July 21, 2009
How His Garden Grows
Mayoral Candidate Mike McGinn Is Quite Contrary—and His Contrary Positions Are Really Smart
Tools
Everyone in the mayor's race supports and opposes the same things, more or less. Except for one guy. Mike McGinn, an environmentalist with bona fides that include heading up last year's park levy and chairing the local Sierra Club chapter, isn't just being contrary for contrary's sake. Quite the opposite. His positions are unexpected, smart, and progressive.
At a mid-July mayor's-race forum organized by Friends of Seattle at the Spitfire, red-bearded McGinn filled out a giant flash card for a lightning round of questions. Does he support repealing the so-called head tax? Passed in 2006, it requires businesses to pay $25 for each employee who drives solo to work more than once a week. The revenue goes to neighborhood street improvements, such as building new sidewalks in the 30 percent of Seattle that currently lacks them. The head tax is something no one cared about—it's only $4.5 million in the city's annual budget of $3.6 billion—until the mayor's race heated up. Soon after mayoral challenger Joe Mallahan mentioned that we should repeal it, Mayor Greg Nickels said he planned to repeal it. (Nickels proposed the tax in the first place, but now that he's seeking reelection he's against it.) Former SuperSonic James Donaldson also indicated that the tax should be repealed, as did city council member Jan Drago (who voted to approve the head tax three years ago).
Stranger Personals
But McGinn is for keeping it. Most candidates can't resist the campaign staple of promising to repeal taxes, but he argues this is a tax that makes sense. The argument for repealing it is, essentially, that in this economic climate, businesses can't shoulder any more costs—and that a tax on businesses, even a very small one, might cost jobs. "It's hard for me to see how eliminating this tax will create a single job, but I do know how eliminating this funding source will take away jobs in the community," says McGinn, a member of the city's Pedestrian Master Plan advisory committee. Since the head tax pays for things like street improvements, the revenue the tax generates is keeping people employed. "People who build sidewalks or repair streets, those people have real jobs," McGinn says. (Drago insists that she can keep those workers employed using revenue from parking fees, which have exceeded forecasts. However, McGinn points out that the city's finances are tighter than they have been in years, largely due to the recession, and that street improvements will be on the chopping block if the head tax is removed.)
And anyway, McGinn has a bigger bone to pick—in terms of dollars, more than 200 times bigger. While his competitors bray about this token tax, McGinn points out the other candidates for mayor are "simultaneously backing billions of dollars for a deep bore tunnel on the waterfront to replace the viaduct." The city would have to shell out $930 million of that money, primarily by hiking taxes and utility rates, in support of an infrastructure that only benefits cars, which might not be the wisest investment for transportation or the planet. He prefers the surface/transit option. When you talk to him, McGinn answers virtually every question by talking about the city and state's current plans for a tunnel under downtown, which every mayoral competitor but McGinn supports (except no-chance candidate Elizabeth Campbell, who wants to rebuild the godforsaken viaduct). "If I am mayor, I guarantee you, they are not going to build that tunnel through town," he told the Spitfire crowd.
It's a wise tack, considering polling conducted by his campaign in late May shows that McGinn jumps from fourth place to a commanding lead when voters are told the tunnel's cost overruns could fall on the city and that McGinn is the only mayoral candidate who opposes it. "I could be like the other candidates and claim that I am for walking and biking and transit and public safety and social services and for spending billions on a tunnel," says McGinn. "But they are not being realistic with the people. You cannot be for all of those things simultaneously, because we don't have the resources to pour $930 million into a tunnel and work on our other priorities."
To earn favor with voters in the next four weeks, McGinn must
capitalize on his contrasts with the other candidates for mayor, or
he's out of the race. He is consistently polling behind Nickels, Drago,
and Donaldson. Ballots for the primary will be mailed July 30 to all
King County voters, who have until August 18 to mail them back. Only
the top two candidates for mayor will advance into the general
election. 
Share via
2
No matter what happens to the viaduct Seattle still has to replace the Seawall. These are separate items, frankly, but both need to be done asap. We would still be on the hook for that. The rest of the $930 million is for road improvements to guide traffic more smoothly. These would also have to take place no matter what the decision (which has already been made btw) with the viaduct.
Does McGinn understand that the surface/transit plan he pushes costs $3.6 billion?
Does McGinn understand that the surface/transit plan he pushes costs $3.6 billion?
3
Awesome to see someone take positions based on reason and thought instead of just sticking their finger into the political winds. McGinn's right on the tunnel (see www.tunnelfacts.com if you still have lingering questions on this issue) and his Schools + Transit + Broadband platform is pretty cool as well when you take the time to look into it.
4
@ 2 - That $3.6 billion you mention includes a HUGE increase in transit service (the tunnel option does not), improvements to I-5 (the tunnel option does not), a surface street (with a great waterfront and the seawall - and the year long SDOT + WSDOT study found that it was pretty much the best alternative on most factors (including traffic) - so basically, you get way more, for way less (and almost no chance of cost overruns); sounds pretty good to me.
