I want to see McGinn and Holmes go to legal war over this. There is no fucking way SEATTLE should be on the hook for the fiscal fuck ups, potential or otherwise, of any third party.

Any Council members who support this do not support Seattle, and every last one of them automatically should be driven out on rails. Their fiduciary responsibility is to protect and defend Seattle first.

Build the damn tunnel if you need to: but the city and it's residents cannot be on the hook for this financially.

I agree with Joe. In fact, I'm dismayed that the City didn't file immediate suit when the legislation passed last year. Any City in this State would be hopping mad about it; nobody would stand for it, and Seattle should be no different.

Glad to see McGinn using this line with the Governor. That agreement, championed at an impressive Press Conference last year, held several key components that the State has simply ignore. For the Governor to pretend, now, that she didn't agree to certain things with the City, is disingenuous; to then, further, criticize the City for attempting to protect itself on this issue is the worst kind of politics.

I actually like the tunnel option (for aesthetic reasons, nothing to do with cost), but I applaud the mayor for taking a stand to make sure the city isn't on the hook for the inevitable cost overruns from the state's portion of the project.

Here you go:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=12…

Gregoire is one stupid ninny if she thinks she can retain the governor's mansion after pissing off the electorate in Seattle. Seattle voters are the only reason she's there - they hate her on the east side of the state.

the three executives also agreed that the state would provide Metro the one percent MVET to both add more service in the AWV corridor and make up the upcoming fiscal crisis, that Sims knew was coming. the deep bore provides bypass capacity. the three governments expect transit to carry more trips oriented town downtown Seattle.