One of the scariest days in recent Seattle memory occurred just over a decade ago, when the 6.8-magnitude Nisqually earthquake crumbled old masonry walls and set swaying the two-level viaduct that carries automobile traffic along the downtown waterfront.
The viaduct was damaged, but didn't collapse. That was only by fortuitous accident, engineers said later. Had that 2001 earthquake been a bit stronger or lasted, say, 20 seconds longer, the elevated roadway would have pancaked like a deadly house of cards.
Thus began the process of endless studies, debate, attempted consensus -- and eventually lawsuits and recall attempts -- that often characterizes Seattle politics. Everyone is polite (the worst name-calling here happens when one side accuses the other of not being "real" environmentalists); everyone has an opinion; and nothing ever gets decided.
The issue: Should the viaduct be dismantled and replaced with a $3.1 billion deep-bore tunnel project that will carry traffic under and through downtown -- that's what the state Department of Transportation and most of the City Council want to do -- or should the city pursue a much cheaper network of improvements to surface streets and Interstate 5 that will carry traffic around downtown?
That's where things sit Tuesday, the deadline for mailing in ballots on a referendum that is intended to be a final thumbs-up or thumbs-down on the conundrum known simply as the Tunnel.
If the referendum passes, the City Council will be free to sign the last agreements with the state to proceed with groundbreaking for the tunnel, which makes up $1.9 billion of the estimated $3.1 billion cost of the transportation improvement project, in the fall. If it fails, the city and state will likely try to go ahead with the tunnel anyway. How long can you talk about an issue, after all? But opponents believe a resounding public "no" will, at the very least, send a strong cautionary message to City Hall.
(Warning: The language of the referendum is actually so technical and confusing that both sides could wind up declaring victory when it's over.)
The tunnel would be the largest deep-bore tunnel ever constructed, stacking cars vertically inside a 57.4-foot-diameter underground pipe running 1.7 miles through the heart of the city.
Proponents argue that it would give the city a chance to dump the ugly viaduct and build a "world-class" waterfront that for the first time takes advantage of the breathtaking views of Elliott Bay and the Olympic Mountains.
Opponents say that, with little access to downtown from the tunnel, it would make travel harder, not easier, and would further wed people to their automobiles. They also warn that the $400 million in tolls the state is hoping will help pay for the project will never materialize -- drivers will churn onto surface streets anyway to avoid them -- and Seattle taxpayers will be left to cover the shortfall.
As the sun set over the Olympics, pro-tunnel Councilmember Richard Conlin said the scene from Pier 57 made him think of what the entire waterfront would look like if the viaduct were removed.
In a statement Tuesday night, Gregoire said the vote sent a clear message that "enough is enough."
Even before Tuesday's outcome, the state was determined to press ahead with the project. Contracts have been awarded and groundbreaking is scheduled for early next month. The tunnel is supposed to be completed by December 2015.
The referendum was seen as a measure of public support for the tunnel, even if the actual ballot language was on a narrow question of whether the City Council should approve technical agreements with the state on the project.
Barring a major turnaround in later vote counts, Tuesday's result clears one of the last political hurdles for the long-debated viaduct replacement.
Tunnel supporters portrayed McGinn as an obstructionist whose referendum would only prolong the process of replacing the viaduct. The Let's Move Forward campaign also reminded voters that on the eve of the 2009 mayoral election, McGinn promised to not withhold the city's cooperation on the project.
The pro-tunnel forces vastly outspent the opposition, raising $447,521, much of it from major business interests.
Protect Seattle Now, the anti-tunnel campaign, raised $95,374. But more than half its donations came before April, when it was gathering signatures to get the measure on the ballot. The Sierra Club was the biggest donor with $13,120.
Two McGinn staff members took leaves of absence to work on the signature-gathering effort. McGinn and O'Brien hosted fundraisers; McGinn's campaign consultant Bill Broadhead donated $5,000 and McGinn's wife donated $500.
Protect Seattle Now, with support from the Sierra Club, Real Change newspaper, and a citizens group that favors a viaduct rebuild, submitted more than 29,000 signatures to the city March 29 to qualify the referendum for the ballot. That day, City Attorney Pete Holmes filed a lawsuit challenging the measure's legality.
King County Superior Court Judge Laura Gene Middaugh ruled in May that one clause of the council ordinance adopting the tunnel agreements could go to voters as a referendum. That clause directs the council to give notice to the state to proceed once the final environmental reviews are completed and the project is approved by the federal government.
The narrow, procedural ruling left tunnel backers arguing that the vote would have no legal effect on the project, while McGinn and anti-tunnel activists said it would be a referendum on whether the city supported the project. Faced with poor poll numbers on their favored surface-transit option, tunnel opponents were left criticizing the tunnel but offering no funded alternative.
Local leaders across the country were presented Tuesday with the results of a report that calls for the end of a controversial Department of Homeland Security program involving local officials in immigration enforcement.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement program, known as Secure Communities, seeks to find unauthorized immigrants who have criminal records and deport them. According to ICE, the program is a "simple and common sense" way to carry out its agency's priorities, which include the removal of those who pose a threat to the public or are repeat immigration offenders.
But the report, written by a coalition of community organizations under the umbrella of the National Community Advisory Committee, found that a large number of immigrants being deported were not criminals and that it distracts from local police work.
In more than half a dozen cities Tuesday, groups of activists -- ranging from a handful to dozens -- presented the report to local leaders in an effort to get the federal government to drop the program.
Under the program, law enforcement agencies run the fingerprints of people they arrest through immigration databases, aiming to find illegal immigrants.
Critics have said it results in the deportations of immigrants who are in the United States illegally but have no criminal arrest records.
But federal officials have praised the program, arguing that it allows authorities to catch criminals who could fall through the cracks.