5
Awesome to see someone take reasoned and thoughtful positions not based on sticking their finger into the political wind. @2 - That $3.6 billion you mentions would include a huge increase in transit service (not in the tunnel plan), improvements to I-5 (not in the tunnel plan), a surface street and the seawall - and the year long SDOT/WSDOT study found this alternative to work for traffic and basically present the "best" alternatives (they deemed the tunnel option too costly) - so you get way more for way less (and little chance for huge cost overruns - sounds pretty good to me. You can read more at www.tunnelfacts.com
6
Sorry for the multiple posts, I thought things went all cattywompous and they didn't get posted - my fault.
8
The biggst difference between McGinn and the other cantidates is that McGinn actually has a vision for the future, instead of the past. If you can imagine what Seattle will be like in 50 or 100 years, it's folly to think it will be car centric. So the choice is to begin serious planning and infrastructure now, or to further postpone it while dropping billions on a deep bore tunnel that will be functionally obsolete within a couple of years.
Another McGinn idea is to roll out city wide broadband. The future of the region is in smart entrepreneurship, and building the tools for a future economy. We can continue to play it safe and pander to last week's needs, like Nickles and Drago propose, but to do so would make us a digital Detroit - a city that saw change coming, but lacked the vision and will to invest in the future.
Another McGinn idea is to roll out city wide broadband. The future of the region is in smart entrepreneurship, and building the tools for a future economy. We can continue to play it safe and pander to last week's needs, like Nickles and Drago propose, but to do so would make us a digital Detroit - a city that saw change coming, but lacked the vision and will to invest in the future.
9
That $3.6 figure is deceptive. First of all, the tunnel is inevitably going to suffer from the cost overruns that plague all megaprojects. On a project this size that will usually run at about 30%, which means an extra billion dollars. (Check out Megaprojects and Risk, by Bent Flyvberg) That's important because Nickels has agreed that Seattle taxpayers will pay for those cost overruns. Second, with the surface option we're also paying for desperately needed transit improvements in the bargain. We're going to have to deal with the bus system and other transit issues whether or not we build that tunnel, and the surface option is a timely and cost effective way of doing it.
11
@#2 - I agree - This issue is important to me I want to open up the waterfront, and I paid close attention this past few years and to the work of the stakeholder committee. I feel McGinn is being disingenuous at best and outright foolish at wost to think by destroying this deal he is saving us money. The state will not put a cent towards the surface/transit option. not one cent. That money will not be 're-allocated' for projects in Seattle - will probably go towards paving more roads in the rural areas. While I would be fine with the surface or tunnel option, it is clear the surface option leaves Seattle solely financially responsible and will have to pay WELL over the $900mill than for the tunnel.
McGinn, while he has more community experience than some of the other contenders, and I respect that, is more suited as an activist. It takes more effort to get people to agree on something and move forward than it does to tear down an idea. Apart from the tunnel he has no platform on public safety, health, poverty....nothing. The things he has ideas on (schools and buses) aren't even in the whelm of the Mayor's control. Yes this city needs activists pushing government and McGinn should stick to that.
McGinn, while he has more community experience than some of the other contenders, and I respect that, is more suited as an activist. It takes more effort to get people to agree on something and move forward than it does to tear down an idea. Apart from the tunnel he has no platform on public safety, health, poverty....nothing. The things he has ideas on (schools and buses) aren't even in the whelm of the Mayor's control. Yes this city needs activists pushing government and McGinn should stick to that.
12
Here's a little contrast to the McGinn love-fest going on here on Slog. There is NO WAY I'm going to vote for a mayoral candidate who's only issue is stopping the tunnel. I live in West Seattle and ride Metro every damn day, so I've got a dog in this fight. With all the problems and challenges we face, this is what McGinn brings to the table?
Tossing out a decision that has taken years of dithering, political cowardice and an incredibly useless and expensive "advisory vote" to reach? You got to be fucking kidding me.
Oh and by the way, the idea that we would be paying for cost overruns? It's called critical infrastructure kids, and the people who use it and benefit from it SHOULD pay for it.
Tossing out a decision that has taken years of dithering, political cowardice and an incredibly useless and expensive "advisory vote" to reach? You got to be fucking kidding me.
Oh and by the way, the idea that we would be paying for cost overruns? It's called critical infrastructure kids, and the people who use it and benefit from it SHOULD pay for it.
13
At 8: The Mayor's vision for the city laid out here:
http://gregnickels.com/index.php?page=di…
I suggest you read this before you say no other challenger has a vision for the city. The mayor is the ONLY one with a comprehensive, progressive agenda that covers the range of Mayoral responsibilities.
We have light rail today because of the mayor(and future extensions due to his leadership), we have an affordable housing levy on the ballot today because of the mayor, youth violence programs worth $9mil, bicycle and pedestrian master plans, and yes - we have to ability to debate what happens on the waterfront (without the mayor's office VERY HARD work the viaduct would be in the middle of being rebuilt at this very moment, bigger and uglier than it is now).
I have no problem with factual debates - but give the man SOME credit.
http://gregnickels.com/index.php?page=di…
I suggest you read this before you say no other challenger has a vision for the city. The mayor is the ONLY one with a comprehensive, progressive agenda that covers the range of Mayoral responsibilities.
We have light rail today because of the mayor(and future extensions due to his leadership), we have an affordable housing levy on the ballot today because of the mayor, youth violence programs worth $9mil, bicycle and pedestrian master plans, and yes - we have to ability to debate what happens on the waterfront (without the mayor's office VERY HARD work the viaduct would be in the middle of being rebuilt at this very moment, bigger and uglier than it is now).
