* The first in 1997 basically blessed the project and created the corporate entity to build it, got 53% of the vote.

* A second in 2000 approved public funds to plan it and passed with 56%.

* A third in 2002 approved a motor vehicle excise tax to fund it, and was more controversial (since real money was at stake) and only squeaked through with 50.2% of the vote.

* A fourth initiative in 2004 was intended to kill the project by directing the city to deny air rights above public streets to the project, and was thumped with 64% voting no.

* It was the fifth initiative in 2005 that killed the project, demanded by the city after a disastrous financing plan was announced (The excise tax approved in the 2002 referendum did not deliver the expected revenue, and a ridiculous financing scheme was proposed to cover the shortfall that would result in $9 billion in interest being paid on $2 billion in construction.) And on top of that, the line was significantly shortened, dropping desperately needed service to Ballard.

The fate of this project is more an object lesson in what it takes to actually accomplish a project with popular support in the face of sustained opposition. The whole project was hated from the get-go by some big money in town who had de-facto control over the city council and the mayoralty. That's why there were so many ballot initiatives - the city government was dragged kicking and screaming by the public, through votes to build the damn thing, in the face of well-financed campaigns against the enabling referendums.

In the end, it took self-inflicted injury by the project staff (bad financing plan on top of a scaled-back green line) to get the public to pull the plug. I don't think it's fair to pin the failure of this particular project on "hating public transport for silly reasons."