More Details on the No Tunnel Alliance Campaign

A report on last night's No Tunnel Alliance meeting in the P-I's Seattle@Nite blog:

The No-Tunnel Alliance unanimously voted Tuesday to endorse an elevated structure to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and presented anti-tunnel text for the voter's pamphlet to be distributed in the next two months prior to the March special election.

The alliance also announced the hiring of Michael Grossman as a campaign consultant, and indicated that a Fremont office is expected to serve as alliance headquarters.

In 2003, Grossman helped mastermind Seattle City Councilman David Della's upset of incumbent Heidi Wills. He also worked as a consultant for former City Council challengers Robert Rosencrantz and Paige Miller, and was behind City Attorney Mark Sidran's 2001 unsuccessful mayoral campaign.

The advisory measure on how to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct is scheduled for a citywide, all-mail vote March 13, with voters choosing between an elevated structure or a four-lane tunnel.

The No-Tunnel Alliance's pamphlet text, signed by Della and endorsed by City Council member Nick Licata, promotes a rebuilt Viaduct with six-lanes, and emphasizes that Seattle residents would not be required to pay for additional elevated structure costs, as they would with the tunnel option.

Please fail, No Tunnel Alliance. Pretty please.

Comments

[john]

Honestly, I haven't been completely against the idea of a no-replacement option, but could only be described as luke warm to the idea. Forgive me in advance if I'm not up on all my facts, but I have some questions about no-replacement.

For example, it is my view that a tunnel (original or version 1.2) is not only designed to cater to our continued dependence on cars as the primary means of transportation, but that it also caters toward the City's seeming addiction with development, at all costs, public be damned. I wrote about it here:

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/georgetown/archives/110662.asp

The city leadership, with some exceptions, cares not about the people that make a living on the waterfront, the rare jobs that don't require a college degree and can pay a mortgage or raise a family (but not always both, unless one works 70 hrs a week). Condos getting built will lead to pressure of the Hanjin terminal to bail on their lease, and the fulfillment of the dream of Terminal 46 being just another tourist/consumerist paradise. I'm not hearing a lot about green oriented folks talking to people whose jobs might be affected by an outcome, and the result that will embolden the developers--tunnel and the "no tunnel or viaduct" options.

I know that there is an organization called the People's Waterfront Coalition; are there any longshore workers and/or waterfront mechanics in the coalition? I haven't heard of any, if that is so.

If anything, I want to avoid the old hat environment vs. jobs argument, but to do so, it might help to see some of the jobs issues addressed (and again, if they have--please point me in the right direction, but I've seen very little).

Thanks--John P.
Georgetown Stew