I have no problem with factual debates - but give the man SOME credit.
15
For those who are interested, we have video of the candidate forum (mentioned by Dominic in this article) available for viewing at
http://friendsofseattle.org/voters-guide…
http://friendsofseattle.org/voters-guide…
16
@8 This morning we contacted Qwest to get faster internet connections for our home office, and we found out that no faster option is available in our neighborhood. We telecommute to a semi-conductor company and slow internet hampers our productivity.
Seattle is falling behind other cities around the world in this and it doesn't bode well for our future. Publicly-owned fiber optic cables for all provides the added benefit of preparing us for smart grid technology as well as amazingly high speed internet connectivity.
Seattle is falling behind other cities around the world in this and it doesn't bode well for our future. Publicly-owned fiber optic cables for all provides the added benefit of preparing us for smart grid technology as well as amazingly high speed internet connectivity.
18
I would like to point out how quickly local politics can change. We have had great mass transit ideas and even a system (the street cars) disappear in puffs of smoke. I hope this mayoral race is our chance for a dramatic swing in the opposite direction. Perhaps this 4th place, "also ran" (as someone predicted he will be) can become the next flashpoint of change. People should rally around McGinn and stand up against the stasis and lack of vision our local government has had toward our future infrastructure. Light rail has started and the viaduct is coming down. When has there been a better opportunity for a more vibrant, equitable, and green city to emerge? I honestly believe McGinn will win and the tunnel will be abandoned and I will be able to get rid of my hurt, limping, gas guzzling Oldsmobile for good.
19
I want to add that McGinn has a breadth of leadership, management and oversight experience--with the Sierra Club, Greenwood Neighborhood Assoc., RTID, Parks Levy and Great City. Great City was founded to look at the scope of issues that encompass a livable, workable, and thriving city--what he would lead us toward as mayor. He was also a partner in the law firm, Stokes Lawrence, where he did business litigation for 13 years.
20
@3,4,5 - Yes, it would be nice to see a politician with true convictions rather than sticking their finger in the political wind. Unfortunately, McGinn is the one candidate in this race who most egregiously violates this principal. McGinn doesn't give a shit about the tunnel. It's the one issue that his polling showed might give a candidate with no name recognition and little money a shot. He didn’t care about the tunnel until his polling told him that he should. If the tunnel is his raison-d’être for running, why did he drone on and on about three completely different topics during his campaign launch pressy? Face it surface option folks, you don't have a hero, you have a political opportunists who sees you as his only ticket to the next round. And it's too bad, because McGinn really is a bright, committed man. It's too bad that with the pressure on, he revealed himself as such a whore.
21
Your Write: Drago insists that she can keep those workers employed using revenue from parking fees, which have exceeded forecasts. However, McGinn points out that the city's finances are tighter than they have been in years, largely due to the recession, and that street improvements will be on the chopping block if the head tax is removed. However, the point of econmic stimulus is to create jobs. We need to keep the sides walks growing. I live in Maple Leaf (a neighborhood in North Seattle, I've paid my full share of property taxes but no sidewalks, the city council is a joke when it comes to living up to the Bike and Ped master plans. Drago, go home and make ice cream. You're a joke.
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/how-h…
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/how-h…
22
"His positions are unexpected, smart, and progressive." BAW-HA-HA. Dominic, you should have thought a little harder before you exposed the awful truth: "When you talk to him, McGinn answers virtually every question by talking about the city and state's current plans for a tunnel under downtown" - and here I thought running a city was a vastly complicated endeavor...
23
@14, McGinn will get the mild-mannered single-issue bears, but not the wild bears, the ones who actually vote.
24
@12 writes, "Tossing out a decision that has taken years of dithering, political cowardice and an incredibly useless and expensive "advisory vote" to reach? You got to be fucking kidding me."
tunnelfacts.com (just read it today, not one of the authors) makes the good point that the voters rejected both a multi billion tunnel (albeit a different design) and an elevated rebuild, and the Stakeholders group recommended I-5/Surface/Transit or a smaller elevated bypass rebuild.
It was Nickels/Gregoire/Sims, the creationists at Discovery, and the state legislature (Frank Chopp!) that threw out this process and imposed the $4.2 billion deep bore tunnel.
tunnelfacts.com (just read it today, not one of the authors) makes the good point that the voters rejected both a multi billion tunnel (albeit a different design) and an elevated rebuild, and the Stakeholders group recommended I-5/Surface/Transit or a smaller elevated bypass rebuild.
It was Nickels/Gregoire/Sims, the creationists at Discovery, and the state legislature (Frank Chopp!) that threw out this process and imposed the $4.2 billion deep bore tunnel.
25
McGinn also had a breadth of leadership and management experience--he was a partner in the law firm Stokes Lawrence, where he practiced business litigation for 13 years. His community leadership has focused on making this city livable, workable and vibrant--Greenwood Neighborhood Association, Sierra Club a,d founding and leading Great City, specifically to convene the diverse interests involved in making our city work well. He is the right guy to lead our city forward at this time.
27
@ CMB - Are you thick? Of course it includes bigger transit investments and $$ for widening I-5 than the tunnel hybrid plan (which, btw includes a lot of transit).
