The Seattle Six

Jamie Pedersen and Frank Chopp have lost my vote. Way to represent. Nice work.

Jamie Pedersen and Frank Chopp have lost my vote. Way to represent. Nice work.

represent: to act for or in behalf of (a constituency, state, etc.) by deputed right in exercising a voice in legislation or government

And Joe Mallahan thinks that we should pay them no matter what, and he’s “been crystal clear on this.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj81ChdI6po

represent: to act for or in behalf of (a constituency, state, etc.) by deputed right in exercising a voice in legislation or government

And Joe Mallahan thinks that we should pay them no matter what, and he’s “been crystal clear on this.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj81ChdI6po

Hey, why is a lawyer working so hard to enforce an unconstitutional amandment?

Stacy is right, in the KING 5 debate when Mallahan was asked point blank if he would still move forward with the tunnel even if Seattle has to pay for all of the cost overruns he said, “I think I’ve been crystal clear on this, the answer is yes.”

Mallahan and his big money backers do not care if regular Seattleites have to pay for their Big Dig profits.

Hey, why is a lawyer working so hard to enforce an unconstitutional amandment?

Stacy is right, in the KING 5 debate when Mallahan was asked point blank if he would still move forward with the tunnel even if Seattle has to pay for all of the cost overruns he said, “I think I’ve been crystal clear on this, the answer is yes.”

Mallahan and his big money backers do not care if regular Seattleites have to pay for their Big Dig profits.

So Mr Baker, you realize that without this amendment the State will not allocate money for the tunnel, right?

So Mr Baker, you realize that without this amendment the State will not allocate money for the tunnel, right?

Mr. Barker, Senator Kastama says he will hold up the entire state transportation budget if anybody other than Seattle has to pay for the cost overruns:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/182926.asp

The only way the Big Dig legislation passed was to have the amendment forcing Seattle to pay. There is no way Kastama and other legislators will want to have to explain to their constituents why they are helping to pay for what could be 2 billion dollars in cost overruns.

Mr. Barker, Senator Kastama says he will hold up the entire state transportation budget if anybody other than Seattle has to pay for the cost overruns:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/182926.asp

The only way the Big Dig legislation passed was to have the amendment forcing Seattle to pay. There is no way Kastama and other legislators will want to have to explain to their constituents why they are helping to pay for what could be 2 billion dollars in cost overruns.

Don’t be talkin’ shit about Sharon Nelson, she’s an angel that’s worth 10 times what we’re paying her.

Don’t be talkin’ shit about Sharon Nelson, she’s an angel that’s worth 10 times what we’re paying her.

Isn’t Judy Clibborn the one responsible for the amendment?

The tunnel is a Downtown Seattle bypass – a convenient way to avoid Seattle altogether, and a traffic change that will make access for people trying to reach downtown more difficult. Why should downtown businesses pay for the overruns?

The Seneca and Western exits will no longer exist, and I doubt the north and south exits will be as convenient as Broad street or 1st Ave South.

To pin overruns on the very businesses that are going to be hurt by this change doesn’t make any sense.

Isn’t Judy Clibborn the one responsible for the amendment?

The tunnel is a Downtown Seattle bypass – a convenient way to avoid Seattle altogether, and a traffic change that will make access for people trying to reach downtown more difficult. Why should downtown businesses pay for the overruns?

The Seneca and Western exits will no longer exist, and I doubt the north and south exits will be as convenient as Broad street or 1st Ave South.

To pin overruns on the very businesses that are going to be hurt by this change doesn’t make any sense.

Stacyx3, how do you explain Joe’s position on this one?

Stacyx3, how do you explain Joe’s position on this one?

Probably too little too late, but we’re finally getting at the core of this issue by digging into it.

My primary concern with the tunnel, at this point, is this very provision, and the message that it has sent Seattle.

What is most disappointing to me in this entire debacle is the lack of backbone that our Seattle elected officials have.

The argument goes that we should hire Mallahan for the office of Mayor, because he’ll play nice with Olympia. But, through a series of decision this past year (tunnel, stimulus funding, etc.) it has become clear that Seattle has absolutely zero negotiating power in Olympia. This was the primary reason that Nickles had to go.

So, hire Mallahan to fix this? That is a laughable notion.

Mallahan is being backed precisely because he WON’T fix it. He’s being supported by the power structure that want to rush this project through and don’t want anything getting in their way. Mallahan is a stooge. Nothing more.

And, it’s not only on the AWV. He’s caved on 520 as well. Did anyone else note in the KING 5 debate where Mallahan said that Seattle should just get with it and accept what the Eastside and what The State want? He completely dismissed the valid concerns of the west side (Seattle) residents.

Mallahan has stated over and over again that he will not stand up to the State for any reason; and why would he? He’s sold himself to become a pawn of the State.

Probably too little too late, but we’re finally getting at the core of this issue by digging into it.

My primary concern with the tunnel, at this point, is this very provision, and the message that it has sent Seattle.

