UPDATE: The campaign we identified as "Move Seattle Smarter" predated the current campaign, "Protect Seattle Now". We regret the error.
Also, we want to clarify that the $700 million is the total projected from toll fees of $400 million and the Port's promised contribution of $300 million.
Chaos and confusion confront commuters caught in construction between West Seattle and downtown during rush hour these days. So too is the quagmire of questions confronting these same commuters seeking clarity on the removal of the current, aging viaduct while understanding the citizens referendum, initiative, costs, tolling, and taxes on the deep bore tunnel plan. The hole in the ground may be just a hole, but with it come more movable parts than a Rube Goldberg machine.
Two current campaigns are forcing the issue, and pushing the public to quickly choose up sides. Alex Fryer, a West Seattle resident and former spokesman for Mayor Greg Nickels, also of West Seattle, consults for the pro-tunnel campaign "Let's Move Forward". That website declares, "Vote “YES” on Ref. 1!"
The campaign, "Protect Seattle Now" which developed from the pre-referendum organization "Move Seattle Smarter" initiated the referendum and gathered 29,000 signatures to put a portion of one of the agreements, an ordinance, between the City and State on the tunnel project to a vote this August. (Initiative-101 collected over 20,000 signatures. Its future remains in the courts.) And, yes, to all sides concerned, what the voters are voting on does not actually promise to go ahead with, or stop, the tunnel project, but rather seems in place to confuse the voter. It's not a "yay-or-nay" vote on building the tunnel.
Alex Fryer spoke with the West Seattle Herald about "Let's Move Forward", then Mayor Mike McGinn later weighed in with us.
Alex Fryer:
"The referendum vote is complicated and people have a right to be confused with this process," Fryer said. "Judge (Laura Gene) Middaugh decided that one section of those many pages of the (tunnel) agreement can go to voters and so that's what we're voting on and that's when our campaign got kicked up. I think you can say that this referendum belongs to Mayor Mike McGinn. He's the one who, when the City Council passed the ordinance, he challenged that. His veto was overwritten by the City Council by an eight-to-one margin, same as the vote for the original passage for the ordinance.
"He went out and got a paid signature gathering campaign to put it on the ballot and here we are because the judge said you can put this little thing on the ballot, so I think people are confused by that process. The question is how did they get the money to pay for the campaign? His (The Mayor's) wife gave money. Some of his staffers took a leave of absence and volunteered for the campaign, and he challenged people to give money to the campaign.
"I think that what the tunnel brings to the folks in West Seattle is that it is the only way to get folks to the city without having the current viaduct go down."
Asked why his campaign is needed considering Governor Gregoire has stated that the tunnel project is a "done deal", Fryer responded, "Because there is an election coming up. People in West Seattle are going to read a ballot. They're going to need to make a choice. It would be a complicated environment if the referendum went down. It could mean years of more of litigation of initiatives and confusion. Delay does mean more money in construction.
"Again, this ongoing uncertainty, litigation, initiatives, we could keep talking about this for another 10 years," Fryer warned. "This is time to get going, to get moving in the direction that would go forward with the tunnel. That has the majority of the City Council, (County Executive) Dow Constantine, the Governor, WSDOT. It is the only proposal that is funded.
"The money is set aside for it," he added. "There is a contract signed with the contractor. The State of Washington has tax gas money to pay for it. There's the Port money committed. They will stick steadfast to that $300 million. A yes vote reaffirms the Council's authority to go ahead and review what the final (Federal) EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) says. If it all squares up to say 'yes', we then consecrate this agreement with Washington (D.C.) and build."
So is Fryer saying that if the EIS statement is favorable on the tunnel project, it may then be reviewed by the City Council, Governor, Constantine and WSDOT, and possibly be rejected?
"It's hard to say," he said. "It's unlikely. They have been working with the Feds on it. But it has not been finalized so you can's say for sure.
Mayor McGinn responds
Regarding Fryer complaining about the Mayor's wife's donation, McGinn said, "They have tunnel companies, consultants and lawyers that are all going to make millions and millions of dollars on the tunnel. They're probably going to contribute who knows how much to his campaign. And he's upset that my wife made a contribution because she wants Seattle citizens to have the right to vote, and doesn't want the people of Seattle to get stuck with higher taxes?
"There's polling out there that shows the public wants to vote on this and I support their right to vote on this," the Mayor said. "This is something in which overruns could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Don't voters of Seattle have the right to vote on this?"
As for Fryer asserting that the tunnel is already paid for, or that the funds have been "identified", the Mayor responded, "The tunnel is not even close to paid for. It's crazy. The (State) Legislature hasn't even authorized tolling yet, which is supposed to raise $400 million. Why didn't they vote on this in the last session? Perhaps the leadership didn't bring it up because they didn't know what would happen to their tunnel project.
"The State doesn't have any more gas tax money yet," he added. "They have already committed all their gas tax money. So if there are any cost overruns the Legislature says that the City of Seattle has to pay for it. And the Port can't tell anybody where they're getting their money from. They'll have to raise it by raising taxes .Officially, the Port hasn't identified where its $300 million will come from."
