When Gov. Gregoire stepped into the ring with Mayor McGinn June 3 to spar over tunnels costs, the smart money was already on the guv. Her many previous bouts gave her the advantage and she slugged away at the new mayor while hardly breaking a sweat.

When she showed up for the fight, she already had the backing of the big money in downtown Seattle. Mayor McGinn, in office only half a year, may have underestimated the punch the diminutive governor packed.

McGinn's best shot was his objection to who would pay for cost overruns on the tunnel to replace the Alaska Way Viaduct. The city, already strapped for cash, was at risk, McGinn said, because of the clause in legislation that bound Seattle taxpayers for overruns.

Gov. Gregoire was all swagger and bluster at the meeting knowing she had both the backing of the legislature, the Seattle City Council and facing a rookie politician. She told the mayor that if he didn't like the Frank Chopp-inspired clause to take it up with the legislature.

Still, McGinn stayed on his feet and took the blows. For that, we applaud the mayor for his courage in the face of considerable odds. McGinn is a man of principle who believes strongly that his constituents should not be stuck with the bill for the inevitable cost overruns of the tunnel project.

Last week, an article in the Seattle Times revealed that tunnels and bridges overrun their estimates by 34 percent. Surely state officials and members of the legislature and the city council are aware of this. Yet they are plowing ahead in support of sticking Seattle with the bill that is sure to come.

The mayor's announcement Friday that he has hired an independent consultant to look for pitfalls in the state plan is perfectly in keeping with his approach to the big dig. Remember, he inherited the projected from two politicians who are no longer on the local stage--Greg Nickels and Ron Sims. He SHOULD be skeptical. And comments from Councilman Rasmussen suggest a certain competitiveness for attention. He said the mayor should be content with the analysis from the state DOT. Really? Is it possible the state DOT has felt some pressure from Gregoire over the project and feels duty-bound to present the project in a certain light? Whose bread I eat his song I sing.

We think McGinn has the best interests of the taxpayers in mind in his objection. Hiring a consultant to study the studies might be the the best money spent on the project.