What is the Tunnel Referendum Really About?

What is the Tunnel Referendum Really about?  People will see what they want to see in it… In reality the referendum is a neutered proposition at this point. 

Those for the tunnel will dismiss any “down” vote as meaningless, and use a “up” vote as validation from the “silent majority”, against a vocal, narrow anti-car cabal. 

Those against the tunnel will see a “down” vote as a affirmation of their beliefs, and a stepping stone towards more meaningful legislation to stop the tunnel. An “up” vote would generate accusations of elitist-backed propaganda winning over the ill-informed sheep of the city.

In reality, the language of the referendum is obtuse by any stretch.  It will never amount to a strong statement regardless of the outcome. 
  

Diehard anti-tunnelistas aside, it’s at best a symbolic and at worst a meaningless vote, a further exercising of the Seattle Process. The Weekly has it right today: “Some council members refer to
the latest upcoming public vote as the Seinfeld referendum, because,
like the TV show, it’s about nothing. And, aside from the money and time
wasted, pretty funny.”  

instead of watching theses fagots cry over and over about how the tunnel is evil and for rich people with cars, the surface-transit people need to put together a actual plan (even if that means using their own money) as soon as possible and present it as a alternative. its one thing to be against the tunnel with a very detailed plan that includes plans for appropriating funding and transit stations and lines , but it is totally different when all they do is wax poetic over intangible things that  the joys and necessities of riding transit will bring.

It might be risky for council members to mock democracy – especially those up for re-election.

It might be risky for council members to mock democracy – especially those up for re-election.

while I agree with your statement, Seattle would only vote in clones of these people in any eventuality.

*ignore* button activated.

*ignore* button activated.

*ignore* button activated.

Considering that a sizable number of people think there is no need to have this vote I’m not sure how risky it really is. 

Considering that a sizable number of people think there is no need to have this vote I’m not sure how risky it really is. 

Considering that a sizable number of people think there is no need to have this vote I’m not sure how risky it really is. 

Considering that a sizable number of people think there is no need to have this vote I’m not sure how risky it really is. 

If the vote means nothing does that mean Let’s Move Forward will sit out the election?

If the vote means nothing does that mean Let’s Move Forward will sit out the election?

If the vote means nothing does that mean Let’s Move Forward will sit out the election?

If the vote means nothing does that mean Let’s Move Forward will sit out the election?

 Monster says: “instead of watching theses fagots cry over and over”

Hey Josh, how about you ban this piece of shit homophobe’s IP once and for all? Please stop indulging mini-Fred Phelps here.

So if “the people” vote for the tunnel does that mean the opponents will go away? Or, like the world not ending on May 21st, is that just something they refuse to accept as possible? 

So the tunnelers asked a judge for an opinion on R-1. Now they wish they hadn’t. The spin machine is being worked hard to obscure what the judge actually said, noted here for the record: 

“The Agreements that are the subject
matter of the 2011 Ordinance …[include] far reaching agreements on
how to implement a final choice/decision to build the tunnel. It is clear from all the materials
provided that the overriding intent of the referendum was to allow
the people of the City to be involved in the final choice of which
option the City chooses to replace the viaduct. Allowing a referendum of this provision [Section 6] to go forward alone does
further the intent of the referendum.”

So the tunnelers asked a judge for an opinion on R-1. Now they wish they hadn’t. The spin machine is being worked hard to obscure what the judge actually said, noted here for the record: 

“The Agreements that are the subject
matter of the 2011 Ordinance …[include] far reaching agreements on
how to implement a final choice/decision to build the tunnel. It is clear from all the materials
provided that the overriding intent of the referendum was to allow
the people of the City to be involved in the final choice of which
option the City chooses to replace the viaduct. Allowing a referendum of this provision [Section 6] to go forward alone does
further the intent of the referendum.”

boo hoo you know im right they won’t present a real plan but they will tarnish another. progressiveism is about providing alternatives and solutions and moving forward and again all the pro tranist people do is talk metaphorically about the future, but if this is so important to them they would put up some funds to run a comprehensive study

boo hoo you know im right they won’t present a real plan but they will tarnish another. progressiveism is about providing alternatives and solutions and moving forward and again all the pro tranist people do is talk metaphorically about the future, but if this is so important to them they would put up some funds to run a comprehensive study

It’s not neutered at all – it does exactly the same thing it did initially, which is to cancel the city council’s agreements with the state. They can just re-do those agreements – but any legislative body may overturn any referendum. The key here is that legislative bodies don’t generally do that, they listen to their constituents because that’s their job.