What is most disappointing to me in this entire debacle is the lack of backbone that our Seattle elected officials have.

The argument goes that we should hire Mallahan for the office of Mayor, because he’ll play nice with Olympia. But, through a series of decision this past year (tunnel, stimulus funding, etc.) it has become clear that Seattle has absolutely zero negotiating power in Olympia. This was the primary reason that Nickles had to go.

So, hire Mallahan to fix this? That is a laughable notion.

Mallahan is being backed precisely because he WON’T fix it. He’s being supported by the power structure that want to rush this project through and don’t want anything getting in their way. Mallahan is a stooge. Nothing more.

And, it’s not only on the AWV. He’s caved on 520 as well. Did anyone else note in the KING 5 debate where Mallahan said that Seattle should just get with it and accept what the Eastside and what The State want? He completely dismissed the valid concerns of the west side (Seattle) residents.

Mallahan has stated over and over again that he will not stand up to the State for any reason; and why would he? He’s sold himself to become a pawn of the State.

I got a dollar says Senate Ways and Means finds a way to be mean to Jim Kastama, holding up funding for anything in Puyallop.

Have fun in January, Jim, dumbass.

I got a dollar says Senate Ways and Means finds a way to be mean to Jim Kastama, holding up funding for anything in Puyallop.

Have fun in January, Jim, dumbass.

In the same King 5 interview Mallahan said the cost overrun provision, “had this little goofy thing there added at the last minute um that says overruns have to be borne by Seattle.”

And later when he talked about people who are concerned about having Seattle alone saddled with cost overruns, he referred it as their, “little objection.”

Yeah, one or two billion dollars of cost overruns on a 1.7 mile car tunnel, I’d say I have a “little objection” to that.

In the same King 5 interview Mallahan said the cost overrun provision, “had this little goofy thing there added at the last minute um that says overruns have to be borne by Seattle.”

And later when he talked about people who are concerned about having Seattle alone saddled with cost overruns, he referred it as their, “little objection.”

Yeah, one or two billion dollars of cost overruns on a 1.7 mile car tunnel, I’d say I have a “little objection” to that.

BTW…I think it should be illegal for the Legislature to knowingly pass an illegal bill.

Do not blame McGinn or anyone else when this tunnel deal unravels. The entirety of the blame lays on the shoulders of those who tried to circumvent a rational path to a solution on the AWV by playing politics with their vote.

Judy Clibborn should be ashamed. She should never receive another dime from Seattle democrats.

BTW…I think it should be illegal for the Legislature to knowingly pass an illegal bill.

Do not blame McGinn or anyone else when this tunnel deal unravels. The entirety of the blame lays on the shoulders of those who tried to circumvent a rational path to a solution on the AWV by playing politics with their vote.

Judy Clibborn should be ashamed. She should never receive another dime from Seattle democrats.

Mayoral Debate Watching and Dance Party Saturday Night at Hidmo Restaurant in the Central District!

Where: Hidmo, 2000 S Jackson St
When: Saturday October 24, 7 pm to 2 am
What: FUNdraiser and dance party
Why: Because we deserve a Mayor who likes to have fun while we change the world.

Hidmo Eritrean Restaurant is hosting a McGinn fundraiser and dance party this Saturday from 7 p.m. to 2 a.m. DJ Funkscribe from KBCS will be spinning old soul and funk to keep all the McGinn supporters dancing. Bring a blank piece of clothing for silk screening. Mike will be coming by to pump up the crowd after the debate.

Mayoral Debate Watching and Dance Party Saturday Night at Hidmo Restaurant in the Central District!

Where: Hidmo, 2000 S Jackson St
When: Saturday October 24, 7 pm to 2 am
What: FUNdraiser and dance party
Why: Because we deserve a Mayor who likes to have fun while we change the world.

Hidmo Eritrean Restaurant is hosting a McGinn fundraiser and dance party this Saturday from 7 p.m. to 2 a.m. DJ Funkscribe from KBCS will be spinning old soul and funk to keep all the McGinn supporters dancing. Bring a blank piece of clothing for silk screening. Mike will be coming by to pump up the crowd after the debate.

Currently on a light rail and TOD tour with large group including Clibborn. She just said that she doesn’t intend, and has never intended Seattle to be on the hook for cost overruns. She used an example of Tacoma HOV lanes that cost 3x more than planned. She said the state never asked Tacoma to pay the extra and won’t on the AWV. This whole thing is a red herring. The language was only included to get the bill passed and even Clibborn admits it’s NOT constitutional.

Currently on a light rail and TOD tour with large group including Clibborn. She just said that she doesn’t intend, and has never intended Seattle to be on the hook for cost overruns. She used an example of Tacoma HOV lanes that cost 3x more than planned. She said the state never asked Tacoma to pay the extra and won’t on the AWV. This whole thing is a red herring. The language was only included to get the bill passed and even Clibborn admits it’s NOT constitutional.

