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.

Licata Nails It Re: The Tunnel

In his email newsletter sent out yesterday Seattle City Councilmember Nick Licata nails it regarding the $2.8 billion spending cap on the deep-bore tunnel project.

Licata makes the case that the spending cap, not the cost overrun provision, is likely to be the bigger problem in the long run:

The most important project element for Seattle is taking down the current Viaduct to free up the waterfront to pedestrians. The State funding toward viaduct removal and rebuilding Alaskan Way is $290 million, but the State could use this money to cover any additional tunnel costs. The City could argue that the State was still obligated to do the project, but if the money isn’t there, the State Legislature would have to approve funding, which would put Seattle in a weak position. This problem could be solved by the State and the City agreeing in advance to put aside the money for the waterfront, thus creating a separate locked box for it.

Another major part of the tunnel project, to be tackled after the tunnel is completed, is to reconnect Thomas, Harrison and Republican streets across Aurora Avenue, to “reconnect” the street grid between Queen Anne and South Lake Union. It is a critical engineering task, necessary to avoid congestion problems on Mercer and facilitate access to the tunnel. The same approach of separate funding should be undertaken with this project as with the waterfront; in a worst case scenario, this is the portion of the tunnel project that could be sacrificed – it would be the most difficult one to convince the State Legislature to fund if this money is used for the tunnel.

Agreed. So then, what do Licata and the rest of the Council propose to do about it?




  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    “So then, what do Licata and the rest of the Council propose to do about it?”

    Nothing. Even if only $2,000,000,000 is spent or 2.5 or 3.1, leaving the tunnel undone, it's still 2+ billion in revenue for various parties. Did anyone really think this tunnel and the zealot support from “pro-tunnel Council members” was about benefiting Seattle overall?

    Will Publicola, the Stranger, the Times, or anyone else investigate after final bids are in to track down all the political money and gifts to see which Seattle Council members benefit the most here? I doubt it, because that wouldn't be a fun combat-y narrative that will drive advertising click through.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    “So then, what do Licata and the rest of the Council propose to do about it?”

    Nothing. Even if only $2,000,000,000 is spent or 2.5 or 3.1, leaving the tunnel undone, it's still 2+ billion in revenue for various parties. Did anyone really think this tunnel and the zealot support from “pro-tunnel Council members” was about benefiting Seattle overall?

    Will Publicola, the Stranger, the Times, or anyone else investigate after final bids are in to track down all the political money and gifts to see which Seattle Council members benefit the most here? I doubt it, because that wouldn't be a fun combat-y narrative that will drive advertising click through.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    “that wouldn't be a fun combat-y narrative that will drive advertising click through”

    Really? I think it would be exactly that.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    “that wouldn't be a fun combat-y narrative that will drive advertising click through”

    Really? I think it would be exactly that.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    Until I see the local news media twisting the screws on the fiscal bottom line of the Council as advocates for the public — anyone remember Woodward and Bernstein? — I'm under no illusions. The bottom line for politicians isn't the city budget; it's the longevity of their careers and campaign contributions. You don't check and police the mob with arrests; you do it by checking and policing the flow of funds to them, which leads to everything else. Same with political figures.

    But to do that, oh boy. That would be a nasty. What's more important: potential long-term media access, or hardcore journalism?

    Why would Josh, Dom, Joni or anyone else burn down all the bridges and possibly friendships they have with politicians? This isn't some political game or exercise with the tunnel. “McGinn scores a nasty left! Conlin and Gregoire — a metal chair to the back when McGinn looked away!”

    No, this is all of us taking it up the ass with either a four to five figure financial liability or having a nice hole dug under downtown that by 2030 will be an annex to the current Underground Tour.

    I can't fault them if they don't do it, but… we have no other guardians but the media. If they don't take a stand, no one will, because no one can now, if we labor under absolutely no illusions and are pure realists. Is their job continued access, or to tear out the bleeding truth no matter what?

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    Until I see the local news media twisting the screws on the fiscal bottom line of the Council as advocates for the public — anyone remember Woodward and Bernstein? — I'm under no illusions. The bottom line for politicians isn't the city budget; it's the longevity of their careers and campaign contributions. You don't check and police the mob with arrests; you do it by checking and policing the flow of funds to them, which leads to everything else. Same with political figures.

    But to do that, oh boy. That would be a nasty. What's more important: potential long-term media access, or hardcore journalism?

    Why would Josh, Dom, Joni or anyone else burn down all the bridges and possibly friendships they have with politicians? This isn't some political game or exercise with the tunnel. “McGinn scores a nasty left! Conlin and Gregoire — a metal chair to the back when McGinn looked away!”