Because it is the *surface/transit option*. Duh. It is a different plan. It does not have the tunnel's capacity so it instead proposes to widen I-5 and add *even more* transit than the tunnel plan proposes. They are two DIFFERENT plans. One costs $4.2 and builds a tunnel, adds transit, and reshapes the roads on the waterfront to aid in throughmovement.
@MallyG - thanks. I'm only pointing out that McGinn keeps shouting about the "$$4.2 billion dollar tunnel!" which pretends that surface/hybrid costs.. apparently.. zero. It is misleading and disingenuous.
That is all.
Because it is the *surface/transit option*. Duh. It is a different plan. It does not have the tunnel's capacity so it instead proposes to widen I-5 and add *even more* transit than the tunnel plan proposes. They are two DIFFERENT plans. One costs $4.2 and builds a tunnel, adds transit, and reshapes the roads on the waterfront to aid in throughmovement.
@MallyG - thanks. I'm only pointing out that McGinn keeps shouting about the "$$4.2 billion dollar tunnel!" which pretends that surface/hybrid costs.. apparently.. zero. It is misleading and disingenuous.
That is all.
28
@20 - Don't post lies based on speculation. I know McGinn personally, and he has been against the tunnel from day 1 and has always and will always stand up firmly for his beliefs (see RTID, Parks Levy and more). It takes serious courage to stand up against the political establishment and say NO to the tunnel. Mike, like many of us, believe that we as a City can do better, and negative posts based on on nothing don't help the situation.
29
@CMB - Are you thick? Of course the surface/transit option includes *even more transit* than the tunnel hybrid option (which btw includes a lot of transit). That is because that is WHAT THE PROJECT INCLUDES. The tunnel project has capacity to *move more vehicles through* than surface only, which is why the surface/transit also widens I-5.
We are talking about TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS. One is $4.2 billion, one is $3.6. These are the facts.
@Westsideforever & MallG - thanks for your insights. It is disingenuous to pretend like surface/transit is free. Hardly.
We are talking about TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS. One is $4.2 billion, one is $3.6. These are the facts.
@Westsideforever & MallG - thanks for your insights. It is disingenuous to pretend like surface/transit is free. Hardly.
31
@CMB - Are you thick? Of course the surface/transit option does different things than the tunnel hybrid plan. The surface option doesn't move enough people, so they have to widen I-5 to keep some semblance of capacity. The tunnel plan includes transit, but less because it retains capacity. It doesn't need to include a widened I-5 BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFERENT PLAN.
So the bottom line is $4.2 for tunnel + some transit and road improvements. $3.6 for widened I-5, much more transit, road improvements. Them's the facts. It's also a fact capacity and traffic times are better for the tunnel plan.
@11, 12 - thanks for the insights. I too think it's disingenuous for McGinn to pretend like the surface/transit is free. Many people don't know enough about the issues and if he wants to be a quality candidate his campaign shouldn't prey on the lack of knowledge of others.
That is all.
So the bottom line is $4.2 for tunnel + some transit and road improvements. $3.6 for widened I-5, much more transit, road improvements. Them's the facts. It's also a fact capacity and traffic times are better for the tunnel plan.
@11, 12 - thanks for the insights. I too think it's disingenuous for McGinn to pretend like the surface/transit is free. Many people don't know enough about the issues and if he wants to be a quality candidate his campaign shouldn't prey on the lack of knowledge of others.
That is all.
32
@18, I agree, this is our chance to have a great mayor who has been working, volunteering his time in nonprofit groups, blue ribbon commissions, the Governor's Climate Action Team (CAT), and more. He has had his feet on the ground fighting for transit, parks, Puget Sound cleanup, affordable housing and more.
We need to get out and vote for Mike McGinn. This is our time.
We need to get out and vote for Mike McGinn. This is our time.
33
McGinn REALLY needs to get on the news more! He has no coverage locally. And he's not running any ads that I've seen.
Unlike Drago, he represents a *real* contrast to Nickels; I think that could make him a strong competitor for Nickels in the general election. If Drago advances with Nickels to the general, it will be the most somnifacient mayor's race in 6,000 years of human civilization.
McGinn has no name recognition, which is all that matters in the primary. His team needs to get their butts in gear and get people familiar with him.
Unlike Nickels and Drago, he's weirdly cute, too.
Unlike Drago, he represents a *real* contrast to Nickels; I think that could make him a strong competitor for Nickels in the general election. If Drago advances with Nickels to the general, it will be the most somnifacient mayor's race in 6,000 years of human civilization.
McGinn has no name recognition, which is all that matters in the primary. His team needs to get their butts in gear and get people familiar with him.
Unlike Nickels and Drago, he's weirdly cute, too.
34
This guy is SO emblematic of why it's so difficult to improve our city. He has only one idea, really. Stop the tunnel.
He has fantasies about broadband, schools, transit but no real plans. His plan for schools? Have the mayor take them over. Great plan. Go read about it for yourself on his site. There's no there, there. Just facile talk about "great transportation" and whatnot. Also, has anyone told him that the school district is not controlled by the city, but by the state. The mayor can't just say, "You're stupid bitch. You're mine now. I'm going to fix you up good!"