The unedited version of Joe’s support for Seattle paying for the cost overruns:

http://www.nwcn.com/video/index.html?nvid=408766

The unedited version of Joe’s support for Seattle paying for the cost overruns:

http://www.nwcn.com/video/index.html?nvid=408766

Big surprise. Jamie Pedersen is a corporate shill. And Frank Chopp is, well, Frank Chopp.

Big surprise. Jamie Pedersen is a corporate shill. And Frank Chopp is, well, Frank Chopp.

@11, they hated Nickels, HATED.
McGinn picking fights with them would be a rerun of how the hated Nickels. No question in my mind.

Jan Drago did have a point about having a working relationship with the legislature, and watching how she was treated when she testified was clearly better than other folks. That was not enough for me to think about voting for her, just a casual observation from somebody that watches tvw online for fun.

@11, they hated Nickels, HATED.
McGinn picking fights with them would be a rerun of how the hated Nickels. No question in my mind.

Jan Drago did have a point about having a working relationship with the legislature, and watching how she was treated when she testified was clearly better than other folks. That was not enough for me to think about voting for her, just a casual observation from somebody that watches tvw online for fun.

@16 AGH…

YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND. Stop listening to Clibborn. She’s clueless.

The point is, she did need to pass the amendment in order to get the votes. But, now that she has the votes, she still has to fund the project, and in order to fund the project, she still has to get the votes.

Senator Kastama, one of those votes, has declared that he and others are absolutely opposed to paying one cent more for the tunnel.

The funding of the tunnel is absolutely not a red herring. But, you know what is? The Clibborn Amendment. That amendment will be the undoing of this house of cards, and all blame for the delays in the AWV will rest on the shoulder of Clibborn and other legislators who attempted to game the politics. THEY are the source of delay and obfuscation.

@16 AGH…

YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND. Stop listening to Clibborn. She’s clueless.

The point is, she did need to pass the amendment in order to get the votes. But, now that she has the votes, she still has to fund the project, and in order to fund the project, she still has to get the votes.

Senator Kastama, one of those votes, has declared that he and others are absolutely opposed to paying one cent more for the tunnel.

The funding of the tunnel is absolutely not a red herring. But, you know what is? The Clibborn Amendment. That amendment will be the undoing of this house of cards, and all blame for the delays in the AWV will rest on the shoulder of Clibborn and other legislators who attempted to game the politics. THEY are the source of delay and obfuscation.

@16

the Tacoma HOV lanes were 300% over budget, but a deep bore tunnel that hasn’t even been engineered will come in on budget?

now that we know the Discovery Institute made up the numbers for this ridiculous project, lets call it what it is – faith based transportation policy.

I heart Timothy

@16

the Tacoma HOV lanes were 300% over budget, but a deep bore tunnel that hasn’t even been engineered will come in on budget?

now that we know the Discovery Institute made up the numbers for this ridiculous project, lets call it what it is – faith based transportation policy.

I heart Timothy

@19 Mr. Baker…precisely. Nickles had absolutely no credibility in Olympia.

But, here’s the point. McGinn is not picking a fight with Olympia; Olympia already started the fight. You’re falling to the misdirection being created by State interests. The question is, should Seattle fight back in any way?

OF COURSE IT SHOULD.

Mallahan will be worse than Nickles; he’ll call Olympia to figure out his position before he even takes it.

The argument that we should play nice with Olympia so that they’re not mean to us is like a battered spouse thinking they should be nice to their abuser so that the abuse doesn’t continue.

You can’t defend a choice to vote for Mallahan in this line of reasoning. He’s already stated that he’ll roll over for just about anything the State wants. He has never fundamentally understood that he’s running for the Mayor of Seattle.

@19 Mr. Baker…precisely. Nickles had absolutely no credibility in Olympia.

But, here’s the point. McGinn is not picking a fight with Olympia; Olympia already started the fight. You’re falling to the misdirection being created by State interests. The question is, should Seattle fight back in any way?

OF COURSE IT SHOULD.

Mallahan will be worse than Nickles; he’ll call Olympia to figure out his position before he even takes it.

The argument that we should play nice with Olympia so that they’re not mean to us is like a battered spouse thinking they should be nice to their abuser so that the abuse doesn’t continue.

You can’t defend a choice to vote for Mallahan in this line of reasoning. He’s already stated that he’ll roll over for just about anything the State wants. He has never fundamentally understood that he’s running for the Mayor of Seattle.

It almost seems like Joe’s running for Mayor of some eastside City half of the time. He’s on record opposing increases (and even calling for reductions) in the commercial parking tax to help pay for the tunnel, stating, “the most important tourists are the ones from Redmond and Issaquah,” while he wants to raise money through an MVET increase on Seattle residents instead.

That’s right, Joe wants to lower taxes on people from the eastside who drive to Seattle to work, and raise taxes on everyone in Seattle; all to help pay for the tunnel – the same tunnel that Joe wants Seattle tax payers to cover the cost overruns on! Is Joe crazy, or just completely in the pockets of the pro-tunnel establishment?

