9:00 AM Sun, Sep 13, 2009 | Permalink |
Robert Rosencrantz and Mike O'Brien are facing off for the council position number eight. O'Brien is a financial officer for a Seattle law firm. He has been an active member of the Sierra Club and has a master's degree in business administration from the University of Washington. Rosencrantz is an affordable housing specialist and past president of the Montlake Community Club. He has a bachelor's degree from the University of Washington. Here are a couple of key differences between the candidates: O'Brien opposes the bored tunnel solution to the Alaskan Way Viaduct; Rosencrantz supports it. O'Brien opposes getting rid of the employee head tax; Rosencrantz supports getting rid of it.
In the race for the fourth council position, Sally Bagshaw is running against David Bloom. Bagshaw has been an attorney for 31 years and also served on the Lake Forest Park city council. Her law degree is from the University of Idaho. For 19 years Bloom directed urban programs for the Greater Seattle Council of Churches. He has a master's degree in theology from Princeton. The two candidates disagree on the viaduct; Bagshaw supports the bored tunnel option and Bloom calls it a bad deal for taxpayers. They also disagree about the proposed solution to the Mercer Mess. Again, Bloom says it costs too much without improving traffic flow. Bagshaw says the plan is critical and needs to move forward.
So, tell us what you think of these candidates. Is it Bagshaw or Bloom, Rosencrantz or O'Brien?
O'Brien wants to wreck the city's transportation infrastructure by cutting state highway 99 and going with the fantasy of the "surface option". Bzzzzzzzz. Thanks for playing, delusional moran.
What to do about highway 99? I don't know, but I do know that essentially removing it (which is what the "surface option" does) is the worst possible thing we could do. Preserving the capacity of that highway should be non-negotiable, and any proposal that fails to do that is a non-starter.
I'm not convinced that the deep bore tunnel is the right option, but it's clear to anyone who is honest that the so-called "surface option: is a recipe for disaster. If you think Seattle is gridlocked now, just wait until half the road capacity is eliminated. Any candidate who pretends otherwise deserves the voters' contempt.
I'll vote for Rosencrantz. O'Brien's position on this issue show's he's either dishonest or clueless.
The viaduct has to come down sooner or later, either we bring it down or Mother Nature is bringing it down, I prefer the former.
Built the tunnel and get over the endless debating. It is counterproductive and no surface option is going to improve transportation through the area. Just try driving through it now.
When it comes to the Mercer Mess, there is a reason it is called a "Mess". To keep doing what we have been doing for generations and not fix things somehow believing the problems will just disappear is what has gotten us into this problems in the first place
Bagshaw and Rosencrantz have my vote.
After Mayor Nickels shafted Ballard and West Seattle with his power play on the Monorail he followed up with the deep bore tunnel. Anyone who supports it should be required to discuss how Ballard and West Seattle's access will be served. At least the surface street option doesn't saddle us with a huge bill and lack of access for the decade or more it will take to build the deep bore tunnel.
The really inspiring candidate here is David Bloom. He is actually speaking for the people of the city. Sally Bagshaw, in response to a question about Mercer, responded that it would connect neighborhoods. What neighborhoods? The Mercer Mess is largely caused by people who don't live in Seattle but use that corridor to get onto the freeway. It is not a neighborhood issue. Everything David Bloom says is pointing to consideration for the citizens of this city and that is refreshing. Seattle was a middle class and working class city and the city council would do well to remember that.
I would vote for Susan Hutchison