Seattle PostGlobe - Top News: McGinn says he'll uphold tunnel agreement

In a sudden shift in the final days of Seattle's mayoral election, Michael McGinn, who has largely been identified with his opposition to the plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a tunnel, said he would not try to block the project if elected mayor.

McGinn's announcement came shortly after the City Council unanimously approved a Memorandum of Understanding that lays out the responsibilities of the state and to city to build the $4.2 billion project, of which the city would pay $927 million.

McGinn in a statement said, "I disagree with the decision.  I disagree with the timing.

"But the reality is Mayor Nickels and the Council have entered into an agreement, and the City is now committed to the tunnel plan.

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

The P-I reported that McGinn said, "This doesn't change my opposition to the tunnel, it's just my recognition of what the mayor's job is."

McGinn, despite highlighting other issues since the primary election, has been so closely identified with the tunnel issue it immediately left open the question of what his campaign will highlight in the final two weeks.

What was somewhat puzzling is that the Memorandum of Understanding "is a policy statement, not a contract," said City Councilman Nick Licata in a statement.

Licata said, "Our Law Department says it commits the city to only 3 things:

1. To continue to work together to complete the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program;
2. To endeavor to open the bored tunnel by the end of 2015;
3. To develop additional agreements, deal with issues such as right-of-way use and utility relocation. Unlike this agreement, those will certainly be legally enforceable."

Licata stressed that by taking the action, the city is not agreeing that it is responsible for any cost overruns -- as provided by state legislation authorizing the project.

Up to now, McGinn had vowed to try to stop the project, saying the city under his administration would not grant permits and proposing the tunnel should go before voters. He has opposed the project on several grounds from the cost, the idea that the funds should be spent on other city priorities instead of roads, the lack of a clear plan on how to come up with the city's portion and the uncertainty over who will be responsible for cost overruns.

McGinn, in his statement, tried to lay out a contrast between he and opponent Joe Mallahan, saying," I will continue to ask tough questions:

"• We don't know how much it's actually going to cost.

• If it ends up costing more than the current budget allows, there is serious disagreement between Seattle and the State over who will pay the cost overruns.

• Where will the money come from, and who will bear the burden?  Will we have to cut police, fire, library, or services for the poor?"

He said, "I'm worried the people that want the tunnel have a champagne appetite and the City has a beer budget.  The question is who will end up paying the tab."

McGinn said, "There is a clear choice in this election. My opponent has refused to ask any hard questions about the tunnel."

McGinn pointed to Mallahan's comments in seattlepi.com as indication that Mallahan was not asking hard questions. Mallahan said in the online site:

Of course I was disappointed in that amendment. But if I were mayor, rather than taking potshots at Democratic leadership who put that (amendment) on, I'd express disappointment and say, "OK, we can live with this."

Because I don't think there are going to be cost overruns. We can manage it. If there are, and if we get there, then we'll go talk to the state again about it. That's the sort of tenor I think you need to have to develop strong relationships with other government partners. That's kind of what we lack right now.

 As for what's next with McGinn’s campaign, he stressed during Sunday night's KIRO TV debate his own experience as head of the Greenwood Community Council and on such local issues as last year's parks levy.