Mike McGinn made his opposition to the Big Bore tunnel a central theme of his mayoral campaign, so it’s little surprise that the media remains focused on the mayor’s continued opposition as the cost overrun controversy comes to a head. But is this focus misplaced?
That’s what I started wondering after a long conversation with Seattle City Councilmember Mike O’Brien on Friday, in which he emphasized how lonely he was on the council in advocating for a more cautious approach on the tunnel project. According to O’Brien, there are eight firm votes for signing a contract with the state, even with the Legislature’s odious (if possibly unenforceable) cost overrun provision in place. O’Brien remain’s the lone dissenter.
That means, even if the mayor were to refuse to sign a contract, vetoing the authorizing ordinance, there are likely eight firm votes on the council for overriding the mayor… and, well, only six votes are needed. And you wonder why council president Richard Conlin appears so confident?
One of the frequent complaints about former Mayor Greg Nickels was that he acted in a bullying, unilateral manner, but if he did, it was only with the acquiescence of the council. Unlike some other cities, our charter does not create a “strong mayor” system; in fact, power is pretty evenly split between the executive and legislative branches. It just often appeared to be a strong mayor system, partially due to the political attitude and skill of Mayor Nickels (and his consigliere Tim Ceis), and partially due to the individual councilmembers’ inability to work together as a meaningful check and balance.
Nature abhors a vacuum, and all that.
But with Mayor McGinn still learning the ropes, and seemingly so at odds with eight of nine councilmembers, there’s really not much he can do to procedurally monkey-wrench the contract. His cooperation would be preferable, but it’s really not necessary.
I’m not ready to write off Mayor McGinn any more than I’m ready to declare a new councilmanic renaissance; in time, McGinn could still prove to be just as big a bully as Nickels, while this council proves just as incapable of sustaining political coherence as those of our recent past.
But for the moment at least, the political dynamic has changed. We in the media might not have fully recognized it, and neither, possibly, has the mayor, but when it comes to the tunnel contract (and barring an initiative), it is the council who is driving the train, and the mayor this time, who just appears to be along for the ride.
McGinn doesn’t matter now and he won’t until he learns to talk with potential allies before talking to the press. There are 8 firm votes for signing a contract now. If McGinn had done a bit of one-on-one lobbying with council members there might be three instead of one standing with him. It doesn’t look like he is learning either. He made the same mistake re 520 and his Seattle nightlife plan. Joel Connelly discusses this in his PI column today.
You are also discounting the idea that the regional press very much knows what the score is and is playing up McGinnn’s opposition to set him up for his ultimate failure when it goes through.
Nindid @2,
Of course, that said, if the cost overrun provision ends up biting Seattle in the ass, they’re also setting up McGinn to be a hero.
How many car-hating, bicycle-loving urbanazis and members of the “design community,” whatever the fuck that is, have been posting on this and other blogs for years now that “the Viaduct must come down AT ALL COSTS!”
This is your cost, bitches. Pay it or STFU. If you don’t want to pay it, fine. Just tell the Legislature, which will be happy to slap up a new earthquake-proof Viaduct for you, and pay all cost overruns.
i liked mcginn’s work with the byrds.
McGinn was lagging in the polls till he backed off on his anti-viaduct stance. He was elected with barely over 50% of the vote. Every city council person did better than that.
It’s been 9 1/2 years since the Nisqually earthquake. The legislature had largely ignored the viaduct concentrating more on eastside freeways till Ed Murray had pushed to get something done on it.
Whether one agrees with the DBT or not it took many years to get this far.
@1 puts it pretty well. McGinn needs to learn to work and play well with others so to speak. It’s not just the viaduct but 520 and aggressive pan handling where he’s been at odds with others.
McGinn ceased to matter after he backed down on his plan to layoff or demote 200 city workers in an effort “to boost morale”.
McGinn who?
LOL @ the residents of Seattle
you sure know how to pic ’em!
retards…
@1 McGinn doesn’t matter now and he won’t until he learns to talk with potential allies before talking to the press.
Yea, well:
Seattle residents agree with mayor on tunnel cost overruns, poll finds
“Nearly two-thirds of Seattle residents agree with Mayor Mike McGinn that construction of a deep-bore tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct should wait until the state agrees to pay any cost overruns, according to a new KING 5 News poll.”
http://www.king5.com/news/loca.....72329.html
Mark @6 – Like it or not, McGinn was right about 520 and panhandling, and he’s right about the tunnel, too. And as Josh @10 points out, he has firm support among the citizens for his positions.
@10
if the mayor and citizens of seattle do not want to pay for any cost overruns, then they should be supporting a new viaduct – the state has gladly stepped up to pay for that.
@11
Right because you agree with him? Don’t see anything on that poll about panhandling or 520.
Hizzoner has done prettty well playing to his larger “audience.” It’s just that he can’t seem to perform well with the other “actors” on stage with him. For this reason, I call his production “Amateur Hour @ City Hall.” Greg made us wince @ his heavy-handedness. With Hizzoner, we wince @ his gaping ineffectiveness.