Jan Drago to Serve on County Council Until November

When will Drago be sworn in?
Phillips is such a bitch.

When will Drago be sworn in?
Phillips is such a bitch.

Patterson points out that McDermott’s Senate district is entirely inside the Eighth District. Did she also point out that Drago’s home is entirely inside the Eighth District? Yet another stupid quote by Patterson and more lazy reporting from ECB…

Patterson points out that McDermott’s Senate district is entirely inside the Eighth District. Did she also point out that Drago’s home is entirely inside the Eighth District? Yet another stupid quote by Patterson and more lazy reporting from ECB…

Boo on Larry Phillips. While I understand his unease with the seat being vacant for an extended period of time, thereby causing a lack of representation to the District, there would have been better ways to go about this whole mess. I just hope that Ms. Drago works with Sen. McDermott in appointing staff, to allow for some continuity when he takes office at the end of the year.

Boo on Larry Phillips. While I understand his unease with the seat being vacant for an extended period of time, thereby causing a lack of representation to the District, there would have been better ways to go about this whole mess. I just hope that Ms. Drago works with Sen. McDermott in appointing staff, to allow for some continuity when he takes office at the end of the year.

@2 – the difference is that the district is much more West Seattle and Burien, and not very much Pioneer Square. While I’m sure Ms. Drago obtained a decent understanding of the needs of West Seattle, she has had no reason to understand the needs and concerns of Burien, Vashon or Normandy Park. Sen. McDermott could have hit the ground running. Drago will be playing catch-up.

@2 – the difference is that the district is much more West Seattle and Burien, and not very much Pioneer Square. While I’m sure Ms. Drago obtained a decent understanding of the needs of West Seattle, she has had no reason to understand the needs and concerns of Burien, Vashon or Normandy Park. Sen. McDermott could have hit the ground running. Drago will be playing catch-up.

Wow. I guess I haven’t seen Dunn in a while. When did he put on so much weight?

Wow. I guess I haven’t seen Dunn in a while. When did he put on so much weight?

Sorry, Michael, but there is going to be an election.

Sen. McDermott will have some explaining to do on his vote to saddle Seattle taxpayers with the cost overruns on the $4 billion tunnel we voted against and do not want.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5768&year=2009

Sorry, Michael, but there is going to be an election.

Sen. McDermott will have some explaining to do on his vote to saddle Seattle taxpayers with the cost overruns on the $4 billion tunnel we voted against and do not want.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5768&year=2009

@6 – I know. There will be an election. And McDermott is the odds on favorite to win.

As for your “$4 billion tunnel we voted against and do not want” -

If memory serves (and it does), the citizens of Seattle voted against a rebuild and a cut and cover tunnel in an “advisory” vote, expressing the wishes of the City to the State, who, as you may be aware, are the people who actually own said highway.

Further, the most recent polling that was done on the tunnel “issue” in October had a plurality (or slim majority, I can’t remember the specifics) in support of the tunnel, and the vast majority in support of moving forward.

As someone once said, one of the keys to economic sustainability in the Seattle area is North-South transportation mobility. The tunnel will be part of that, as the viaduct is now.

@6 – I know. There will be an election. And McDermott is the odds on favorite to win.

As for your “$4 billion tunnel we voted against and do not want” -

If memory serves (and it does), the citizens of Seattle voted against a rebuild and a cut and cover tunnel in an “advisory” vote, expressing the wishes of the City to the State, who, as you may be aware, are the people who actually own said highway.

Further, the most recent polling that was done on the tunnel “issue” in October had a plurality (or slim majority, I can’t remember the specifics) in support of the tunnel, and the vast majority in support of moving forward.

As someone once said, one of the keys to economic sustainability in the Seattle area is North-South transportation mobility. The tunnel will be part of that, as the viaduct is now.

joe mcdermott? zack hudgins? you’re fucking kidding me. Those two morons have no business being in the legislature, much less the KCC.

joe mcdermott? zack hudgins? you’re fucking kidding me. Those two morons have no business being in the legislature, much less the KCC.

Having an interim appointment for Dow’s seat was the correct thing to do. Now there will be a true democratic electoral process later this year for this and the other two seats (State Senator and State Rep) affected by this decision. Otherwise we would have had three backdoor appointments, which would have been a sleazy deal by the clique controlling the 34th Dems.

Having an interim appointment for Dow’s seat was the correct thing to do. Now there will be a true democratic electoral process later this year for this and the other two seats (State Senator and State Rep) affected by this decision. Otherwise we would have had three backdoor appointments, which would have been a sleazy deal by the clique controlling the 34th Dems.

