Seattle Mayor: PubliCola Picks Mike McGinn

By PublicolaPicks, Monday, August 3, 2009 at 4:37 PM
View Comments

smallpicks9

Ever since 2004, when Mike McGinn emerged as a Greenwood neighborhood leader and reclaimed the vaunted role of "neighborhood activist" from the anti-urban reactionaries who had dominated local politics for so long, he has been shattering the status quo and pointing Seattle in the right direction. His first victory: Turning the Greenwood Community Council into a platform for green density, pedestrian-oriented streets, and smart development (he stopped a big-box development on North 85th St. )

In order, McGinn’s follow-up acts included: 1) Starting an urbanist nonprofit called the Seattle Great City Initiative, which, among other things, helped nudge the city council to pass the legislation requiring the city to add bike and pedestrian facilities whenever it tears up city streets; 2) Defeating the ill-advised $18 billion 2007 roads and transit measure, which would have undermined light rail expansion by coupling it with 182 miles of new highways (and predicting, against liberal establishment naysayers, that it would come back and win in 2008); and 3) Taking the parks levy to the ballot last year and (again) winning—this time, against Mayor Greg Nickels’ vocal opposition.

McGinn, a past local Sierra Club board chair and longtime attorney with Stokes Lawrence, is out to shatter the status quo again. First, he’s an underdog. Incumbent Nickels is perceived as unpopular, but his numbers in the six-way scrum are perfectly acceptable (in the 20s), while his bank account and that of T-Mobile exec-turned-candidate Joe Mallahan dwarf McGinn’s—as do the name I.D. of former Sonic James Donaldson and longtime city council member Jan Drago, who are also running.

Second, McGinn has banked his campaign on overturning the decision to build a $4.2 tunnel along the downtown waterfront, now the consensus option of city hall and Olympia (and all the other candidates).

McGinn isn’t only opposed for environmental reasons (the tunnel will preserve our region’s dedication to the car and foreign oil). He’s also against it because he thinks it takes money away from more important city priorities.

"You can’t use all of our tax revenues and put them into the tunnel and not see that as the most significant economic development decision in the city," McGinn says.

McGinn’s opponents have accused him of being a single-issue candidate obsessed with the downtown tunnel. Having talked to McGinn repeatedly about issues ranging from density to transit access to neighborhood policing, we think that criticism is off base.

For example, in the most timely and on-point  of any candidate in the race, McGinn has declared he will redirect resources (some of them, yes, from the tunnel) toward city programs that help kids in public schools; and dramatically, if the schools don’t improve within two years, he says, he’ll take them over.

"We have to make the case to the public about what a different vision would look like," McGinn says. "I’d love to have all the elected officials competing for who could do the best job for our schools."

PubliCola applauds McGinn’s position, which dovetails with President Obama’s education platform.

Nickels has the right agenda,  but he’s too polarizing to lead effectively.

T-Mobile executive Joe Mallahan has made vague promise to remake the city using his skill as a private sector manager. He also seems to be coming up with campaign themes as he goes, most of them simply criticisms of specific Nickels blunders.

Longtime city council member Jan Drago is a talented legislator, but she lacks vision as a candidate. On the campaign trail, she’s been underwhelming and rambling, and her recent 16-page "A Blueprint for Our Future" (Bullet Point: "Increase training and job opportunities" …. white space, white space, white space … ) was a bit embarrassing.

We chose not to interview former Seattle Supersonic James Donaldson, viaduct-rebuild champion Elizabeth Campbell, or matchmaker Norman Sigler. After seeing Donaldson speak at numerous forums and meeting him informally several times, we weren’t impressed with the caliber of his statements or grasp of the issues in the campaign. Both Sigler and Campbell seem unqualified for the job.

PubliCola wants McGinn to make it through to the general election, where we hope he’ll expand on his already well-calibrated campaign theme of greening the city’s priorities and fixing our public schools.