Critics of Secure Communities -- including several state governors -- have argued that is not the case.
Touted as protecting citizens from dangerous convicts, the program could split thousands more families, erode trust between immigrant communities and police and cost the president Latino votes if his administration pushes ahead with plans to make it mandatory nationwide, protesters warned Tuesday.
Department of Homeland Security officials are due to host what’s likely to be a heated town hall meeting in Chicago Wednesday about the program.
Just 26 of Illinois’ 102 counties currently participate., including include DuPage, where Procopio was arrested. But the Department of Homeland Security recently told Gov. Pat Quinn and the governors of two other states they can no longer opt out.
Angry immigrants are expected to pack Wednesday’s 6 p.m. meeting at the IBEW Hall, 600 W. Washington Blvd.
“We came to this country for the same reason as everyone else, to work,” said Procopio’s common-law wife, Sonia Perez, one of three dozen protesters at a news conference Tuesday in Pilsen.
“If they take him, I don’t know what I’ll do,” she said, sobbing.
As protesters chanted “Hey, hey, Obama, don’t take away my mama,” Susana Chinchilla, 24, said she is facing deportation after being picked up for running a red light in South Holland in November. Though she was not charged with a criminal offense, she said, police referred her case to Immigration.
Immigration officials emphasize that most immigrants detained under the Secure Communities program are accused of more serious crimes. Statistics from Cook County — which is not part of the program but where Immigration agents can manually check arrestees’ identities through state records — support that argument.
Just two of the 278 inmates held for Immigration at Cook County Jail face driving charges, while 29 are charged with murder, Sheriff’s spokesman Steve Patterson said.
If Cook County was forced to join the program, “I don’t know that we’ll see a big change,” he said.
Protest organizer Emma Lozano disagreed, saying the program would make it “much easier for Immigration to sweep people up.
Republicans lost two seats in the state Senate through the recalls, one short of the three Democrats needed to retake the majority. All three Democrats targeted for recall, including two on Tuesday night, were victorious. Following their two defeats, the Republican majority in the Senate narrowed to 17-16.
More than $40 million was estimated to have been spent on the recalls, with most of it pouring in from national unions and independent conservative groups, as the battle in Wisconsin took on national implications in advance of the 2012 presidential race.
Democrats still say they plan to launch a recall of Walker next year, but at least for a few months the political turmoil that rocked Wisconsin with the unveiling of Walker's union bill in February should subside.
Walker is already trying to moderate, saying after the two Republican losses last week and the release of a poll showing a 59 percent disapproval rating that he wanted to work in a more bipartisan way with Democrats. His spokesman Cullen Werwie reiterated that message after the two Democratic wins Tuesday.
"With the uncertainty of the recalls over, the governor is looking forward to working together with the Legislature and job creators to get more Wisconsinites back to work," Werwie said.
Democrats, still stung by Walker's pushing through of the collective bargaining bill without compromises, were skeptical.
"I believe the governor is afraid for his job and is talking in moderate terms," said Democratic Sen. Bob Wirch of Pleasant Prairie, who along with Sen. Jim Holperin of Conover held on to their seats Tuesday. "I will believe him when he backs it up with action."
Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate said Democrats have "fundamentally changed the face of power in the Wisconsin Legislature" through the recalls. Even though Republicans remain in the majority, Tate said Democrats' picking up two seats and making gains in Republican districts sets the table for big wins next year.
"It's really hard to go five for nine and not be pleased of the progress that we made," he said.
The problems facing our state are too serious for these political games, and the Democrats' permanent campaign cycle," Fitzgerald said. "The Democrats need to start working with the other side of the aisle, not just moving on to their next recall target."
His message was echoed by Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, the former Wisconsin GOP party chairman.
"Liberals should stop distracting voters with expensive recall elections and start helping Gov. Scott Walker and the Republicans get Wisconsin back to work," Priebus said in a statement.
Wirch said what voters want is moderation and compromise.
"They're sick and tired of the extremism they're getting out there," Wirch said.
Wirch, who was first elected to the Assembly in 1992 and the Senate in 1996, defeated Kenosha attorney Jonathan Steitz with 58 percent of the vote based on unofficial results. His district covers the city of Kenosha and surrounding area in southeast Wisconsin near the Illinois border.
Robert Merton, 73, a retired firefighter from Pleasant Prairie, said he voted for Wirch on Tuesday because the senator has always stood up for unions and middle-class values.
"He's done a good job," Merton said. "He's always been there for us."
But another Pleasant Prairie voter said he couldn't forgive Wirch for fleeing the state rather than staying to express his objections in Madison. Don Camacho, a 61-year-old sales representative in the manufacturing industry, said he voted for Wirch in the past but this time chose Steitz because Wirch abandoned his constituents.
"I was (ticked) off at him for leaving the state," Camacho said. "He got elected to do a job. He should have done it."
Holperin, who won with 54 percent of the vote based on unofficial results, said the election showed that not everyone disapproved of Democrats leaving the state during the heated collective bargaining debate.
"Voters apparently think that was more of a good thing than a bad thing," he said.
Holperin is the first state-level elected official in U.S. history to have faced two recall attempts. He survived one in 1990 as a member of the state Assembly after he was targeted for supporting tribal spearfishing rights.
In that race, Holperin spent $56,000. So far this time he's spent at least $319,000 and combined with spending from outside groups and his tea party Republican opponent Kim Simac, total spending is estimated to be at least $4.5 million.
It's estimated that total spending may break $40 million on the nine recall races combined.
The rural district covers Wisconsin's sprawling north woods.
The nine recall elections in Wisconsin this year were the largest ever in the nation's history. Previously, in nearly 100 years there had been only 20 recall attempts, including Holperin's, with just 13 successful.
