O'Brien is one of the best people on the council. I hope he wins re-election for many years to come.

The "linkage" in linkage fees in only in the imagination of proponents

There is no logical connection between building new market-rate housing and the genuine need to subsidize housing.

O'Brien is a good guy but he is so totally unwise on so -called linkage fees, where in fact there is no linkage. If the public can extort money out of buiders, then why not have linkage fees for market-rate restaurants or market rate advertisers like the stranger.

I met him several times when he was over City Light. Good guy, who seemed to genuinely care and be interested about the wonky utility stuff we talked about. I hope he gets re-elected.

O'Brien caved into NIMBYs in supporting, perhaps inadvertently, the elimination of hundreds of formally established since 1900 vacant building sites.

Hundreds of parcels that last year could be developed as 'starter' homes have been made worthless through the committee's actions.

I know this because I met with O'Brien to explain the unintended consequences of the Council's action.

The Councilmember who should really retire is Godden. She's another tunnel supporter who now has the nerve to tell us that this mess is a surprise. She's "Shocked! Just shocked!"

Another Councilmember who should really retire is Godden. She's another tunnel supporter who now has the nerve to tell us that this mess is a surprise. She's "Shocked! Just shocked!"

and to be fair Bagshaw and Burgess should also go. They should all go!

This is good for the city. Good luck, Mike.

@5,@6(dup): don't know where you're getting this tripe. She never supported it. She wanted the cut and cover solution, and was steam-rolled along with the rest of the council by Olympia. Your logic is the traditional/hackneyed "throw the bums out!"; nonetheless don't just make up lies to support that.

@8
Go look at Godden's votes.

I am not imagining from logic but stating from Godden's own actions. It can't get much clearer. She went along with the herd and the herd will, I hope, get rounded up and sent out to pasture.

But I am glad to see that her supporters like you have sense enough to try to back away from the Tunnel.

Soon it will be that the whole City Council will be saying "Us? We were always against the Tunnel. In fact we supported McGinn in trying to ensure that Seattle didn't get caught up in cost overruns!"

@8 Bullshit. It was Godden who penned the clueless "nothing to see hear, move along" editorial accusing McGinn for spreading "FUD" on the tunnel. Her votes are on the legislation that allowed the tunnel to move forward without accounting for the risks we now face. Zero accountability whatsoever.

@8 re Godden:

. She never supported it. She wanted the cut and cover solution, and was steam-rolled along with the rest of the council by Olympia.

Then why didn't she just vote against it whenever she had the opportunity? Did the Council President put a literal gun to her head? Did Gregoire?

Why did she write her infamous "fear mongering" essay?

A lazy statistic: 37.5% or 3 of the 8 City Councilmembers who were tunnel supporters on the record have been either forced from their office by the public (Conlin) or have declared retirement from office (Licata, Rasmussen).

If we end up with a total turnover of the City Council from the Conlin era, is that an electoral repudiation of them and their tunnel legacy? I would certainly say so.

Mike Bikes!

@4, just where are these hundreds of vacant lots that are now unbuildable? Address locations please, for just a few of them.

Hey Mikey, how about taking a drive through Ballard and checking out our collapsing streets and roads? Whoops sorry getting rid of plastic bags must be more important.

I am also curious as to what @4 is referring to?

@4 is sorta basically correct.
The City won't allow, for example, three 4000 SF platted lots as 3 houses. (Assuming zoning is 5000 SF minimum lot size.) You'd take the 12,000 SF of ground and make it into 2 6000 SF lots.
Some may like that. Some not.
Since in most cases a 3000 SF lot is perfectly fine, I think that the Single Family Elitists are wrong.

O'Brien's phonebook ordinance was struck down and the city negotiated a settlement where us taxpayers handed over at least half a million dollars to the assholes who make yellow pages.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2013…

Also, the bag fee was first put forth by Conlin and McGinn, then voted down by the voters, and then Mike O'Brien put forth the bag ban bill... because the voters certainly like that idea, right?

Yes, every Seattle-ite has now given $1 to those phonebook companies thanks to Mike.

@17, cites please. Where in the code does it say you can't build a house on a 4,000 SF lot in a 5,000 SF zone?

And I'm still looking for all those vacant lots that O'Brien rendered unbuildable. Address, locations, please. Or is this all just gas?

@20
Go re-read my comment, friend.