    No, this is all of us taking it up the ass with either a four to five figure financial liability or having a nice hole dug under downtown that by 2030 will be an annex to the current Underground Tour.

  • gloomy gus

    It would be, but you'd have to find a writer able to get paid to do the legwork to establish convincingly that contributions = causation for the legislation, and not just the usual mere correlation of “whoever's in office gets contributions”. I don't think any news outlet invests in that kind of long-form work any more, certainly when the odds of a juicy story that sticks don't look too strong.

  • gloomy gus

    It would be, but you'd have to find a writer able to get paid to do the legwork to establish convincingly that contributions = causation for the legislation, and not just the usual mere correlation of “whoever's in office gets contributions”. I don't think any news outlet invests in that kind of long-form work any more.

  • herr_nichte

    You seem highly motivated and desirous of your own news outlet. Why don't you get busy, discover all these sinister plots, and make yourself famous.

  • herr_nichte

    You seem highly motivated and desirous of your own news outlet. Why don't you get busy, discover all these sinister plots, and make yourself famous.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    If I had something called financial capital, I can assure you I would.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    If I had something called financial capital, I can assure you I would.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    I agree completely, except I don't think we have proof of Publicola being chummy with politicians. The Times and PI? We certainly do. It's time to test online journalism's metal.

    What do you say Josh and Erica? Are you up to publishing an in-depth list of who's paying who what, including city and state officials as well as second and third level contributors (i.e., who's inside each PAC, etc.)? If nothing else it sounds like a great research project for an intern.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    I agree completely, except I don't think we have proof of Publicola being chummy with politicians. The Times and PI? We certainly do. It's time to test online journalism's metal.

    What do you say Josh and Erica? Are you up to publishing an in-depth list of who's paying who what, including city and state officials as well as second and third level contributors (i.e., who's inside each PAC, etc.)? If nothing else it sounds like a great research project for an intern.

  • http://michaelmaddux.blogspot.com/ Michael M.

    It's all public record. Pay attention to who's getting the bids, and then see if those companies match the employers of the people whose dollars are given to campaigns.

  • http://michaelmaddux.blogspot.com/ Michael M.

    It's all public record. Pay attention to who's getting the bids, and then see if those companies match the employers of the people whose dollars are given to campaigns.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    @Michael M (stupid nesting)

    That's well and good, but I'm not a journalist; I don't have Rasmussen or Burgess's cell phone numbers for comments, and even if I had the skill to gather up all that and corral it and figure it out, no one will give a shit if it's http://www.joeszilagyi.com. If Publicola runs it, or the Stranger, or the Times, it will get eyes and attention.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    @Michael M (stupid nesting)

    That's well and good, but I'm not a journalist; I don't have Rasmussen or Burgess's cell phone numbers for comments, and even if I had the skill to gather up all that and corral it and figure it out, no one will give a shit if it's http://www.joeszilagyi.com. If Publicola runs it, or the Stranger, or the Times, it will get eyes and attention.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    The contributions = causation bit would be nice, but would require either luck or a wonderful leak. A simple list of “X construction company paid council member Y $20k” would get us 90% of the way there.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    The contributions = causation bit would be nice, but would require either luck or a wonderful leak. A simple list of “X construction company paid council member Y $20k” would get us 90% of the way there.

  • gloomy gus

    That's the tough part – 90% of the way there is easy, sure, but gets us mere correlation. If all we need is fresh mud to sling, great.

    Pushing past 90% to get at causation – to get at something that means more to voters than just another round of soundbite fodder – that's expensive and risky.

  • gloomy gus

    That's the tough part – 90% of the way there is easy, sure, but gets us mere correlation. If all we need is fresh mud to sling, great.

    Pushing past 90% to get at causation – to get at something that means more to voters than just another round of soundbite fodder – that's expensive and risky.

  • morning

    First of all the amount of money city candidates get is not enough to win elections by buying them. Check it out:
    http://www2.seattle.gov/ethics/elpub/2009Report…

    The most important part of getting the money is that the media cover it and then only take those with the most money as “serious” candidates”.

    The most likely recipients of the contributions will be state positions since they will be giving the contract and paying for most of it. Contributions are for the future. What mega projects will the city council be handing out next?

    What is more important to the members is that the DT establishment support, or at least not oppose, their next campaign. The construction companies rarely give much at the local level but law firms that benefit from the civic purse are always at the top of the list. Also, check out the top contributors on the link above both for individuals and companies.

  • morning

    First of all the amount of money city candidates get is not enough to win elections by buying them. Check it out:
    http://www2.seattle.gov/ethics/elpub/2009Report…

    The most important part of getting the money is that the media cover it and then only take those with the most money as “serious” candidates”.

