Jolt
Conlin Tries to Short-Circuit Public Vote on Tunnel
Today's Loser: Bellevue city council member Kevin Wallace (and the other three Bellevue council members who support the so-called B7 light-rail alignment south of Bellevue).
A majority of the Bellevue city council supports B7, an alternative to Sound Transit's preferred route that would run across the Mercer Slough wetland preserve and along the abandoned Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad right-of-way alongside I-405, bypassing downtown Bellevue as well as the existing South Bellevue Park-and-Ride and, instead, running by property owned by Wallace.
The council voted to spend $670,000 studying the alignment (which has also been the subject of multiple conflict-of-interest allegations against Wallace).
Seattle Transit Blog reports that the previously unreleased study concludes that B7 will cost at least $150 million more than Sound Transit's preferred alignment, known as B2M.
The Bellevue council will discuss the findings at its meeting tonight at Bellevue City Hall (450 110th Ave. NE) starting at 6pm; watch the meeting online here.
Today's Winner: City council member Mike O'Brien
O'Brien didn't technically win today, but sometimes racking up good-guy points is enough for Afternoon Jolt. O'Brien threw down a righteous (though quixotic) protest at this afternoon's council meeting, when council member Richard Conlin proposed a frankly cynical vote tomorrow morning to short-circuit King County Superior Court Judge Laura Middaugh's finding that one portion of the tunnel agreement was in fact subject to a public vote. (The council legislation would scuttle the public's opportunity to weigh in in August by requiring the council to vote on a separate ordinance in the future; only that ordinance would be subject to a potential referendum.)
"I'm concerned about having a .... hasty meeting with little notice on a resolution when the public and the judge have said it's time to move forward on a vote," O'Brien said. "It's really clear to me that the public in Seattle would like a vote on this issue."
O'Brien also raised a futile protest about the timing of the vote, asking rhetorically, "Why can't we vote on this today?" instead of waiting until tomorrow. The answer, as Conlin acknowledged, was that with O'Brien sure to vote no, and with only five council members in town, he didn't have the council majority he needed to pass the legislation today.
A majority of the Bellevue city council supports B7, an alternative to Sound Transit's preferred route that would run across the Mercer Slough wetland preserve and along the abandoned Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad right-of-way alongside I-405, bypassing downtown Bellevue as well as the existing South Bellevue Park-and-Ride and, instead, running by property owned by Wallace.
The council voted to spend $670,000 studying the alignment (which has also been the subject of multiple conflict-of-interest allegations against Wallace).
Seattle Transit Blog reports that the previously unreleased study concludes that B7 will cost at least $150 million more than Sound Transit's preferred alignment, known as B2M.
The Bellevue council will discuss the findings at its meeting tonight at Bellevue City Hall (450 110th Ave. NE) starting at 6pm; watch the meeting online here.
Today's Winner: City council member Mike O'Brien
O'Brien didn't technically win today, but sometimes racking up good-guy points is enough for Afternoon Jolt. O'Brien threw down a righteous (though quixotic) protest at this afternoon's council meeting, when council member Richard Conlin proposed a frankly cynical vote tomorrow morning to short-circuit King County Superior Court Judge Laura Middaugh's finding that one portion of the tunnel agreement was in fact subject to a public vote. (The council legislation would scuttle the public's opportunity to weigh in in August by requiring the council to vote on a separate ordinance in the future; only that ordinance would be subject to a potential referendum.)
"I'm concerned about having a .... hasty meeting with little notice on a resolution when the public and the judge have said it's time to move forward on a vote," O'Brien said. "It's really clear to me that the public in Seattle would like a vote on this issue."
O'Brien also raised a futile protest about the timing of the vote, asking rhetorically, "Why can't we vote on this today?" instead of waiting until tomorrow. The answer, as Conlin acknowledged, was that with O'Brien sure to vote no, and with only five council members in town, he didn't have the council majority he needed to pass the legislation today.