It almost seems like Joe’s running for Mayor of some eastside City half of the time. He’s on record opposing increases (and even calling for reductions) in the commercial parking tax to help pay for the tunnel, stating, “the most important tourists are the ones from Redmond and Issaquah,” while he wants to raise money through an MVET increase on Seattle residents instead.

That’s right, Joe wants to lower taxes on people from the eastside who drive to Seattle to work, and raise taxes on everyone in Seattle; all to help pay for the tunnel – the same tunnel that Joe wants Seattle tax payers to cover the cost overruns on! Is Joe crazy, or just completely in the pockets of the pro-tunnel establishment?

@24 Stacy, great point.

Let’s begin to enumerate the ways in which Joe Mallahan has explicity stated his preference to work for the interests of others over the interests of Seattle.

Tunnel: takes his orders from the State
AWV: Prefers Eastside & State position
Taxes: lower taxes on Eastside visitors, raise taxes on Seattleites
Guns: Won’t Support position of Seattle, preferring AG’s position
Burke Gilman Trail: Won’t support position of City, prefering to support the position of the industrial business who are suing the City and funding his campaign.

Others?

@24 Stacy, great point.

Let’s begin to enumerate the ways in which Joe Mallahan has explicity stated his preference to work for the interests of others over the interests of Seattle.

Tunnel: takes his orders from the State
AWV: Prefers Eastside & State position
Taxes: lower taxes on Eastside visitors, raise taxes on Seattleites
Guns: Won’t Support position of Seattle, preferring AG’s position
Burke Gilman Trail: Won’t support position of City, prefering to support the position of the industrial business who are suing the City and funding his campaign.

Others?

@23,
McGinn will pick a fight with Olympia to kill the entire project, force his option on them, try to roll back 520 to 4 lanes.

Comparing that to removing an unconstitutional amendment from an appropriations bill is absurd.

OOps. My second point, above, where I said:

AWV: Prefers Eastside & State position

Should read:

520: Prefers Eastside & State position

@23,
McGinn will pick a fight with Olympia to kill the entire project, force his option on them, try to roll back 520 to 4 lanes.

Comparing that to removing an unconstitutional amendment from an appropriations bill is absurd.

OOps. My second point, above, where I said:

AWV: Prefers Eastside & State position

Should read:

520: Prefers Eastside & State position

@26 Mr. Baker…

First off, you continue to not understand the nuance of the point. Olympia is consistently treating Seattle poorly. A fight with Olympia is long overdue, and we are not the ones who picked this fight. The fight exists; Seattle needs to put on the gloves, and stop just submitting to the punches.

And, your minimizing the cost overruns provision merely tells me that you don’t fully grasp the dangerous game being played here.

@26 Mr. Baker…

First off, you continue to not understand the nuance of the point. Olympia is consistently treating Seattle poorly. A fight with Olympia is long overdue, and we are not the ones who picked this fight. The fight exists; Seattle needs to put on the gloves, and stop just submitting to the punches.

And, your minimizing the cost overruns provision merely tells me that you don’t fully grasp the dangerous game being played here.

If we rebuild the Viaduct, the state will pay for all of it.

If we rebuild the Viaduct, the state will pay for all of it.

BTW…I meant to post this sooner.

For all of you tunnel supporters, I’ve created an online petition whereby you can express your support for the project.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/tunneltax/

If you feel you’ll benefit from the tunnel, you can sign the petition to express your willingness to be on the hook for the cost overruns.

Run and sign! I expect to see Mr. Mallahan on this list soon. And Stacyx3? Mr. Baker? Step right up and put your money where your vote is!

BTW…I meant to post this sooner.

For all of you tunnel supporters, I’ve created an online petition whereby you can express your support for the project.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/tunneltax/

If you feel you’ll benefit from the tunnel, you can sign the petition to express your willingness to be on the hook for the cost overruns.

Run and sign! I expect to see Mr. Mallahan on this list soon. And Stacyx3? Mr. Baker? Step right up and put your money where your vote is!

@28, there is zero “nuance of the point.”

Picking fights with Olimpia is long over due?

That has worked so well for the past 8 years, too.

I’d does not matter who started the fight, it matters who ends it, and how. Battling more with rehashing poorly formed ideas sounds a lot like.. More.

I understand your point, I just do not agree with it, not even a tiny bit.

@28, there is zero “nuance of the point.”

Picking fights with Olimpia is long over due?

That has worked so well for the past 8 years, too.

I’d does not matter who started the fight, it matters who ends it, and how. Battling more with rehashing poorly formed ideas sounds a lot like.. More.

I understand your point, I just do not agree with it, not even a tiny bit.

So, Mr. Baker, you think the State-owned Mr. Mallahan has what it takes to stand up for Seattle, even when it means standing against the State? Explain who that will happen.

damn typos! Publicola…I’m about the rescind my membership fee for this site! I want my zero dollars back!