PubliCola picks McGinn.

Full disclosure: PubliCola’s cofounder and advisor Sandeep Kaushik works for Mayor Greg Nickels; PubliCola advisory board member Mark Matassa is consulting for Jan Drago; and our ObamaNerd columnist works for Joe Mallahan. We’ve explained our endorsement process fully here (in short, Kaushik, ObamaNerd, and Matassa had nothing to do with our mayoral endorsement process).

  • Ben
    I think it was a poor choice to not formally talk with Donaldson, it makes your article seem like it was pre-determined before it was written (which it likely was). your bias is too evident.

    That and you said a lot about this guy, but still what I got out of it was this is the anti-tunnel guy.
  • Walkable Greenwood
    If you found a single fallacy David, you would have noted it. Those who know him, know exactly what I'm saying. Those who don't please consider personal experience over rhetoric.
  • David L.
    @36 (@34)

    It would take an equally inappropriate length message to explain the many fallacies in your message.

    Your pain of not being listened to or taken seriously comes through quite loudly--unfortunately, this posting probably helps people understand why that happens to you.
  • Walkable Greenwood
    McGinn is a self-aggrandizing arrogant obstructionist ineffective guy with a thirst for political power that trumps all. Anything that doesn't have his name on it for his resume gets short shrift. If you squint, you cannot tell the difference between Nickels and McGinn.

    For the Neighborhood Matching Fund application that Greenwood Sidewalks put together to comprehensively plan and facilitate neighborhood organizing toward a 10 year plan to get the 200 blocks of sidewalks completed that are missing in Greenwood, he would not offer a letter of support. He kept asking what the "deliverable" was. It's called a planning document. There reason we live in PLANNING HELL is in no small part because people like McGinn think you just build one off things or have one off ideas and that's good enough. Well the application went in without his letter of support, it got funded, and some very talented consultants have been selected for the project.

    What McGinn would rather do is build ugly short-lived high maintenance asphalt sidewalks and curbs within 100' of his house and call it good. And that's what he did. He'd just meet with SDOT folks and they'd work out whatever he needed. Shawna Walgren was his pet.

    When Greening Greenwood organized to be a voice for the south end of the Piper's Creek Watershed and other neighborhood environmental issues related to Piper's Creek and suggested a role as a community council committee, he said we could sweep sidewalks and plant posies, but we weren't going to get a committee to advocate for the watershed.

    In Greenwood, he did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when it came to helping the neighborhood with the sinking associated with the dewatering of Greenwood Bog. Additionally, he served on the Town Center Planning group and brought no environmental sustainability to the table. He's a born again environmentalist at best and then only for things that work for his resume. Sound familiar? What he did do is sue Safeway to get sidewalks on his block. Most of his "volunteer work" in Greenwood has been within 100' of his house.

    In all the years as a "community organizer" in Greenwood as community council president he refused to schedule executive committee meetings, actively hone committees or do ANY committee work at all. He would just go from month to month doing whatever he pleased meeting with whoever he pleased. Never a memo, discussion, or engagement of others in issues he involved himself in as a solo act. An island of a leader with an umbilical cord that was directly connected to Nickels until he decided he wanted his job.

    His inability to get to a meeting and actually contribute was again seen recently with pedestrian planning. He came to 3 of the Pedestrian Master Plan Advisory Committee meetings. (Actually about 3 others, but within a few minutes of the meetings wrapping up.) That's 3 meetings over the course of over 2 years. We met monthly as a full committee and twice a month as a steering committee. He seems to see himself as above needing to participate or attend, he just says his thing and that's supposed to be gospel. The last few times he showed, as always, he'd barge in, interrupt the meeting, get on his soapbox and just start spewing his spiel. The last few times it was all about "viral marketing".

    Like telling us what we need instead of a tunnel. If it actually went for a vote, I am quite certain he'd be unhappy with the results. His surface option IS MORE CARLANES just a bit further east at I-5 at no cost savings at all.

