Oh yeah, and those downtown property owners are going to LOVE that - just like they did the monorail.

Expect this trial balloon to be shot down faster than Dick Cheney can say, "Pheasant? Where?"

Why shouldn't they pay? They'll reap direct benefits from the increased attractiveness of their property.

Especially those multi-million-dollar penthouse buyers - and even those fools who keep driving even 1 bedroom prices well beyond the reach of any reasonable person.

amazing how you guys can add up budget shortfalls now that the monorail is gone.

amazing how you guys can add up budget shortfalls now that the monorail is gone.

At least the monorail total cost was ten times cheaper than the underwater tunnel.

I expect the downtowners who hated the monorail - that they could actually use - will love the underwater tunnel with no downtown exits they can't use - especially if each and every year they have to pay TEN TIMES what they paid for the monorail - FOR THIRTY YEARS!

Riiiight.

And how about calling B.S. on the Mayor, Dan?

So a LID is a great idea for his tunnel, but not for the monorail when it had a shortfall?

I'm with Mickymse. I say we do anything we can to sabotage this city just so we can stick it to the bastards who killed the monorail. The only way they're going to learn their lesson is if this city descends into perpetual political gridlock.

I also support Will in Seattle's approach. We need to spread as many outrageous, hysterical lies and exaggerations as we can about the tunnel plan. If there was ever a time for us to adopt the political strategies of Karl Rove, the time is now.

And as for that poll showing the surface route is by far the least popular option -- well, obviously it's time to learn the lessons of the successful Sunni insurgency in Iraq. The Sunnis are not and never will be a majority in Iraq, but they sure can make things miserable for everyone else.

Cute... No one is suggesting we need perpetual political gridlock.

Just a little perspective... For example, why is the Viaduct a big issue for Seattle at all? Exactly how many city residents do you think actually use it on a regular basis? Even if every user was a resident, that would be just about 20% of the population; and we know a large number of the daily users are NOT city residents.

On the other hand, how many City residents do you think cross the Ballard and West Seattle Bridges every day, cressona?

I'm with Cressona - though I'm not sure either Viaduct or Boulevard supporters will get your irony.

They're more into hyperbole and fantasy, respectively.

Mickymse wrote: "On the other hand, how many City residents do you think cross the Ballard and West Seattle Bridges every day, cressona?"

Tell ya what, Micky, if I knew that killing Nickels' tunnel plan would bring back the monorail, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Instead, killing Nickels' tunnel plan means one thing and one thing only: an expanded elevated highway along our scenic downtown waterfront.

Sorta like framing a Van Gogh exhibit with a concrete fence -- well, if putting a concrete fence around a Van Gogh exhibit could, in the process, do the bidding of ExxonMobil, OPEC, General Motors, and Dick Cheney.

Mickymse wrote: "Just a little perspective... For example, why is the Viaduct a big issue for Seattle at all? Exactly how many city residents do you think actually use it on a regular basis? Even if every user was a resident, that would be just about 20% of the population; and we know a large number of the daily users are NOT city residents."

Micky, I see you're now adopting Henry Aronson's brilliant arguments against the Green Line, simply replacing "monorail" with "tunnel." Good for you.

Yo Mickey,

Go out to West Seattle and ask that question - then tell them you want to tear their lifeline down.

You might want to wear a football helmet and pads while doing so, though...

I don't think anyone in West Seattle wants a downtown tunnel instead of a cheaper viaduct, especially if they have to pay tolls to use it.

I'm wondering about this idea that, because their property values are going to go up, the land owners should pay an extra tax ON TOP OF the huge increases they're going to see in their property tax bill anyways. That's what property tax is, a tax on property values. Nickels is wanting to tax it twice.

I'll bet the phone lines at the mayor's office are on fire today.

Seattle will, in the end, get what it deserves. Shame anyone with any sense will end up leaving.

A very nice website !! Very well Done !!! nokia6630