(no subject)

[gfish]

NO / NO!

Comments

[ashley-y.livejournal.com]

I got a ballot in the mail, but I just couldn't figure out what the best option was, so I left it.

[najalaise.livejournal.com]

Yes!

Counting chickens, etcetera

[loree.livejournal.com]

What the article utterly fails to mention is that only 30% of the ballots have been counted so far, at least as of the local news report at 8am today.

[samildanach.livejournal.com]

I'm happy that no/no won, but this was either a terribly thought-out election or a brilliant piece of anti-democratic political engineering. Consider: at this point, 45% voted yes on viaduct/no on tunnel, 30% voted yes on tunnel/no on viaduct, and 25% voted no/no. (This assumes that yes/yes votes are down at the noise level.) Something close to 75% voted for expanding road capacity in some form.

[caladri.livejournal.com]

But with the precise message sent by voters unclear, the future of the 54-year-old viaduct remains unsettled.

If even the local news can't make out the message of the vote, then I daresay that it's still a failure at this point.

[ilmarinen.livejournal.com]

We fail at infrastructure planning.

However, the longer it takes to make a decision, the harder it will be to actually build anything, so, by default, the surface/transit option just has to obstruct the other options long enough . . .

If the City politicians think it will continue to get them elected, they will fight a new viaduct tooth and nail . . . and although the state could theoretically pull rank, in practice the City can delay indefinitely.

Hurray for political gridlock.

(I myself voted yes for tunnel, as the better option of the two. Disapointed the tunnel lost worse than the viaduct--not that it "lost" just that more people disliked it than the viaduct.)

-B.