Dammit - his pool boy was supposed to have read it to him by now. Fuckin' Fernandinho, man, that cat is lazy.

I hear he outsourced the reading to his foreign contractor.

Maybe we should just realize that not only does Seattle NOT want it, but we can't afford it, and there is no way it will be approved by the VOTERS in Seattle, in King County, or in Washington State.

It is an EX-tunnel.

Give Rasmussen a break. Like other electeds he has 1000s of pages of documents to read every week (I'm not exaggerating). He and other electeds have 100s of staffers whose job is to read things like this and be experts. We are not paying him to read every boring page of every document. We're paying him to listen to the public, listen to the experts, weigh the evidence, and make a choice in our best interests. You guys gotta get over the idea that it's possible for an elected to read everything that crosses their desks.

Whine whine, we can't afford it. What else is new? Soon everyone will be on a Mcbike and there won't be any traffic downtown but the occasional tourist.

That's 1 for "build it or the city will fail" and another for "why should he know what's in the study". We even got a bonus McPun.

Next up: claims of obstruction and a war on cars.

Sandman @3 is right. Rasmussen, unlike a lot of elected officials, has a reputation for actually reading these kinds of technical documents. So, if he's saying he will read it, he's one city official who really will.

Not that it really matters. The SDEIS doesn't say anything that the City Council committee hasn't been talking about for more than a year, anyway. There's no council action expected on the tunnel until next year. I don't see Rasmussen saying he's blowing off the issues that affect Seattle, only that he hasn't (yet) read the 250 pages plus 20 technical appendices that make up the document. Big fucking deal.

@Will in Seattle

Technically we cant afford to tear down the viaduct, yet alone re-build a similar elevated roadway. What is it? 2.5 billion to tear down and re-build, vs 4 billion to tunnel?

Either way you flip that coin, you'll have safety issues and cost overruns to deal with.

Or you can just tear it down and not re-build anything, one option nobody will like and fucks everyone in the ass hard, with no lube.

I figured it out. Seattle is a multiverse. You have all these groups of people running around with an "image" of what it's like, but with almost no one responding to the physical reality of what it is.

More on this later...

"He must be an awfully slow reader."

Just when I thought there were no bridges left for Dom to burn...

@3: You are correct. A City Councilperson (or any elected official, for that matter) cannot possibly read every word of every document that crosses their desk. This means that Mr. Rasmussen must prioritize: he must choose, based on some set of heuristics, what to read personally and what to let his staff summarize for him. This means he chose not to personally read the most important document yet produced for the largest project within his direct domain of responsibility. Ergo Dominic's assertion that Rasmussen is not doing his due diligence is also correct.

Zelbinian@11: That is simply not true. He has not read it *yet*. The SDEIS was only published a couple weeks a go (in the middle of the budget cycle). While SDOT was involved in it's development, the council has no say in the development of a draft EIS. The public comment period is open until December 13. So, there is no harm that could possibly come to the city by him not having read it at this point. Dominic is making an issue out of nothing.

@ 12, I like Tom, but I wouldn't give him a pass on this one...

The City has had drafts of this circulating for SEVERAL WEEKS now. On top of that, Tom was one of several vocal Council members who ridiculed the Mayor for requesting an additional week to study the documents and suggest any changes, remember?

Whether or not Tom is informed or will read the whole thing, that suggests that it doesn't matter at all to him whether he reads it because he's already made up his mind on the project.

And, as numerous people keep trying to point out to our local electeds, the WHOLE POINT of an EIS process is to identify the risks and concerns on a project and to compare alternatives in order to THEN make a final decision.

In conversations with various electeds, it has become very obvious there are at least five lawsuits waiting to happen if the Billionaires' Tunnel goes forward.

All for something we don't even want.

It's time to just say NO.

THURSDAY

Federal, state, and local bureaucrats are holding a public hearing on the Billionaires' Tunnel Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement. They are even taking public comments on the project's controversial EIS. Endorse the EIS and there are rumors circulating that Richard Conlin might preemptively sign for your tab at the bar later. (Plymouth Church, 1217 Sixth Ave, 5 to 7 p.m., free)

in case you forgot

and then head over to SLOG Happy for your filled cupcakes ... um, wait, no, the TSA is strip searching those.