    He boasts about the parks levy feather in his cap, but those of us who participated can attest that the process was skewed and inequitable. An excellent example of more PLANNING HELL. That's the kind of deals I expect from him. Greenwood has amongst the worst ratio of open space to residents in the city of Seattle, and we only got enough to fix the embarrassingly decrepid play structure at Sandel Park. What's wrong with a levy process that works from a needs-based assessment? That would be refreshing. McGinn isn't interested in that. What he wanted was a way to say, hey i got the levy through and thumb his nose at Nickels. Again, a part of his resume goals. It didn't matter if it was chaotic and inequitable, he knows people will say yes to parks. How about helping people understand that levies can be directed to respond to needs? That one needed way more help and should never have passed that time around.

    When it comes to big taxes, he wrote the Bridging the Gap voters guide entry and purposefully put sidewalks in there to confuse voters into thinking that sidewalks were going to get done with BTG. That's the 400 year plan for sidewalks which is the Nickels plan. 1 block per district per year. Shameful. And what's wrong with actually taking care of what we have as we go along. So we're saddled with BTG, yet we still haven't adjusted our systems to take care of what we have as we go forward. So then what? We craft more BTGs to make the public think we don't have to take care of what we have with existing tax revenues because big whopper levies will cover butts from here to the South Park bridge? Yikes.

    I'll take Mallahan, thanks.
  • solto
    "Mayor McCheese flak lackey, Sheepdip Cowshit."

    Ever since I can recall, all Feit and Barnett have done is agitate for more infill and anything that will turn Seattle into a sorry, overcrowded mess like New York.

    What a trio of pseudo-progessive stooges.

    Seen any bike lanes in New York? Know what would happen if some greenwashers tried to eliminate traffic lanes in NYC and make bike lanes out of them? Hey, here's thought -- why don't you go back there and see if you can get New Yorkers to go for it?

    Why do you guys even live here? Why don't you get the fuck out and go live in some overpriced, single-cell apartment back east? I'm sure you'd be happier there, and I know we'd be happier here.

    Oh, and confidential to #34, who wrote: "Both of them - both as leaders of the Sierra Club and as campaigners for this year’s election - are clearly in support of the Surface/Transit Option. Like Most of Seattle."

    Yep, you're a liar, alright. "Most of Seattle" voted against a tunnel, but we most certainly never voted in favor of Surface/Transit. It was never on the ballot, for one. It was Cary Moon's hallucination, for two.

    Wow...what a cornucopia of crap. And just in time for Hempfest, too. What else ya got in that baggie?
  • Walkable Greenwood
    McGinn did not stop the Fred Meyer big box last time around. It was the Greenwood Market lease that stopped Fred Meyer's big box. McGinn actually put us in the postition of having to fight a Fred Meyer big box in our urban village by turning a blind eye to the C1 auto-oriented big box zoning in the town center.

    McGinn can't even get to a meeting on time. In fact he can't get to alot meetings he's committed to at all.

    For years his favorite thing in Greenwood was to come to the Community Council meetings 45 minutes late (he was president at the time), tell us for the 100th time that he was on the Nickels transition team and then spend the next 15 minute telling us how important a person he is.

    To my best knowledge, I don't believe that McGinn participates in education activism in Seattle. I have never seen him at a meeting (definitely not a school board meeting), never read a post from him, never seen him analyze and synthesize education challenges with solutions, etc. Why on earth would anyone think the City of Seattle should take over schools? The things they already are in charge of need some serious help, so why wouldn't he want to put their own house in order first? The completely dysfunctional money pit we call SDOT would be a nice start.

    I'd like you to correct your endorsement with the facts. Please.
  • PikeandPine
    If it's Nickels / McGinn, I'm moving to Burien before the general. Seattle will get exactly what it deserves-- either choice is ego-centric, political rather than strategic, unskilled at building consensus, and polarizing. McGinn doesn't seem to get that there is a world behind his white, north of the Ship Canal enviro universe. At the South Seattle Candidate Forum, he talked about "hostile streets" and meant that the sidewalks were UGLY. Meanwhile, gang members are recruiting on Metro buses.

