action.

  • tikka

    Seems to me that this means McGinn is actually moving forward and taking action. The seawall is Seattle’s responsibility and it would be irresponsible of McGinn to ignore that. What happens with the state/tunnel/viaduct is not within McGinn’s control, so it’s right to go forward with Seattle’s actual work. It does put Seattle closer to a conclusion on the AWV replacement, so if he was willing to ignore public safety (like the state is apparently willing to do) for politics, he wouldn’t be taking this action.

  • Wells

    The seawall should be rebuilt as soon as possible. As Cary mentions, an accessible shoreline in places is desirable and if possible, could still occur after the seawall rebuild.

    It’s not exactly correct to say “the seawall was going to serve as one wall of the cut-n-cover tunnel.” WSDOT Drawings indicate 2 walls (seawall and tunnel wall) adjoining. Mayor Mike has the right idea to get the seawall rebuilt without delay and the right attitude to take charge. :^)

  • Wells

    The seawall should be rebuilt as soon as possible. As Cary mentions, an accessible shoreline in places is desirable and if possible, could still occur after the seawall rebuild.

    It’s not exactly correct to say “the seawall was going to serve as one wall of the cut-n-cover tunnel.” WSDOT Drawings indicate 2 walls (seawall and tunnel wall) adjoining. Mayor Mike has the right idea to get the seawall rebuilt without delay and the right attitude to take charge. :^)

  • johnmocha

    How about a levy to address the public safety issue of crime? I’d be happy to pay another $48 a year to double manning of the south and east precincts. Seawall – not so sure.

  • johnmocha

    How about a levy to address the public safety issue of crime? I’d be happy to pay another $48 a year to double manning of the south and east precincts. Seawall – not so sure.

  • Fat-tailed

    @11 Yeah, I noticed the lack of electric-assist too. What’s up here? Now that he’s actually mayor, he’s actually going to pedal?

    More to the point, was the bike ride just for show (and therefore no e-bike b/c it’s less MikeBikes PR-friendly), or has he actually been riding around as mayor? Hardly the most important question, just curious as a bit of bike gossip…

  • Fat-tailed

    @11 Yeah, I noticed the lack of electric-assist too. What’s up here? Now that he’s actually mayor, he’s actually going to pedal?

    More to the point, was the bike ride just for show (and therefore no e-bike b/c it’s less MikeBikes PR-friendly), or has he actually been riding around as mayor? Hardly the most important question, just curious as a bit of bike gossip…

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Baker/150568099583 Mr.Baker

    $241 million, not completely designed. There are risks, what is the project estimate for major elements?
    And… How about those cost overruns? Will he just come back and ask for another vote in a year?

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Baker/150568099583 Mr.Baker

    $241 million, not completely designed. There are risks, what is the project estimate for major elements?
    And… How about those cost overruns? Will he just come back and ask for another vote in a year?

  • pete

    @9, you say ‘not cool to jettison the goal to build a smarter, more ecologically supportive seawall.’ Does today’s announcement necessarily jettison a more ecological and public friendly design?

  • pete

    @9, you say ‘not cool to jettison the goal to build a smarter, more ecologically supportive seawall.’ Does today’s announcement necessarily jettison a more ecological and public friendly design?

  • Leviathan

    OK, now I’m really confused. On the surface, 3M’s proposal sounds rational. A lot of these comments, however, present very valid reasons to question it. As a voter, I couldn’t tell you whether or not I support this.

    This calls for calm discussion. I’m sure it’ll be on KUOW within a week.

    As for our new mayor, I’d appreciate a good heavy dose of the transparency we’ve been promised.

  • Leviathan

    OK, now I’m really confused. On the surface, 3M’s proposal sounds rational. A lot of these comments, however, present very valid reasons to question it. As a voter, I couldn’t tell you whether or not I support this.

    This calls for calm discussion. I’m sure it’ll be on KUOW within a week.

    As for our new mayor, I’d appreciate a good heavy dose of the transparency we’ve been promised.

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Baker/150568099583 Mr.Baker

    What about the Pramanade that worried Nick Licata so much that he abstained from the first tunnel vote right before the election.

    Anybody think the council (Nick) will ask the tough questions?

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Baker/150568099583 Mr.Baker

    What about the Pramanade that worried Nick Licata so much that he abstained from the first tunnel vote right before the election.

    Anybody think the council (Nick) will ask the tough questions?

  • ahem

    Cary

    1. if you have a better design could you kindly tell us the per household cost in Seattle so we can compare?

    2. not enough time? haven’t people been talking about this for ten years?

    3. show us your design and then we can consider it, thanks.

    4. jobs.

    5. let’s integrate the underwater ivar’s sign into the seawall design, then any salmon w “dry” sense of humor about their mortality will chuckle…..