So, Mr. Baker, you think the State-owned Mr. Mallahan has what it takes to stand up for Seattle, even when it means standing against the State? Explain who that will happen.

damn typos! Publicola…I’m about the rescind my membership fee for this site! I want my zero dollars back!

@30,
I will not sign an unconstitution pledge. It is shameful that somebody would encourage people to pledge to act against the state constitution.

I will pettition my government to remove unconstitutional language from legislation.
The cost of the state’s road is the responsibility if the state. I will not pay it, they can see me in court.

@30

Signed.

@30,
I will not sign an unconstitution pledge. It is shameful that somebody would encourage people to pledge to act against the state constitution.

I will pettition my government to remove unconstitutional language from legislation.
The cost of the state’s road is the responsibility if the state. I will not pay it, they can see me in court.

@30

Signed.

Mallahan will work with people, not against them, to drive concesus among steakholders and steakeaters.
And that is why I am voting for Joe Mallahan, your next Mayor of Seatlle.

11 days.

Mallahan will work with people, not against them, to drive concesus among steakholders and steakeaters.
And that is why I am voting for Joe Mallahan, your next Mayor of Seatlle.

11 days.

@35 FTW Costly WIN!

Michael J. Maddux (can I make that name public? Or was he participating in anonymous political speech here?) becomes the very first Citizen of Seattle to stand publicly and say he’ll pay for the cost overruns on the tunnel!

Here! Here! Now, you others, you don’t expect him to bear these costs on his own, do you?

@35 FTW Costly WIN!

Michael J. Maddux (can I make that name public? Or was he participating in anonymous political speech here?) becomes the very first Citizen of Seattle to stand publicly and say he’ll pay for the cost overruns on the tunnel!

Here! Here! Now, you others, you don’t expect him to bear these costs on his own, do you?

@37 -

I think about 13% of the folks here know who I am

@37 -

I think about 13% of the folks here know who I am

Timothy is to the AWV debate on Publicola what Matt was to the I-901 debate on the old Stranger Forums. Anybody remember that guy?

Timothy is to the AWV debate on Publicola what Matt was to the I-901 debate on the old Stranger Forums. Anybody remember that guy?

How many tunnels are we going to build under SEattle?

One for autos, another one for high speed rail? Or are we going to put our high speed rail in a tunnel under Bellevue, so it goes to Bellevue, not Seattle?

How many tunnels are we going to build under SEattle?

One for autos, another one for high speed rail? Or are we going to put our high speed rail in a tunnel under Bellevue, so it goes to Bellevue, not Seattle?

@25 I thought it was Kemper Freeman, Susan Hutchison, and Mike McGinn that wanted to put light rail on 520.

@25 I thought it was Kemper Freeman, Susan Hutchison, and Mike McGinn that wanted to put light rail on 520.

@41 Pete…

In the KING 5 debate, Mallahan stated that Seattle was holding up a decision on 520, that the Eastside and the State already know what they want, with the implication being that we should accept the Eastside’s position on 520 as somehow more important than the concerns raised by the westside.

@41 Pete…

In the KING 5 debate, Mallahan stated that Seattle was holding up a decision on 520, that the Eastside and the State already know what they want, with the implication being that we should accept the Eastside’s position on 520 as somehow more important than the concerns raised by the westside.

@11 & 41 at the King 5 debate Mallahan said, “You know the 520 uh solution is largely solved. Uh the communities on the Eastside have uh come to agreement how to proceed.”

Then said, Seattle is, “holding up the rest of that project.”

Who cares about the wetlands in the Arboretum being destroyed for more cars? Joe doesn’t, he says it’s not for him to say which option is best.

@11 & 41 at the King 5 debate Mallahan said, “You know the 520 uh solution is largely solved. Uh the communities on the Eastside have uh come to agreement how to proceed.”

Then said, Seattle is, “holding up the rest of that project.”

Who cares about the wetlands in the Arboretum being destroyed for more cars? Joe doesn’t, he says it’s not for him to say which option is best.

@41 McGinn said he wants light rail on I-90 AND 520. it is already planned for on I-90 and that is really excellent (McGinn has spent years fighting for light rail). 520 should not be built without light rail, we need it on both bridges to accommodate population growth.

Kemper Freman and Susan Hutchison want to derail Sound Transit 2 – that’s their game. KING 5 did a really sloppy story on this, they should do another and explain exactly what Susan Hutchison is up to. She is bad news for transit.

@41 McGinn said he wants light rail on I-90 AND 520. it is already planned for on I-90 and that is really excellent (McGinn has spent years fighting for light rail). 520 should not be built without light rail, we need it on both bridges to accommodate population growth.

Kemper Freman and Susan Hutchison want to derail Sound Transit 2 – that’s their game. KING 5 did a really sloppy story on this, they should do another and explain exactly what Susan Hutchison is up to. She is bad news for transit.

@Stacy, Susanneston, Timothy

The only outcome that will satisfy team McGinn is for McGinn to be elected mayor and the AWV replacement tunnel project cancelled.

