Pretty smart I'd say. If something bad happens with the tunnel come next eletion time (or any election time while these council members are in office), an opponent can point to the chance they had to ask Seattle if we wanted the thing. This may not be enough to make the council change their mind, but it can't hurt.

Shame that we (or O'brien) can't force them to all go on the record of why they oppose putting it to a vote.

@2 because they hate Democracy.

After all, since we all know the Deeply Brodignian Tunnel will result in the City exceeding it's bonding capacity, since the 520 bridge Western Approach has to come at the same time, can't let the Voters and Citizens decide it, right?

Cause we might prefer to fund Schools instead of gold plated Vanity Tunnels ...

@2 because they hate Democracy.

After all, since we all know the Deeply Brobdignian Tunnel will result in the City exceeding it's bonding capacity, since the 520 bridge Western Approach has to come at the same time, can't let the Voters and Citizens decide it, right?

Cause we might prefer to fund Schools instead of gold plated Vanity Tunnels ...

You'd think there was an election this year or something.

Yeah, #1 and #2 have it right, but let me give you the Bacon Bits version:

O'Brien: Hey guys, do you support the right of the people who have expressed disgust at a lack of financial security and no movement on removing the cost overrun provision?

Rest of Council: This would be a ballot-box question, not some online poll, right?

O'Brien: Well, yeah.

Rest of Council: Um... what else is on the ballot this year?

O'Brien: 5 of your jobs.

Rest of Council: Oh, then fuck the people. We vote no.

This will completely upset the council's rhetoric about doing this "to protect the people", and combined with the legislature's refusal to remove the cost-overrun provision and a lack of council work on improving our protection against that, there is absolutely NO way they can claim to be working for the people without getting a blistering smackdown.

Bad year to be an incumbent, no doubt.

Dumb idea. The ballot will be "Vote for Tunnel or Vote for Surface Option". With the surface option (what the mayor wants) putting an amazing amount of cars onto downtown and I-5.

If you vote against the tunnel, you are basically voting to piss away all the money we've spent up until this point. Scrap the project, start all over.

@7 wrong. The Surface Option would put fewer cars on Downtown arterials than the Massively Lower Occupancy And More Costly Tunnel would, Kinison.

Got debt?

Cause you need a Vote of the People to get that thru, then, and there ain't no state funding fairy to bail you out.

The tunnel was on the ballot.

McGinn ran a single issue campaign: no tunnel.

He won.
The People spoke.
Ang Gregoire and Conlin ignored them.

Heck, the one time they let us vote on a Tunnel we voted it down 70-30.

Tunnel == Death == Debt == Pollution.

@7, the bored tunnel actually puts more traffic on more streets than the surface/transit option. The bored tunnel north portal diverts the 35,000 Interbay-bound vehicles from Western/Elliott access over to Mercer Street/Place and Denny Way. It also eliminates access for 5-10,000 vehicles via the Battery Street Tunnel and Broad Street Underpass without which are diverted onto surface streets.

The Western/Elliott access has less hillclimb, no turns, and fewer stoplights (7-9 as opposed to 12-13 via Mercer & 15-16 via Denny Way). Western/Elliott is a more suitably commercial corridor for thru-traffic unlike "residential" Mercer through Queen Anne and Lake Union, both districts more pedestrian-oriented.

The bored tunnel is a corporate conservative vendetta against urban environmentalism and liberalism, unfortunately proving that liberals are as easily misled with deceitful propaganda as anyone else.

Mayor Mike is right to support the surface/transit option. Wow. Seattlers think they're educated, but I suppose that's what a seattle education consists of - thinking oneself educated rather than being able to demonstrate it.

Who is going to put up the money for anything other than the DBT? Because the State isn't.