Did you send yours?!

just FYI.

who has a board meeting in the middle of the day?

(and, how come i am suddenly reminded of the simpsons episode that was on last night about medical marijuana?)

the email was sent out this morning, so hopefully most people got a chance to act early!

Most public meetings allow comments in writing or via email for awhile before and after the actual meeting. Ah the glories of an open society...

hooray for open society

or, as beck would say:

HELL YES

I don't understand the usefullness of post-vote coorespondance to a Board.....after today the decision is pretty much made...one way or the other.

And frankly, if Nick Licata's assessment of the First Hill station is correct, then we would be better to do without it - especially if we want something resembling mass transit in our lifetimes.

One good thing that can be said about the ST Board is that they are willing to make comprimises and changes in plan in order to get the project built. We all won't be happy with the final result, but Seattle will be an immensely better place to live, even if ST doesn't stop at First Hill.

Was today a council committee meeting with a binding vote or was it a public hearing? They take public comments at both, but I am confused about the vote part.

In other news, participation is good and it is good for them to hear from folks they don't usually hear from.

i see the point you and licata make, but i agree with Ed Murray's assessment.

In my opinion, if ST builds the First Hill station, they're doing the right thing FIRST. Will the line not get as far without new taxes if it is built? Probably.

However, I have faith that, when Light Rail is finished, it will be very popular. Once the project is finished, having key dense population centers services by ST Light Rail will insure that the program is successful and that people will want to add onto it. (meaning, they'll be willling to pay more taxes).

In my opinion, we can go longer later. Let's get it done right the first time and expand later.

I also question why Husky Stadium should be more important than First Hill. Why? The Dawgs play 8 games a year there and are done by November. People live and work in First Hill year round. The First Hill station may not be as sexy as Husky Stadium, but it makes a hell of a lot more sense if you're trying to get buses and cars off the road 365 days a year, opposed to a handfull of Saturdays in the fall.

I do agree that, one way or another, ST Light Rail will make Seattle a better city.

I beginning to re-think my support of both the monorail and ST light rail. Right now, I'd dump the monorail and invest in light rail for the whole city (down the I-5 corridor).

Go ST Light Rail... but go right the first time!

The area right around Husky Stadium is a major transportation hub (520, etc), and is right next to the UW Medical Center and the Univeristy of Washington (home to 30,000+ students and who knows how many employees).

Nothing personal, but if we don't get something built soon, the populace is going to lose what little trust they ever had in the dream of mass transit - and then we'll be doomed to another 30 years of Metro and gridlock.

ST taking so long to build is the reason why the monorial took off in the first place - people just wanted to see some progress - and sometimes we have to sacrifice for progress (something the monorail isn't able, or is unwilling to do). Not going to First Hill isn't a death knell to the project, but losing those federal funds and not getting it to the University in the first leg could be...

nothing personal? don't worry! i'm not taking any of it that way. we're both supporters of mass transit, and we have a different opinion on what should happen.

ST is already being built. i work in georgetown and see the progress everyday. the elevated light rail is looking great. my point being ST has broken ground, repaired a majority of it's bad public image and it is showing actual everyday progress. i don't think it's at risk of getting killed at all.

this arguement isn't rather or not we should build- it's underway in the majority of South Seattle right now. the arguement is whether or not we should make short-term sacrifices that include elimiating the most densely populated area of the city in order to stretch the line a bit longer.

making the line skip over First Hill will be difficult to fix in the future. simply adding length later on will not be as hard.

my larger point is, plan for the long term. i have great faith in light rail. it will solve many problems in my opinion. people in the south end are going to love it. people in the north end are going to want it, and will help to expand it.

in my opinion, this will happen either way- with or without First Hill. why not do it right the first time, then?

and that's what I worry about, because when they go to the voters the first segment won't have been built, and the public will be well aware that the first segment (in a future that includes First Hill) won't make it to the University, as they were promised on the first vote.

That's what I'm worried about. To build the second leg we're probably looking at either a sales tax increase (which progressive Seattle frowns on) or (maybe, if the monorail gets out of the way) an MVET (which will be hard to pass).

We'll see - in a perfect world I'd be on your side, but this thing is so far behind original schedule that I think we need to do it now - and keeping First Hill takes precious time and money.

just because the board votes today, doesn't mean your voice can't be heard.

the line wasn't suppose to go to the airport, either. in my opinion, that was as short sighted as skipping first hill. public input changed this and the airport is now included. (though i do realize there is now discussion about the airport link, too)

things can change, and your voice can make that happen.

keep sending those emails if you agree with saving the first hill station, even if it's after today's meeting.