To that end you’re exaggerating the project risks and dismissing the next mayor’s opportunities (and responsibility) to mitigate and manage the project risks. Mallahan just isn’t going to step back and put this critical project on autopilot despite your spin to the contrary.

You should stop the scare tactics – they’re not working.

@Stacy, Susanneston, Timothy

The only outcome that will satisfy team McGinn is for McGinn to be elected mayor and the AWV replacement tunnel project cancelled.

To that end you’re exaggerating the project risks and dismissing the next mayor’s opportunities (and responsibility) to mitigate and manage the project risks. Mallahan just isn’t going to step back and put this critical project on autopilot despite your spin to the contrary.

You should stop the scare tactics – they’re not working.

StacyX3,
The mayor of Seattle will not be the manager of the Washington State Department of Transportation. Mallahan thinks he will be, but that is a State run department, not a City owned dept.

It’s easy for rich people to say that others are exaggerating the cost, but if this project goes over budget by 50%, that will be $14,000 for every Seattle household.

Mallahan is all too comfortable with cost overruns, his campaign is running in the red and he doesn’t seem to mind.

StacyX3,
The mayor of Seattle will not be the manager of the Washington State Department of Transportation. Mallahan thinks he will be, but that is a State run department, not a City owned dept.

It’s easy for rich people to say that others are exaggerating the cost, but if this project goes over budget by 50%, that will be $14,000 for every Seattle household.

Mallahan is all too comfortable with cost overruns, his campaign is running in the red and he doesn’t seem to mind.

@45 – I was unaware that Joe was running to be the head of WSDOT, you know, the State Dept. that’s managing the project that the mayor of Seattle has no control over. As a business person with years of management experience, Joe should no better than to commit his customers to billions of dollars of potential risk.

@45 – I was unaware that Joe was running to be the head of WSDOT, you know, the State Dept. that’s managing the project that the mayor of Seattle has no control over. As a business person with years of management experience, Joe should no better than to commit his customers to billions of dollars of potential risk.

man, i could’ve gone and seen where the wild things are tonight, but i didn’t need to; they’re right here. love the vigorous debate.

so far, the mcginn clan is winning and michael j maddux is the big (fiscal) loser

man, i could’ve gone and seen where the wild things are tonight, but i didn’t need to; they’re right here. love the vigorous debate.

so far, the mcginn clan is winning and michael j maddux is the big (fiscal) loser

@47 Stacy

Working in partnership with the Governor, Legislature, and City Council, I think it’s probable that a Mayor Mallahan will be able to mitigate the cost risks.

@47 Stacy

Working in partnership with the Governor, Legislature, and City Council, I think it’s probable that a Mayor Mallahan will be able to mitigate the cost risks.

@49 – How specifically? What qualifications and experience does someone who’s title involved the words “customer delight” have in mitigating cost risks in a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project? By the way, T-Mobile got an F from the Better Business Bureau last year for their customer service.

The most common reason for cost overruns on a project is strategic misrepresentation of the costs of a project, made by supporters of a project to get the thing going; because they know once its underway its almost impossible to stop it. Now that we all know the fix was in from the start with the tunnel and that the costs were clearly falsified (faith-based transportation policy), I’m not willing to risk billions of dollars on the “probability” that a Mayor of Seattle (the City that Olympia loves to screw) will be able to “work in partnership” with the elected leaders to “mitigate” these risks (what does that mean exactly anyways?) – especially now that we have a State Senator declaring there’s no way in hell that the State will pay a dollar more than $2.4 billion and we all know that the Legislature would never have appropriated money for the tunnel without the cost overrun amendment.

Joe made it “crystal clear” on Wednesday that Seattle should pay for all cost overruns and that we should hold him accountable; OK then, what’s Joe’s plan for “mitigating the risks?” Does it involve ideating how to drive efficiencies across the project to move Seattle forward?

@49 – How specifically? What qualifications and experience does someone who’s title involved the words “customer delight” have in mitigating cost risks in a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project? By the way, T-Mobile got an F from the Better Business Bureau last year for their customer service.

The most common reason for cost overruns on a project is strategic misrepresentation of the costs of a project, made by supporters of a project to get the thing going; because they know once its underway its almost impossible to stop it. Now that we all know the fix was in from the start with the tunnel and that the costs were clearly falsified (faith-based transportation policy), I’m not willing to risk billions of dollars on the “probability” that a Mayor of Seattle (the City that Olympia loves to screw) will be able to “work in partnership” with the elected leaders to “mitigate” these risks (what does that mean exactly anyways?) – especially now that we have a State Senator declaring there’s no way in hell that the State will pay a dollar more than $2.4 billion and we all know that the Legislature would never have appropriated money for the tunnel without the cost overrun amendment.

Joe made it “crystal clear” on Wednesday that Seattle should pay for all cost overruns and that we should hold him accountable; OK then, what’s Joe’s plan for “mitigating the risks?” Does it involve ideating how to drive efficiencies across the project to move Seattle forward?

