It doesn't matter what they call it. As long as they name it after whoever is mayor, he will have no choice but to wave his magic Mayor Scepter and eradicate homelessness, same as Nickels did.
Kudos to whoever thought of "Nickelsville", by the way. Fracking amazing results.
The McGinn campaign has promised that, if elected, he will within six months hold a public vote on a whether a new name should be selected; if the public votes to move forward with a new name, he will within six months hold a primary vote to narrow to two the wide range of names suggested in the interim at biweekly neighborhood and internet caucuses. He will hold a general election to determine the new name shortly before he begins his campaign for a second term.
Posted by gloomy gus on November 3, 2009 at 3:44 PM
@14: Yes, it was fair to call it Nickelsville. Nickels would not allow hoovervilles to be built legally, nor would he admit that more shelter was needed. He simply played back the empty mantra of "housing first" (even though everyone knows there isn't enough housing) and then claimed that Seattle does more for homeless people than any other municipality, and those municipalities should take care of their people instead of sending them to Seattle (no proof that was happening). While, of course, sending police and hazmat teams to roust people out of the greenbelts, when they had nowhere to go.
You'd think the fact that hazmat teams had to be sent in there would indicate something... like those camps' being a health menace to the people who live there and the general public. But, sure, the homeless should be permitted to camp where there are no basic sanitation facilities available.
Posted by keshmeshi on November 3, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Comments (31) RSS