City Council appears poised to put viaduct issue to a vote

Responding to pressure from state leaders, the Seattle City Council will vote today whether to hold a March 13 election on how to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct.

It's likely the council will decide to send the issue to voters in March, several council members said Thursday. A ballot measure might revive hope of replacing the earthquake-damaged viaduct with a waterfront tunnel — an idea many declared dead Wednesday.

In the latest twist, some state leaders now say a March election could keep the tunnel alive.

A March vote also would reverse the council's earlier stance that voters didn't need to weigh in on a viaduct replacement.

Jan Drago, chair of the council's transportation committee, said she was persuaded by conversations with state legislators Thursday that "we need to go to the ballot and we need to do it now and decisively."

Viaduct dispute


Coming up

Today's special Seattle City Council meeting starts at 12:45 p.m. at City Hall, 600 Fourth Ave., second floor.

State House leaders plan to move ahead with replacing the viaduct with another elevated highway, but Senate leaders aren't so sure.

Environmentalists say they'll sue if the state tries to build another viaduct.

Is the viaduct safe in the meantime?

The state says the viaduct is still safe for drivers, but would need emergency repairs if it continues to sink. The viaduct was damaged in the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, and a section has been settling since then.

After the earthquake, consultants hired by the state concluded there was a 1-in-20 chance of an earthquake that would cause the viaduct to fail before 2011.

An inspection in October found the structure had settled a quarter-inch in six months, and would need repairs if it sinks another inch and a quarter.

A majority of the council wants to replace the aging viaduct with a tunnel, but have opposed a popular vote because polls show the more expensive tunnel would lose.

Mayor Greg Nickels and Drago said earlier this week they wanted to hold an April 24 election on a new proposal — a smaller, less expensive tunnel than the $4.6 billion six-lane model that had been on the table.

But Gregoire and legislative leaders said Wednesday that was not an option, and a vote had to occur before the Legislature adjourned April 22. They also expressed concern about the accuracy of the city's cost and traffic-capacity estimates for the smaller tunnel.

They said that left two alternatives: move ahead with a new elevated highway or shift the $2.4 billion the state had earmarked for the viaduct to a new Highway 520 bridge.

The prospect of putting the tunnel proposal on the ballot in March was welcomed by Democratic leaders in the state Senate. The development was met with indifference in the House.

For Gregoire, a date change could put the tunnel back in play.

The governor's office said putting the tunnel proposal on the ballot in March would meet the first requirement laid out by Gregoire and Democratic legislative leaders. Now the city must meet the second requirement: verify the smaller-tunnel numbers before the people vote.

"If the city council elects to have the vote on March 13 they will have met an important criteria that Legislative leadership and I laid out yesterday," the governor said in a statement issued by her office Thursday night.

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, also said a March ballot date changes the debate for her.

But, like Gregoire, she has questions about the city's cost and traffic figures.

"I'd want to hear from the governor what she believes the timeline is for the state Department of Transportation to validate this new proposal," Brown said.

Senate Transportation Committee Chairwoman Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, agreed the new date could change things in the Senate. "Nothing is dead in this session."

The House is a different matter. Democratic leaders said they'll likely move ahead with a proposal to replace the viaduct with an elevated highway. A fallback position for them would be to put the money already set aside for the viaduct into Highway 520.

The new ballot date "doesn't change anything because the basic problem is around being able to confirm that what you're taking to the voters is correct," said House Transportation Chairwoman Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island.

"There isn't enough time" before March 13 for that confirmation, she said.

It's not clear what voters would be asked, council members said Thursday.

Some want Seattleites to get an up-or-down vote on a new elevated highway. Some want a popular vote on just a tunnel. Others want voters to choose between a new elevated structure and a smaller four-lane tunnel. Nickels prefers the latter.

Council members spent Thursday afternoon trying to reach consensus on strategy. They met in small groups so they wouldn't violate the state's open-meetings law. At one point, Drago had to leave her office so there wouldn't be an illegal council quorum inside.

Meanwhile, environmental activists in Seattle said they might file lawsuits to stop the state from building a new elevated highway.

"We are prepared to use a range of citizen protest tactics, including marches and litigation," said Jessyn Farrell, head of Transportation Choices Coalition. "This would be a disastrous decision on the long-term health of the city. I hope we could come to some compromise that averts pitting the city of Seattle against the state." Leaders of the Sierra Club and Futurewise made similar statements.

In another new wrinkle, the Port of Seattle might not contribute $200 million for a smaller tunnel, said Port Commissioners Bob Edwards and Lloyd Hara. They questioned whether a smaller tunnel could serve the Port's need to move cargo.

The city has been counting on those funds, but Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said the city could still build a $3.4 billion four-lane tunnel without the Port money.

Susan Gilmore contributed to this report.

Bob Young: 206-464-2174 or byoung@seattletimes.com

Andrew Garber: 360-236-8268 or agarber@seattletimes.com