From the Apr 8 – Apr 14, 2004 issue

Columns

Letters to the Editor

FEIT'S SOUND TRANSITION
DEAR JOSH: I just read your story about the initiative and Sound Transit [Five to Four, Josh Feit, April 1]. While I know you aren't a fan, I do want to thank you for the clarity of your article. You and I do share the fact that we are both pro-transit. I am very committed to continuing our progress after huge missteps, whether intentional or not. No doubt, there will be new issues and problems--there always are with major public works projects--but it is time to allow the region to get moving. And I sincerely appreciate your recognition of this larger goal for transit. Thanks much.

Joni Earl

FIMIA'S STILL FIGHTING
TO JOSH FEIT: Many of us continue to push back not because we are "mired in hostility toward Sound Transit," but because we see how this agency is grossly wasting transit dollars in the name of mobility and the environment--when the reality is that this is a dangerous, outdated, prohibitively expensive project that will not achieve anything close to what we need. For us in Seattle, it will damage and waste one of the best and most successful parts of our existing HCT system, the bus tunnel.

We would all like to get on with life--but Sound Transit is taking enormous amounts of present and future transit service away from those who can least afford it, and alienating voters in the process. Sorry we can't fall in line like good soldiers.

Maggie Fimia

Shoreline City Council

MONORAIL FAILS THE HILL
TO THE EDITOR: I supported [the monorail] before, until I found out the route [Save the Monorail!, edited by Josh Feit, April 1]. It was such a big issue among Capitol Hill residents that people forgot to ask one simple important question: What is the route? I bet people don't even know that this monorail doesn't even come near Capitol Hill. And Sound Transit's light rail will terminate at the Westlake Mall, not even Convention Place, like today's 5 mph bus tunnel. So rotten Capitol Hill can enjoy slow, stinky, homeless-infested #7 and alike for another century. Sound Transit and monorail don't even have any firm plans about any rapid transit on and around Capitol Hill. The neighborhood lacks the convenience of transit completely. Most routes today cater only to homeless or disabled, or people who have no responsibilities. It is idiotically slow and goes NOWHERE IMPORTANT. Typical Seattle nonsense. I don't know what I am still doing here.

The Stranger is located on Capitol Hill. Don't you care about it? Just look around us. It looks like a dump more and more every day. Buildings, people. Even new buildings look like shit. Of course no one decent will come here to invest or spend money. There is no parking and no decent transit. There is no decent way to get here.

Mikhail Khachiyants

DAN SAVAGE RESPONDS: Monorail boosters are confident that once the Ballard-downtown-West Seattle Green Line is built--once Seattle finally gets a taste of rapid transit--the logic of building additional lines to other parts of the city will be irresistible. Seattle residents all over town will, we believe, demand more lines and vote for new lines. For the first line, however, it makes more sense to connect two more-remote neighborhoods to downtown Seattle (and each other) than it would to connect the relatively accessible Hill to downtown.

PUTTING OBSTRUCTIONISTS IN THEIR PLACE SINCE 1991
EDITOR: Thank you for The Stranger's excellent focus on the monorail project, and in particular, for putting the obstructionists in their place. I moved to Seattle from Portland about four years ago, and what I found when I arrived was jarring: a city at least two decades behind the curve in terms of transportation infrastructure. In contrast, Portland's enlightened local government has consistently made choices (the waterfront park, the growth boundary, the light-rail system) that have revitalized downtown and created an infrastructure that will last well into the future. Seattle, seemingly, has been all yak-yak-yak and no action for as long as anyone can remember.

The Seattle Monorail Project, it seems to me, has done an incredible job. It is our one ray of hope. I have no doubt that once it is built, the obstructionists will be happily riding it to get to their next Keep-Seattle-in-the-Dark-Ages appointment downtown.

Bill Coniff, West Seattle

McIVER'S CONCERNED
TO THE STRANGER EDITOR: As the chair of the City Council's Budget Committee, I feel compelled to respond to your article about the recent action of the Council to cut some $9.3 million from the City's budget ["What You Don't Know...," Erica C. Barnett, April 1]. You stated that this action "slashes human-service spending," and "will devastate many of Seattle's most vulnerable, including homeless women, tenants, and the working poor." While those of us in City Hall would not dispute that these cuts will have an impact, you leave your readers with a distorted picture of what the City of Seattle is doing. In fact, we are continuing to spend millions every year on human services.

