What is the Tunnel Referendum Really About?

After King County Superior Court Judge Laura Gene Middaugh ordered a single section of an ordinance related to tunnel construction to be placed on the ballot, many voters rightly wondered: How does this impact the overall project? Fortunately, Judge Middaugh answered that question in court: “This decision is not a referendum on whether we’re going to have a tunnel or not.” publicola.com

Once upon a time I took several classes with Edward Said, the critic and Palestinian activist. He taught me a lot. For example, when starting with a text -- as this Referendum is, a "text" -- he said to start with verbs and nouns -- what is actually happening. The basics. Who is speaking? Doing what? etc etc

And then once you are clear about the people and their actions, then you can interpret to heart's content. As an old carpenter told me, "First you carpent, then finish." Get the framework right and then customize and smooth things out as you like.

So what puzzles me about the Referendum is not what it _means_ in the sense of interpretation and "the big picture," but literally what it _says_: the small picture. The Referendum says "The City Council is authorized to decide whether to issue the notice..."

Are we literally taking away the power of the Council to decide YES? or NO? If I vote "REJECTED" then am I saying  " "The City Council is NOT authorized to decide whether to issue the notice...?" Seems kinda strange. But that is what appears to say.

Mind, I am very much against the Tunnel and want to vote against it, but damned if I can understands the actions buried in the Referendum.

•••

Here is whole text from the Seattle P-I:

REFERENDUM 1

The Seattle City Council passed Ordinance Number 123542 entering into agreements related to the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement. Section 6 of that ordinance has been referred to the voters for approval or rejection.

Section 6, if approved, would authorize the City Council to give notice to proceed, beyond preliminary design work, with three agreements concerning the State’s proposal to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep-bore tunnel. Section 6 states:

“The City Council is authorized to decide whether to issue the notice referenced in Section 2.3 of each Agreement. That decision shall be made at an open public meeting held after issuance of the Final Environmental Impact Statement.”

Should this ordinance section be:

Approved?

Rejected?

via blog.seattlepi.com