Jolt
Afternoon Jolt: Where's the Polling? Where are the Environmentalists?
Today's double loser: The pro-tunnel campaign.
Part 1: Scrolling through city campaign finance reports for Campaign Fizz today, we noticed that the pro-tunnel campaign, Let's Move Forward, spent $4,200 in May on polling by EMC research---polling data they never released. Generally, when a campaign doesn't release a poll, that means bad news for the campaign. We have a call out to LMF spokesman Alex Fryer to ask why the campaign didn't release its polling data.
Part 2: As we noted at the time, the "environmental coalition" that the pro-tunnel campaign, Let's Move Forward, announced last week was pretty thin on representatives from Seattle’s major environmental groups, including Futurewise, Transportation Choices Coalition, and King County Conservation Voters. In their place, Let's Move Forward trotted out Washington Forest Law Center director Peter Goldman; People for Puget Sound founder Kathy Fletcher; Earthjustice board member Russ Daggatt; Cascade Land Conservancy advisory council member Maryanne Tagney-Jones; and Seattle Aquarium director Bob Davidson.
Earlier this month, four members of that group made the case in Crosscut that the tunnel is the environmentally friendly viaduct replacement option, arguing that it would "give back Seattle its waterfront," produce less exhaust, prevent stormwater runoff, and make the waterfront more bike- and pedestrian-friendly.
Today, a group of far more recognizable environmentalists (among them: Sightline director Alan Durning, Earth Day cofounder Denis Hayes, and Climate Solutions policy director KC Golden, and People's Waterfront Coalition leader, obviously, Cary Moon) strike back, arguing that the surface/transit I-5 option will put fewer cars on downtown streets, produce a better waterfront faster and more cheaply, and prepare the city for a "post-carbon future." Interestingly, though, most of their arguments are economic---a tolled tunnel would hurt low-income drivers, surface/transit/I-5 can be built for $1 billion less than the tunnel, surface/transit/I-5 is better for traffic downtown---rather than environmental.
Part 1: Scrolling through city campaign finance reports for Campaign Fizz today, we noticed that the pro-tunnel campaign, Let's Move Forward, spent $4,200 in May on polling by EMC research---polling data they never released. Generally, when a campaign doesn't release a poll, that means bad news for the campaign. We have a call out to LMF spokesman Alex Fryer to ask why the campaign didn't release its polling data.
Part 2: As we noted at the time, the "environmental coalition" that the pro-tunnel campaign, Let's Move Forward, announced last week was pretty thin on representatives from Seattle’s major environmental groups, including Futurewise, Transportation Choices Coalition, and King County Conservation Voters. In their place, Let's Move Forward trotted out Washington Forest Law Center director Peter Goldman; People for Puget Sound founder Kathy Fletcher; Earthjustice board member Russ Daggatt; Cascade Land Conservancy advisory council member Maryanne Tagney-Jones; and Seattle Aquarium director Bob Davidson.
Earlier this month, four members of that group made the case in Crosscut that the tunnel is the environmentally friendly viaduct replacement option, arguing that it would "give back Seattle its waterfront," produce less exhaust, prevent stormwater runoff, and make the waterfront more bike- and pedestrian-friendly.
Today, a group of far more recognizable environmentalists (among them: Sightline director Alan Durning, Earth Day cofounder Denis Hayes, and Climate Solutions policy director KC Golden, and People's Waterfront Coalition leader, obviously, Cary Moon) strike back, arguing that the surface/transit I-5 option will put fewer cars on downtown streets, produce a better waterfront faster and more cheaply, and prepare the city for a "post-carbon future." Interestingly, though, most of their arguments are economic---a tolled tunnel would hurt low-income drivers, surface/transit/I-5 can be built for $1 billion less than the tunnel, surface/transit/I-5 is better for traffic downtown---rather than environmental.