@9 – was that pun intended?

@9 – was that pun intended?

@7, You forgot to mention the old freight canard. Wasn’t moving freight one of the excuses for the tunnel? (Never mind that it would take longer to get to the tunnel entrance on Mercer than to just head south along the waterfront.)

On the talking point that the state owns the highway, I say, fine — Let the state pay for the whole thing and let the state’s voters have their say.

On the talking point that it was a cut-and-cover tunnel we voted down, I still have yet to hear where the deep-bore tunnel with fewer lanes, more expense, and no exits inside of downtown would have gotten more votes.

The key to mobility is moving people and freight. That means dedicated right-of-way for moving freight (e.g. having two or all of the lanes on the waterfront be dedicated to freight and transit), and dedicated right-of-way for moving people (e.g. the bus tunnel, the 3rd Avenue transit mall, commuter rail, high-speed rail, and light rail).

More capacity for SOVs is not the key to mobility.

@7, You forgot to mention the old freight canard. Wasn’t moving freight one of the excuses for the tunnel? (Never mind that it would take longer to get to the tunnel entrance on Mercer than to just head south along the waterfront.)

On the talking point that the state owns the highway, I say, fine — Let the state pay for the whole thing and let the state’s voters have their say.

On the talking point that it was a cut-and-cover tunnel we voted down, I still have yet to hear where the deep-bore tunnel with fewer lanes, more expense, and no exits inside of downtown would have gotten more votes.

The key to mobility is moving people and freight. That means dedicated right-of-way for moving freight (e.g. having two or all of the lanes on the waterfront be dedicated to freight and transit), and dedicated right-of-way for moving people (e.g. the bus tunnel, the 3rd Avenue transit mall, commuter rail, high-speed rail, and light rail).

More capacity for SOVs is not the key to mobility.

@9 is right. It was totally fair to give Reagan Dunn a vote on who would represent West Seattle, and give the republicans on the council control over the choice of who would represent West Seattle. This is far more democratic than leaving the interim choice to fill the vacancy to the duly elected precinct committee officers of the West Seattle Democrats the way it would have been done before and the way a vacancy would be filled for
state representative
state senator
etc. etc.

It’s just common sense that pete von reichbauer and reagan dunn and others decide this for West Seattle. That’s democracy. And most of all, that’s the level of common place lying that goes on in the name of democracy today!

@9 is right. It was totally fair to give Reagan Dunn a vote on who would represent West Seattle, and give the republicans on the council control over the choice of who would represent West Seattle. This is far more democratic than leaving the interim choice to fill the vacancy to the duly elected precinct committee officers of the West Seattle Democrats the way it would have been done before and the way a vacancy would be filled for
state representative
state senator
etc. etc.

It’s just common sense that pete von reichbauer and reagan dunn and others decide this for West Seattle. That’s democracy. And most of all, that’s the level of common place lying that goes on in the name of democracy today!

hey we’re going to bore a tunnel under our downtown, too. But we’re not so vacuous as to put a highway in it. We’re going to put a train in it.

Buy go ahead Seattle, you’re the most greenest-posturing city in america, we all know that!

hey we’re going to bore a tunnel under our downtown, too. But we’re not so vacuous as to put a highway in it. We’re going to put a train in it.

Buy go ahead Seattle, you’re the most greenest-posturing city in america, we all know that!

@12
There’s a lot more to the 8th District than West Seattle.

@12
There’s a lot more to the 8th District than West Seattle.

@14, Yes, chilly, which both Joe McDermott AND Sharon Nelson (and Zach Hudgins, for that matter) fully understand as they represent most of the non-Seattle parts of the 8th in their capacity as 34th District legislators.

As such, they also understand the pressing issues in the District — like gravel mining on Maury Island and the ferry district.

That’s just two examples of things that Jan Drago has not had to deal with on Seattle City Council.

@14, Yes, chilly, which both Joe McDermott AND Sharon Nelson (and Zach Hudgins, for that matter) fully understand as they represent most of the non-Seattle parts of the 8th in their capacity as 34th District legislators.

As such, they also understand the pressing issues in the District — like gravel mining on Maury Island and the ferry district.

That’s just two examples of things that Jan Drago has not had to deal with on Seattle City Council.

@ 6, @ 8, @ 9, @ 14:

We’re going to elect Joe McDermott by a landslide. If you think you can stop us, bring it on. Who’s your candidate, smart guys?

@ 11:

On the talking point that the state owns the highway, I say, fine — Let the state pay for the whole thing and let the state’s voters have their say.