    The most likely recipients of the contributions will be state positions since they will be giving the contract and paying for most of it. Contributions are for the future. What mega projects will the city council be handing out next?

    What is more important to the members is that the DT establishment support, or at least not oppose, their next campaign. The construction companies rarely give much at the local level but law firms that benefit from the civic purse are always at the top of the list. Also, check out the top contributors on the link above both for individuals and companies.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    Wow, it looks like there's a $700 limit to campaign contributions in Seattle. That sure removes above board corruption from the picture here. How do we get these caps statewide and nationally?

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    Wow, it looks like there's a $700 limit to campaign contributions in Seattle. That sure removes above board corruption from the picture here. How do we get these caps statewide and nationally?

  • joshuadf

    Correction, the SR 99 North Portal would reconnect John, Thomas, and Harrison Streets (just north of Denny Way), and convert Republican Street into a freeway ramp. Latest designs at:
    http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/workin…

    Personally I'm unimpressed with the Harrison overpass design. Thomas St, on the other hand, will hopefully be a “20’ – 22’ green promendade with substation screening” and part of the Bay to Lake Trail (Myrtle Edwards to Lake Union Park). Preliminary designs at
    http://www.seattle.gov/Dclu/Planning/ThomasStre…

  • joshuadf

    Correction, the SR 99 North Portal would reconnect John, Thomas, and Harrison Streets (just north of Denny Way), and convert Republican Street into a freeway ramp. Latest designs at:
    http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/workin…

    Personally I'm unimpressed with the Harrison overpass design. Thomas St, on the other hand, will hopefully be a “20’ – 22’ green promendade with substation screening” and part of the Bay to Lake Trail (Myrtle Edwards to Lake Union Park). Preliminary designs at
    http://www.seattle.gov/Dclu/Planning/ThomasStre…

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    The point from Nick, omitted by Dan (how very McGinn of you), was to isolate the sub-projects from the tunnel. The tunnel contract is WSDOT's, signed by the State.
    Argue with Nick about it.
    Here ya go, straight from the email I got last night.
    Enjoy.
    Urban Politics #294, 6-7-2010

    By City Councilmember Nick Licata

    WHO PAYS FOR COST OVERRUNS? TUNNEL AGREEMENTS AND CONTRACT

    The question that has dominated the discussion of the deep bore tunnel replacement for the Alaskan Way Viaduct has been: who will pay for any cost overruns? The answer is the State with regards to the contract for the tunnel. The reason is that the contractor that wins the design-build contract for the tunnel will be signing a contract with the State of Washington, not the City of Seattle. The contract will oblige WSDOT to cover risks associated with the tunnel.  The City of Seattle will not be contractually obligated to cover cost overruns for the tunnel.

    Think about it for a moment, the contractor could care less who pays the bill, as long as they get paid. They are not going to sign a contract in which this is left in doubt. Since the City is not a party to the contract, there would be no legal standing for either WSDOT or the contractor to look to the city to cover any of the bill spelled out in the contract.

    That said, what does the $2.8 billion cap that the State legislature set on the entire tunnel project mean? The cap is real in the sense that the Governor cannot spend more state money than the legislature has approved. So let's assume that the $1.96 billion tunnel goes over budget; the State is on the hook, not the contractor. The state could pay them and still be under the $2.8 billion cap. However, what happens to the other parts of the overall tunnel project?

    The most important project element for Seattle is taking down the current Viaduct to free up the waterfront to pedestrians. The State funding toward viaduct removal and rebuilding Alaskan Way is $290 million, but the State could use this money to cover any additional tunnel costs. The City could argue that the State was still obligated to do the project, but if the money isn't there, the State Legislature would have to approve funding, which would put Seattle in a weak position. This problem could be solved by the State and the City agreeing in advance to put aside the money for the waterfront, thus creating a separate locked box for it.

    Another major part of the tunnel project, to be tackled after the tunnel is completed, is to reconnect Thomas, Harrison and Republican streets across Aurora Avenue, to “reconnect” the street grid between Queen Anne and South Lake Union. It is a critical engineering task, necessary to avoid congestion problems on Mercer and facilitate access to the tunnel. The same approach of separate funding should be undertaken with this project as with the waterfront; in a worst case scenario, this is the portion of the tunnel project that could be sacrificed – it would be the most difficult one to convince the State Legislature to fund if this money is used for the tunnel.

    Seattle and the State are negotiating agreements to allow the tunnel and related projects to proceed. Hopefully they will protect funds for the waterfront and reconnecting the grid. We will need to see what is included before knowing how well or whether this is addressed.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    The point from Nick, omitted by Dan (how very McGinn of you), was to isolate the sub-projects from the tunnel. The tunnel contract is WSDOT's, signed by the State.
    Argue with Nick about it.

