But while outrage was the mood burning up the computer lines of repeal advocates, the mood at Capestany's desk late on August 23 was more telling: cynicism. After all, outrage reflects hope for change, while cynicism reflects lack of hope. This is the only appropriate response to Mayor Schell's wild disregard for the hard work of citizen volunteers who put their faith in a public process and crafted a new and improved replacement ordinance (the All-Ages Dance Ordinance or AADO) that won the approval of seven out of nine city council members.
"I hate to give this to you," City Clerk Judith Pippin said, as she handed Capestany Schell's official veto package at 10 minutes before 5:00 that day.
"Wow," was all Capestany could muster, hovering by her desk in shock.
Her boss, Richard Conlin, was a little more articulate. "It's a real slap in the face for the citizens and city staff who participated in this process in good faith," he said in a statement released that afternoon.
Unfortunately, the mayor's veto is likely to withstand any override attempt by the council. Even though the repeal passed 7-1 and it only takes six votes to rebuke a veto, two of the seven votes were iffy at best (Jim Compton and Richard McIver).
In a last-ditch effort to ward off cynicism and keep hope at the table, we would like to offer up the following outraged response to Schell's veto.
1. Schell attacks the AADO because it has no age restrictions. His objection is baseless. Keeping kids out of dances is stupid because (a) it's safer for them to be supervised at a public dance than hanging out in the street; and (b) there are laws in place to protect them from dangerous situations. Guess what? The TDO wouldn't even have outlawed the infamous Monastery (a controversial dance hall that was shut down by the city in the mid-'80s). The AADO would have.
2. Schell attacks the AADO because it nixes the requirement for off-duty police officers to work security at dances. As evidenced by 15 years of the TDO, using cops for security is a terrible idea, because the city doesn't have the authority to force the police union to provide off-duty officers for dances. In other words, when it's up to the cops whether or not to work a dance, they have the ultimate power to cancel any youth dance event they want.
3. Schell attacks the AADO for failing to require promoters to buy insurance. According to task-force member Newell Aldrich (a staffer in City Council Member Nick Licata's office), most venues are already insured. Moreover, the AADO includes an extensive indemnity clause that relieves the city of any liability should something horrible happen at a dance.
If the council doesn't take action to override Schell's veto, his clumsy meddling will sabotage the task force's significant effort to salvage Seattle's crippled youth entertainment scene. It will also help cripple the public's confidence in government.
Task-force member Stephanie Pure believed in the city's process. Now, she has a few choice words for Schell. "Mayor Schell, I am not nearly as upset about your veto (as livid as I am about that) as I am about your seeming lack of respect for our time and our work," she wrote in an e-mail to the mayor the day after the veto. "As citizens (volunteers, if you will) with full-time jobs, these efforts are exhausting and taxing, and despite a major interest in getting this legislation passed, we simply don't have another two years to discuss changes."
Pure has every reason to be cynical. Not only does Schell's veto undermine the civic process, it also captures him as a two-faced politician. In the summer of 1999, Pure invited Schell to attend a July 27 task-force meeting. At that meeting, Schell was asked point blank how he felt about repealing the old Teen Dance Ordinance. He said, and we quote, "I'll leave that to you. That is really what you've been asked to help [the city council] with."
For crying out loud, Schell, that's exactly what they did. Pure--along with about 20 other music and youth advocates, as well as officials from the city's fire, police, and law departments--spent nearly two years working on this carefully thought-out legislation. Schell seems to have devoted just one day to tearing it apart. Gee, undermining the will of the people? Sounds similar to the county's rebuke of the voters' will on the stadium and the city's decision to kill the monorail. It's startling that Seattle citizens continue to diligently follow the processes set up for them by the city's laws, only to have their work and their voices completely ignored and trampled on by city officials.
One can only conclude that the hard work of the Music & Youth Task Force fell victim to the small-minded games of election politics. In this case, Schell--perhaps the first odds-on loser incumbent in Seattle history--was playing to the cops and the mainstream press.
First and foremost, vetoing the AADO and the TDO repeal was Schell's nod to the cops, with whom he's had a terrible relationship. Schell obviously sees the recent appointment of Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske as a window of opportunity to jump-start the relationship. This was his first overture.
Second, Schell is nervous about getting support in the mainstream press. The Seattle Times, a supposed Schell supporter, recently trashed Schell in a shape-up or ship-out Sunday editorial. Taking the "pro-family" veto stance is his obvious attempt to provide the bold leadership that the Times wants. No doubt, it'll score points with the P-I which, along with the Times, recently ran some anti-TDO repeal editorials. As for that shape-up or ship-out thing, we vote to ship him out, now.
