The word from Olympia is that if Seattle has its heart set on a tunnel to replace the aging viaduct, we’ll need to be willing to pay the bill for a prettier waterfront. Not satisfied with the city council’s authority to speak for the masses, the governor has demanded that we put dig vs build on the ballot so that voters will be aware of the spendy nature of the project.

Peeved by the need to have a quick vote, Council president Nick Licata is asking the state to front the cost of the spring balloting. [p-i] Yes, it’s a million dollar hassle (plus postage!) to bring an advisory measure before city voters, but doesn’t it seem problematic that the city thinks that we can afford our own little Big Dig when we aren’t willing (or able) to put the question to a vote?

Meanwhile, all sorts of people have come to the revolutionary conclusion that traffic planners are simply not to be trusted. With this in mind, a parade of endorsements for shutting down the viaduct just to see what happens without it [times,slog,horsesass,citycomforts...] (i.e., nevermind the long view, if we can live without it for a year, we probably don’t need it at all).