Alaskan Way Viaduct

Friends of Seattle's picture

Tunnel Resolution - Proposed Amendments

On Monday the City Council will vote to approve a resolution that will say the Council intends, in the future, to authorize the city-state agreements necessary to construct a deep bore tunnel.

Friends of Seattle has proposed two amendments (see below) which would affirm the people's power of referendum and would put in writing--for the first time--the Council's belief that the cost overruns provision of RCW 47.01.402(6)(b) is legally unenforceable.

Proposed Amendment - People's Power of Referendum

The Council should allay public fears that the Council plans to find a loophole to avoid the referendum power. Our proposed amendment would reassure the public that Council is acting in good faith and respects the people's ultimate authority to legislate. If Council says no to our proposed amendment, then the question becomes, "Why?" A refusal to adopt it would suggest that the Council does in fact intend to find a way around a referendum.

Proposed Text: "With this Resolution, the City Council does not intend to abridge the people's power to subject city ordinances to a public referendum. Upon the Council's authorization of the agreements attached as Attachments 1, 2 and 3 to this Resolution, the Council recognizes that the people may subject the Council's authorization of the agreements to a referendum, as provided in the City Charter."

Proposed Amendment - Cost Overruns

The resolution says city policy is that Seattle is not liable for cost overruns. However, we think state law is what matters, not city policy. Many councilmembers have joined the City Attorney in saying that the cost overruns provision of RCW 47.01.402(6)(b) is not enforceable. If the Council really believe that the cost overruns provision is legally meaningless, the Council should put it in writing. We have lingering doubts about it, of course. But the city would be better off going on the record. If the Council demurs, our question, given that the above amendment is consistent with their position, again is "Why?"

Proposed Text: "RCW 47.01.402(6)(b) provides that any costs for the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project 'in excess of two billion eight hundred million dollars shall be borne by property owners in the Seattle area who benefit from replacement of the existing viaduct with the deep bore tunnel.' The City Council believes that this portion of RCW 47.01.402(6)(b) is legally unenforceable, and the State therefore does not presently have the legal authority to levy a tax or special assessment on Seattle area property owners for any cost overruns."

administrator's picture

Tunnel or Rebuild? Neither (Op-Ed in Real Change)

Friends of Seattle is in the news.

Sean Howell & Gary Manca, "Tunnel or Rebuild? Neither,"Real Change (11 Jan 2007)

January 10, 2007

Tunnel or Rebuild? Neither
City needs to demand none of the above to replace Alaskan Way Viaduct

BY GARY MANCA AND SEAN HOWELL
Guest Writers

The worst thing about the governor playing hot potato with the Alaskan Way viaduct decision is that the potato she has tossed to the voters is rotten. The six-lane tunnel is unaffordable, and a new Viaduct would be a monstrosity that violates Seattle zoning codes and shoreline protection ordinances.

Our leaders should refuse to play the governor’s game and demand the state to go back to the drawing board. No good options for the voters to consider, no vote. But if the City Council does force a vote, we should have a strict up-or-down ballot on a new viaduct. That way, we can reply to the state when it tries to sell us its only "feasible" option: "No, thanks. You can keep your rotten potato!"

administrator's picture

What the Governor Should Have Done About Viaduct (Op-Ed)

Friends of Seattle is in the news.

Mike O'Brien & Gary Manca, "What the Governor Should Have Done About Viaduct," Seattle P-I (2 Jan 2007)

By MICHAEL O'BRIEN AND GARY MANCA
GUEST COLUMNISTS

Now that Gov. Chris Gregoire has punted the Alaskan Way Viaduct decision to Seattle voters, we face a bruising public contest pitting a tunnel we can't afford against an elevated rebuild requiring us to kiss the Elliott Bay waterfront goodbye.

Residents are outraged that the governor foisted this dreary decision on them. But it's no surprise she avoided the political thorns attached to both bad options.

Syndicate content