It’s not neutered at all – it does exactly the same thing it did initially, which is to cancel the city council’s agreements with the state. They can just re-do those agreements – but any legislative body may overturn any referendum. The key here is that legislative bodies don’t generally do that, they listen to their constituents because that’s their job.

Can’t ignore anonymous on Disqus.

If it’s meaningless, why are they dumping tens of thousands of dollars into fighting it, pray tell? They want you to believe it doesn’t matter.

In reality, section 6, the portion that is on the ballot, is the trigger section for the rest of the ordinance. If it fails, the entire ordinance cannot be enacted without the city council re-doing what we’re voting on.

no they won’t if you haven’t learned anything over the past few years is that progressives and liberals do not take defeat well, they will bad mouth and attempt to delegitmize the results of the election if it doesn’t go their way

 I could give a shit about the tunnel; you need to be banned for constantly tossing around anti-gay epithets.

Exactly. They’re talking out of both sides of their mouths.

i don’t care if you ignore me but you know im right. you guys have no answers and to just say ignore or demand transit is no longer enough

you should be banned never truly adding anything to the conversation other then left wing memes

you should be banned never truly adding anything to the conversation other then left wing memes

you should be banned never truly adding anything to the conversation other then left wing memes

if you don’t give a shit about the tunnel you can leave this forum then. I’m suggesting something that will give the transit a-holes a chance to win for a change, if they don’t act on it then Seattle deserves the tunnel.

Have we all forgotten that the one time we did vote, the tunnel got a ringing 20% support?

BTW, Monster, if you want to continue throwing around homophobic insults, learn to spell them correctly.

You can keep trying to read more into the Referendum and the judicial decision, but that will not change the fact that the only thing up for public vote is Section 6 and, as Tayloe and others have pointed out, a vote against that section (the referendum’s scope) will not change anything.  But at least die-hard tunnel opponents can rejoice that they were able to get something on the ballot to vote on — and in the process waste a great deal of time, money and patience.  Way to go!

in a era with better fiances

how about you stay on topic, what is with liberals not slurring people.

Stay classy, PubliCola.

I’m not “trying to read into” anything. Section 6 is the trigger section that enables the rest of the ordinance. The judge was very clear that this is a vote on the tunnel. Tayloe just doesn’t want that to be the case.

Joe,

Thanks for flagging that comment for me. I edited his comment. I’m not going to ban him because, like Ivan, he often has a valid point to make. However, I may get tired of babysitting his comments, and at some point, I’ll ban his IP. 

No, it’s a vote on whether the Council’s decision to have a public meeting as part of the review process for the EIS can be negated.  The Council is still required to review the final EIS regardless of the vote.

Monster,

I edited your earlier comment. PubliCola is interested in debate not name calling.

Stop the homophobic garbage.

mental *ignore* button.

Section 6 as written would have allowed the Council to just “give notice” after the review you’re speaking of, rather than do the politically more dangerous work of passing an ordinance elevating the tunnel from the preferred alternative to the actual choice. The referendum, if successful, would require Council to actually pass an ordinance, not let the tunnel slide through. That ordinance would itself be able to be up for referendum, where a “notice” would not.

But more importantly, as the judge herself said: the Council did their best to make sure this was a “neutered ordinance” from the beginning. They used a phalanx of lawyers to make sure than anything that actually could make it to voters was meaningless.

This isn’t because voters don’t want to send a message, it’s because Council and the business community don’t want to hear it.

Section 6 as written would have allowed the Council to just “give notice” after the review you’re speaking of, rather than do the politically more dangerous work of passing an ordinance elevating the tunnel from the preferred alternative to the actual choice. The referendum, if successful, would require Council to actually pass an ordinance, not let the tunnel slide through. That ordinance would itself be able to be up for referendum, where a “notice” would not.