  • herr_nichte

    Indeed, it's a good system for preventing this sort of thing. Another one is city-council folks at large, instead of by district, (for example, if Licata were -the- council member for Ballard). This is the sort of thing that has largely prevented the corporate plot big money theory that's so often spun here in the comments page. It's not nearly as fun as it is to imagine conspiracy, but most of Seattle politics is boring old personal preference, (O'Brian really does love McGinn, Conlin really does love goats…)

  • herr_nichte

    Indeed, it's a good system for preventing this sort of thing. Another one is city-council folks at large, instead of by district, (for example, if Licata were -the- council member for Ballard). This is the sort of thing that has largely prevented the corporate plot big money theory that's so often spun here in the comments page. It's not nearly as fun as it is to imagine conspiracy, but most of Seattle politics is boring old personal preference, (O'Brian really does love McGinn, Conlin really does love goats…)

  • N8

    If there are cost overruns or if there isn't money to tear down the tunnel, Seattle should create a local improvement district to tax those businesses that will most benefit from the removal of the viaduct. Also, it can use the increased revenue from the increased taxes from the rising values on those properties to offset the costs. If not, WSDOT could sell the rights, easements and any property it owns for the viaduct to the highest bidder to cover cost overruns and viaduct tear down. Maybe someone like Rossi's development company could buy those rights and build condos on stilts.

  • N8

    If there are cost overruns or if there isn't money to tear down the tunnel, Seattle should create a local improvement district to tax those businesses that will most benefit from the removal of the viaduct. Also, it can use the increased revenue from the increased taxes from the rising values on those properties to offset the costs. If not, WSDOT could sell the rights, easements and any property it owns for the viaduct to the highest bidder to cover cost overruns and viaduct tear down. Maybe someone like Rossi's development company could buy those rights and build condos on stilts.

  • diadora

    Licata is actually addressing the issues, unlike the other city council people. Hooray for him! However, I still think McGinn is right on his basic point; the city should not sign anything until it is clear that the city (and its residents) know the limits of their obligations.

    When he says that WSDOT would have to pay overruns, Licata is being hopeful. That would be logical, but it all depends on the law and the contract. The fuzzy law must be clarified.

  • diadora

    Licata is actually addressing the issues, unlike the other city council people. Hooray for him! However, I still think McGinn is right on his basic point; the city should not sign anything until it is clear that the city (and its residents) know the limits of their obligations.

    When he says that WSDOT would have to pay overruns, Licata is being hopeful. That would be logical, but it all depends on the law and the contract. The fuzzy law must be clarified.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    He is being hopeful on the state's side, and factual on the city side. WSDOT signs that contract.
    Isolate the city obligations.

    I expect the state would extend the tolling by a number of years.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    He is being hopeful on the state's side, and factual on the city side. WSDOT signs that contract.
    Isolate the city obligations.

    I expect the state would extend the tolling by a number of years.

  • morning

    LIDs must be approved by the property owners in it.

  • morning

    LIDs must be approved by the property owners in it.

  • http://spifflines.blogspot.com/ John Bailo

    Agreed? By whom? This whole thing is a travesty being ramrodded by imperious Government workers!

  • http://spifflines.blogspot.com/ John Bailo

    Agreed? By whom? This whole thing is a travesty being ramrodded by imperious Government workers!

  • Olby Bunderwood

    wrong. city council candidates all campagin based on a list of the 2000 top donors in Seattle, the kinds of people who throw $250 to each of several council candidates in the primary and the general, the people who can put in $250-$5000 a year in donations. These are mainly lawyers, developers, engineers, folks living in Bellevue but who work in downtown Seattle, and the like. Check out the SEEC pie charts, downtown Seattle and Belleuve are the top two neighborhoods for council donations, everything else is far, far far behind with real neighborhoods like Lake city contributing only a miniscule fraction. The entire class of pro project folks know it's not about one or two guys throwing in $250K a pop, it's a broad reaching effort for the entire class of folks tied to the project to throw in money. BTW your notion that $700 ain't much is belied by the fact they give that in the primary and the general, that's $2800, then multiply that by 5 council members and you're up to about $10 grand a cycle. which most people can't give.

  • Olby Bunderwood

    wrong. city council candidates all campagin based on a list of the 2000 top donors in Seattle, the kinds of people who throw $250 to each of several council candidates in the primary and the general, the people who can put in $250-$5000 a year in donations. These are mainly lawyers, developers, engineers, folks living in Bellevue but who work in downtown Seattle, and the like. Check out the SEEC pie charts, downtown Seattle and Belleuve are the top two neighborhoods for council donations, everything else is far, far far behind with real neighborhoods like Lake city contributing only a miniscule fraction. The entire class of pro project folks know it's not about one or two guys throwing in $250K a pop, it's a broad reaching effort for the entire class of folks tied to the project to throw in money. BTW your notion that $700 ain't much is belied by the fact they give that in the primary and the general, that's $2800, then multiply that by 5 council members and you're up to about $10 grand a cycle. which most people can't give.

