Just shut it down?

So say people who have never liked the monorail. A commenter on the Monorail election results used the phrase (and assumed it possible) "...inexperienced SMP disbanded by the legislature or City Council."

Many people assume that the State Legislature, the Governor, The Mayor or the City Council can just swoop down as an avenging angel -- and with the wave of pen -- just abolish the monorail agency. I'd suggest that both legally and politically it is not quite that easy. In fact it would be rather messy.

Just as a preface, two of the member of the SMP were elected and the balance were appointed by the Mayor and City Council so it will be a bit difficult (but hardly impossible) for Mayor and Council to turn on their own folks (some of whom came on the Board as skeptics, btw) and portray them as wild-eyed dreamers.

Other points:

1. The SMP charter gives authority for disbanding to the people of the City through initiative. On what basis would the State legislature or City Council attempt to intervene and shut down the SMP? Policy differences? That's hardly enough legally (and per item #2) any such attempt will end in Court.

2. The SMP has a stream of income and can defend itself in court for many years. In fact I'd suggest that it is the legal and moral duty of the SMP Board to fight with every means at its disposal to maintain its existence (as a means to pursue the voter-mandated goal of building the monorail.) The Board might legitimately disband itself if it found the project impracticable etc etc. But no Court (assuming the Legislature or Council went that far) would order disbandment this point or for years to come.

3. Politically there is no pressure for the Legislature or Council to attempt to disband it and I don't think even they would want to go there as it is far too dangerous a precedent. The idea that a superior level of government can pick and choose and determine which independently-authorized local government is to continue is not a power that they will want to take up without a showing of fraud or corruption etc etc...If any group of tax-payers wants to do something ill-advised  -- but clearly not illegal or against public policy -- then I don't think that a superior level is going to want to intervene.

The practical politics is important. Suppose a group of Eastern Washington farmers organize in their county to create an irrigation district and such new District is legal under long-standing State law and public policy...as is the case. Then suppose a group of State legislators decide  that the district (after a year or two of operation) should be shut down because...well yes...because why?... but let's assume that it is attempting to establish a water-conserving type of fire-fighting and that the Legislature doesn't like that sort of approach...doesn't believe in the technology. Well I am sure you can start to see the issue. Once the Legislature starts to mess with local authorities on a policy basis, where does it stop? What is the political payoff? Long and messy lawsuits? (Per # 2.)

Does anyone think that the SMP will simply roll over and disband because the Legislature tells them to do so? Guess again. Such an action would be the greatest energizing force for the SMP etc etc..

No folks, I don't think it is quite that simple and I don't think there are either legal or political grounds to justify the Legislature, the Council or the Courts from stepping in. Please do remember that at the last binding vote on this -- less than a year ago -- the voters ratified the Monorail with 63%!

Does that mean that the SMP Board has done a great job? No way. But I don't want to punish myself when the simple solution is a better Board and some assistance -- rather than bullying -- from the Mayor and City Council.

Comments

[bfree2think]

So much to respond to, so little time. The legal reality is that the city has the ability to grant or withhold permits to operate in city right of way. The legislature granted the right under state law for the SMP to operate and decided which taxes it could levy. Without either permission the monorail simply cannot be built.

Therefore it is incumbent on the SMP to move quickly and decisively if it is to have a chance to survive. The city council cares deeply about public perception and if the SMP continues to dither they will turn against the project. This is funded entirely by Seattle car owners. A heavy burden, and one that is quite noticable. Remember, if the monorail goes down it will affect the tax climate in this city for countless other worthy needs like housing, education, our decrepit street system, and much more.

As for the legislature, methinks you haven't been outside Seattle in a while. I was born and raised in E. Washington and have tons of family and friends there. The hostility towards Seattle is enormous. This is sad and misguided as is our urban charecterization of them as idiots. If the Seattle delegation is united in support of the monorail, then you are correct, the leg would likely defer. But they are divided and that gives Republicans with nothing to lose, and Democrats from swing districts an easy chance to distance themselves from Seattle.

I am not sure what you base your legal opinions of whether the SMP could fight the city or the state, but I can guarentee you it would be a public relations nightmare if they sued with my tax dollars.

If you really care about the monorail, it is time for less kool-aid and more coffee.

[David Sucher]

The commenter above is mis-reading my remarks as suggesting some sort of particular action and ends his remarks with a catchy "If you really care about the monorail, it is time for less kool-aid and more coffee."

Such rhetoric is a bit off-target. Nowhere do I suggest that the SMP should go around suing anyone or remain inert. I am openly critical of the Board. But it is important to have some view of the legal and political circumstances in which the SMP exists before one charts a course of action.

This is hardly my first choice, buyt if the State Legislature tried to shut down the SMP I'd have no problem with the SMP resisting legally. In fact I'd think it would have a moral obligation to do so. If Seattle voters want to tax themselves to build something which is otherwise legal, then I can't see that it is much of anyone's business but the voters. It would be more of a PR disaster for the State Legislature than anyone.

In light of the scenes of people attempting to flee Houston and the obvious implications for transportation, I find the hostility from the Mayor, Council and columnists to the monorail to be extremely depressing with regard to our society's ability to deal with problems.

As to what the SMP Board should actually do, it seems clear to me (from my limited knowledge) that the Board should simply adjust the project to the funds available and build a shorter line. If that means going back to the voters for approval, so be it; that is part of the deal.