A bill co-sponsored by Senate transportation chair Mary Margaret Haugen (D-10) and North Seattle Sen. Ken Jacobsen (D-46) would severely restrict Seattle’s say in major state construction projects like reconstruction of the SR-520 bridge and the deep-bore tunnel along the waterfront.
Senate Transportation Committee Chair Sen. Mary Margaert Haugen (D-10)
Essentially, the bill would exempt the state department of transportation from the requirement to get local government permits to build state highway projects—a clear swipe at Seattle, which has two major state highway projects—the waterfront tunnel and replacement of the 520 bridge over Lake Washington—in the pipeline.
Specifically, the state transportation department would no longer be “required to obtain local government master use permits, conditional use permits, special use permits, or other similar local zoning permits for staging areas related to the construction of state highways.”
Additionally, under the bill, any street use permits obtained by the state for major state road projects (i.e., the tunnel) would be “presumed approved as submitted” and could only be appealed in superior court, not to a local hearing examiner “or through any other local appeal process.”
Mayor Mike McGinn’s communications director, Mark Matassa, had not yet seen the legislation and said he would get back to me later this afternoon.
Cary Moon, head of the anti-tunnel People’s Waterfront Coalition, calls the bill “incredibly ominous. It basically says the state does not have to get local permits for its projects, and it can just do whatever it wants.” Under current law, “you’ve got to get local approval, because you can’t just come in and shut down the city,” Moon says.
Moon sees the bill as a preemptive strike against Mayor Mike McGinn. Not only does McGinn oppose the waterfront tunnel (saying only that he “won’t stand in the way” of construction), he supports building light rail across the 520 bridge—a position that puts him in conflict with transportation leaders in the legislature, who want to build a six-lane bridge with two HOV lanes and a new drawbridge over the Montlake Cut. McGinn, along with state House Speaker Frank Chopp (D-43) and Jamie Pedersen (D-43) has also said the state’s preferred option would adversely impact neighborhoods on the west side of 520 and send too much traffic through the Arboretum.
State Sen. Ed Murray (D-43), who recently wrote an op/ed for Horse’s Ass arguing that the city of Seattle has been missing in action on the 520 issue, believes the legislation is aimed at limiting the city’s input on 520. “[Legislators are] very concerned that the city will do what Mercer Island did for almost 20 years, which is take absolutely no action,” Murray says.
Murray believes the legislation won’t hold up in court. “I think cities have the right to make decisions on their own jurisdiction,” Murray says. ” I ultimately don’t think it will pass. … I don’t see members voting to allow the state to come in” and override decisions made by local jurisdictions, Murray says.
I have calls in to Haugen and both the city and state transportation departments to find out more about the implications of the bill for Seattle.
Tweet
Extraordinary.
The Democrats conspire to lift McGinn out of the cul de sac he elected himself into.
At the same time he becomes a powerless pawn in the Big Money game.
I’m laughing. Hardily!
New mayor. Same crappy relationship with Olympia.
@1 It’s “Heartily,” hardly “Hardily.”
I’ve joined the Publicola grammar police!
Great! If we Seattleites have no say then the state can pickup all of the cost overruns.
@3
hardily [ˈhɑːdɪlɪ]
adv
in a hardy manner; toughly or boldly
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hardily
@4 Hahaha. “Can”; certainly. More accurately: “will not.”
So…cue the outrage of Seattle’s elected officials…happening any moment now…really, I’m sure they are almost here, patience please…chirp, chirp, chirp…ahem… [hey! cue the music! cut to commercial...somebody find out where they've all gone to!]
Seriously, Seattle needs to learn how to wield it’s power. We continue to be played by Olympia. And, to pre-empt criticism of that point, we don’t wield our power to be assholes, we do it to safeguard the rights and responsibilities of our citizens and our city, in the same manner that elected officials from Spokane would naturally come together to wield their power.
@2, I hope you’re not suggesting that Mayor McGinn has had sufficient time to work on this?
again, damn typos. give me edit.
I stand corrected. That should teach me to waste comment space correcting people’s typos.
I am interested in whether others agree with your conspiracy theory. Is this just a straightforward FU, to Seattle, or is it as convoluted as you suggest?
McGinn as a pawn/figurehead is actually a very comforting concept. I can’t help it that he kinda scares me still.
@8: OK, I’ll give him more time to listen to the voters and think about it. He never has to actually do anything.
Snarkiness aside, Olympia took the initiative to show that they don’t trust him and think they can push him around.
I’m waiting to see less blah, blah, blah and some more leadership. And the seawall thing is a confusing and polarizing way to start.