  • at large = we represent $

    wrong again the at large system is designed to ensure you need money to win, and can't doorbell to win, and to ensure the top groups of top donors get a piece of each council member. none of them is allowed to have a neighborhood base of real folks. In fact, the detachment of the council members from teh voters that comes from having nine at large which most folks in seattle barely even know their names! is a driver of the fact they all need $300K for an election just to mail a few post cards to all voters.

  • at large = we represent $

    wrong again the at large system is designed to ensure you need money to win, and can't doorbell to win, and to ensure the top groups of top donors get a piece of each council member. none of them is allowed to have a neighborhood base of real folks. In fact, the detachment of the council members from teh voters that comes from having nine at large which most folks in seattle barely even know their names! is a driver of the fact they all need $300K for an election just to mail a few post cards to all voters.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    I'm not saying it's perfect. But a $700 cap removes the large deep-pocketed corporations from being overly influentual. I'd rather have a larger group, who won't necessarily agree on any one issue, adding that influence.

    Of course I'd much prefer having a, say, $100 cap. Or even better, change to a secret ballot system to completely remove money from influence. But I'm just saying our system isn't as bad as I thought it was.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    I'm not saying it's perfect. But a $700 cap removes the large deep-pocketed corporations from being overly influentual. I'd rather have a larger group, who won't necessarily agree on any one issue, adding that influence.

    Of course I'd much prefer having a, say, $100 cap. Or even better, change to a secret ballot system to completely remove money from influence. But I'm just saying our system isn't as bad as I thought it was.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    “and Belleuve”

    There really ought to be a law limiting campaign contributions to residents of the municipalities in question. I'm a Seattle resident. I have no business giving campaign cash to Bellevue elections, and vice versa.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    “and Belleuve”

    There really ought to be a law limiting campaign contributions to residents of the municipalities in question. I'm a Seattle resident. I have no business giving campaign cash to Bellevue elections, and vice versa.

  • morning

    Don't let facts get in your way. The campaign limit for both the primary and the general is $700 total Yes, someone can spend thousands on donations but can only give $700 to the winner. So even though they gave thousands their influence on any one candidate is limited to $700.

    If people want to follow the money, go to the “independent” committees. Fire and Police, for example, spend tens of thousands for their chosen few. Then there is the Forward Seattle group – check out their contributors.

    If you want the list of shame, read those that gave to Jesse Israel.

  • morning

    Don't let facts get in your way. The campaign limit for both the primary and the general is $700 total Yes, someone can spend thousands on donations but can only give $700 to the winner. So even though they gave thousands their influence on any one candidate is limited to $700.

    If people want to follow the money, go to the “independent” committees. Fire and Police, for example, spend tens of thousands for their chosen few. Then there is the Forward Seattle group – check out their contributors.

    If you want the list of shame, read those that gave to Jesse Israel.

  • J.R.

    The city of Seattle's $700 limit applies to all contributions (it's not split into a primary limit and a general election limit like the state system) and it's applies to the full four-year election cycle, so the most you could give to five Councilmembers in a cycle is $3,500 (5 x $700).

  • J.R.

    The city of Seattle's $700 limit applies to all contributions (it's not split into a primary limit and a general election limit like the state system) and it's applies to the full four-year election cycle, so the most you could give to five Councilmembers in a cycle is $3,500 (5 x $700).

  • N8

    Yeah, so, the viaduct doesn't get torn down with the approval of a lid.

  • N8

    Yeah, so, the viaduct doesn't get torn down with the approval of a lid.

  • Selma

    That's a pretty egregious withholding. It'd be nice to see a correction from the author.

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr. Baker

    Oh no, I figure this might be the only time me, Licata, and Bertolet agree, Nick did Nail it!! Hooray for us!

    Sure he had to hug the edge of lying by omission (the McGinn political Slanket), but I'll still enjoy the moment.

    Dear Doogie,
    Dan said Nick was right, and so did I, and gosh, the State is on the hook for the tunnel.

  • good_grief

    Good luck with that — from Dan you are more likely to just get petulant name-calling.

  • Barleywine

    I'm not sure Josh and Erica should be dragged into a fight that they don't feel a personal need to spend their time fighting, but I like the challenge. And I would hope they would publish work done by interns if it lead to some page hits and insight.

