News
Council Will Put Off Tunnel Referendum Vote Until Court Ruling
At its meeting this afternoon, the city council will introduce a measure putting Referendum 1, the anti-tunnel referendum, on the August ballot but will agree to hold off on an official vote until a King County Superior Court judge has ruled on whether the three city-state tunnel agreements the measure would overturn are subject to the referendum process.
City attorney Pete Holmes has sued the referendum campaign, Protect Seattle Now, and its supporters, arguing that the three agreements---which address things like the state's right to access city right-of-way to build the tunnel---are merely "administrative" measures to implement a previously adopted city policy approving the deep-bore tunnel. [pullquote]The city council will introduce a measure putting Referendum 1, the anti-tunnel referendum, on the August ballot but will agree to hold off on an official vote until a King County Superior Court judge has ruled on whether the three city-state tunnel agreements the measure would overturn are subject to the referendum process.[/pullquote]
Superior Court judge Laura Middaugh agreed earlier this month to expedite hearings on the tunnel lawsuit so that if tunnel opponents prevail, they'll be able to put the referendum on the August ballot instead of waiting until November. The city council has until May 24 to put the measure on the ballot; their last scheduled council meeting before then is May 23.
At a council briefings meeting this morning, council president Richard Conlin said, "We do expect a ruling in advance of the May 23 date," but added, in response to a question from tunnel opponent Mike O'Brien, that that if the court doesn't rule by the 23rd, "we'll have to make a decision as to what we're going to do and we'll consult with the city attorney as to what the best course of action is."
In a statement today, Protect Seattle Now argued that the city council is legally obligated to put the tunnel referendum on the ballot now, before the court case is completed. "Even if the city council believes that a citizen ballot measure is not referable, the city council still must carry out its mandatory duty to place it on the ballot. Otherwise, the city council will be breaking the law," Protect Seattle Now attorney Gary Manca said.
Also today, the anti-tunnel group filed a motion to dismiss the city as a party to the tunnel lawsuit, arguing that because neither the city council nor Mayor Mike McGinn directed Holmes explicitly to file the lawsuit, Holmes is not representing the city. (Holmes, for his part, has dismissed this claim, arguing that the city attorney is "co-equal" with the mayor and council and has the authority to file lawsuits on the city's behalf without asking them for written permission).
PubliCola has asked Manca for a copy of the motion.
City attorney Pete Holmes has sued the referendum campaign, Protect Seattle Now, and its supporters, arguing that the three agreements---which address things like the state's right to access city right-of-way to build the tunnel---are merely "administrative" measures to implement a previously adopted city policy approving the deep-bore tunnel. [pullquote]The city council will introduce a measure putting Referendum 1, the anti-tunnel referendum, on the August ballot but will agree to hold off on an official vote until a King County Superior Court judge has ruled on whether the three city-state tunnel agreements the measure would overturn are subject to the referendum process.[/pullquote]
Superior Court judge Laura Middaugh agreed earlier this month to expedite hearings on the tunnel lawsuit so that if tunnel opponents prevail, they'll be able to put the referendum on the August ballot instead of waiting until November. The city council has until May 24 to put the measure on the ballot; their last scheduled council meeting before then is May 23.
At a council briefings meeting this morning, council president Richard Conlin said, "We do expect a ruling in advance of the May 23 date," but added, in response to a question from tunnel opponent Mike O'Brien, that that if the court doesn't rule by the 23rd, "we'll have to make a decision as to what we're going to do and we'll consult with the city attorney as to what the best course of action is."
In a statement today, Protect Seattle Now argued that the city council is legally obligated to put the tunnel referendum on the ballot now, before the court case is completed. "Even if the city council believes that a citizen ballot measure is not referable, the city council still must carry out its mandatory duty to place it on the ballot. Otherwise, the city council will be breaking the law," Protect Seattle Now attorney Gary Manca said.
Also today, the anti-tunnel group filed a motion to dismiss the city as a party to the tunnel lawsuit, arguing that because neither the city council nor Mayor Mike McGinn directed Holmes explicitly to file the lawsuit, Holmes is not representing the city. (Holmes, for his part, has dismissed this claim, arguing that the city attorney is "co-equal" with the mayor and council and has the authority to file lawsuits on the city's behalf without asking them for written permission).
PubliCola has asked Manca for a copy of the motion.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