I agree. That’s what I want, too. That will get us a new, bigger, and better rebuilt elevated Viaduct.

@ 6, @ 8, @ 9, @ 14:

We’re going to elect Joe McDermott by a landslide. If you think you can stop us, bring it on. Who’s your candidate, smart guys?

@ 11:

On the talking point that the state owns the highway, I say, fine — Let the state pay for the whole thing and let the state’s voters have their say.

I agree. That’s what I want, too. That will get us a new, bigger, and better rebuilt elevated Viaduct.

@ 1
@ 5
Ditto! Phillips is a bitch…a bully blowhard bitch!

@ 1
@ 5
Ditto! Phillips is a bitch…a bully blowhard bitch!

@ 1
@ 5
Ditto! Phillips is a bitch…a bully blowhard bitch!

I do hope for Larry’s sake that he doesn’t intend to run again….for anything.

This whole council situation is just a cock-up…and one that dems should be ashamed of. Grrrr!

I do hope for Larry’s sake that he doesn’t intend to run again….for anything.

This whole council situation is just a cock-up…and one that dems should be ashamed of. Grrrr!

I do hope for Larry’s sake that he doesn’t intend to run again….for anything.

This whole council situation is just a cock-up…and one that dems should be ashamed of. Grrrr!

@11 -

The State is paying for the highway. The City is paying for the Seawall, moving of utilities, and the beloved surface street option (realistically, the tunnel itself is only expected to cost $2.5b, +/-, which is actually less than the cut and cover, and that doesn’t include the mitigation costs the C/C would have required). The County will be paying for the improved transit. The Port will kick in a little for good measure. The State has already budgeted $500mm for cost overruns, and tolling would be able to bring in another $400mm in bonds, in case there are even MORE overruns. Oh, and the State can’t force a municipality to impose a tax on its citizen.

And what, pray-tell, is your solution to the AVW?

@11 -

The State is paying for the highway. The City is paying for the Seawall, moving of utilities, and the beloved surface street option (realistically, the tunnel itself is only expected to cost $2.5b, +/-, which is actually less than the cut and cover, and that doesn’t include the mitigation costs the C/C would have required). The County will be paying for the improved transit. The Port will kick in a little for good measure. The State has already budgeted $500mm for cost overruns, and tolling would be able to bring in another $400mm in bonds, in case there are even MORE overruns. Oh, and the State can’t force a municipality to impose a tax on its citizen.

And what, pray-tell, is your solution to the AVW?

@11 -

The State is paying for the highway. The City is paying for the Seawall, moving of utilities, and the beloved surface street option (realistically, the tunnel itself is only expected to cost $2.5b, +/-, which is actually less than the cut and cover, and that doesn’t include the mitigation costs the C/C would have required). The County will be paying for the improved transit. The Port will kick in a little for good measure. The State has already budgeted $500mm for cost overruns, and tolling would be able to bring in another $400mm in bonds, in case there are even MORE overruns. Oh, and the State can’t force a municipality to impose a tax on its citizen.

And what, pray-tell, is your solution to the AVW?

@19 Close all downtown exits and add a new lane to I-5. Turn the waterfront into a vast bikeway. Re-route any remaining viaduct traffic onto avenues 1-9. Close all east-west downtown streets.

@19 Close all downtown exits and add a new lane to I-5. Turn the waterfront into a vast bikeway. Re-route any remaining viaduct traffic onto avenues 1-9. Close all east-west downtown streets.

@19 Close all downtown exits and add a new lane to I-5. Turn the waterfront into a vast bikeway. Re-route any remaining viaduct traffic onto avenues 1-9. Close all east-west downtown streets.

@19,

The solution for the viaduct is to enable people and freight to continue to have mobility to and through downtown.

A lot has already been done to get people out of gridlock: the bus tunnel, closing 3rd Ave to general traffic during rush hour, more and more and more bus lines, commuter rail, light rail. More light rail and bus rapid transit are coming. Hopefully, we’ll even see a bullet train from California to British Columbia have a stop near Quest Field some day.

The key to getting freight out of gridlock is to give it some dedicated right-of-way through downtown. Perhaps that is a street that is just for trucks (and maybe transit). Perhaps that is just truck-only lanes.

The cultural shift that is necessary is for a lot more people to use the available transit to go downtown instead of filling up all available space with cars.

BTW, @19, how do you propose to enable freight to get through downtown?

@19,

The solution for the viaduct is to enable people and freight to continue to have mobility to and through downtown.

A lot has already been done to get people out of gridlock: the bus tunnel, closing 3rd Ave to general traffic during rush hour, more and more and more bus lines, commuter rail, light rail. More light rail and bus rapid transit are coming. Hopefully, we’ll even see a bullet train from California to British Columbia have a stop near Quest Field some day.

