Alaskan Way viaduct/City of Seattle
Some of the wiser observers saw this prospect coming, the double-no vote that materialized on the Alaskan Way viaduct issue. The city's construct of the ballot - allowing voters to consider the proposed viaduct tunnel or elevated rebuild options and approve or reject either or both - allowed for several unreadable results. If voters approved one and other rejected the other, fine; but what if they approved or (as actually happened) rejected both? What should be read from that?
The Seattle debate over that interpretation having gone on unabated for approaching three weeks now, we thought we'd take a swing at it.
There is at least a patch of common ground on which to start. Only about 29% of Seattle's voters voted in favor of the tunnel option, which means about 66% voted no on it. That seems a clear rejection of that concept at least.
The argument focuses on the 41% yes, 55% no vote on the proposal to rebuild the elevated highway, and the way it compares to the tunnel vote.