Comments

1
WTF. Mayor MchSwinn still isnt over the tunnel? Obsessed anyone?
2
i'm not ' over it ' either. and i'm not obsessed.
3
Yea McGinn! Seattle is lucky to have you.
4
I'd hope he'd veto them - he said he would. Of course, he also said he would work tirelessly to convince the legislature to support the surface/transit option he claims to super believe in, but he hasn't lifted a finger on that front. One might be forgiven for thinking he's maybe less interested in solving the viaduct problem than in milking a wedge issue, any wedge issue.
5
All your Tunnel is belong to Schadenfreude.

Got Funding? Got required EIS hearings and EPA hearings at the Fed level?

Nope.

no tunnel for you!
6
Obviously everyone knew he was anti-tunnel. What bothers me is that he so blatantly lied to get elected. He made an about face during the campaign and said that he would not oppose the tunnel. Everyone knows this cost overrun bullshit for what it is--he simply opposes the tunnel. The cost issue is a red herring. Why the subterfuge? He should have stuck with his position during the campaign so everyone knew what we were getting. That WAS the referendum! By twisting in the wind, he has now forced us to have months of confusion, and require yet another referendum on this issue (possibly). In addition to causing all sorts of unnecessary friction with the counsel, the legislature (including the Seattle delegation) and the governor at a time of ridiculous budget cutting when we desperately need them standing together and on the side of sane and progressive budegting priorities.

Perhaps I am naiive, but it would be nice to have a politician who says what he means and means what he says, and then sticks with it.
7
He never lied.

Council never did what they had to do. Trying to short circuit the process is on Council's doorstep in the blame game.
8
Hail mary is a good term for it. If the tunnel project moves forward, and particularly if it moves forward without explicit cost-overrun protections, it will destroy the goal at the centerpiece of his campaign and his administration. It will render moot the primary reason that so many of us voted for him.

Take that away, and he hasn't really done much for us. This fight is also the fight for his political future. Lack of results (especially combined with his prodigious bridge-burning with Olympia and the council) will get a man voted out of office right quick. If the tunnel goes forward, and without cost-overrun protections, he'll have lost my vote and many others. Sorry, that's just how the game works.
9
McGinn stated from the beginning that he's not approving any contract until his original questions were answered. Voters knew this, the council knew this. The only liars are concern trolls saying "oh, if only he kept his word" when he's doing exactly what he said he would and acting on their shrill dares to stop these contracts.
10
Thank the gods for Mayor McGinn, quite probably the first honest mayor Seattle's had in forty years.

Should anything catastrophic take place during the construction of the largest deep-bore tunnel in history, Seattle would be stuck with the bill since no actual insurance coverage has been undertaken.

And the probability, given the soil history of downtown Seattle, is quite high.

This is a strictly and typically, developer-drive suicide operation, and idiotic from all vantage points.
11
So he lost all support from Olympia and MIGHT have the support of people in Seattle. Does anyone seriously see this moron being re-elected?
12
@8, you've put your finger on it with the cost-overrun protections. He said he'd work hard to lobby the legislature to remove the overrun clause he claims is so harmful, but the proof is in the pudding.

He hasn't visited the legislature a single time. He hasn't sought out anybody to sponsor a bill of any kind.

He's happy with the overrun clause in there - it gives him something to keep looking busy by shadowboxing with. For now. But you're right - when the project moves forward and the clause is never heard of again, he's got some fancy footwork to do, and will have some supporters wondering if he was just twisting them around to get himself temporary political leverage.

Maybe he can stir something up on the 520 project. We'll see.
13
I like an elected leader that makes decisions with future generations in mind not just future elections. He said he would ask the tough questions and he has, unfortunately Council and WSDOT have no answers. Veto away Mike! The residents of Seattle of will back you up when we get a vote.
14
So, prediction time - will the Tunnel Funding fail by 68 percent or by 75 percent when it comes to the mandatory required public vote?

Well?

Or will the invisible funding fairy from DC pay for the whole thing?

You can make a camel go thru the eye of the Tunnel more easily than you can make a Rich Despot stop trying to stiff working and middle class Seattle citizens with the bill for a gold-plated vanity tunnel nobody asked for.
15
Got to hell you flip-floping liar...

"If I'm elected mayor, although I disagree with this decision, it will be my job to uphold and execute this agreement," (McGinn) said. "It is not the mayor's job to withhold the cooperation of city government in executing this agreement."

This is from October 19, 2009 two weeks before the election and the only reason he won. I'm counting down the days when his term is OVER!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/po…
16
I don't necessarily disagree with the Mayor's opposition to the tunnel--but what is done is done. I DO disagree with the way that he said that he would not oppose the tunnel, and now he is. I understand that he would argue that he is not opposing the tunnel, just the cost overrun provision (or lack thereof). But frankly I just don't believe him. I think that is just an excuse, and that (1) he hasn't worked very hard to resolve the issue because it allows him to oppose the tunnel without looking like he is (i.e. have it both ways), and (2) if the cost overrun issue were to be resolved, he would find some other issue to latch onto that would prevent him from supporting the tunnel (say, perhaps, that the people should vote via a referendum before he could approve).

Again, if he had stuck with his original position, then whether he won or lost we would not need to have a referendum because the election would have been the referendum. Instead, the voters had no clear anti-tunnel candidate and so now we need Lord knows how much more Seattle process before we can do anything.

That is the problem!
17
I can't wait to vote against this cynical liar. And on principal, I will vote against any city council candidate he endorses.
18
#12 and #16 FTW -- MCGinn hasn't done a single thing to try to change the cost overrun clause, and it's only the Kool Aid drinkers who can't see what this guy is really about. Yeah, he has the support of the 100 people who comment on here, but I suspect the vast majority of voters are sick of this issue, are pissed off that he lied about not obstructing the tunnel, and basically just want a Mayor who actually accomplishes some things.
19
How is this news?
20
@ 15 for the win.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.