Ditto on the transit. He thinks that we can make quick, easy fixes. Nonsense. He says, for example, that we should have both "pay-before-you-enter fares" and "leveling loading through multiple doors." (Again, please someone tell this guy the mayor isn't really that involved. Metro Transit is run by the COUNTY.) But ignore that. His nonsense about multiple doors means replacing every bus in the metro fleet. Good plan, Mike. While you sort that out, please let us know how we can have pay-before-you-enter fares? Thousands of ticket machines? People already have the option of buying tickets and passes before they enter.
And our broke city is also going to build the biggest municipal broadband network in the country. Right. Move on.
So then it comes back to the tunnel. Whatever you think of the decision, it took years to get to it. Haggling. Compromise. Fighting. But we have a funded plan to rid our city of an unsafe eyesore. Mike's big plan? Let's unmake that massive decision. That's not progressive. That's conservative. It would leave us where we were years ago, when several quakes reminded us that the viaduct was getting very old. We currently have a plan to make progress. To actually solve a problem. Mike McGinn is an obstacle, not a solution.
More...
He has fantasies about broadband, schools, transit but no real plans. His plan for schools? Have the mayor take them over. Great plan. Go read about it for yourself on his site. There's no there, there. Just facile talk about "great transportation" and whatnot. Also, has anyone told him that the school district is not controlled by the city, but by the state. The mayor can't just say, "You're stupid bitch. You're mine now. I'm going to fix you up good!"
Ditto on the transit. He thinks that we can make quick, easy fixes. Nonsense. He says, for example, that we should have both "pay-before-you-enter fares" and "leveling loading through multiple doors." (Again, please someone tell this guy the mayor isn't really that involved. Metro Transit is run by the COUNTY.) But ignore that. His nonsense about multiple doors means replacing every bus in the metro fleet. Good plan, Mike. While you sort that out, please let us know how we can have pay-before-you-enter fares? Thousands of ticket machines? People already have the option of buying tickets and passes before they enter.
And our broke city is also going to build the biggest municipal broadband network in the country. Right. Move on.
So then it comes back to the tunnel. Whatever you think of the decision, it took years to get to it. Haggling. Compromise. Fighting. But we have a funded plan to rid our city of an unsafe eyesore. Mike's big plan? Let's unmake that massive decision. That's not progressive. That's conservative. It would leave us where we were years ago, when several quakes reminded us that the viaduct was getting very old. We currently have a plan to make progress. To actually solve a problem. Mike McGinn is an obstacle, not a solution.
35
@31 Nobody is pretending that transit/I-5 plan is free, but you cannot predict the costs of a mega project like the tunnel. They always go over budget and Seattle taxpayers are responsible for paying all of the cost overruns.
The proposed tunnel is only 2% designed and it is the largest diameter tunnel ever attempted in the world. Bigger than the Chunnel and Boston's Big Dig - and we know how expensive those two projects turned out to be.
All of our priorities are in jeopardy if the tunnel moves forward. Schools, shelters, libraries, sidewalks etc.
The proposed tunnel is only 2% designed and it is the largest diameter tunnel ever attempted in the world. Bigger than the Chunnel and Boston's Big Dig - and we know how expensive those two projects turned out to be.
All of our priorities are in jeopardy if the tunnel moves forward. Schools, shelters, libraries, sidewalks etc.
36
@34 You are dead wrong about schools. The Obama administration is pushing for mayoral control of schools and McGinn is first going to try being a strong advocate for schools. We need a mayor who cares about schools, our graduation rate is abysmal.
Nickels was working to get a state highway put underground, was that not his place either? I think his time would have been better spent asking for support for Seattle schools and transit (Seattle transit dollars are going to be cut by 20% next year).
Nickels was working to get a state highway put underground, was that not his place either? I think his time would have been better spent asking for support for Seattle schools and transit (Seattle transit dollars are going to be cut by 20% next year).
37
@ 34 - We do not have a plan for funding the tunnel, and it took us years to get to a decision (surface + I-5 + transit) that our elected leaders threw out after it had been carefully vetted. It was not a "massive decision"; it was backroom deal making without any plan to pay for the proposal (see tunnelfacts.com for more info). Being progressive involves laying the foundation for the future, and that does not involve spending billions to bury a freeway; it involves investing in things that matter, like schools (ask Norm Rice and Obama if the Mayor has no influence on schools), transit service (see the S.L.U.T for how the Mayor can influence transit, for better or for worse), and broadband (Tacoma found a way to pay for it, so can we). This is our time to help elect a real progressive Mayor.
38
Seattle provides 2/3 of Metro's farebox revenue, and if I recall correctly approximately 2/3 of Metro ridership.
If you think Seattle's mayor shouldn't be talking about bus service in Seattle, I think you should think again.
If you think Seattle's mayor shouldn't be talking about bus service in Seattle, I think you should think again.
39
@12: I'm a Seattle taxpayer and I don't have a car. How do I benefit from the tunnel? It should be funded by drivers who use it, not the general public.
40
Isn't he the dude who ran the org that sent me giant dead polar bear themed postcards last year which said that we would singlehandedly bring forth the end of the Earth if we voted for the roads/transit package?
Yeah, I'll totally vote for a total fucking knob like that.
...
Yeah, I'll totally vote for a total fucking knob like that.