    We need a change, not a continued re-hashing of the Viaduct (guess what-- nobody is going to get everything they want on that, but we need to do SOMETHING). McGinn will get crushed by Nickels. Don't do it, Seattle. I like Burien but I don't really want to move there.
  • Mr. X
    @24,

    The polling at the time actually showed that the so-called "Surface/Transit" option was going to get clobbered at the polls as badly or worse than the tunnel ultimately did. There's a reason Jan Drago and Co. structured the phony-baloney advisory ballot the way they did - and that was that of all the options (well, except for retrofitting the AWV, which was not part of the polling), the one with the most public support - albeit only a plurality - was the elevated rebuild/replacement of the AWV.

    Please put tearing the AWV without replacing it on the ballot - I double dog dare you.

    To those who say we can just widen I-5, I ask where and how? The Washington State Convention Center pretty much precluded that option, which is why many people objected to siting it over an already congested freeway (not to mention the fact that the crosstown routes from SR 99 to I-5 are already gridlocked).
  • McGrumpy
    McGinn is down right cranky when you even ask him a basic question about his campaign. He has been a real jerk to me and I have worked with the guy for years. I had not made up my mind who I would vote for and I asked him a few questions and he treated me like I was asking innappropriate questions. I cannot imagine someone with a temperment like that leading a whole city.
  • ivan
    @ 24:

    Both of them - both as leaders of the Sierra Club and as campaigners for this year’s election - are clearly in support of the Surface/Transit Option. Like Most of Seattle.


    Like most of Seattle? Liar.
  • clerk
    I've taken the time to read these comments. And no, that doesn't make the comment trolls qualified to make endorsements.
  • Ryan M
    @26

    Isn't the fact that you take the time to read their endorsements qualification in itself?
  • Jenny B
    I think Nickels has done an excellent job overcoming NIMBYism to make real progress for our city and our region. I will be voting for Nickles
  • Sharon Fields
    It's an interesting concept these endorsements - while they are busy making out like the great arbiters of politics, or playing kingmaker, they never set out what uniquely qualifies them to make the endorsements in the first place. In the end they are not uniquely qualified, so much of the commentary is based on a certain vanity of the endorsers.
  • Wells
    Greg Nickels' agenda is to serve Seattle's wealthy and pretend he's concerned about the rest. Link light rail is the worst performing new start in the nation and the extension to Husky Stadium or even as far as Northgate won't improve that bottom line much. The extension south to Federal Way, a spur through Southcenter, and a line east through Bellevue have much more potential to guide regional growth and development, reduce traffic congestion and build ridership at a fraction of the cost. UW and Capital Hill are already well-served with transit.

    And as for the Deep-bore tunnel, because it doesn't provide access to Ballard-bound traffic, about 40,000 vehicles daily or 2500 per hour are directed onto the new Alaskan Way with 15-20 stoplights. Even half that much additional traffic there will produce bumper-to-bumper gridlock all day long.

    The best AWV replacement option is WsDOT's "4-lane" Cut-n-Cover, Scenario 'G' produced after voters rejected the "6-lane" Cut-n-Cover because it incurred too much construction disruption.

    The 4-lane version reduces most of the disruption by allowing the AWV to remain in place up til the last year for constructing Lower Belltown. At that time traffic is routed via Broad and a probably permanent bridge over the railroad tracks onto Alaskan Way and enters the completed tunnel portal at Pike.

    The trench is dug in 2-block segments from the south. Normal Alaskan Way traffic is directed around the trench, under the AWV and returned to the surface above completed segments. Excavation debris is removed via the tunnel. This is a manageable contruction process that the Waterfront District can survive.