So… did everyone who thinks the deep bore tunnel is too expensive also oppose light rail? Because Seattle’s light rail system is by far the most expensive in the US so far, at $179 million per mile, compared to the national average $35 million per mile (that’s from Wikipedia). And the tunnel is too expensive because…? Since when does cheaper always mean better? And last time I checked, Highway 99 serves only the greater Seattle metropolitan area (according to Google Maps). So why shouldn’t it be our responsibility to pay for a large part of it? Finally, I have to say that this “$14,000 per household” cost overrun figure is very misleading. That is like saying “the house I just bought cost $150,000 per person in our household!” Yes, it did, but that cost will be paid through a mortgage over 30 years. Likewise, most public infrastructure projects are funded by long term bonds (eg 20-30 years). So the cost is spread over a long period of time. Big improvements take big investments. I’m not saying that there aren’t any problems with the tunnel plan – just that a lot of the criticism seems knee-jerk to me.

So… did everyone who thinks the deep bore tunnel is too expensive also oppose light rail? Because Seattle’s light rail system is by far the most expensive in the US so far, at $179 million per mile, compared to the national average $35 million per mile (that’s from Wikipedia). And the tunnel is too expensive because…? Since when does cheaper always mean better? And last time I checked, Highway 99 serves only the greater Seattle metropolitan area (according to Google Maps). So why shouldn’t it be our responsibility to pay for a large part of it? Finally, I have to say that this “$14,000 per household” cost overrun figure is very misleading. That is like saying “the house I just bought cost $150,000 per person in our household!” Yes, it did, but that cost will be paid through a mortgage over 30 years. Likewise, most public infrastructure projects are funded by long term bonds (eg 20-30 years). So the cost is spread over a long period of time. Big improvements take big investments. I’m not saying that there aren’t any problems with the tunnel plan – just that a lot of the criticism seems knee-jerk to me.

This is not the biggest issue in the Mayor’s race. McGinn and Publicola would obviously like it to be. The PI.com called the Viaduct/tunnel the biggest issue, not the silly amendment that allowed the legislature to approve the tunnel, as Josh infers in his post.

The amendment is clearly not worth the paper it is written on. It doesn’t say all Seattle residents will pay for overuns, it says property owners who benefit would pay. Good luck.

At any rate, the big property owners who would pay don’t seem concerned about it – and it looks like all of them are supporting Mallahan.

The purpose of reporting is to enlighten with facts. I suppose Publicola is an advocacy site, which is fine. But it would carry more weight if it stuck to facts and embraced all the facts.

Yes. I voted for Mallahan. The McGinn campaign turned me off when it started relying on silly distortions, like its emphasis on that silly Viaduct amendment. Then there was the “largest tax increase” distortion. The intern who worked for Slade Gorton with all the seriousness of a true bombshell. And then the oddball flip-flop=flip on the tunnel, which I’m still trying to figure out. The call I got that indicated Mallahan was with the NRA on guns. Etc.

Do we really want more of this?

This is not the biggest issue in the Mayor’s race. McGinn and Publicola would obviously like it to be. The PI.com called the Viaduct/tunnel the biggest issue, not the silly amendment that allowed the legislature to approve the tunnel, as Josh infers in his post.

The amendment is clearly not worth the paper it is written on. It doesn’t say all Seattle residents will pay for overuns, it says property owners who benefit would pay. Good luck.

At any rate, the big property owners who would pay don’t seem concerned about it – and it looks like all of them are supporting Mallahan.

The purpose of reporting is to enlighten with facts. I suppose Publicola is an advocacy site, which is fine. But it would carry more weight if it stuck to facts and embraced all the facts.

Yes. I voted for Mallahan. The McGinn campaign turned me off when it started relying on silly distortions, like its emphasis on that silly Viaduct amendment. Then there was the “largest tax increase” distortion. The intern who worked for Slade Gorton with all the seriousness of a true bombshell. And then the oddball flip-flop=flip on the tunnel, which I’m still trying to figure out. The call I got that indicated Mallahan was with the NRA on guns. Etc.

Do we really want more of this?

@50 Stacy

It must frustrate you that your selective narrative isn’t resonating or even being heard by most voters. Seattle voters are tired of the eight year AWV replacement discussion and want to move forward. Team McGinn wants to stop the project.

After the election I’ll be happy to give you a tutorial on project risk management, but the short answer is that the next mayor must actively work to ensure that the risks are being managed. Some approaches for managing (mitigating) cost risks include working with legislature to remove the cost over run provision (that’s likely unconstitutional), negotiating the cost risks contractually with the Governor and WSDOT, and/or encouraging WSDOT to use its frequent practice of shifting cost risks to the contractor(s).

There’s 147 members of the legislature. One senator is entitled to his view but I doubt he speaks for the legislature.

Joe’s titles have included VP – Corporate Strategy, VP – Operations Strategy, and at one time yes VP – Customer Delight. At T-Mobile Joe was the go-to guy for big complex projects.