...
41
And it's perfect that a knob like Dominic would get on this bandwagon. I guess every Stranger news/political writer has to get on some nonsense clown-shoes candidate's bandwagon before every election. He's all yours, Dominic!
42
Since when is McGin an expert on schools?????? he worked at the SIERRA CLUB people and you are willing to just HAND over the keys to our kids education to him?? Seriously, this is an argument we are having??? I want an expert on education in charge of our schools, and unless one is running for Mayor - hell no!!!!
44
@ 39, I got no problem with tolls if that's the best way to pay for it. But I do have a problem with another decade of dicking around with this issue before action is taken. Or we could just wait for the next 6.0+ earthquake and solve this worst case scenario style.
45
A lot of the commenters here seem to miss something. McGinn is an underdog. He doesn't have the money or the name recognition that any of the other candidates have. The smart strategy for any politician is to take an issue that you care about the most, make it the cornerstone, and make sure people know that you're the guy about that issue.
Does that mean he doesn't have any other ideas? Of course not. McGinn has pretty smart answers for a lot of the questions you've been posing, and you are free to ask him personally via his campaign's Twitter account (McGinnForMayor). I've done this many times, and have gotten a relatively swift - and thoughtful - response.
Keep in mind that you should all keep your tongues civil. A lot of the characterizations of him are the same kind of lazy, uninformed arm-chair politicking you heard a lot of people say about Obama. You don't actually know the man as a person, and therefore you can't possibly know what you're talking about.
Does that mean he doesn't have any other ideas? Of course not. McGinn has pretty smart answers for a lot of the questions you've been posing, and you are free to ask him personally via his campaign's Twitter account (McGinnForMayor). I've done this many times, and have gotten a relatively swift - and thoughtful - response.
Keep in mind that you should all keep your tongues civil. A lot of the characterizations of him are the same kind of lazy, uninformed arm-chair politicking you heard a lot of people say about Obama. You don't actually know the man as a person, and therefore you can't possibly know what you're talking about.
46
I want to know if Zelbinian's on McGinn's payroll, or if he's actually volunteering for the guy.
Sorry dude, but your comment made it way too obvious. Be a little more subtle next time.
Sorry dude, but your comment made it way too obvious. Be a little more subtle next time.
48
IF McGinn had any direct POLITICAL/ELECTED role, he would be a stronger candidate.
For me, he is neither good looking or offering any leadership that I consider important. He is just spouting. He should have run for the council and then worked on a political resume.
Darcy Bruner with a dick. "It is me, I love me, I have no experience but want your vote"!!!
Nickels is looking better all the time.
I can live with the tunnel - tired of years of talk and no action.
For me, he is neither good looking or offering any leadership that I consider important. He is just spouting. He should have run for the council and then worked on a political resume.
Darcy Bruner with a dick. "It is me, I love me, I have no experience but want your vote"!!!
Nickels is looking better all the time.
I can live with the tunnel - tired of years of talk and no action.
49
Hello Slog Fans. I am Norman Sigler - a candidate for Seattle mayor with an approach to running this city that is inclusive of great ideas that lead to the best solutions for our city. We need to move away from the last 40 years of single issue and individual interest-only leadership. All parts of our community must come together to get things done. If we rely solely on government to “solve” our problems, the solutions will be expensive and the outcomes lackluster. I am proposing a new way for Seattle leadership. One where we leverage all of the talents and assets within and between our communities. Please visit my website to learn more and see videos of my interviews during this campaign. www.SiglerforSeattle.com
To address the tunnel: I voted against the cut and cover option and the rebuild of the viaduct in favor of a surface/transit/I-5 solution. We need to reclaim the beautiful waterfront for all to enjoy. However, as mayor, I will not stand in the way of the Bored Tunnel decision. We cannot continue to discuss the same issues over and over – decades after the debate started (1989 collapse of the Embarcadero). What is left out of this tunnel debate is we will need to improve the surface streets, add transit options, and improve I-5 in either case. If you take all of the above together (tunnel, surface, transit, I-5), it begins to resemble a workable solution to the viaduct replacement.
I respect Mr. McGinn and my fellow candidates for mayor. We are all passionate in our beliefs that we have the best solutions for Seattle and can effectively operate the city. I am the only candidate with a pragramatic and practical viewpoint to executive leadership. We need a government that works well with all parts within our community and with our surrounding communities.
My platform is this (I’ve added a few specifics because I know you all like them) :
1. Facilitate partnerships throughout our city and region (public/public, public/private, and public/nonprofit). One example: The city’s healthcare costs for its employees (just like your healthcare costs) have increased by about 40% over the last 4 years. This represents the highest expense item in our budget. It doesn’t make sense for Seattle, Bellevue, Tacoma, Everett, Lynnwood, King Co, Pierce Co, the State, etc to operate their own systems. If we pool the purchasing power of all municipalities to leverage negotiations with health insurers, we could reduce that expense by about 40%. The savings can go toward deficits or back to the citizens in reduced taxes.
2. Listen to and communicate with citizens to understand their needs and offer transparency in all governmental decisions (from the idea phase to implementation). I will have all 10,000+ city employees go out in the community every two months to talk with citizens about how well (or not well) they are being served by their government. This will take place at coffee shops, community centers, bars, restaurants, parks, libraries, etc… Government employees will not be able to hide. Citizens will have 10,000+ more ways to communicate with government.