Remember, this impacts every local government in the state, not just Seattle. So while Haugen et. al. may have launched this as a preemptive strike against McGinn, I can’t imagine that any city would approve of this legislation. I predict this either fails or backfires. Where’s the AWC on this one?
Boy with friends like these in the state senate…
What make the state to run our affairs(Seattliets), Last-time i checked the State was 2.9 Billion in the red. We are city with great mayor and strong city Council. We are capable of running our affairs. Olympia keep on advocating unpopular Tunnel.citizens of Seattle are recording your actions. November is around the corner
What impact would this have on Bellevue’s ability to deny permits for the East light rail construction?
Paging Pete Holmes for the major lawsuit versus the state if this passes.
@16…you mean like the lawsuit the City filed when the State put it on the hook for cost overruns on the Tunnel?
Erica,
Bill numbers if you please. Don’t make us work harder than we must to track these bills.
Policy wonks may want to know that, with a bill number, they can use Washington Votes to be notified as the bill moves through the Legislature. The Leg’s own website, http://www.leg.wa.gov allows you to request updates by topic or committee.
It’s SB 6366. The following senators signed on to it: Swecker (Rochester), Haugen (Camano Island), Jacobsen (Seattle), King (Yakima), Marr (Lake Stevens), Ranker (San Juan Island), Hatfield (Raymond), Berkey (Everett), Sheldon (Potlatch), Tom (Eastside/Medina), Stevens (Arlington)
Two are from King County (one from Seattle). Haugen, Jacobsen, King, Marr, Hatfield, Berkey, Tom and Sheldon are Democrats, although Sheldon often doesn’t vote with the caucus.
Nine who are co-sponsors are among the 16 members of the Senate Transportation Committee: Haugen, Marr, Berkey, Hatfield, Jacobsen, King, Ranker, Sheldon, Swecker. Apparently, the bill will make it out of committee without any trouble. Besides Jacobsen and Tom, other King County members of Senate Transportation are Tracey Eide and Claudia Kaufman.
Apparently, the Senate isn’t taking any chances on Seattle’s stalling the tunnel, with or without the Mayor’s support. Rescinding the “Seattle pays all cost overruns” law would make this additional incursion into local authority more palatable. Chances are high that both will end up in court and themselves cause delays.
Who’s going to start the PAC that punishes electeds of whatever party who vote against Seattle’s interests, by funding their opponents?
A well-funded SeattlePAC would make them think twice about doing crap like this. Need to put a little fear of Seattle into these people.
If it means defeating some Dems in tight races, so what? I’d rather have a Republican-run Leg that’s afraid of getting Seattle too pissed off than our current “friends.” We couldn’t get screwed much worse by a GOP Leg, anyway.
I’ve never given to a GOP candidate before, but Haugen’s next opponent, in particular, will get a check from me.
@ 7, @ 20:
Continue to ignore reality if you think it makes you feel better. Seattle has what, 550,000 residents? The state has what, 6.5 million? Seattle is what, roughly 8.7 percent of the state’s population?
Why keep pushing this myth of “Seattle wielding its power” in Olympia? It’s a myth, like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Three — count ‘em, three — Legislative Districts out of 49 lie entirely in Seattle, and the other three that contain Seattle precincts have other cities to represent. That’s six legislative delegations out of 49.
Joel Kretz (R-7), who represents Colville, Omak, Okanogan, Republic, and Twisp, has as many people in his District as any Seattle legislator has.
And, @ 20, who decides what represents “Seattle’s interests?” You, maybe? Guess again.
Even Seattle legislators disagree on the future of Highway 99, Eileen Cody (D-34) and Mary Lou Dickerson (D-36) favored a rebuilt Viaduct, and as far as I know, still do. You can’t seriously imagine that any challenger to either of these two would draw anything but ridicule.
I’m not defending Haugen. I think she sucks. But the R’s in her District (Whidbey and Camano Islands, and some of Snohomish County) have tried time and again to beat her, and they can’t, because BIAW and road contractor money continues to fund her, and why should they fund a Republican challenger when they have the Senate Transportation chair in their pocket?
So just face reality, will you? Nobody’s asking you to like the situation, just recognize it for what it is.
We don’t need a PAC to defend Seattle. We just need to make frequent road trips to these other districts to campaign against Haugen, Clibborn, et al.
@ 22:
In what fantasy world do you live, that you think such an effort would have any effect whatever?
@21: Ivan, I thought redistricting caused all legislative districts to have approximately the same population. How could the 7th LD have twice as many people as the 34th? Really?