    It costs about $1 billion less, has a better emergency evacuation system and maintains the all important access to Ballard-bound traffic.

    Greg Nickels didn't even get the streetcar system or its expansion plans right. Not even close. I'm telling you, all transportation planning in Seattle is so utterly incompetent, corruption cannot be ruled out and Nickels is to blame. All he's got is shiny PR and a political machine with a gang of misguided toadies.

    My pick is McGinn in a landslide. Him and Donaldson.
  • Zelbinian
    All that have said that McGinn and O'Brien have not provided an alternative to the tunnel are just plain not paying attention. Both of them - both as leaders of the Sierra Club and as campaigners for this year's election - are clearly in support of the Surface/Transit Option. Like Most of Seattle.

    @20 - You can't reward for someone just for making a decision. When a smoker is trying to decide to quit for a decade, and finally decides against it, is the fact that they made a decision enough, even if it's the wrong one? Hell no. The voters said no to a tunnel and the Northwest is supposed to be this bastion of environmentalism. We can't be building new car-only infrastructure (that doesn't even serve 70% of current use!!). Period. Check out some of the things Mike O'Brien has to say about funding surface/transit.

    @20, 22 - Mike O'Brien will school you on financial planning any day of the week. He has an economics degree from Duke University, has an MBA from the University of Washington, and was the Chief Financial Officer of a major Seattle law firm. He's more of a finance and policy wonk than almost anyone else running for any position in Seattle.

    Read the FriendsOfSeattle.org endorsements of those two candidates and watch the interview videos. You'll learn a lot.
  • Maria
    I don't see how he can do it. Nickel's will bury McGinn's political career in a general election.....deep.
  • Pete Spalding
    I just don't get it...so we don't build the tunnel as Mike suggests....then what will we do? Where will the money come from to do his iotion? OH that's right he has not proposed an option....I love that the Mike's (Mcgonn & Obrien) do not bring forth any proposals for what they will do with the viaduct and how they will pay for that....let's get real folks
  • Ouch!
    @20-- "Let's build it and move on".... It's gonna take close to a decade for them to bury this 1.5 mile of highway.... If it wasn't such a delicate situation we'd have moved on by now.... This is a huge mistake, and I really think it's vital that us inhabitants of Seattle don't let the headache and impatience of the matter cloud our judgement..... The tunnel is a huge huge mistake.
  • SeattleGrrrrl
    I have a lot of trouble with a candidate who wants to revisit the viaduct decision. For years and years, we have been trying to reach a decision, we finally do, and now he wants to revisit it! Arggghhh. Seattle process and gridlock at its absolute worst!

    Yes, the decision made is flawed, but so are all of the alternatives, including the one favored by Mr. McGinn. Let's build it and move on.
  • justin
    @8
    i think you make a good point. nickels has a lot of money and can buy tons of spots that attack mcginn as 'nothing more than an idealist'. mcginn is gonna have to be very smart with his messaging. meanwhile his stuff online is scattered and unclear. his youtube videos are amateurish. he's a great candidate, but i'm crary worried about his messaging/communications...
    did he or his staff take any notes from david axelrod last year?
  • Cj
    @ 16 - I think that they are going for views over 'impress in person or demeanor'. Apparently Joe didn't if they didn't endorse him.

    I think the whole 'style' debate in this election is wack. I mean vote for someone who can get what you want done. who cares about the rest.
  • Beautiful but Poisoned
    dude(tte?) @ 14, the sound is poisoned in large part because of our driving habits. 22,580 TONS of oil and petroleum flow into the sound each year from our cars (not to mention the magnesium, cadmium, copper, etc). stopping that is also about reducing our dependence on cars, hence why the tunnel matters for Puget Sound's health. check the times report from last year http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/flatpages/loca...
  • clerk
    So in a sense you're endorsing Nickels for a third term? Probably should have mentioned that, instead of forcing us to read between the lines.