I haven’t seen the BBB mentioned anywhere but here but T-Mobile holds the wireless industry record for JD Power customer satisfaction awards and is the only wireless company ever listed in the BusinessWeek Customer Service Top 25.

@50 Stacy

It must frustrate you that your selective narrative isn’t resonating or even being heard by most voters. Seattle voters are tired of the eight year AWV replacement discussion and want to move forward. Team McGinn wants to stop the project.

After the election I’ll be happy to give you a tutorial on project risk management, but the short answer is that the next mayor must actively work to ensure that the risks are being managed. Some approaches for managing (mitigating) cost risks include working with legislature to remove the cost over run provision (that’s likely unconstitutional), negotiating the cost risks contractually with the Governor and WSDOT, and/or encouraging WSDOT to use its frequent practice of shifting cost risks to the contractor(s).

There’s 147 members of the legislature. One senator is entitled to his view but I doubt he speaks for the legislature.

Joe’s titles have included VP – Corporate Strategy, VP – Operations Strategy, and at one time yes VP – Customer Delight. At T-Mobile Joe was the go-to guy for big complex projects.

I haven’t seen the BBB mentioned anywhere but here but T-Mobile holds the wireless industry record for JD Power customer satisfaction awards and is the only wireless company ever listed in the BusinessWeek Customer Service Top 25.

Back to basics @51 — what planet are you living on? The AWV tunnel project, all two miles of it, will cost as much as building 14 miles of Link light rail!

Light rail transit costs way less than building new urban freeways, as everybody except Kemper Freeman and Susan Hutchison (and apparently you) realize.

Back to basics @51 — what planet are you living on? The AWV tunnel project, all two miles of it, will cost as much as building 14 miles of Link light rail!

Light rail transit costs way less than building new urban freeways, as everybody except Kemper Freeman and Susan Hutchison (and apparently you) realize.

Hi 54, how refreshing to be only mildly insulted in blog comments. I would like to point out that Link Light Rail currently has just 16,000 passenger trips per weekday, whereas the Viaduct has 110,000 (of which the tunnel is expected to take 85,000, while 25,000 go on the new waterfront boulevard). Light rail is expected to approach this number of trips (116,000) – but only in 2030, including the addition of the $300 million airport link and the $1.9 billion, 3.15 mile University Link. So we’re spending $4.5 billion on light rail to accommodate the same number of trips as the tunnel project. I’m not implying that these projects are interchangeable. I am making a point about costs. It’s not just about miles – it’s about usage and capacity. So your assertion that I just don’t understand the costs of light rail vs freeways appears to be wrong, when looking at cost per use, which looks to be roughly equal for these two projects. Anyway, in your haste to insult me, you apparently failed to notice that I’m not pro-tunnel or anti-light rail – just that some of the rabid anti-tunnel rhetoric surprises me given transit realities.

Hi 54, how refreshing to be only mildly insulted in blog comments. I would like to point out that Link Light Rail currently has just 16,000 passenger trips per weekday, whereas the Viaduct has 110,000 (of which the tunnel is expected to take 85,000, while 25,000 go on the new waterfront boulevard). Light rail is expected to approach this number of trips (116,000) – but only in 2030, including the addition of the $300 million airport link and the $1.9 billion, 3.15 mile University Link. So we’re spending $4.5 billion on light rail to accommodate the same number of trips as the tunnel project. I’m not implying that these projects are interchangeable. I am making a point about costs. It’s not just about miles – it’s about usage and capacity. So your assertion that I just don’t understand the costs of light rail vs freeways appears to be wrong, when looking at cost per use, which looks to be roughly equal for these two projects. Anyway, in your haste to insult me, you apparently failed to notice that I’m not pro-tunnel or anti-light rail – just that some of the rabid anti-tunnel rhetoric surprises me given transit realities.

Of course, Clibborn is now saying the clause is just a sham to get votes. Check out Chris Daniels’ report Saturday on KING.

Of course, Clibborn is now saying the clause is just a sham to get votes. Check out Chris Daniels’ report Saturday on KING.

It is not news that the clause if worthless. Any attorney worth his salt knows that. McGinn knows that. But he’s finding opportunity in promoting distortions. That’s what’s wrong with him. It is a fatal flaw.

It is not news that the clause if worthless. Any attorney worth his salt knows that. McGinn knows that. But he’s finding opportunity in promoting distortions. That’s what’s wrong with him. It is a fatal flaw.

Who really cares what the PI.com is calling the biggest issue? Last I checked, that site consisted of a couple of journalistic has-beens, a couple of kids that don’t know their heads from their asses, and dozens of photo galleries of semi-pornographic beauty pagents.
That’s your idea of good journalism?

Who really cares what the PI.com is calling the biggest issue? Last I checked, that site consisted of a couple of journalistic has-beens, a couple of kids that don’t know their heads from their asses, and dozens of photo galleries of semi-pornographic beauty pagents.
That’s your idea of good journalism?