News
McGinn: "Clearly, the Public Wants to Move Ahead"
Mayor Mike McGinn sat down for a post-election night interview with PubliCola this morning, part of a day-long media blitz that had reporters and camera crews lining up outside the mayor's seventh-floor conference room at City Hall.
Sounding notably subdued, McGinn steered the conversation repeatedly away from last night's lopsided tunnel vote---a defeat for which the mayor, as the city's most prominent tunnel opponent, must take some of the blame---to the November election, when voters will decide whether to adopt a $231 million Families and Education Levy and a $60 vehicle license fee to pay for transit, bike and pedestrian projects, and road maintenance.
What follows is an edited transcript of our interview.
PubliCola: Why do you think the tunnel lost?[pullquote]"I can't imagine that any elected official would have done more than I did to try to raise tough questions against the face of the political establishment that wanted to proceed with [the tunnel]."[/pullquote]
Mayor Mike McGinn: The public wants to move forward with the project. I think what was in front of the voters was, should we proceed with the tunnel? And the public said yes. Clearly, they wanted to move ahead. ... We put all this in front of the voters, and what the public is saying is, let's move ahead. If these [cost overrun] issues arise, we'll deal with them as they come up. That's their directive to me.
PubliCola: You ran a campaign based on opposition to the tunnel, and you're still the city's most prominent tunnel opponent. Why did you go MIA during the most important moment, the campaign itself.
McGinn: That's, in some respects, a fair question. I clearly would not be mayor were it not for the concerns that existed about the tunnel. ... My promise to the voters was to ask the hard questions. I made that offer to the city council and the state. I just felt it was really important, before we entered into a project of this magnitude, that the public deserved an opportunity to weigh in. ... I can't imagine that any elected official would have done more than I did to try to raise tough questions against the face of the political establishment that wanted to proceed with [the tunnel]. I went really far, and I put the weight of my office in getting it onto the ballot. [But] the campaign was run by the campaign, and they chose where to go with it.[pullquote]"Frankly, I don't want [the tunnel] to go over budget. I don't want to be the mayor that says, 'I told you so.'"[/pullquote]
I raised questions about the tunnel and they went after me. ... It was not about personalities, it was about the project. Frankly, I don't have lot of time to campaign. We were working on the families and education levy, our city budget, getting the transportation ballot measure on the ballot this fall.
PubliCola: What did you learn from this campaign?
McGinn: What I learned here was that this one was just a lift too far for me. We didn't get the questions raised early enough and effectively enough to really change the course of something that was pretty well set before I took office. ... I think there are things we could have done better in execution. I'm not just talking about the campaign, but about me and my office and what we've been doing. I'm playing at a level higher than I have before and I've got to get better at it.
PubliCola: King County Executive Dow Constantine had a pretty amazing political coup recently, convincing two Republicans on the King County Council to vote in favor of two-year, $20 vehicle license fee to preserve Metro service, obviously a tough vote for Republicans. He did it by bringing together both parties, environmentalists, business, and labor. In contrast, it seems like the anti-tunnel campaign never really built that kind of coalition and relied heavily on town halls and online outreach. Does the relative success of the two campaigns make you rethink what it takes to win?
McGinn: Dow did a great job in helping to build that coalition to take care of that $20 VLF without putting it on the ballot. I've been impressed by Dow's skill. But we got a 9-0 city council vote to put a substantially larger families and education levy on the ballot this fall, which has broad public support, and we've got a $60 vehicle license fee on the ballot that's there because worked with [city council president] Richard Conlin.
PubliCola: But with regard to the Families and Education Levy, how was that a heavy lift for you? It always passes the council unanimously, and the people always approve it overwhelmingly.
McGinn: Look what happened with Bridging the Gap. When it went in front of the city council, it got whittled down. [The vehicle license fee] got whittled down. Look what happened with the Families and Education Levy. When it went to the city council, it didn't get whittled down. It got a 9-0 vote. The coalition was the Levy Oversight Committee. I actually sat down with Tim Burgess and we worked hand in hand to get that passed. ... The feedback we got from the Youth and Families Congress was really critical in shaping the levy.
PubliCola: Your approval rating is around 23-25 percent. How are you going to turn it around to have a shot at winning in 2013?
McGinn: I can't even go there. You guys always want to get to the end of the story. I was at six percent at the beginning of the mayor's race. I just made a commitment that I was going to work as best as I could. Whether or not that's going to make me popular, I don't know.
PubliCola: Do you think the tunnel deal is likely to fall apart---because of cost overruns, revenue shortfalls, or because the machine gets stuck underground---in time for a slate of anti-tunnel candidates in 2013?
McGinn: I'm not making any predictions about what happens on the tunnel. Frankly, I don't want to go over budget. I don't want to be the mayor that says, 'I told you so.' You cannot point to a single day of delay in this project caused by any action that has been taken by this administration. I wanted the policy decision resolved before we let the final contract. We've worked with the state to keep it on schedule. ... Now that we've made a decision to proceed, we're going to keep working to avoid any potential problems. We don't want to see any additional expense.
