September 18, 2009
The Viaduct is not dead. Or at least not as of yet. A law suite has been filed by Elizabeth Campbell according to her supporters. This is in the process of being verified. However, I had knowledge that this was going to happen two months ago. The only delay was in the acquisition of funds for the lawsuite. Stay tuned as to exactly what the specific details are. Will be getting this information from Elizabeth Campbell as soon as I am able to contact her.
The stigma of the lawsuite should be that an environmental impact statement has not been filed for the Tunnel as of yet. The Tunnel project has been separated into many different parts so that the necessity for a large Environmental Impact Statement is lessened. This might be strategic on the construction of the Tunnel but it violates the spirit of the law. A correction in this endeavor needs to be upheld and thus stop the progress of the building of the Tunnel until a correct and complete Environmental Impact Statement can be completed and evaluated by Federal Authorities and others who would need to make evaluations.
But is this the part of the lawsuite which is being filed. Stay tuned for complete details on this obvious controversy.
SR 520 construction may be dependent upon these determinations and findings. Financing of both are tight and could be flipped at any time. Who is responsible for what and when still needs to be answered. Again, the costliest roads are being played with. Your money is at stake again.
Either through politics or legal maneuvering.
March 18, 2009
Mr. Scott White.
I believe you are on the Transportation Committee when I looked this up previously.
Am the treasurer for the initiative I-99 which seeks to take away the right-of-way for the Seattle Tunnel as proposed by Mayor Nickels.
The cost of a tunnel at this time is extremely expensive and Elizabeth Campbell who is the sponsor of the initiative will be having a 100% effort in gathering signatures for this initiative after her Winter 09 class ends. I will join the signature gathering efforts after the tax season ends on April 15, 2009.
However, this effort would be null and void if the funding for the Seattle Tunnel is not approved by the State Legislature and yourself and the committee on Transportation.
Have spoken with many people concerning this effort, obviously, and almost virtually everyone is opposed to the Seattle Tunnel idea. Some comments circle around the State Budget and the need to balance the budget and others also still do love the idea of the beautiful travel route which the current Seattle Waterfront Viaduct passes by. Others are extremely upset that voting does not count and recollecting the vote which overwhelmingly ditched a tunnel option previously. The voters do not like to be ignored whatsoever. As you recall I had said I would approve a teachers pay raise as per the voters even if no other state employee were to get a raise as per the voters electing this a few years ago.
Personally I still would like a retrofit of the Viaduct and then an accumulation of funds for the setting aside of funds for other more appropriate roadway construction in about 20 years or so. I assume you would still like a Street Version of the Viaduct. Both are incongruent with the Seattle Tunnel alternative and I would wish you to vote “NO” on any approval of a Seattle Tunnel version.
Thanking you in advance for your deep concern on this important roadway structure for the beautification of the Seattle Waterfront and the drivers of Seattle and the enjoyment of the beautiful vista which drivers are able to enjoy at the present time. An enjoyable drive while in Seattle will remain if you agree to Vote against funding of a Seattle Tunnel project.
Keith Ljunghammar, EA