    My personal work, entirely fictional, starts with one disturbed individual with an unhealthy dislike of Nickels that goes way back, pre-mayor. Leads to him recruiting others to fight for anything, and I mean ANYTHING, connected to Nickels. Light rail, bike days, bag tax, restoration of salmon habitat, big developer-buddy projects, etc.

    One recruited is P. Murakami. Fantasy says that she is related in some way to K. Murakami of PI fame, because the group has a very strong relationship with the PI and hates the Times. And K. Murakami's articles about transit tend to be negative.
    My link isn't worth two cents, but I'd give seventyfive cents to anyone who could show a familial relationship there.

    And along the lines of the Council, an apparently very fine architectural firm with a very sure familial tie has won many of the contracts that only the Council votes on; for public works projects like police, fire and train stations.
    I'd love to know if money (and blog time, letter-to-editor time) from my group went mostly to Council members who voted for this firm.

    It wouldn't be nearly as interesting for me if were only money, but if it started as a grudge between two people long ago, that would be a human interest story if there ever was one.
    LIGHT RAIL FAILS BECAUSE ONE KID PISSED OFF ANOTHER KID ON PLAYGROUND LONG AGO (corrected)

  • tpn

    “sure removes above board corruption from the picture here”

    Although, most if not all corruption is below the board, making this a misnomer.

  • morning

    Tequila?????

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    Well, clearly finance caps won't solve under-the-table bribes. Though again, secret ballots could.

  • Barleywine

    Morning: “Tequila?”

    No, IPA.

    But totally serious. I know you don't care. You're a cute, fizzy morning thing, but it matters to me.

  • Wells

    Have a close look at at WSDOT's detailed map of the DBT north portal surface street rebuild designs, both the old portal on Aurora and the new one on 6th Ave. Both rebuilds restore connectivity of John, Thomas and Harrison as SR99 is rebuilt below. Both close the Broad Street Underpass – NOT a good idea. Understanding why exposes another reason why the Deep-bore is also NOT a good idea. You engineer types ought to know better.

    The 1st Phase of the Mercer rebuild retains the Broad St Underpass and directs traffic away from Lower Queen Anne onto Broad and Denny Way, a more suitable route for thru-traffic than Mercer.

    Mercer Place is definitely not a feasible route to Elliott as it is only 2-lanes wide and entirely high-density residential. SDOT is lying about Mercer Place as a feasible route option. LYING. Other routes to Elliott from Mercer must be arranged, most likely turning at Dexter and 6th to Denny Way, Broad, Western then Elliott. But also along Mercer to the Queen Anne/1st Ave couplet, then west on Republican, Harrison, Thomas, John, Denny Way and Western to Elliott. The streets which aren't designated as the official “through corridor” will become makeshift or 'cut-through' routes.

    We're talking around 20,000 vehicles daily redirected from commercial Elliott and Western access to SR99 through residential neighborhood districts. Oh wait, they'll be all electric cars and all nifty and everything and totally like OK cuz they're like electric, with like electricity.

    Compounding the problem is how this additional traffic affects the Mercer Mess. A new traffic pattern is created that increases traffic on Mercer between Aurora and I-5. Should you think about it? Oh well. Nevermind. You're smart. So smart, you don't have to think about it. Big Brother's sister Mephistopholes Crunican loves you.

  • bethatuw

    What little information the local media outlets review about this project centers on the dollar cost of this project, but no attention has been given to the fact that these bored tunnels are environmental disasters, controlled yes, but disasters just the same. No attention either has been given to the fact that with a fair amount of regularity bored tunnel projects experience cave-ins related more often than not to either the design, construction, or geological unsuitability of the project.

    The tunnel collapse in Cologne last year is just one of many tunnel projects where this has happened (see below and above link for information about how pervasive this problem is). Far from being unusual these situations happen all too often. It is no coincidence that both of the tunnel projects in the Seattle area experienced these problems. Those were “small” tunnels in comparison to the one that WSDOT is insisting on starting, the magnitude of harm should something go wrong with the Alaskan Way tunnel will be much greater.

    The conditions that led to the collapse in Cologne were not that different than here. The WSDOT expectation is to solve most if not all the boring /ground instability problems with the jet grouting – the process they tout as a miracle cure for tunneling pitfalls. But as in Cologne, so here, extensive groundwater permeation and water inflows along the tunnel pathway.

    In Cologne it was a river adjacent to the project that created the pressure, here there is the hydrologic pressure from a whole bay and sound to contend with. There it was an highly developed urban setting with older buildings surrounding and standing in the pathway of the tunnel, same here. But we’re supposed to forget about though because WSDOT has profusely assured the public in general, the Pioneer Square people and other property owners that they have everything under control. And of course WSDOT is holding ongoing preemptive meetings with the latter groups – the WSDOT PR arm has established these meetings in order to diffuse any opposition or concern about safety and stability.

