Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, March 29, 2011
City City Attorney Says Tunnel Referendum is "not a subject for voters."
Posted by Cienna Madrid on Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 4:02 PM
- Pete Holmes, wistfully dreaming of a tunnel to the sky.
Tunnel critics have charged that Holmes is essentially suing Seattle voters on behalf of the city. And while Holmes still insists he's tunnel neutral—he admits that he instigated his complaint on behalf of city council president Richard Conlin and the majority of other tunnel supporters on council.
Still, Holmes argues that he’s “doing his duty” for voters as well by blocking the referendum now. Holmes says that voting to suspend three city council agreements to move forward with a deep-bore tunnel is not legal because the agreements are an administrative act executed by council rather than a legislative one (which voters could change).
"It’s not a subject for the voters," says Holmes. "This is about carrying out policy that’s already been enacted by the state and the city."
And essentially, he says that he's doing tunnel supporters a favor by suing now: "Make no mistake—at some point, litigation will be used to decide the outcome of this case. If [an August ballot is] a wasted effort, what’s the point?"
Holmes's complaint has been referred to Judge Laura Middaugh* in King County Superior Court. No date has yet been set to review the complaint. The lawyers for all sides must now get together to agree on an expedited review process—essentially, a fast-tracked time line for reviewing the complaint—which they will present to Judge Middaugh.
*Interesting side note—Judge Middaugh is the wife of state Senator Adam Kline. Given the state's involvement in the tunnel drama, it's unclear whether or not she'll be asked to recuse herself.
1
This referendum is a sneaky way of trying to get around a decision, now a law, that some people don't like. Your recourse is to vote these politicians out of office, rather than this silly referendum.
Anyway, I'm glad the Stranger so strongly endorsed this Holmes fellow. He didn't win by much, if I recall, so you guys made all the difference. Thanks guys!
Anyway, I'm glad the Stranger so strongly endorsed this Holmes fellow. He didn't win by much, if I recall, so you guys made all the difference. Thanks guys!
3
ah, well since the tunnel isn't subject to voters, then it's only fair to assume the cost overruns won't either... right?
4
Dont worry, if the tunnel was approved of by a local vote, the mayor and his supporters would still be complaining about it. They would block it no matter what was approved.
5
The City Attorney is not suing the voters. He's suing the drafters of the petition who have not sufficiently familiarized themselves with our state's laws. And if he hadn't, someone else would have. There are many, many voters who do not believe that we should have endless plebiscites on administrative decisions. Our federal constitution guarantees us a republican form of government, not a free-for-all where the crankiest and the loudest prevail at endless, mind-numbing town halls.
Obviously, tunnel opponents should have filed a referendum against the first ordinance that the Council passed, not the ordinance approving some electrical contracting work. But wait--that was the ordinance that Saint Michael of McGinn said he wouldn't oppose. So tunnel opponents, direct your anger at Mayor Bait-'n'-Switch, not to the City Attorney who is actually doing his job.
Obviously, tunnel opponents should have filed a referendum against the first ordinance that the Council passed, not the ordinance approving some electrical contracting work. But wait--that was the ordinance that Saint Michael of McGinn said he wouldn't oppose. So tunnel opponents, direct your anger at Mayor Bait-'n'-Switch, not to the City Attorney who is actually doing his job.
6
Adam Kline is a legislator elected by a certain subsection of state voters, not a State administration official. His job isn't affected in the least by the tunnel issue or by how his wife would rule on this lawsuit.
8
#5 - That is a good point. McGinn was trying so hard to get elected in 2009 that he made a calculated decision not to oppose that first ordinance, which passed just a few weeks before the election. I'm surprised, though, that nobody else tried to file a referendum back then, even without McGinn's leadership.
9
@6: So, nobody would argue that his political future is linked to the outcome of the case?
Remember, it's about avoiding the *appearance* of impropriety as much as avoiding actual impropriety. Perception is important, and you don't want either side to have an easy way to argue that the case was decided by bias or conflict of interest.
Remember, it's about avoiding the *appearance* of impropriety as much as avoiding actual impropriety. Perception is important, and you don't want either side to have an easy way to argue that the case was decided by bias or conflict of interest.