What is revolved is we're going to let the contracts and proceed and deal with that issue later. If cost overruns arise, we haven't resolved how we're going to deal with that. We haven't resolved how we're going to deal with traffic diversion and tolling on surface streets. How that all plays out, I can't predict.
Sounding notably subdued, McGinn steered the conversation repeatedly away from last night's lopsided tunnel vote---a defeat for which the mayor, as the city's most prominent tunnel opponent, must take some of the blame---to the November election, when voters will decide whether to adopt a $231 million Families and Education Levy and a $60 vehicle license fee to pay for transit, bike and pedestrian projects, and road maintenance.
What follows is an edited transcript of our interview.
PubliCola: Why do you think the tunnel lost?[pullquote]"I can't imagine that any elected official would have done more than I did to try to raise tough questions against the face of the political establishment that wanted to proceed with [the tunnel]."[/pullquote]
Mayor Mike McGinn: The public wants to move forward with the project. I think what was in front of the voters was, should we proceed with the tunnel? And the public said yes. Clearly, they wanted to move ahead. ... We put all this in front of the voters, and what the public is saying is, let's move ahead. If these [cost overrun] issues arise, we'll deal with them as they come up. That's their directive to me.
PubliCola: You ran a campaign based on opposition to the tunnel, and you're still the city's most prominent tunnel opponent. Why did you go MIA during the most important moment, the campaign itself.
McGinn: That's, in some respects, a fair question. I clearly would not be mayor were it not for the concerns that existed about the tunnel. ... My promise to the voters was to ask the hard questions. I made that offer to the city council and the state. I just felt it was really important, before we entered into a project of this magnitude, that the public deserved an opportunity to weigh in. ... I can't imagine that any elected official would have done more than I did to try to raise tough questions against the face of the political establishment that wanted to proceed with [the tunnel]. I went really far, and I put the weight of my office in getting it onto the ballot. [But] the campaign was run by the campaign, and they chose where to go with it.[pullquote]"Frankly, I don't want [the tunnel] to go over budget. I don't want to be the mayor that says, 'I told you so.'"[/pullquote]
I raised questions about the tunnel and they went after me. ... It was not about personalities, it was about the project. Frankly, I don't have lot of time to campaign. We were working on the families and education levy, our city budget, getting the transportation ballot measure on the ballot this fall.
PubliCola: What did you learn from this campaign?
McGinn: What I learned here was that this one was just a lift too far for me. We didn't get the questions raised early enough and effectively enough to really change the course of something that was pretty well set before I took office. ... I think there are things we could have done better in execution. I'm not just talking about the campaign, but about me and my office and what we've been doing. I'm playing at a level higher than I have before and I've got to get better at it.
PubliCola: King County Executive Dow Constantine had a pretty amazing political coup recently, convincing two Republicans on the King County Council to vote in favor of two-year, $20 vehicle license fee to preserve Metro service, obviously a tough vote for Republicans. He did it by bringing together both parties, environmentalists, business, and labor. In contrast, it seems like the anti-tunnel campaign never really built that kind of coalition and relied heavily on town halls and online outreach. Does the relative success of the two campaigns make you rethink what it takes to win?
McGinn: Dow did a great job in helping to build that coalition to take care of that $20 VLF without putting it on the ballot. I've been impressed by Dow's skill. But we got a 9-0 city council vote to put a substantially larger families and education levy on the ballot this fall, which has broad public support, and we've got a $60 vehicle license fee on the ballot that's there because worked with [city council president] Richard Conlin.
PubliCola: But with regard to the Families and Education Levy, how was that a heavy lift for you? It always passes the council unanimously, and the people always approve it overwhelmingly.
McGinn: Look what happened with Bridging the Gap. When it went in front of the city council, it got whittled down. [The vehicle license fee] got whittled down. Look what happened with the Families and Education Levy. When it went to the city council, it didn't get whittled down. It got a 9-0 vote. The coalition was the Levy Oversight Committee. I actually sat down with Tim Burgess and we worked hand in hand to get that passed. ... The feedback we got from the Youth and Families Congress was really critical in shaping the levy.
PubliCola: Your approval rating is around 23-25 percent. How are you going to turn it around to have a shot at winning in 2013?
McGinn: I can't even go there. You guys always want to get to the end of the story. I was at six percent at the beginning of the mayor's race. I just made a commitment that I was going to work as best as I could. Whether or not that's going to make me popular, I don't know.
PubliCola: Do you think the tunnel deal is likely to fall apart---because of cost overruns, revenue shortfalls, or because the machine gets stuck underground---in time for a slate of anti-tunnel candidates in 2013?
McGinn: I'm not making any predictions about what happens on the tunnel. Frankly, I don't want to go over budget. I don't want to be the mayor that says, 'I told you so.' You cannot point to a single day of delay in this project caused by any action that has been taken by this administration. I wanted the policy decision resolved before we let the final contract. We've worked with the state to keep it on schedule. ... Now that we've made a decision to proceed, we're going to keep working to avoid any potential problems. We don't want to see any additional expense.
What is revolved is we're going to let the contracts and proceed and deal with that issue later. If cost overruns arise, we haven't resolved how we're going to deal with that. We haven't resolved how we're going to deal with traffic diversion and tolling on surface streets. How that all plays out, I can't predict.
