One of the most important measures on the November ballot will be Initiative 83, a measure that, if passed, could halt the construction of the monorail indefinitely. Some think the measure is in the best interest of the common citizen while others believe serves the best interest of wealthy developers.
Seattle voters have cast ballots three times since 1998 for a monorail. The last time was in 2002 when I-53 passed by a narrow 877 vote margin. If the latest measure is passed, I-83 would prohibit the monorail from being built over public land. With construction scheduled to begin early next year, I-83 has monorail proponents, including Cleve Stockmeyer-member of the Seattle Monorail Project Board of Directors and co-author of I-53-seething with frustration.
"This initiative does not say improve it. It says forbid this monorail-forbid any monorail ever," Stockmeyer said. "It's like they're trying to throw the baby out with the bath water."
Although I-83 started out as a grassroots effort, that early image has been tarnished by a large campaign contributions from wealthy developers, including Martin Selig, a Seattle real estate icon. Selig, not known for his political activity, has contributed nearly $200,000 to the Monorail Recall Campaign.
Stockmeyer and other I-83 opponents believe the real estate company owner, who holds the titles for buildings along the proposed 14-mile Green Line spanning from Ballard to downtown to West Seattle, has a personal interest in the project. The monorail might diminish the value of his property.
"This is class warfare," Stockmeyer said. "This is rich property owners denying the public good-denying democracy. You know transit is a public utility like public electricity or public education: it helps working families the most."
However, Monorail Recall campaign manager Tim Killian doesn't see it that way. He believes that monorail technology is wrong for Seattle or for any mass transit system.
"We agree that we need mass transit solutions. We agree that Seattle is lacking in viable options. We just don't believe that monorail is the right answer," said Killian. "Seattle Monorail Project is advocating using this as a backbone for a future multi-line monorail system. No other major city has done that. Monorail works well in theme park environments in very specific, limited capacity uses."
Killian noted another monorail disadvantage stems from its status as a city project, which means it can't receive federal funding. On the other hand, Sound Transit's light rail system is regional, allowing it to receive federal matching funds. When the voters passed I-53 in 2002, they agreed to pay an annual 1.4 percent excise tax on their vehicles.
"This (I-83) doesn't recall the monorail, it just outlaws the construction of monorails," No Recall Monorail campaign coordinator George Allen asserted. "People will still be paying their taxes, there will still be a mandate to build the monorail, it just makes it impossible to do so. He added: "People voted to tax themselves because we needed leadership to get the monorail done."
Furthermore, Allen believes that the light rail system is good for certain areas of Seattle, but can not fathom it being used in western Seattle neighborhoods such as Ballard.
"I live in Ballard, and getting a sound transit version of light rail to Ballard and West Seattle would be hugely expensive," asserted Allen. "I don't think the people of Ballard and West Seattle would ever be served because it would be cost prohibitive."
Seattle City Council member Nick Licata agrees with Allen and also cites the safety benefits of the monorail.
"I think monorail offers advantages over light-rail because it takes it out of the flow of traffic," Licata said. "Light-rail is going down the middle of Rainier Valley and there will be statistically certain deaths resulting from that rail. You look at other cities that have similar systems in similar neighborhoods, you're not going to avoid it. The monorail is going to be safer for people."
But Seattle civil engineer Jon Magnusson, whose projects include Seahawk Stadium, has offered an alternative to the monorail much like Skytrain in Vancouver B.C. According to Magnusson, this system would be more cost effective and is more efficient than monorail. Skytrain-style systems use linear propulsion technology.
A series of electromagnets in the track pull the train forward, which, according to Magnusson, works elevated, on the ground, or below grade. However, he did not offer cost projections in his analysis.
The fight to keep the $1.75 billion monorail project going is not a simple issue, especially when considering Seattle's rolling topography. Killian said a major argument of I-83 supporters is that the monorail will disallow an integrated transit system with integrated fares, and that Sound Transit should be that integrated system. Stockmeyer's rebuttal is that every major city with mass transit has multiple systems such as New York and San Francisco.
Although Stockmeyer's statements about I-83 and what he has called the "neverendum" process referring to the recall may seem a bit hyperbolic, Licata doesn't hesitate to agree with him.
"The biggest problem the monorail has is that it goes in front of buildings owned by millionaires," said Licata.
Whether the intentions of the I-83 backers are altruistic or not, one thing is certain: If I-83 passes, the hope of developing rapid transit in Seattle within the next 10 years could rapidly disappear.
[[In-content Ad]]