But more importantly, as the judge herself said: the Council did their best to make sure this was a “neutered ordinance” from the beginning. They used a phalanx of lawyers to make sure than anything that actually could make it to voters was meaningless.

This isn’t because voters don’t want to send a message, it’s because Council and the business community don’t want to hear it.

Like fount says – the Council bent over backwards so you could make arguments like you just did. That doesn’t mean your argument is good, it just means you want the tunnel. We’re going to put it to bed.

Excuse me. I don’t have to present a real plan – the state already did. I-5/Surface/Transit was the agreed upon option by the state and city before they came up with this new tunnel nonsense.

 I’m definitely voting YES on this referendum.  The tunnel must be stopped!

so a locally derived plan that uses quantitative methods in planning shouldn’t be sought after? because no one saw the i-5/S/T plan or cared about it enough to prevent the tunnel from getting this far. And when i say local i mean by all the local “activists” not from the states offices.

here’s the plan amigo.

1. First, stop doing something bad.
2. Then, do something good.

This technique has worked since time immemorial.  I recall to you the events of 1776 and a few years later?  First we got rid of King George, mmm?

THEN we settled on a constitution about 1787.  Wow dude that was like years later!

First Roosevelt had a bank holiday.  THEN he figured out what to do, etc.  You get the idea.

here’s the plan amigo.

1. First, stop doing something bad.
2. Then, do something good.

This technique has worked since time immemorial.  I recall to you the events of 1776 and a few years later?  First we got rid of King George, mmm?

THEN we settled on a constitution about 1787.  Wow dude that was like years later!

First Roosevelt had a bank holiday.  THEN he figured out what to do, etc.  You get the idea.

Monster… the I-5/S/T plan was the preferred alternative for WSDOT and the state-appointed stakeholder committee. You seem to be uninformed about this project.

Monster… the I-5/S/T plan was the preferred alternative for WSDOT and the state-appointed stakeholder committee. You seem to be uninformed about this project.

Punk is a real thing, but not as we have come to know it. Punk is
actually the government code name for a secret nerve agent that they
were developing in the late 1960′s. The idea of the agent was that it
was designed as a weapon, and it would be used to kill people, as that
is what weapons are designed for (ie: to kill people). What happened to
the unlucky test victims was that their hair fell out, except for a line
in the middle, which turned funny colors. They also developed attitude
as their nerves were attacked by the lethal component.

Obviously,
no one was meant to find out about this government secret, and so the
victims were sent off to England, where they were free to roam the
streets. Other people saw them and thought, “Wow, that’s cool. I’m gonna
do that.”

The victims vomited quite a bit, and so the ordinary
people on the street decided that they must be drunk. They were copied
in every way. When questioned as to what had inspired them, they
answered “Punk”. And so, a new movement was born. The government still
has bottles of the original formula, but it is being carefully
destroyed, after some punks were found to be indulging in absolutely
disgusting and degrading habits, such as listening to Oasis, who despite
anyone else’s opinion, are a pile of shit.
 

Punk is a real thing, but not as we have come to know it. Punk is
actually the government code name for a secret nerve agent that they
were developing in the late 1960′s. The idea of the agent was that it
was designed as a weapon, and it would be used to kill people, as that
is what weapons are designed for (ie: to kill people). What happened to
the unlucky test victims was that their hair fell out, except for a line
in the middle, which turned funny colors. They also developed attitude
as their nerves were attacked by the lethal component.

Obviously,
no one was meant to find out about this government secret, and so the
victims were sent off to England, where they were free to roam the
streets. Other people saw them and thought, “Wow, that’s cool. I’m gonna
do that.”