The key to getting freight out of gridlock is to give it some dedicated right-of-way through downtown. Perhaps that is a street that is just for trucks (and maybe transit). Perhaps that is just truck-only lanes.

The cultural shift that is necessary is for a lot more people to use the available transit to go downtown instead of filling up all available space with cars.

BTW, @19, how do you propose to enable freight to get through downtown?

@19,

The solution for the viaduct is to enable people and freight to continue to have mobility to and through downtown.

A lot has already been done to get people out of gridlock: the bus tunnel, closing 3rd Ave to general traffic during rush hour, more and more and more bus lines, commuter rail, light rail. More light rail and bus rapid transit are coming. Hopefully, we’ll even see a bullet train from California to British Columbia have a stop near Quest Field some day.

The key to getting freight out of gridlock is to give it some dedicated right-of-way through downtown. Perhaps that is a street that is just for trucks (and maybe transit). Perhaps that is just truck-only lanes.

The cultural shift that is necessary is for a lot more people to use the available transit to go downtown instead of filling up all available space with cars.

BTW, @19, how do you propose to enable freight to get through downtown?

What people seem to forget is that the Alaskan Way Viaduct was meant as a way for people to BYPASS downtown Seattle. That’s why there’s only the one exit each way(well, two if you include the southbound Pioneer Square/Stadium exit and northbound Western Avenue). If the new tunnel is going to have exits to downtown, then tell me where is that traffic going to sit inside the tunnel while waiting for the first light to turn green outside the tunnel? Then you’d have even more backups and stalled traffic.

It is just a vocal minority who keeps screaming anti-tunnel rhetoric. I am looking forward to seeing the new park and open space created by getting rid of the viaduct. A warm summer evening hearing the sound of a ferry departing. A concert back on the waterfront. Birds and water. Anyway, drivers shouldn’t be looking at the view from their cars; they’re not paying attention to the traffic in front of them. Does anyone really miss seeing Mercer Island or Mt Baker when traveling on I-90?

Plus, why do people keep talking about adding more bike lanes? That’s insane to expect people to give up their cars and capacity for a bike commute. Now, more public transportation–busses and much more rail–with the ability to carry bicycles if necessary, would help a whole lot more than additional bike lanes.

What people seem to forget is that the Alaskan Way Viaduct was meant as a way for people to BYPASS downtown Seattle. That’s why there’s only the one exit each way(well, two if you include the southbound Pioneer Square/Stadium exit and northbound Western Avenue). If the new tunnel is going to have exits to downtown, then tell me where is that traffic going to sit inside the tunnel while waiting for the first light to turn green outside the tunnel? Then you’d have even more backups and stalled traffic.

It is just a vocal minority who keeps screaming anti-tunnel rhetoric. I am looking forward to seeing the new park and open space created by getting rid of the viaduct. A warm summer evening hearing the sound of a ferry departing. A concert back on the waterfront. Birds and water. Anyway, drivers shouldn’t be looking at the view from their cars; they’re not paying attention to the traffic in front of them. Does anyone really miss seeing Mercer Island or Mt Baker when traveling on I-90?

Plus, why do people keep talking about adding more bike lanes? That’s insane to expect people to give up their cars and capacity for a bike commute. Now, more public transportation–busses and much more rail–with the ability to carry bicycles if necessary, would help a whole lot more than additional bike lanes.

What people seem to forget is that the Alaskan Way Viaduct was meant as a way for people to BYPASS downtown Seattle. That’s why there’s only the one exit each way(well, two if you include the southbound Pioneer Square/Stadium exit and northbound Western Avenue). If the new tunnel is going to have exits to downtown, then tell me where is that traffic going to sit inside the tunnel while waiting for the first light to turn green outside the tunnel? Then you’d have even more backups and stalled traffic.

It is just a vocal minority who keeps screaming anti-tunnel rhetoric. I am looking forward to seeing the new park and open space created by getting rid of the viaduct. A warm summer evening hearing the sound of a ferry departing. A concert back on the waterfront. Birds and water. Anyway, drivers shouldn’t be looking at the view from their cars; they’re not paying attention to the traffic in front of them. Does anyone really miss seeing Mercer Island or Mt Baker when traveling on I-90?

Plus, why do people keep talking about adding more bike lanes? That’s insane to expect people to give up their cars and capacity for a bike commute. Now, more public transportation–busses and much more rail–with the ability to carry bicycles if necessary, would help a whole lot more than additional bike lanes.