3. Reduce inefficient costs that are currently buried into our general fund and capital spending plans. This is the time to renegotiate all contracts in this economic environment. When the economy turns around (and it will), we will have lost our leverage. Having worked from 3 airlines in the finance and controller groups, I have successfully negotiated reduced vendor costs.
4. Transportation: Focus on improving/creating more train transit service within Seattle by partnering with Sound Transit in lieu of creating a new transportation agency (ala the Monorail). ST has to become the regional experts of train transit development for communities in the Puget Sound. ST should have built the rail service for W.Seattle to Ballard. I will bring the right groups together to get the service built.
5. Helping the superintendent and School board fulfill their mission to educate all of our children so they are able to pursue their passions and compete on a global scale. One example is instead of closing schools for low enrollment, how about selling the schools to the neighborhoods and leasing back the space to educate the kids that remain. Children and families will not be disrupted by decisions to cut costs. The school system will remove those fixed costs from its books (pun not intended).
6. Creating an economic future that is less impacted by global or national forces. I will place resources in every community to facilitate business growth especially family businesses. I will also locate more resources in communities left out of past economic successes due to infrastructure “improvements” or neglect. All parts of Seattle should thrive.
Being a mayor is not about a single issue but about what is best for the entire community. We must agree about our vision for Seattle and agree to disagree how we get there.
Thank you for your reading.
Norman Sigler
www.SiglerforSeattle.com
More...
To address the tunnel: I voted against the cut and cover option and the rebuild of the viaduct in favor of a surface/transit/I-5 solution. We need to reclaim the beautiful waterfront for all to enjoy. However, as mayor, I will not stand in the way of the Bored Tunnel decision. We cannot continue to discuss the same issues over and over – decades after the debate started (1989 collapse of the Embarcadero). What is left out of this tunnel debate is we will need to improve the surface streets, add transit options, and improve I-5 in either case. If you take all of the above together (tunnel, surface, transit, I-5), it begins to resemble a workable solution to the viaduct replacement.
I respect Mr. McGinn and my fellow candidates for mayor. We are all passionate in our beliefs that we have the best solutions for Seattle and can effectively operate the city. I am the only candidate with a pragramatic and practical viewpoint to executive leadership. We need a government that works well with all parts within our community and with our surrounding communities.
My platform is this (I’ve added a few specifics because I know you all like them) :
1. Facilitate partnerships throughout our city and region (public/public, public/private, and public/nonprofit). One example: The city’s healthcare costs for its employees (just like your healthcare costs) have increased by about 40% over the last 4 years. This represents the highest expense item in our budget. It doesn’t make sense for Seattle, Bellevue, Tacoma, Everett, Lynnwood, King Co, Pierce Co, the State, etc to operate their own systems. If we pool the purchasing power of all municipalities to leverage negotiations with health insurers, we could reduce that expense by about 40%. The savings can go toward deficits or back to the citizens in reduced taxes.
2. Listen to and communicate with citizens to understand their needs and offer transparency in all governmental decisions (from the idea phase to implementation). I will have all 10,000+ city employees go out in the community every two months to talk with citizens about how well (or not well) they are being served by their government. This will take place at coffee shops, community centers, bars, restaurants, parks, libraries, etc… Government employees will not be able to hide. Citizens will have 10,000+ more ways to communicate with government.
3. Reduce inefficient costs that are currently buried into our general fund and capital spending plans. This is the time to renegotiate all contracts in this economic environment. When the economy turns around (and it will), we will have lost our leverage. Having worked from 3 airlines in the finance and controller groups, I have successfully negotiated reduced vendor costs.
4. Transportation: Focus on improving/creating more train transit service within Seattle by partnering with Sound Transit in lieu of creating a new transportation agency (ala the Monorail). ST has to become the regional experts of train transit development for communities in the Puget Sound. ST should have built the rail service for W.Seattle to Ballard. I will bring the right groups together to get the service built.
5. Helping the superintendent and School board fulfill their mission to educate all of our children so they are able to pursue their passions and compete on a global scale. One example is instead of closing schools for low enrollment, how about selling the schools to the neighborhoods and leasing back the space to educate the kids that remain. Children and families will not be disrupted by decisions to cut costs. The school system will remove those fixed costs from its books (pun not intended).
6. Creating an economic future that is less impacted by global or national forces. I will place resources in every community to facilitate business growth especially family businesses. I will also locate more resources in communities left out of past economic successes due to infrastructure “improvements” or neglect. All parts of Seattle should thrive.
Being a mayor is not about a single issue but about what is best for the entire community. We must agree about our vision for Seattle and agree to disagree how we get there.
Thank you for your reading.
Norman Sigler
www.SiglerforSeattle.com
50
Norm,
How about you agree to sluff off however many supporters you may have to McGinn, and I will personally purchase you a tasty treat from Molly Moon's. I have a pragmatic, progressive vision of a ice cream cone in your future. Perhaps we can have a couple dozen city employees on hand to offer their opinions.
How about you agree to sluff off however many supporters you may have to McGinn, and I will personally purchase you a tasty treat from Molly Moon's. I have a pragmatic, progressive vision of a ice cream cone in your future. Perhaps we can have a couple dozen city employees on hand to offer their opinions.