    Of course, if you read WSDOT's blithe internal reports – their plan all along has been to make the State responsible only for a fraction of any possible damage to buildings, Ron Paananen said that very thing today in the Seattle Times about the tunneling problems that happened up in B.C. – WSDOT is planning on fobbing the bulk of the risk off onto their maybe not so unwitting contractor victim.

    You know also that what will happen in response to the disclosure about the high risk of a tunnel collapse, the WSDOT and tunnel apologists machine will go into overdrive. The Seattle Chamber and Downtown Association will invoke their approval of the project, followed by the Discovery Institute acolytes and Bob Donegan from Ivars running the private interference that WSDOT cannot. WSDOT’s Hammond or Dye will claim they have everything under control. Then EnviroIssues will step in and start churning out their flyers entitled, “Why Seattle’s Deep Bored Tunnel is not the Cologne Tunnel”, or “Lessons Learned: It Can’t Happen Here”. They will then add those same pages to their PowerPoint presentations that they are showing at those meetings they are holding just about every other day around town as part of the tunnel “outreach” campaign.

    This will then be followed by the canned statements from Ron Paananen – “Everything’s under control, we have made the necessary risk analyses; the ground conditions are not the same here; we have tunneling experts that have thoroughly vetted this project and we have their assurances; we’re being transparent; we’ve advised everyone concerned; there will be an advisory mechanism so that we can immediately address any exigent conditions”, and of course that whole speech will be followed by WSDOT’s clincher narrative, the recitation of the project history, about the many years that went into this decision, how the mayor, governor, and county executive have all agreed on the tunnel, they’re moving forward, the economic climate is so favorable for the project, it must be built now!

    Of course all this belies the fact that this tunnel project is every inch the land- side corollary to the Deepwater Horizon situation, i.e. epic disaster. The tunneling industry has the same deep roots and questionable relationships with and within WSDOT, as the oil industry and BP has with the US Mines and Mineral Service and with the Department of the Interior.

    Tunnel industry business reps and tunnel industry business groups have connections to WSDOT that go back to pre-2001; they have only deepened since that time.

    The genesis for the deep bored tunnel is not as some believe within the City of Seattle, but within WSDOT. WSDOT just got lucky that the City wanted a tunnel more than an elevated structure; this dynamic paved the way for WSDOT in conjunction with its tunneling industry connections and consultants to use State resources to bring about a deep bored tunnel – John Reilly, Harvey Parker, Don Phelps, and Brenda Bohlke – all with decades of ties to international tunneling businesses, contractors, suppliers, and tunneling industry associations – and all of whom have received contracts with WSDOT as a result of the governor selecting the tunnel. Does that sound cozy or what?

    In an article in the NY Times a few days ago it was reported, “BP’s Ties to Government Are Long and Complex”, it then went on to detail how corporate interests had been developed within the federal agency that was supposed to have oversight of the oil industry. By obtaining appointed positions within these governmental agencies, by gaining official and consultant positions, individuals with strong industry ties were able to evade regulation of the oil industry often, get sweetheart treatment, and even have a large hand in establishing and guiding departmental policies, rules, and regulations. The critical focus in the inquiry into the Deepwater Horizon matter relates to these industry infiltrations, the cooption of the agencies, and the concomitant lax regulation and outright circumvention of environmental laws that this allowed them to achieve.

    This is the same sort of culture and practice that pervades WSDOT. They are no more independent of industry influence than those federal agencies are. Attached is a list of the tunneling industry luminaries, lobbyists, and corporate representatives that have had, and continue to have, a hand in one, ensuring that a deep bored tunnel was picked to replace the Viaduct, two, in ensuring that the state and city political powers went along for the ride, three, in ensuring that individuals from their ranks have both paid consultant positions with WSDOT and continue to hold important positions on the advisory boards that are overseeing the project; all poised to intercede and divert any inquiry or fault finding away from the tunneling industry.

    There is no distinction from the industry-backed bureaucratic handling of the Deepwater Horizon project and the Alaskan Way deep bored tunnel project. Just over a year and a half ago WSDOT started the same myriad of environmental review shortcuts and lax agency oversight initiatives for the bored tunnel, the same kind of initiatives that led to the Deepwater Horizon disaster. WSDOT’s sentiments and tactics for the environmental review of the tunnel project mimic those of the Deepwater debacle to a tee.