  • ahem

    Cary

    1. if you have a better design could you kindly tell us the per household cost in Seattle so we can compare?

    2. not enough time? haven’t people been talking about this for ten years?

    3. show us your design and then we can consider it, thanks.

    4. jobs.

    5. let’s integrate the underwater ivar’s sign into the seawall design, then any salmon w “dry” sense of humor about their mortality will chuckle…..

  • Pablo

    A tax measure that needs 60% for a seawall that has no voting constituency? This sure seems like a rash first move out of the gate. And little upfront work with key stakeholders (DSA, WSDOT, Chamber, etc) was done so now they will be splaining themselves for next month.

    A lot of head scratching going on by the inside baseball crowd.

  • Pablo

    A tax measure that needs 60% for a seawall that has no voting constituency? This sure seems like a rash first move out of the gate. And little upfront work with key stakeholders (DSA, WSDOT, Chamber, etc) was done so now they will be splaining themselves for next month.

    A lot of head scratching going on by the inside baseball crowd.

  • SODO

    The seawall Cary describes has been part of the whole AWV replacement discussion for some time now. The seawall McGinn refers to is just a rehash of the current one. I would love to have a comment from the People for Puget Sound on this issue – would you support building a seawall that does not meet today’s standards? McGinn got really bad advice on this one -a bad misstep so early in his term of office. Costly mistake.

  • SODO

    The seawall Cary describes has been part of the whole AWV replacement discussion for some time now. The seawall McGinn refers to is just a rehash of the current one. I would love to have a comment from the People for Puget Sound on this issue – would you support building a seawall that does not meet today’s standards? McGinn got really bad advice on this one -a bad misstep so early in his term of office. Costly mistake.

  • Cary

    @21 and 23,
    The new broader goals have been identified, but the new design hasn’t been invented/ engineered/ costed yet. The City is hiring the new seawall team now. Because the new approach would integrate expertise from several professions to achieve several goals simultaneously, and there are probably synergies and tradeoffs to consider, there isn’t an *answer* yet. Because the City is not buying off the shelf product, it takes some time to develop innovation that offers a net improvement to shoreline ecology.
    PWC has been working to identify principles and strategies with pro-bono designers, engineers, Puget Sound advocates, and ecologists who want to help our city do a kickass job with this opportunity. The one thing all these folks agree on is that a vertical, concrete-intensive wall is the worst thing we could do. There are smarter, simpler, cooler, lower impact, and possibly cost-equal or cheaper solutions; we need to identify what can work where, given local conditions and the public space vision. For instance, when the Sculpture Park design team shifted from the seawall design pushed by WSDOT to a softer edge + beach solution they figured out themselves, they saved 80% on cost — and it’s been incredibly productive in creating thriving intertidal ecology, both flora and fauna. And the tiny beach is beloved.

    Here is the key goal statement from the operative RFQ for seawall design teams:

    “The existing seawall was designed and built primarily to provide public safety and stability to upland structures and infrastructure including the Alaskan Way Viaduct. In approaching its replacement, the City will develop an integrated “shoreline system” that also improves the ecological function of the shoreline and creates opportunities for visitors to see, feel and understand the Puget Sound’s natural processes. The seawall replacement and creation of a new shoreline system supports Seattle’s effort to re-create the central waterfront and redefine its interface with Elliott Bay.
    The Seattle Department of Transportation’s goals in replacing the aging seawall with a new shoreline system include the following:
    • Provide structural support to upland infrastructure and future open space with a shoreline system that meets current seismic standards and maintains access to the historic piers.
    • Increase public access to the water and creative opportunities for Seattle’s residents and visitors to experience the waters of the Puget Sound.
    • Develop an integrated overall approach to improve the shoreline ecology of the central waterfront, reconnecting upland and marine ecological systems by using solutions that re-integrate the land and the water.
    • Achieve a fiscally responsible solution.
    • Enhance the fish migration corridor, including in those locations where a vertical seawall is deemed necessary.”

  • Cary

    @21 and 23,
    The new broader goals have been identified, but the new design hasn’t been invented/ engineered/ costed yet. The City is hiring the new seawall team now. Because the new approach would integrate expertise from several professions to achieve several goals simultaneously, and there are probably synergies and tradeoffs to consider, there isn’t an *answer* yet. Because the City is not buying off the shelf product, it takes some time to develop innovation that offers a net improvement to shoreline ecology.
    PWC has been working to identify principles and strategies with pro-bono designers, engineers, Puget Sound advocates, and ecologists who want to help our city do a kickass job with this opportunity. The one thing all these folks agree on is that a vertical, concrete-intensive wall is the worst thing we could do. There are smarter, simpler, cooler, lower impact, and possibly cost-equal or cheaper solutions; we need to identify what can work where, given local conditions and the public space vision. For instance, when the Sculpture Park design team shifted from the seawall design pushed by WSDOT to a softer edge + beach solution they figured out themselves, they saved 80% on cost — and it’s been incredibly productive in creating thriving intertidal ecology, both flora and fauna. And the tiny beach is beloved.