    The line about McGinn's well-calibrated themes are what really get me -- gotten two pieces of mail from him and they remind me of Eastside Republicans of past years. "No new taxes" and "oppose this megaproject that won't help you."

    There's a chance (not a good one?) McGinn could be a stunning candidate vs Nickels, but as other blogs have said, Mallahan has way more upside. McGinn doesn't impress in person or in demeanor. It says a lot that Nickels outdoes him there...
  • Keo
    I almost voted for McGinn just to see him debate with Nickels for the general election, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. I just flat out disagree with him on the tunnel issue, which he has made the central theme of his election bid. Good man though, I would not mind having him as mayor.
  • Seattle the Beautiful
    The balloting has just begun. Publicola did not anoint the top two. McGinn does not have mass appeal as he is bulldog-like on his stance of no tunnel without offering an alternative or how he would pay for it. If McGinn and his followers were true environmentalists, they would be fighting to clean up the raw sewage being spilled into the Sound daily (Anybody see "Poisoned Waters" on KCTS?

    I hope more centrist candidates make it out of the primary. If there aren't any, we are doomed to the divisiveness of our past.
  • Trevor
    "from density to transit access to neighborhood policing."

    Affordability?
  • dicrisci
    thank you, publicola, for joining The Stranger in endorsing McGinn. I'm so tired of the old Seattle do-nothing crap. It's time to move on, and McGinn is the only candidate with any possibility of moving the city forward.
  • Nighthawks
    I agree. Best race for Seattle is McGinn vs. Nickels.
  • Cj
    "Nickels has the right agenda, but he’s too polarizing to lead effectively."

    I don't know if I buy that McGinn will somehow be less polarizing, in fact from his campaign speeches he might be more. He has proven to not like negotiating or compromising on issues he tackles (roads + transit, tunnel issue & it's not necessarily a bad thing for an activist). He will have to show he can compromise and work with groups that may not agree with him or he will develop enemies fast.

    I also would like more info on his schools plan, that seems like pie in the sky to me, and taking over the schools should be talked about in the community first and I haven't seen much of that debate.
  • hram
    I should add that this was a "no-duh" moment for me. Meaning I think everyone new that Publicola was going with McGinn. ECB and J-Feit have loved him from day 1. It is as if Josh never worked on the Mass Transit Now Campaign and saw how "effective" Mike was.
  • hram
    McGinn would have to diversify if he goes up against Nickels. Enviros are great for the primary but how can McGinn appeal to the center (admittedly this means "the less liberal liberals") will tell if he can win. As of now alot of the "any one but Nickels" people would not easily transition to someone like McGinn who is even more liberal on the things they hate about Nickels and who has no clue or declard policy position on the things that they really hate about Nickels.

    Should be fun.
  • McGinn v. Nickels would be a fantastic race and would provide a choice between two candidates who have dedicated their lives to improving the quality of life in our City; let's hope it happens.
  • I'm not a business man, I'm a
    Deciding what to focus time and energy on is perhaps THE economic development decision, McGinn's prediliction for not investing in an old economic model (Detroit anyone?) and to instead invest in the innovation economy is astute, forward looking, on-point and bold. If we are truly to make an exceptional city, we need to invest in our intellectual capital, and that means our schools. I understand that people are concerned about electeds getting involved with schools, but, in the end, the scarier thing is if they don't. Education and entreprenuerial innovation should be the number one priority for the city and I think I'll be voting for McGinn because I want a Mayor that cares enough to engage, rather than hold the schools at arms length.
  • I agree. A McGinn-Nickels race would highlight all the issues we need most to be talking about in this city!
  • Christi S
    Good call, Publicola!
  • Emerald
    Sorry, meant "general" in post above. Nice job today, Publicola.
  • Quinn
    Could not agree more.
  • Emerald
    Seattle deserves a Nickels-McGinn primary. The rest of the mayoral candidates frighten me for one reason or another.
blog comments powered by Disqus