Carlyle: ‘Let’s get this out of the courts’

A small group of Ballard residents joined Rep. Reuven Carlyle for a conversation over coffee this morning.

Hot topics included public safety, parking, public transportation, the tunnel and the “missing link” of the Burke Gilman trail. “Let’s get this out of the courts,” Reuven said about the lawsuit filed by a group of Ballard businesses over the city’s plan to fill the gap in the trail. He said he suggested to the mayor’s office that everyone sit down and negotiate a settlement. “There has to be a win-win,” he said, explaining the need to connect the trail. “We have to figure this out. It affects us all.”

If you missed this morning’s chat, join Rep. Carlyle at the Farmers Market on August 30th from noon – 2 p.m. We will have more details closer to that date.

Geeky Swedes

The founders of My Ballard

35 thoughts to “Carlyle: ‘Let’s get this out of the courts’”

  1. Concerning the missing link, get it done now. No compromises, build it as per the city plan. The Ballard Chamber of commerce and the obstrtuctionist industries do not have a case, just too much money to try and delay a much needed safety project. Keep up the pressure on the chamber by avoiding chamber businesses and let them know you want a trail now and you are tired of them wasting taxpayer dollars with needless litigation. Some have chosen to boycott any chamber of commerce member, my approach is to talk with the businesses and express my concerns. Keep up the pressure.

  2. Gee, and I was under the impression the conversation was going center around issues handled by the state legislature — transportation, education funding, health care, etc. — issues that Rep. Carlyle actually has some responsibility for delivering to the citizens.

    Silly me for thinking health care is more important than the bike trail.

  3. That is kind of an odd statement by Carlyle. There is no other appeals process — the business interests already lost their appeal, that's why they sued. So if the lawsuit is dropped, I'm not sure how the mayor could step in and “negotiate”.

    I wonder if that's something Carlyle came up with on the spot as a feel-good phrase, or if he knows something I don't about how this could hash out.

  4. I attended the conversation with Rep. Carlye. The focus of the conversation was education, public transit, city and county spending, Health & Human service programs, the upcoming mayoral election, and a host of other valid and relevant concerns. The ‘missing link’ just happened to be one of them, and was not the focus of the two hour conversation.

  5. The length of the post was about all that was brought up in the 2 hour conversation concerning the trail. The rest of the issues were all addressed. You should please reserve the sarcastic comments for something that you might actually know about.

  6. Arbitration is a good idea, if both parties are open to it. In this case, it can't be forced.
    Maybe it's time for Nickels to host a beer summit on the missing link.

  7. Did any birthers show up!? Those crazies are awesome. I think they're dropping that fight for the health care interruption bit where they won't even let the group talk.

  8. Agree that there must be a win-win. I liked the idea in the forums a few days ago about the chicanes that could be installed to slow down bikes and make them aware that they are crossing through an industrial area.

  9. “Nickels chose Lazyboy Brewing!? Does he know that is an Everett beer and not a Seattle beer? THE NERVE! He hates Seattle.”

  10. “Gee” Mickey, as a daily commuter along the “missing link” I do see this as a health care issue. Bicycle safety (injury prevention) is one way to reduce expensive emergency room “health care”. I also think he has the ability to work with the state insurance commission if any of the business owner's comments are correct (concerning insurance increases due to building out the missing link). These are local and state issues.

    The current health care debate (universal health care) is a national approach (not state); so, Rep. Carlyle's position doesn't directly allow him to address it. Although he can address state-based health and human services programs as mentioned by another post.

  11. I think Reuven was suggesting that they settle out of court before going to court. Since the City of Seattle is a party to the lawsuit, the Mayor or another city employee could represent the city in a settlement meeting.

    An elected official might be a better person to convene the meeting than a lawyer in the City Attorney's office just meeting with a Ballard Chamber attorney.

    Hell, Reuven should invite both sides to his house and just mediate the damn thing.

  12. I wouldn't invite the SDOT to my house. I'd say meet up at Maritime Pacific, several pints of IPA later, let 'em bike the missing link. (it will appear as though the chicanes are already in place)

  13. Not to mention the health benefits of biking/ walking which are great for preventitive care.

    The link helps offer a health/ fitness commuting option for folks who wouldn't try biking now for fear of their safety but would if links around the city were created.

  14. You have it backwards… trucks are not at risk of being killed by a cyclist. What people don't want to recognize is that part of neighborhoods developing is that industries get pushed out of the area. It's just part of how city development works. With population density you add traffic and responsibility to look out for more people. It's a blessing and a curse at the same time.

  15. But the industry along Shilshole will not be pushed out. Your refuse to compromise attitude is the perfect example of why nothing ever gets done in Seattle.

  16. The chicanes and any other solution you throw out here won't mean a thing to the obstructionist industrialists because safety, environment, insurance, and every reason they give publicly has NOTHING to do with why they're fighting this.
    They're afraid that a bike trail will make the area too nice and push rents up too much to afford a nasty industrial business.
    Salmon Bay Gravel doesn't want to give up using the public right of way as if it's their own land. If you wanted to put in a curb and line down that street they'd be out there with pitchforks and torches (both of which they sell BTW).

  17. Frightening isn't it.

    Reality really does bite but life is better when you figure it out and relax.

    SO many bowels in SUCH an uproar.

  18. Here's a short list of the government entities that actually fund maintenance and improvements to the Burke Gilman Trail:

    1) King County
    2) City of Seattle “Bridging the Gap” Levy

    The Washington State Legislature has nothing — nothing — to do with the Burke Gilman Trail. I prefer that state legislators focus on state issues and leave the controversy over local issues to local officials.

    I'm very glad to know Carlyle talked about state issues at the meet-up. Maybe the Swedes could have front-paged those issues instead of the trail controversy.


    And, yes, the fact that state government is dropping tens of thousands of state residents from the the Basic Health Plan is a major issue which certainly should be addressed by Rep. Carlyle. That was my point.

  19. Sorry, Attended, but the post above is titled “Let's Get this out of the Courts.” That refers specifically to the trail controversy, the only issue that was elaborated on in the post. And that ain't sarcasm, that's just a fact.

    Perhaps you would like to like to write a post about the rest of the morning's discussion for the forum.

  20. Yeah, but property tax is an issue, any improvements will result in a higher assessed value.
    Just pointing it out.
    It's absolutely not a reason to oppose the link.

  21. Mickey, I guess you didn't know or understand that the latest lawsuit to block the completion of the trail was filed in superior court (state of Wahington) using a state law (RCW 4.21 STATE Environmental Policy Act) for the argument. So I do fell this is a relevant topic to bring up with a state representative.

    So maybe if there weren't so many frivolous lawsuits there would be more money for state-based “Basic Health Plan”. I know it's not that simple ; but again, isn't the latest attempt at health care reform a national issue.

Leave a Reply