The buzz around the deep-bore tunnel project has not been, well, boring. Is the project, which would cost the city, county, state, port and, of course, taxpayers between $1.9 billion and $8 billion, a fait accompli?

"No!" said Ballard activist Ed Plute, with StopTheTunnel.com and Seattle Citizens Against the Tunnel or SCAT.

The groups' leaders meet in a conference room at the Ballard Neighborhood Service Center. Others include West Seattle retired general contractor Bud Shasteen, Port Townsend retired civil engineer Victor Gray and wife Paula, political activists Elizabeth Campbell from Magnolia and Dorli Rainey from Queen Anne, and retired Seattle civil engineer Christopher Brown.

SCAT comes up with the $8 billion figure by adding in bond issues' interest. With cost overruns, it's $10 billion. The $1.9 billion figure is the tunnel alone and not the cost of I-5 improvements, viaduct demolition, the seawall replacement, etc.

"Our slogan is, 'The tunnel is not a done deal,'" said Shasteen, a University of Washington graduate and general contractor for 35 years in Hawaii. "Most people think the way they're ramrodding this through it's a done deal, but it isn't by any means. People don't realize how big a fiasco this is going to be. As we'd say in Hawaii, it's a 'shibai,' or boondoggle.

"The mayor is somewhat on our side," he said. "He's questioning the tunnel, and saying 'unless you protect Seattle voters from cost overruns, I'm against it.' He is somewhat of an ally. We want to stop this damn tunnel then discuss his buying us all bicycles or whatever."

SCAT's concerns are about cost overruns like Boston's Big Dig that began at $2.6 billion but totaled $14.5 billion and the tunnel's safety.

They are skeptical with the Washington State Department of Transportation in charge of most of the project's moveable parts. They cite the Brightwater tunnel, where two of four boring machines broke down and residents experienced cracked pavement.

The 13-mile, 14-foot-diameter tunnel is for pipes to carry after-treatment wastewater from the new plant near Woodinville. One machine is still stuck in the tunnel.

"The hole under the city will be 56-feet wide, not 14 like Brightwater, and will go under some of the biggest buildings downtown," Shasteen said. "Of the 157 buildings the tunnel will be near, there will be 37 buildings in danger."

"The tunnel project will bankrupt us and cause major building collapses," Plute said. "That boring machine is going to be a billion dollar toothache."

Gray supplied photos of the subway tunnel collapse in Cologne March 2009, 1,000 feet from the Rhine River with shallow ground water. Campbell's photos showed a collapsed 13-story apartment building in Shanghai January 2009 due to a weakened foundation by the piling of excavated soil and digging an underground garage.

"Taxpayers will pay for building damage," Shasteen warned. "They keep referring to the viaduct as dangerous. If anything is dangerous it's the tunnel. A tsunami could flood the tunnel. And, we hear fires are dangerous in tunnels.

SCAT wants an elevated viaduct option. Some want a new viaduct, others, a retrofit.

"They always mention the Nisqually earthquake," Shasteen said. "The total damage to the viaduct was two columns that ran 60 and 70 feet apart with 4.5-inch settling. As a contractor, I know that's minor. It will take $1.3 billion to repair the viaduct and fix the seawall to give 30 to 50 years of service, if maintained. The viaduct is built like a brick s**thouse. Supposedly our politicians believe in democracy. We voted on this. They didn't even put the retrofit on the ballot and still 70 percent didn't want the tunnel."

Most of the Seattle City Council is in favor of the deep-bore tunnel. But, Councilmember Mike O'Brien said the city, while facing significant transportation challenges, needs to fully understand the cost implications before proceeding with the tunnel.

"Until the state removes language capping the amount the state will pay on the project at $2.8 billion, it is unclear who, if anybody, will pay to complete the project if it goes over budget," O'Brien said. "I don’t believe the city should commit to building the tunnel until this issue is resolved.”

Councilmember Tom Rasmussen chairs the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project and Central Waterfront Planning.

"The existing structure has a risk of collapsing in an earthquake," Rasmussen said. "The deep-bore tunnel would best fit the needs of the area. The viaduct will remain in place while the tunnel is constructed. One of the things the city council will be doing is hiring our own independent consultants before entering into any agreements with the state. They will carefully revue state documents including the technical data. We are very mindful of risks and concerns that have been raised. We have open public meetings every two weeks and have a lot of information on our city and state Web sites."

SCAT questions the Port of Seattle's $300 million portion.

"The interest cost alone on the bond issues will be $8.8 million a year," Campbell said. "I don't see a direct benefit to the Port by having a tunnel."

"Our container terminal and cruise terminal facilities are dependent on transportation to move people quickly," said Charla Skaggs, Port of Seattle corporate media officer. "Our commissioner said we want our investment to come at the tail end of the (financing of the) project in 2015, and since 2009 we have been putting money into a transportation reserve account for the tunnel.

"We will refinance some of our existing debt and have bonds payed off earlier than planned," Skaggs said. (SCAT's) figures assume we will issue bonds to finance the entire $300 million. However, we have not made any decisions on 100-percent financing."

The viaduct will stay up while the tunnel is built.

"We would lose cargo coming into our competing ports without traffic flow and can't afford to risk having gridlock while replacing or repairing the viaduct," Skaggs said. "If it does not work efficiently, the entire area is in chaos. Port Metro Vancouver just signed a new supply agreement with Canadian National Railroad to get goods to the American Midwest. We're in this dogfight for cargo to the north and for keeping jobs here. Shippers will go where it's fastest."

The Washington State Department of Transportation and the city are careful to avoid officially stating that the deal is done.

A motion was filed by SCAT in King County claiming the city has taken final action to OK the tunnel despite publication of the required environmental impact statement and a judicial review under the State Environmental Policy Act.

In an order denying the motion entered by SCAT, the King County Superior Court states, "While many steps have been taken to prepare for the possibility of construction of the deep-bored tunnel, none of these actions constitute a final decision on the deep-bored tunnel option. It is reasonable to expect that a project as complex as the viaduct replacement would require some coordinate planning."

"This is a legal semantics game," said Campbell. "The city was exceeding the bounds under SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act). The Battery to Spokane tunnel was one project originally. The project was chopped into three then five or six. This is a way to sneak through environmental variances in small steps. They should revue the whole project together to know the accumulative environmental effects. Everything is about 'fast-tracking' and 'streamlining.'"