    Here is the key goal statement from the operative RFQ for seawall design teams:

    “The existing seawall was designed and built primarily to provide public safety and stability to upland structures and infrastructure including the Alaskan Way Viaduct. In approaching its replacement, the City will develop an integrated “shoreline system” that also improves the ecological function of the shoreline and creates opportunities for visitors to see, feel and understand the Puget Sound’s natural processes. The seawall replacement and creation of a new shoreline system supports Seattle’s effort to re-create the central waterfront and redefine its interface with Elliott Bay.
    The Seattle Department of Transportation’s goals in replacing the aging seawall with a new shoreline system include the following:
    • Provide structural support to upland infrastructure and future open space with a shoreline system that meets current seismic standards and maintains access to the historic piers.
    • Increase public access to the water and creative opportunities for Seattle’s residents and visitors to experience the waters of the Puget Sound.
    • Develop an integrated overall approach to improve the shoreline ecology of the central waterfront, reconnecting upland and marine ecological systems by using solutions that re-integrate the land and the water.
    • Achieve a fiscally responsible solution.
    • Enhance the fish migration corridor, including in those locations where a vertical seawall is deemed necessary.”

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    I hate property taxes. I wish we would do away them and replace them with something else. This is like paying rent for what you already own. If you cannot pay you are going to lose your property.

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    I hate property taxes. I wish we would do away them and replace them with something else. This is like paying rent for what you already own. If you cannot pay you are going to lose your property.

  • Good Grief

    Hilarious — will someone buy that aging hippy clown a comb? If he has ditched the electric assist maybe he will lose his crown as fatest cyclist in Seattle?

  • Good Grief

    Hilarious — will someone buy that aging hippy clown a comb? If he has ditched the electric assist maybe he will lose his crown as fatest cyclist in Seattle?

  • morgan

    I’m guessing the intention here is to strip away one of the necessary components of the AWV replacement package, thus leaving the tunnel to stand a little more on its own and a little more exposed.

  • morgan

    I’m guessing the intention here is to strip away one of the necessary components of the AWV replacement package, thus leaving the tunnel to stand a little more on its own and a little more exposed.

  • twocents

    I wish we could have a HOT mayor for a change.

  • twocents

    I wish we could have a HOT mayor for a change.

  • http://pugetsound.org/ Heather Trim

    People For Puget Sound does not support using the WSDOT proposal for rebuilding the seawall as essentially what we already have. Therefore, we disagree with: “design for the new seawall would be “the same as what would be used” under the old proposal”

    Instead, we expect the City of Seattle (and this is included in the RFQ that was sent out by SDOT in December soliciting seawall design team applications) to build a new waterfront edge that is fish AND human friendly. That is, it would be designed as part of a holistic approach for the entire waterfront area, would include fish-friendly edges and habitat, and would include beaches (in the two areas with the shallowest water). We know that there will still be a vertical wall in some places but we expect that the city will include habitat function for a significant portion of the waterfront. Our stated goals are: 30% habitat for the waterfront stretch (although we are not talking pristine habitat, obviously) and a continuous fish migration corridor. This matches with the Green-Duwamish watershed and is appropriate given that Elliott Bay is the estuary for that system.

  • http://pugetsound.org Heather Trim

    People For Puget Sound does not support using the WSDOT proposal for rebuilding the seawall as essentially what we already have. Therefore, we disagree with: “design for the new seawall would be “the same as what would be used” under the old proposal”

    Instead, we expect the City of Seattle (and this is included in the RFQ that was sent out by SDOT in December soliciting seawall design team applications) to build a new waterfront edge that is fish AND human friendly. That is, it would be designed as part of a holistic approach for the entire waterfront area, would include fish-friendly edges and habitat, and would include beaches (in the two areas with the shallowest water). We know that there will still be a vertical wall in some places but we expect that the city will include habitat function for a significant portion of the waterfront. Our stated goals are: 30% habitat for the waterfront stretch (although we are not talking pristine habitat, obviously) and a continuous fish migration corridor. This matches with the Green-Duwamish watershed and is appropriate given that Elliott Bay is the estuary for that system.

  • Chad Lupkes

    The Mayor needs to put out a public request for proposals for ideas on how to replace the Seawall. Put people's minds to work on figuring out how to fix and rebuild it. What I'm afraid will happen is some mega-engineering firm with political connections will have a plan already approved, and all we poor Seattle tax-payers need to do is give them billions of dollars. Dollars they will then take to their corporate headquarters in another city, likely another state, possibly another country.