The victims vomited quite a bit, and so the ordinary
people on the street decided that they must be drunk. They were copied
in every way. When questioned as to what had inspired them, they
answered “Punk”. And so, a new movement was born. The government still
has bottles of the original formula, but it is being carefully
destroyed, after some punks were found to be indulging in absolutely
disgusting and degrading habits, such as listening to Oasis, who despite
anyone else’s opinion, are a pile of shit.
 

tell that to all the people who drive through Seattle everyday bub. I walk or bus where i need to go. Again it is not simply enough to say yay transit boo tunnel, especially after ten years of waiting for this stupid thing, you need a plan that can be rapidly implemented. you guys don’t have that.

tell that to all the people who drive through Seattle everyday bub. I walk or bus where i need to go. Again it is not simply enough to say yay transit boo tunnel, especially after ten years of waiting for this stupid thing, you need a plan that can be rapidly implemented. you guys don’t have that.

Also I would love nothing more for the Seattle city council to ruin the city financially with a bad public planning desicion, there are too many a-holes transplanted from other areas (california) here who moved this state too far to the left and are now responsible for all the massive growth you see around here

Also I would love nothing more for the Seattle city council to ruin the city financially with a bad public planning desicion, there are too many a-holes transplanted from other areas (california) here who moved this state too far to the left and are now responsible for all the massive growth you see around here

well on that part iam then but so are a whole lot of other people. besides the state now backs the tunnel thus you cannot trust them on this issue and local study would be wise.

Actually it got 30 percent, which is ten more points than the surface/gridlock option has drawn in recent polls…

Michael, did you parachute in from another thread?

Having just sat through two full days of in-depth candidate interviews with all the City Council candidates — incumbents and challengers — I don’t think any of the incumbents need to lose any sleep. This is one of the poorest crop of challengers in my memory, and I have lived in the Seattle area for almost 45 years now. These people are damn near unelectable — the lot of them — and those who support them will lose a lot of credibility.

Better candidates might have a better chance. This crop doesn’t. These people don’t meet the smell test.

The tunnel debate is no longer interesting, what with Monster ruining PubliCola for me, so I figure…why not randomly throw in some conspiracy theories.

Keep repeating the Cary Moon big lie Schiendelman. Do I have to sic the stakeholders on you again? The stakeholders have said repeatedly that they did not endorse surface as the preferred option at any time ever. Repeating it over and over again won’t make it so.

Don’t you equate him with me, you pissant. 

he’s one of these new age faux liberal that might as well be a religion, he is immune to reality

WE are citizens of Seattle who like the DBT and are against section 6.  So we’re starting the Citizens Radically Against Provisions Unnecessarily Restating Stuff, or CRAPURS. 

CRAPURS wil be urging a “rejected” vote as  way to demonstrate support for a more confident city council.  We expect to win this fight.  So vote “rejected” if you support DBT and a faster pace to get it! 

Sorry if i play hardball but the world isnt all rainbows and unicorns and if your going to throw out liberal memes but no real ideas im gonna make you cry

Sorry if i play hardball but the world isnt all rainbows and unicorns and if your going to throw out liberal memes but no real ideas im gonna make you cry

You know, I was half thinking that maybe I’ve been too hard on you, but then you go and do this. Jesus, Josh, is this guy worth it if he’s driving off people and is unrepentant? This isn’t like Slog’s system or any number of other sites where you can kill anonymous viewing or anything like that. So now we have a user telling others he’ll ‘make them cry’. Total class.

Here’s an idea, next time he posts homophobic or blatantly racist crap, IP ban him for a week.  Tell him you would like to let him continue to contribute to the discussion but that this is your house and you aren’t going to allow him to sit in the corner and throw feces at your other guests.  If he continues to do so it will be permanent. 

P.S. And then just ban Ivan for the hell of it. :p

you were not thinking you were too hard on me, you hate me and  that i challenge your religious beliefs.

Actually, what you want to vote is “Rejected.”

I said it once and i will say it again, it is no longer enough to just be against the tunnel our regions economic future is at stake.

please you are no different.

Really, do tell. How do you challenge my long dormant Byzantine Catholic belief system under which I was raised and baptized, and under which I was an altar boy for many years? Or do you challenge my present views where I’m basically a solo Christian that just does his business in total privacy and goes out of his way to not push his views on others, since I believe religion is meant to be a private conversation between yourself and the sky people of your choosing?

As for hating you, don’t flatter yourself. I pity you.

