Jennifer Robertson, Bellevue resident, supports the B7 option based on the Light Rail Best Practice lessons learned on the importance of doing it right the first time as well as minimizing impacts to neighborhoods. B7 is a better route since it allows better future expansion possibilities, fewer homes and businesses will be displaced, and visibility from I-405 will encourage more regional ridership.

Seriously. Visibility from I-405.

Jeez. Bernie just won’t stop with these mis-informed conspiracy theories.

There IS NO DEBATE on the Bel-Red light rail alignment. So, pray tell how the Wright Runstad conspiracy theory plays out like the self-interested Wallace story does?

The city has been working on re-developing “muffler row” for a long time now. Unless you turn existing arterials into mini-freeways around there, it just isn’t going to pencil-out without light rail.

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/CH2M_HILL_CAPABILITIES.pdf (page 6)

Speaking of “cost effective” bus transit: heads up if you’re coming down from the north:

Update 1:09 PM : I-5 southbound at NE 145th St collision blocking all lanes, verified with camera 12:44 PM – Aid, Fire Dept, Incident Response Team, State Patrol on scene

Bernie is always good for a laugh or two.

If a BRT line actually WAS an effective way to serve the eastside, CH2M Hill would have PLENTY of work to do.

So much for the tired conspiracy theories, Bernie…

(sorry. I meant to post on this thread)

Bernie is always good for a laugh or two.

If a BRT line actually WAS an effective way to serve the eastside, CH2M Hill would have PLENTY of work to do.

So much for the tired conspiracy theories, Bernie…

The difference is that now Wallace can decide on zoning changes and he has a hand in crafting the light rail alignment. Any potential conflict of interest should be reported because he is an elected official and isn’t above reproach, no matter your personal admiration of him. Wright Runstad is not elected to the city council. We know they donate to candidates. We know that companies have influence over local politics. It could be significant. It is not notable to report on their conflict because everything they do has a clear interest. Every subject they broach is specifically brought up to raise revenue. We do not have a similar expectation from Wallace, and why would we?

I understand you’re adopting the town hall style of “discussion” — angry recriminations and accusations of conspiracies — but you’re misrepresenting our work. How many times has Wallace’s property ownership been brought up in our reporting or editorials? I haven’t mentioned it once. That’s because we feel that though there might be an appearance of conflict, we doubt that Kevin Wallace is actually in it for the money. That doesn’t make his proposal that barely serves Bellevue any better.

And that’s the point. You want to take about us and where we’ve failed, or how Wright Runstad benefits from TOD. You want to make Wallace above questioning. But this is the conversation that matters: where do we place light rail in Bellevue? And Wallace, probably a good person with good goals, is suggesting a bad alignment and is doing some pretty serious lobbying to get it done. It’s our duty to push back, because our interest is in the best alignment for East Link. Notably, the interest you’ve made apparent is to kill East Link entirely. We have different goals, and different conclusions.

for Wright Runstad… I doubt many people besides you have even thought to have an opinion on a developlment business trying to make money on development. Wright Runstad is not a member of the Bellevue city council; he/they cannot vote to buy his/its own property. Kevin Wallace is a member of the city council.

Well, certainly folks on this blog want to ignore it. Much easier to point at properties Wallace owns or rents than to look at a 25 acre tract that Wright Runstad bought solely with the idea of reselling after a zoning change. Getting involved in city politics is in your book some how bad? You have no idea how the Wright family operates.

. Do you have any actual evidence that city staff is undermining the city council?

I’ve never even suggested as such. Staff serves at the request of the council. There is a new council elected and it seems you are the one dreaming up conspiracies.