Over on Mayor McGinn’s blog, there’s an interesting entry in the post titled “Community support grows for investing in Seattle’s transit future.” A group with environmental leanings has reunited in favor of the $80 vehicle licensing fee, the same people who not so long ago had a public falling out over the “greenery” of the deep-bore tunnel.

The fussin’ and feudin’ began on July 7th, with the Crosscut article “The environmentalists’ case for the waterfront tunnel.” Written by Peter Goldman (Washington Forest Law Center), Russ Daggatt (Earthjustice, American Rivers), Maryanne Tagney-Jones (Cascade Land Conservancy), and Kathy Fletcher (People for Puget Sound), the article made a connection between support for the tunnel and a peculiar “environmentalism”:

The tunnel will give back Seattle its waterfront and make it a place with fewer cars and less noise and exhaust. It will create an enormous people-friendly park. It will prevent stormwater that drains a busy roadway from entering Puget Sound.

The planned park and stormwater management have, of course, little to do with the tunnel project. And in general, simply running cars and emissions through a tube isn’t considered green. This brought a rubuttal from Alan Durning (Sightline Institute), K.C. Golden, Denis Hayes, Cary Moon (People’s Waterfront Coalition), David Roberts, and Jabe Blumenthal: “The environmental case against the waterfront tunnel for Seattle.” There they argued:

ST5 can deliver exactly the same waterfront design as the tunnel: the same four-lane Alaskan Way, the same parks and bike paths, the same reintegration of city and bay, and – above all – the same eradication of the elevated highway that has blighted our shoreline for half a century and more.

It’s unlikely that anyone was persuaded to shift much, either way. But now, like the slime mold that can dis- and re-aggregate, they’re back together, and lobbying the Seattle City Council for an $80 car tab fee. (This would raise some $27 million annually to be spent in this wise: 30 percent for system preservation and safety, 50 percent for transit improvements and 20 percent for pedestrian and bicycle improvements.)

Dear Councilmembers:

The group of us don’t agree about everything. In fact, we’ve recently disagreed — very publicly and in print — about the tunnel. But we’re writing today to tell you that every last one of us strongly supports the proposed $80 vehicle license fee (VLF) currently under consideration for the November ballot.

The challenges in front of us are urgent and growing, and the need has never been greater to invest in maintaining and updating our infrastructure for mobility, safety, health, and environmental responsibility. We know that the best time to act was yesterday; the second best is today.

Before you is a rare opportunity to do what few cities can do right now. In one legislative act, you can chart a course that creates local, green jobs, improves the safety and quality of our streets for everyone, reduces the city’s carbon emissions, and stems the flow of toxins into our air and water. You can do that by placing this funding package, which invests heavily in transit, family-friendly bike infrastructure and sidewalks, on the November ballot.

We ask you to place this measure before the voters. We are eager to support it. Polls show that the citizens of Seattle want this. Our global climate crisis demands it.

Ask Seattle voters to lead on these issues of global consequence: we know they will.

Sincerely,
Jabe Blumenthal
Alan Durning
KC Golden
Peter Goldman
Denis Hayes
Maryanne Tagney Jones
Cary Moon