51
On January 13, 2009, the state, county, and city signed a letter of agreement for the bored tunnel currently planned. They commmitted to the following funding:
State of Washington
$2.81 billion
City of Seattle
$930 million
County
$190 million
In addition, the Port of Seattle said that they would come up with $300 million.
True, they still need to officially fund the plan. But that's how multi-jurisdiction projects have to work. Make a plan, fund it, build it. It's moving forward.
Love the plan, hate the plan, it took years to work out. And McGinn, a guy with no electoral experience, says he can somehow do better. While he's also declaring war on the school district, which is exactly what a mayoral takeover would suggest. And at the same time he's building some kind of bizarre system of ramps for all of Metro's bus stops, or buying a fleet of new buses, or something. Nuts.
The only good news is that he has no chance of winning. He's a "shape the debate" candidate.
State of Washington
$2.81 billion
City of Seattle
$930 million
County
$190 million
In addition, the Port of Seattle said that they would come up with $300 million.
True, they still need to officially fund the plan. But that's how multi-jurisdiction projects have to work. Make a plan, fund it, build it. It's moving forward.
Love the plan, hate the plan, it took years to work out. And McGinn, a guy with no electoral experience, says he can somehow do better. While he's also declaring war on the school district, which is exactly what a mayoral takeover would suggest. And at the same time he's building some kind of bizarre system of ramps for all of Metro's bus stops, or buying a fleet of new buses, or something. Nuts.
The only good news is that he has no chance of winning. He's a "shape the debate" candidate.
52
He seems a weak candidate to me. I got a flyer from him yesterday in the mail. All it said was, NO on the tunnel option and then everything else I can fix with platitudes.
53
Well, he'll get the white, bike riding, green, save the planet, hobby horse liberal vote that loves living in the Great White North but adopts 3rd world kids to relieve their guilt at living in an all white enclave.
54
he's a viable candidate. if there's a major city in the US that could have someone so progressive, shouldn't it be seattle? stop hum-bugging, regress a bit and vote for the ideals.
p.s. go ephs!
p.s. go ephs!
55
@13 you fail at Stranger Commenting AND faux-experiential marketing. I'm not sure what's more sad, your attempt or the hourly wage you got while writing it.
@28 are you trying to out-whore @13?
@42 so who are you voting for that is pro-education?
I'd like more info on this guy.
Stranger, are you thinking of actually endorsing anyone?
I'd love to see Drago vs. McGinn come voting day.
@28 are you trying to out-whore @13?
@42 so who are you voting for that is pro-education?
I'd like more info on this guy.
Stranger, are you thinking of actually endorsing anyone?
I'd love to see Drago vs. McGinn come voting day.
56
To throw a curve into this discussion, I think it's time we had a City Council that actually stood up to the mayor instead of rolling over for every developer-subsidizing (tunnel included) idea the mayor has. You get that by either voting in better Council members, or, in absence of that, electing a mayor who is an outsider. McGinn is that. He's got my vote.
57
Mcginn is the only candidate who supports issues beyond what to do about the tunnel. He actually lays out his plan. Forget everything else, he's honest. Mcginn O9!
58
@56 has a good point. We need more people like Dorsal Plants, Nick Licata, and other strong council members too.
60
Yea, i want to hear more about the nightlife restrictions too. Seattle is the no fun capital of the USA... People have to smoke next to dumpsters, wth?! It's a state law, but an ordinance can be established by now to allow balcony or patio smoking like any other civilized city has.
Anyways, McGinn seems like a total granola! Same old stale ideas for the rich hippies, i.e. bicycling, walking, no vehicles, unicorns, etc... Sorry, no one has time and money for this anymore. None of these green ideas can get people out of poverty. He talks about transit ridership going up but nothing about the quality of the ride, most people who ride these filthy slow routes are doing it not by choice! Who wants to spend all day changing buses with mental cases and gang members?!
...and who needs sidewalks if they are not safe. Some of these new sidewalks are right next to traffic without any barriers, plus walking is just not safe in Seattle. People get mugged, killed. We need to get around the region and need safe public space. Not just new public space or just more slow dysfunctional bus.
MCginn is the same as Nickels to me. Check out NORMAN SIGLER and ELIZABETH CAMPBELL, they have a number of very constructive ideas. The rest of the candidates are the same old special interest granola.
Anyways, McGinn seems like a total granola! Same old stale ideas for the rich hippies, i.e. bicycling, walking, no vehicles, unicorns, etc... Sorry, no one has time and money for this anymore. None of these green ideas can get people out of poverty. He talks about transit ridership going up but nothing about the quality of the ride, most people who ride these filthy slow routes are doing it not by choice! Who wants to spend all day changing buses with mental cases and gang members?!
...and who needs sidewalks if they are not safe. Some of these new sidewalks are right next to traffic without any barriers, plus walking is just not safe in Seattle. People get mugged, killed. We need to get around the region and need safe public space. Not just new public space or just more slow dysfunctional bus.
MCginn is the same as Nickels to me. Check out NORMAN SIGLER and ELIZABETH CAMPBELL, they have a number of very constructive ideas. The rest of the candidates are the same old special interest granola.
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (60) RSS