Oh this vote is going to be fun

Once upon a time I took several classes with Edward Said, the critic and Palestinian activist. When starting with a text — as this Referendum is — he said to start with verbs and nouns — what is actually happening. The basics. Who is speaking? What acts? etc etc

And then once you are clear about the actions, then you can interpret to heart’s content.

And what puzzles me about the Referendum is not what it _means_ but literally what it _says_.  ”The City Council is authorized to decide whether to issue the notice…”

Are we literally taking away the power of the Council to decide YES? or NO? If I vote “REJECTED” then am I saying  ” ”The City Council is NOT authorized to decide whether to issue the notice…”

Mind, I am very much against the Tunnel and want to vote against it, but damned if I can understands the actions buried in the Referendum.

While true, the state’s version of surface+transit is pretty weak. It’s still the horrendous multi-lane couplet, right? Plus the pictures have large expanses of red brick for seemingly no reason. I’d like to see a surface option that is more well-thought out.

no your religion is your politics, and any one who says something out of line is deemed a heretic by you and people like you and treated accordingly.

hence my arugement that the local activist class put up their own funds and create a truly local and comprehensive plan

“Mind, I am very much against the Tunnel and want to vote against it, but damned if I can understands the actions buried in the Referendum.”

You were expecting something else? All along no referendum had the power to stop the tunnel. From where I sit, you got exactly what you asked for – a meaningless advisory vote at public expense that will not change the outcome. So for whatever that’s worth, congratulations. 

The waterfront design is no different with tunnel or I-5/transit. But it is
better than the expanse already.

Ben be honest.  The states preferred plan was an Alaskan Way/Western Avenue couplet.  they had no provision for “transit”  Their plan would have dumped all viaduct traffic on those 2 surface streets on the waterfront!  

Simply untrue. The judge said the opposite, here’s her quote:
“Is there going to be a tunnel or not? This doesn’t resolve that . . . [it, the referendum] doesn’t resolve any of the issues.”
 

Um, telling someone to be honest and then lying is pretty weird. The option
also has the central streetcar line, and I-5 improvements. Why are all you
tunnel supporters obsessed with lying about the alternative? Do you really
believe these things?

The referendum will be viewed by many as a public rejection of the DBT & the inextricably-related Mercer West project.

The DBT is “insanely risky” and MUST NOT be constructed through the unstable soils beneath downtown buildings. 

Mercer West is poorly engineered for managing traffic and as such will incur severe impacts to public health and safety along the Mercer Street, Mercer Place and Denny Way corridors. 

The pro-tunnel camp is devoting campaign resources to effectively “censor” fervent warnings of catastrophic danger and of urban degradation, no less now than they have since the DBT was first designated as their preferred alternative. The pro-tunnel camp will not honestly inform the public on these issues. Their only reason for supporting the DBT is its “assumed” potential to be constructed with the least disruption to SR99 AWV traffic and business as usual.

Seattle has no choice but to invest in downtown transit, no choice but to improve I-5 exactly as proposed to remove the Seneca access ramps and add lanes through downtown. Wsdot honchos don’t like being told their work is fatally flawed nor how they should fix it. Wsdot rigged their studies on these projects to arrive at predetermined outcomes.      

Both my statement and hers are true. This is a vote on the tunnel, but it
doesn’t resolve everything because it doesn’t demand a particular
alternative. That’s the next step after a referendum.

Any one else thinks that David Rolfs wish list seem cliched? hate to break it to you bub but alot of those things are outside the preview of Seattle’s delegation…. on that note I was not aware that the Seattle Police Department lacked a culture of respect. Last I checked they as a whole were pretty darn respectful in a increasingly disrespectful city.

The referendum WILL be viewed by many as a public rejection of the DBT & the inextricably-related Mercer West project.

The DBT is “insanely risky” and MUST NOT be constructed through the unstable soils beneath downtown buildings. 

Mercer West is poorly engineered for managing traffic and as such will incur severe impacts to public health and safety along the Mercer Street, Mercer Place and Denny Way corridors. 