    First the “experts”, read industry representatives, recommended that WSDOT push the limits of the environmental review process to the max, implementing as much of the project as is possible prior to the EIS being completed. Then they pushed WSDOT to “identify ways to enhance the schedule” in order to “effectively fast track either the environmental process or design/construction efforts before the ROD”. According to these industry advisors, the success of getting the deep bored project started as soon as possible was dependent upon “the degree to which the community and the local stakeholders—all of whom have a legal and political right to engage in the environmental analysis process—support fast-tracked activities.” They went on to say, “Thus, it is important to engage in effective public involvement and collaboration with stakeholders to make sure these people are ready, willing and able to collaborate with any schedule enhancement.”

    The shortcuts don’t stop there though, WSDOT just like BP with the support of the Department of Interior before it have been intent on cutting tunnel project costs at every turn, “value engineering” out every tunnel feature they can in an effort to get the project costs within the artificial cost limits that they set in order to sell the project. However, in the process, just as with the Deepwater project, WSDOT and its tunnel industry consultants have had to compromise the safety of the tunnel and the adjacent roadways they’re going to build, seeking federal design deviations from the Federal Highway Administration, which they have received, seeking greatly reduced fire safety standards from the Seattle Fire Department, which they also have received, and seeking waivers of environmental and local permits, which they have received.

    Links to the documents which substantiate the foregoing are here: http://www.scatnow.com/TunnelCollapses/

    It would appear that the contractors for the tunnel, just as BP, are also banking on their industry ties to WSDOT, and being lulled by those ties, counting on those to hold them in good stead – so that WSDOT officials will run interference for them, get them the change orders and keep them tied into the WSDOT money machine; however, that's the problem, reading the background for the Deep Water disaster, same setup here – WSDOT in tandem with tunnel industry lobbyists and consultants, that are both on retainer by WSDOT during the lead up to pushing through the tunnel project, and given multi-million contracts after the tunnel project becomes a fait accompli.

    How is the deep bored tunnel project any different from the Deepwater Horizon disaster? In substance and practice it is not. The only difference is there is still time to stop the deep bored tunnel project from going forward before it visits an environmental, urban, and economic disaster upon Seattle and its citizens.

    http://www.scatnow.com

  • Sarah68

    Test its mettle instead.

  • gloomy gus

    I admire your brio, if not your wind.

  • Matt_the_Engineer

    Thanks for the new word. I always thought that phrase was about the art of sword making. The phrase seems a little less interesting now.

  • NordicGal

    Licata basically said the City is not on the hook for cost overruns. But Dan didn't report that.

  • Gomez

    Your acronym is a perfect representation of your platform.

  • Wells

    Have a close look at at WSDOT's detailed map of the DBT north portal surface street rebuild designs, both the old portal on Aurora and the new one on 6th Ave. Both restore connectivity of John, Thomas and Harrison. Both close the Broad Street Underpass – NOT a good idea – exposin yet another reason why the Deep-bore is also NOT a good idea.

    The 1st Phase of the Mercer rebuild retains the Broad St Underpass and directs traffic away from Lower Queen Anne onto Broad and Denny Way, a more suitable route for thru-traffic than Mercer, obviously, duh.

    Mercer Place hill is absolutely NOT a feasible route to Elliott as it is only 2-lanes wide and entirely high-density residential. SDOT is lying about Mercer Place as a feasible route option. LYING. Other routes to Elliott from Mercer must be arranged, most likely turning at Dexter and 6th to Denny Way, Broad, Western then Elliott; also along Mercer to the Queen Anne/1st Ave couplet, then west on Republican, Harrison, Thomas, John, Denny Way and Western to Elliott. The streets which aren't designated as the official “thru-corridor” will become makeshift or 'cut-through' routes.

    We're talking around 20,000 vehicles daily redirected from commercial Elliott and Western access to SR99 through residential neighborhood districts. Oh wait, they'll be all electric cars and all nifty and everything and totally like OK cuz they're like electric, with like electricity. BS. Compounding the problem, this additional traffic affects the Mercer Mess between Aurora and I-5. Should you think about it? CAN you think about it? Are you PROGRAMMED to NOT think about it?

  • Gomez

    I'm guessing Mercer Place isn't a candidate for a road diet ;P

    SDOT would probably expand and redesign the west end of Mercer to better serve as a thoroughfare. Yes, the locals might be pissed, but the road is already used as a busy arterial (and having utilized in on several occasions I can confirm it's a busy arterial) so it wouldn't be a culture shock. There would have to be some construction to expand the roadway and streamline it better with Elliott/15th (even if that's not on the current plan they'll probably add it in).

  • Surfit04

    Beautifully written. Creative, maybe even psychotic, but nicely written.

  • Wells

    That's right, just do what you're told, Gomez tool. Screw Lower Queen Anne and tell none there what's coming their way. Don't go to the trouble to find out how much additional traffic will be directed through, nor the impact. If SDOT pays you to shut up, getting paid off is more important than public health, right?