Update 7 pm: Republican Jane Hague announces that she supports the deal, seeming to indicate that the deal will pass after all. Republican Kathy Lambert seems on-board, too.

The deal that was announced last Friday to save Metro from 17% bus cuts while ending the Ride Free Area may be at risk, according to reports on PubliCola and Slog. Slog, in particular, has live updates that don’t sound too encouraging. Apparently, the council has been in recess for many hours while some council Republicans have tried to pressure other Republicans to walk away from the deal. (Transportation Choices Coalition is also live-tweeting the council meeting.)

Overall, the deal is a good one for progressives as well as those concerned with seeing government services operate more efficiently (nominally conservatives), but politics may trump policy.

16 Replies to “Reports: Metro Deal Possibly Slipping Away”

  1. Unbelievable.

    We need to create a PTBA. This whole county-wide transit system idea is dysfunctional and stupid.

  2. Unbelievable. Regan Dunn is a complete COWARD. Doesn’t show up to listen public testimony. Doesn’t contribute to the earlier deal. Then stabs the whole county in the back at the last minute. This is the epitome of the politics of the right these days. Utter cowards.

    1. This is where NW politicians need to learn from those in many east coast and midwest cities. Although it can be sad to see the amount of patronage and corruption that many east coast city mayors have, they know how to make a point about resources and consequences to different constituencies.

      Dunn feels immune, but only because NWers play too nice. Maybe the Dem majority on the council with CE Constantine start to punish his district. They’ve got the power and yes it sucks for people who live there, but people must understand there are consequences for their political and electoral decisions. Its not just about running opposition candidates but using the administrative and legislature majority to your greatest advantage to make the point.

      We’ve created a situation where people would rather have our services die a slow and painful death rather than make a clear example of the costs of these decisions. We think we can win merely by showing people how great these services are, but sometimes taking them away is the best way to illustrate how much people miss them.

    2. Once upon a time, the moderators here considered such comments to be “ad hominem attacks” when Dunn’s name has come up.

      1. If Dunn were not a coward, he would have showed up for any of the public comment sessions. If Dunn were not a coward, he’d be making his arguments publicly instead of arm-twisting behind closed doors to appease his Tea Party supporter contingent.

        Of course if any of the “swing” votes on the Council were anything but cowards they wouldn’t have waited until the 11th hour on the even of an all mail-in election to cast their vote to mitigate potential political consequences.

Comments are closed.