The pro-tunnel camp is devoting campaign resources to effectively “censor” fervent warnings of catastrophic danger and of urban degradation, no less now than they have since the DBT was first designated as their preferred alternative. The pro-tunnel camp will not honestly inform the public on these issues. Their only reason for supporting the DBT is its “assumed” potential to be constructed with the least disruption to SR99 AWV traffic and business as usual.

Seattle has no choice but to invest in downtown transit, no choice but to improve I-5 exactly as proposed to remove the Seneca access ramps and add lanes through downtown. Wsdot honchos don’t like being told their work is fatally flawed nor how they should fix it. Wsdot rigged their studies on these projects to arrive at predetermined outcomes.   

And if it passes, will you people finally shut up?

Um, do you really think that’s likely considering it went down by 70% last
time?

Not true.  It was cut and cover.

Not true.  It was cut and cover.

we know who ivan is in the real world. there is one big difference.

remind me, when was that? are you talking about polls cause I don’t recall a vote on the DBT to date.

no because the language saying the city is empowered is surplusage, it’s empowered whether or not we say so.

no ordinance can empower its entity, otherwise i shall pass an ordinance empowering myself to create the transpo system seattle needs, also a good salary and TIF for my benefit, etc.

Yo Big Jim, You are wrong, and let’s just leave it at that.

But take a look at
http://citycomfortsblog.typepad.com/cities/2011/05/what-is-the-tunnel-referendum-really-about.html

hilarious! lose credibility like how you and the candidates you supported (in every race) lost last go round?

What
you don’t see in Tayloe’s post: any shred of confidence that voters
will endorse the tunnel he foisted upon this city, at the tail end of
almost a decade of public process, without any mandate from the voters
to do so. You would think that if this tunnel is such an awesome idea,
its well-funded backers would salivate at the opportunity to show tunnel opponents that Seattleites want this tunnel.

But instead the tunnel backers have fought a vote all along. Why?
Because they know Seattle *doesn’t* want the tunnel. Democracy exists
to correct those situations.

your right you do know who he is, but what you don’t realize is that I’m closer to you all then you think.

Ben – Answer the question. If it passes, will you then respect the process or not?

First Roosevelt had a bank holiday. Then he robbed every American by devaluing the gold-backed dollar from $20 to $35.

I’m interested in reading about this issue– can you give me a link to the stakeholder’s advisory committee report/recommendations?  And also something that reflects the state/city agreeing to I-5/Surface/Transit prior to the tunnel?  I’d like to read about the history of this mess.

thanks!

A vote against the tunnel would call into question the current representative form of decision making from Olympia on down.

The People have changed in the last 10 years.   They are no longer satisfied to elect “representatives” and entrust them with specific decision making…especially if those decisions seem to not be in their best interest.

Ideally, with today’s technology, we could have true e-Democracy, down to the nitty gritty of project planning and decision making.

But clearly, simply standing on past standards, as Richard Conlin is doing, will not suffice.  No matter how “right” he may believe himself to be — he is still wrong….because Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses.

Thanks, Dennis.

Just google it! I’m on a phone right now and can’t dig.

Just google it! I’m on a phone right now and can’t dig.

There are two big differences. In the real world, Ivan works hard and produces wins at the polls. Or is that three big differences?

ivan may be an asshole sometimes, but he contributes to the conversation and he manages to keep his profanity garden-variety. Monster is a troll who drives away conversation and readers. It’s shocking to me that Monster can get away with his behavior while ivan gets a rep for merely calling people liars and idiots.

So is fucking herpes.

WSDOT has long ago removed the stakeholder advisory committee recommendations from its SR 99 AWV replacement project website.  You can find a good account of the entire sordid story at this link:
http://cascade.sierraclub.org/node/2633

The criticism from Msethc above confuses the plan known as option C with option B from the Stakeholder process.  Ben is referencing option B, the version of I-5/surface/transit that has the most transit capital investment included in it, e.g., the central streetcar line proposed to run along 1st Avenue downtown.  Option C would convert Western Ave to one-way northbound as part of a couplet, but that was the most auto-centric of the surface options with less investment in transit capital projects.  From an urban design standpoint, option B yields the best set of travel alternatives and streetscapes.  It maintains Western Ave as a two-way sleepy downtown street.  