10
The opposition to the tunnel gets a lot of its energy from the way this is being rammed through, legal process be damned. There are still two outstanding EIS that aren't done, but the contracts have already been signed and it is already decided that the alternatives required to be considered in the EIS won't be considered no matter what it says when the EIS is finally done. F that man. Somebody's got a lot of (public trough) money riding on this puppy and they don't want to risk the fricking pesky voters messing it up. As Holmes says, "This isn't for the voters."
11
Citizen initiatives are not an effective way to run a government. See what it did for California. I'm against 'em all.
12
@10 is correct about the lack of the 2 EIS and 3 federal EPA hearings that must be completed.
But that doesn't mean it should preclude us from voting the Tunnel Of Rainier-Sodden Mud down all Five Times it comes up for a Vote until the Governor flees to Wisconsin and becomes a Republican.
But that doesn't mean it should preclude us from voting the Tunnel Of Rainier-Sodden Mud down all Five Times it comes up for a Vote until the Governor flees to Wisconsin and becomes a Republican.
13
Neither Judge Middaugh's nor Senator Kline's political or financial well-being is effected in the slightest by this case.
There are no conflicting interests here, apparent or real, at all, period.
There are no conflicting interests here, apparent or real, at all, period.
14
I read these threads a lot and notice that Will in Seattle is always off doing some stupid joke that no one ever responds to.
Do you think he notices that no one responds to him? It's sad.
Do you think he notices that no one responds to him? It's sad.
15
For as inept as Seattle voters are on transportation and transit issues, the tunnel should not be a subject for the voters.
16
Huh. For a while I thought that since Holmes isn't busy prosecuting cops for randomly shooting people on the street, he'd have time to maybe crack down on slumlords like Sisley blighting the city. But no, too busy preventing us from voting. Oh, and saving our precious children from the threat of speakeasies and card games.
Thanks, Pete Holmes. Heckuvajob.
Thanks, Pete Holmes. Heckuvajob.
18
@16: Holmes isn't busy prosecuting cops for randomly shooting people on the street
Unfortunately, in Seattle it's legal for cops to randomly kill people unless you can prove they were acting out of "malice", which means that this case would have been a very expensive lost cause. Keep in mind, we'd foot the bill for Birk's lawyers as well.
Unfortunately, in Seattle it's legal for cops to randomly kill people unless you can prove they were acting out of "malice", which means that this case would have been a very expensive lost cause. Keep in mind, we'd foot the bill for Birk's lawyers as well.
20
I wonder why the majority of the Seattle City Counsel is so pro-tunnel? They are pro-tunnel enough to not care about the almost 29,000 people who signed this referendum that want to vote on the tunnel project. I'm sure they will pull the same stunt with the I-101 petition, in which 28,000 people also signed that measure. So here you potentially have thousands of Seattle voters that want the right to vote, denied that right. Please remember the actions and decision of the Seattle City Counsel members when its time to vote for their re-election in August. Don't forget how hard they are trying to silence you, and take away your right to vote on a project that "YOU" are paying for. This is very interesting. It sure makes you wonder, what are they gaining if the tunnel is built?
21
We are witnessing the death of the Old Regime in Washington State...litigation will not contain it, because it is tribal, not literate.
22
The city itself established the number of petition signatures required to get a referendum on the ballot. Now, having met and surpassed the city's own requirements, proponents of the referendum are now charged by the city with subverting city government? Yeah, that's the ticket!
24
@23: Like the R.H. Thomson and Bay, both of which were subjected to popular challenge at the municipal level? Ah, I see: http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?Dis…
History, doomed to repeat, etc.
History, doomed to repeat, etc.
25
@24 don't quote precedent.
If Judges started to pay attention to legal precedent, we might have to live under the Rule of Law ...
If Judges started to pay attention to legal precedent, we might have to live under the Rule of Law ...
26
@24, pretty sure the Thomson and Bay were city-led and -funded projects from the get-go, meant to be brand new highways adding capacity by plowing partly through residential neighborhoods. Not too like the viaduct replacement in that way. Ran across some cool material on it, which I'll try to post up at some point.
27
#20 What part of "not a subject for voters" do you not get? If you disagree with him on legal grounds, you could explain why (I'd be curious to hear a good argument on why you think he's wrong - I haven't read one yet). Or do you simply think that if a bunch of people sign a petition, then anything that strikes their fancy should be put to a vote?
28
Thanks, @26. Glad to see that online and not stuff from ian and other apologists for the Deeply Broken Tunnel.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (28) RSS