Jolt
Afternoon Jolt: Dueling Winners
1. Today's winner: Mayor Mike McGinn
This morning, Mayor Mike McGinn laid out a compelling case that city council member Richard Conlin violated the city charter by signing off on an environmental impact statement for the deep-bore tunnel. Speaking eloquently about the separation of powers---"I, as mayor, cannot declare that there is a new law … and the council cannot, by the action of a single member, take an executive branch action"---McGinn argued that Conlin had overstepped the authority of the legislative branch and that his signature was therefore invalid.
"Regardless of what one thinks about the tunnel or about the EIS, there are some fundamental rules regarding how government works, [and] as elected officials we're bound by those rules."
Conlin's limp response---he talked to the city attorney's office, including "an attorney whose name I've misplaced," and they said it was fine for him to sign the document---left McGinn with the upper hand. Not only that, Conlin didn't even do the basic courtesy of telling the mayor he planned to sign the document; he found out from his transportation director last night.
McGinn has the moral high ground in this debate. In contrast to the city council, which got a six-month delay to decide whether they wanted to sign a separate tunnel contract, he was only asking for a single week. The state could have easily moved the schedule for reviewing the EIS back a week---and even agreed to, changing their minds just 15 minutes before the deadline. What would be the harm in giving it to him? Conlin would have done better to stand by McGinn's side and demand that the state back off and let the city review the documents. Instead, he ended up looking like a bully.—ECB
2. Today's winner: Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin
Yeah yeah, Mike McGinn, Esq. made a pretty damn compelling case this morning that council president Richard Conlin has gone rogue, but the establishment crowd has been dying for someone to slap McGinn upside the head as an obstructionist on the tunnel, and Conlin (ditherer Conlin!) came on like velociraptor by defying McGinn and signing off on the deep-bore tunnel.
And talk about dithering. WTF is this wait-another-week-stuff from McGinn? Conlin's action (authorized or not) seems downright electric.
Look, none of the options—the tunnel (the establishment's choice), surface-transit (McGinn's choice), or the rebuild (ugh) has majority support. But people are definitely sick of limbo, particularly the business establishment, which sees the shovel-ready tunnel as an elixir for the economy.
Conlin has now emerged (sorry Burgess) as the anti-McGinn. Not only has he given the tunnel camp some momentum (which it sorely needed), but his own political stock just skyrocketed with the types who can, and want to, donate big bucks to a mayoral run in 2013. —JF
This morning, Mayor Mike McGinn laid out a compelling case that city council member Richard Conlin violated the city charter by signing off on an environmental impact statement for the deep-bore tunnel. Speaking eloquently about the separation of powers---"I, as mayor, cannot declare that there is a new law … and the council cannot, by the action of a single member, take an executive branch action"---McGinn argued that Conlin had overstepped the authority of the legislative branch and that his signature was therefore invalid.
"Regardless of what one thinks about the tunnel or about the EIS, there are some fundamental rules regarding how government works, [and] as elected officials we're bound by those rules."
Conlin's limp response---he talked to the city attorney's office, including "an attorney whose name I've misplaced," and they said it was fine for him to sign the document---left McGinn with the upper hand. Not only that, Conlin didn't even do the basic courtesy of telling the mayor he planned to sign the document; he found out from his transportation director last night.
McGinn has the moral high ground in this debate. In contrast to the city council, which got a six-month delay to decide whether they wanted to sign a separate tunnel contract, he was only asking for a single week. The state could have easily moved the schedule for reviewing the EIS back a week---and even agreed to, changing their minds just 15 minutes before the deadline. What would be the harm in giving it to him? Conlin would have done better to stand by McGinn's side and demand that the state back off and let the city review the documents. Instead, he ended up looking like a bully.—ECB
2. Today's winner: Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin
Yeah yeah, Mike McGinn, Esq. made a pretty damn compelling case this morning that council president Richard Conlin has gone rogue, but the establishment crowd has been dying for someone to slap McGinn upside the head as an obstructionist on the tunnel, and Conlin (ditherer Conlin!) came on like velociraptor by defying McGinn and signing off on the deep-bore tunnel.
And talk about dithering. WTF is this wait-another-week-stuff from McGinn? Conlin's action (authorized or not) seems downright electric.
Look, none of the options—the tunnel (the establishment's choice), surface-transit (McGinn's choice), or the rebuild (ugh) has majority support. But people are definitely sick of limbo, particularly the business establishment, which sees the shovel-ready tunnel as an elixir for the economy.
Conlin has now emerged (sorry Burgess) as the anti-McGinn. Not only has he given the tunnel camp some momentum (which it sorely needed), but his own political stock just skyrocketed with the types who can, and want to, donate big bucks to a mayoral run in 2013. —JF