Not from watery tarts throwing swords?

becuase you are close minded ideolog who see’s one word that has been banned by the religion of liberalism and you cannot get past that

btw saying the F word is not homophobic. calling for a their murders are.

monster amigo:  just repeating yourself doesn’t add anything at all.  So I repeat myself:  no.  You’re wrong.  wow, see how persuasive that is?  You don’t need a plan first.  You can stop doing something bad, then figure out what to do next.  This has worked since time immemorial.  FIRST you leave the spouse who beats you.  THEN you decide where to go from there.  And btw here’s another thing — we do have  a plan.  It’s called “do nothing.”  Take it down, then do nothing.  Got that?  So wrong again.  You just repeat yourself like a 3d grader.  Try to be more interesting and more substantive.  Jerk. 

The tunnel referendum is about the same obstructionists trying to stop the tunnel, this time through the funneled manipulation of public opinion.

There. I could have saved you a ton of text, but i guess saving text doesn’t generate site hits and ad revenue.

aww did i make you cry. did i hurt your week liberal sensabilities … im sorry, but try getting that sand out of your clit and you might feel better. Your right you can, but in the case of a major public works project the tunnel isnt all that bad there are just a bunch of unknowns, now im not in favor of it personally, but to stop it for a surface transit plan that has an equal amount of unknowns is not a good enough reason.

nope, but all the ideologues will be here soon to pounce on you.

nope, but all the ideologues will be here soon to pounce on you.

Ivan, there is a letter. With everyone’s signatures on it. It clearly states that they would support Surface/Transit/I-5 as the preferred alternative and continue studying a bored tunnel if economically feasible. There are even media reports from the time about stakeholders supporting the surface option and folks who wanted to keep studying the bored tunnel — http://www.discovery.org/a/8371.

That’s it. This current proposal was NEVER shown to the public prior to the decision to move forward. There was no 10-year process on this. That’s why 29,000+ people were willing to sign a petition.

Oh bla bla bla. It’s not like my livelihood depends on handicapping local elections. I’m no expert and don’t claim to be. Sometimes I’m right, sometimes I’m not. Obladi, oblada, life goes on, bla.
 

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

deep bore tunnel was never voted on.  a cut and cover one was.  however, the option that does best is rebuilding the viaduct…surface/transit is the least liked by the public…but where’s the vote on that?

you do your position no good by using that kind of language.

then nixon robbed the world by taking the US off the gold standard.

This vote is a referendum on Mike McGinn, on obstructionism, and on the Seattle Process!

1. Tear down the viaduct.
2. The solution will become apparent.

Your logic is a combination of incomprehensible, contorted, and obnoxious.

Come on Josh, how does crap like this add to the dialogue?

The problem is the Council is acting before it has the EIS. The Seattle City government needs to stop making decisions before it knows the likely results. And reasonable alternatives to achieve the same goals. I’m voting to reject the Council’s action.

 If this vote is about public opinion, then we would be sadly rebuilding the viaduct. I don’t want that to happen. Another possibility is further political gridlock on a road that is crumbling. Furthermore, I don’t want to jeopardize our economic future on the hopes for better transit. Compared to many large cities, transit in Seattle is awful! We need higher density to justify better transit. By building the tunnel, we will have a more attractive waterfront that will entice people and businesses to move downtown. This added density (and fewer freeway lanes) is a prerequisite before we build the needed transit that could transport a large fraction of the public. I fear that if somehow this tunnel was blocked, we would end up with the most popular choice, yet anti-urban, anti-environmental choice a new viaduct.

Let’s move forward with agreements in place and the state funds that were allocated by legislature. If we further delay, we may lose the tunnel and any control over how the viaduct is replaced. On balance, the tunnel is better for the environment than the current viaduct because it reduces the total number of lanes through downtown from 10 (Alaska Way + Alaska Way Viaduct) to 6 (Alaska Way + Tunnel). It also provides for better runoff control and provides needed open space for a more natural enviornment.

The surface/transit option is not politically feasible. However, the tunnel is a political comprimise that has unprecedented support from our civic leaders. I urge our elected officials to move us past political paralysis and start digging as soon as the FEIS is out.