Current Readings

« Setting Context: Seattle Budget Trends | Main | Seattle's Good Side »

October 04, 2010

Comments

David Sucher

Mr. Burgess.

You claim State will pay all overruns.
Could you please document that?

David Sucher

Mr. Burgess.

Can you please document anything definitive to state that the State agrees with your interpretation on cost overruns? i.e. That the Legislature has changed it's language?

Thanks.

pat simon

How nice, and completely irrelevant, it is that you have "been bluntly clear—the state and not city taxpayers is responsible for all state costs, including potential cost overruns. Period." regarding the LAW that requires the city to pay for cost overruns. Does your position mean, then, that we can just say no to any law we don't like and the courts and legislature will roll over and play dead? I think not. The requirement that the city pay cost overruns is a law, not a wish, and wishing won't make it go away. It was the cost of Frank Chopp's agreement to let this monstrous waste go forward. If it's not enforceable, then let's see the repeal. I realize you're likely to be long gone from office when this bill hits all of us Seattle residents, but that's no excuse for your absurd position that you can just ingore a law with which you don't agree.

Peter L

It doesn’t look like there is an amount the city Council is not willing to spend. This quite a rouse, you say the state will pay over runs as if the state doesn’t get its money from us too. City council credibility is pretty shot from my point of view. This tunnel will make the downtown library look like a great success and your names will be all over it.

Rick Hunt

I am very pleased with the City Council's actions in providing a clear statement on the funding responsibilities which is more than we seem to get from the mayor. I can't wait to see how the waterfront park will transform my neighborhood with help from the design group just selected.

Nail56@gmail.com

Tim -- why in the world do you want to destroy the traffic capacity of the viaduct? And put us on the hook for the overruns? Your denial that "it's us!" just isn't credible. If the legislature had wanted to be clear about that point, they'd have made it clear. And the legislature doesn't have billions to plug the overrun bill, anyway. You may be united but you're looking like lemmings going over a cliff.

The comments to this entry are closed.