What are you talking about, O'Brien? Legislatures ALWAYS insert unenforceable language into bills they don't intend on pursuing through various legal channels. Silly billy.
I will never understand this notion that you contract for a project at a price and then the contract is basically worthless. The project can charge whatever they please and you're on the hook for the money. Why have a contract at all? You take bids for a job and then they just charge whatever they want anyway? Bullshit!
At least one Councilmember doesn't want the Taxpaying Citizens of Seattle - both property owners and renters - to go broke paying $10,000 per family from the inevitable cost overruns.
Kudos, Mike!
That said, even though I don't agree, I still want my SLOG "I agree with Baconcat" t-shirt ...
Must be a fascinating story behind all this; the soul-searching and the tortured path that took O'Brien through the political wilderness until he found himself allied with, off all people -- wait for it -- Mike McGinn! Who knew?
Mike - great move. But the tunnel cost overruns will be paid by Seattle taxpayers either way. Even if the State gets stuck paying, it will be transferred into taxes to all state taxpayers, and that includes Seattle. No matter what, Seattle taxpayers are going to get screwed.
But also consider the political cost. If the State has to pay, all state taxpayers will have to pay for a project everyone outside of a few City leaders knows would have cost overruns, and when there were several cheaper alternatives. When do you think will be the next time a Democrat from King County will win statewide? The City Council is willing to risk not only all of our money, but our State's progressive future as well.
But the tunnel cost overruns will be paid by Seattle taxpayers either way. Even if the State gets stuck paying, it will be transferred into taxes to all state taxpayers, and that includes Seattle. No matter what, Seattle taxpayers are going to get screwed.
Uh, this is a little bit like saying there's no difference between a 10% marginal tax rate and a 100% marginal tax rate. For Seattle to be stuck with all the cost overruns presents a potentially backbreaking obligation. For all those overruns to be spread out across the whole state makes them tolerable. It's like the difference between having health insurance and paying massive medical bills out of pocket.
But there's an even greater distinction at play here. The Seattle taxpayers who would be stuck with the bill if Seattle is stuck with the bill are a radically different group from those Seattle taxpayers who would be helping to pay things off if the state is stuck with the bill. We're talking in all likelihood gas tax money covering the cost overruns. And as an environmentalist and transit supporter, I'll take a gas tax any day over a property tax or any other tax to pay for a project that's going forward anyway.
What's more, the state is going to be spending its gas tax money one way or another. Better they spend it on a highway that would actually have some virtuous side effects--by making the downtown a more attractive destination without a car--than on just about any other highway project that would only promote sprawl.
Kudos, Mike!
That said, even though I don't agree, I still want my SLOG "I agree with Baconcat" t-shirt ...
Will O'Brien change his mind? Will The Stranger beat his brains in to change it back?
So the debate is between a guy who wants to spend 10 billion dollars.
And a guy who wants to spend $10 billion dollars of other people's money.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/po…
But also consider the political cost. If the State has to pay, all state taxpayers will have to pay for a project everyone outside of a few City leaders knows would have cost overruns, and when there were several cheaper alternatives. When do you think will be the next time a Democrat from King County will win statewide? The City Council is willing to risk not only all of our money, but our State's progressive future as well.
Uh, this is a little bit like saying there's no difference between a 10% marginal tax rate and a 100% marginal tax rate. For Seattle to be stuck with all the cost overruns presents a potentially backbreaking obligation. For all those overruns to be spread out across the whole state makes them tolerable. It's like the difference between having health insurance and paying massive medical bills out of pocket.
But there's an even greater distinction at play here. The Seattle taxpayers who would be stuck with the bill if Seattle is stuck with the bill are a radically different group from those Seattle taxpayers who would be helping to pay things off if the state is stuck with the bill. We're talking in all likelihood gas tax money covering the cost overruns. And as an environmentalist and transit supporter, I'll take a gas tax any day over a property tax or any other tax to pay for a project that's going forward anyway.
What's more, the state is going to be spending its gas tax money one way or another. Better they spend it on a highway that would actually have some virtuous side effects--by making the downtown a more attractive destination without a car--than on just about any other highway project that would only promote sprawl.