It is a simple reality of life that city government must live within its revenues. The combined impact of the economic downturn, the Eyman initiatives, and a recent State Supreme Court decision have forced the Mayor and City Council to make some $100 million in cuts over the past couple of years, many of them very unpleasant. Human service programs have been cut, libraries have been forced to close a couple of weeks each year, Community Service Officers have been eliminated, basic maintenance of the infrastructure has been deferred, city employees have been laid off, and the popular Neighborhood Matching Fund has been scaled back.

This latest round of cuts did indeed include yet more cuts to valuable human service programs. For example, we eliminated $140,000 previously slated for the YWCA's Angeline's Center for Homeless Women. What you failed to tell your readers is that the City will still provide Angeline's with $553,000 this year for operations and maintenance, plus an additional $37,000 for a meal program. We will have provided Angeline's with $2.6 million since 2000.

The article also highlighted a $73,000 funding cut to the Tenants Union, funding the City provides for housing stability services. What you failed to mention is that we are funding eight other programs providing similar services, for a total of $782,000 in 2004. Unfortunately, we have been forced to cut back on the amount of funding we can provide for these services. The City's Human Services Department, through competitive awards, has contracted for these services with the Fremont Public Association, Compass Center, International District Housing Alliance, Family Services, Plymouth Housing Group, and the YWCA. The Tenants Union is one of several agencies the City will no longer be funding to provide these services.

The City will spend $8 million this year for homeless services, part of the total human service spending of $23.5 million (much more if we include funds for public health). I don't dispute that more money could be put to good use. I also don't question that others might have produced a different mix of funding priorities. However, given the amount of money we are directing to human services, I question your contention that the City has turned its back to those among us who need the helping hand of government. Those of us at City Hall care deeply about social needs and work hard to make city government an active participant in answering the call.

Richard J. McIver

Seattle City Council

ERICA C. BARNETT RESPONDS: While I don't dispute that cities frequently make "tough choices" when balancing their budgets, what council member McIver fails to mention is that his colleague, Nick Licata, did have a plan to replace the $215,000 that would have been needed to partially fund the Tenants Union, Angeline's Center, and a child-care program that was also cut. It would have required nothing more than eliminating one vacant position and putting off one new hire until April. These painless cuts could have gone a long way toward restoring programs that in many cases are not duplicated elsewhere or cannot be picked up by other, already overburdened programs. (See "Rat Pack," March 18, for more on the Tenants Union.)

SKATE PARK POLITICS
EDITOR: Ballard skaters, and skaters everywhere, have an uphill battle ["Skate Park Slam," Amy Jenniges, March 25]. This is partially because, as was observed in Ballard's bowl, skaters always appear to be on the verge of colliding with their surroundings. This leaves most pedestrians feeling a bit uneasy, and convinced that sidewalks and malls are not the place for wheeled, flying risk-takers. Add to this the reports of other "collisions," such as [the] event where a skater with a short fuse and no sense of ultimate consequences (and no sense of guilt, apparently) "trucked' and killed a motorist who was confronting another skater for cutting into traffic. These images combine to color all skaters as violent, reckless, and thoughtless.

Keeping alcohol, loud music, graffiti, and drugs away from the bowl were steps in the right direction for convincing neighbors of skaters' benign nature. Boneheaded sports-fan behaviors, such as holding a rant over pitchers of beer or heckling at community meetings, might not do much to advance the cause. What issues might be keeping Seattle from following through with a skate park? Liability? NIMBYs? Developers? Maybe it's just part of the pattern of government becoming less and less responsive to the populace.

RC

JENNIGES: RIGHTEOUS!
TO AMY JENNIGES: Thank you for all the wonderful articles recently--especially on marriage ["Righting Seattle and Writing About Seattle," March 4] and Mia Zapata ["Her Day in Court," March 25]. Your personal story on marriage was very real and personal as was the quick response to Mia's story. Although I didn't know Mia, I know many of her friends, and her story was a powerful one to all the women in Seattle.

Thank you again, you are a great journalist.

Jennifer Keys

Seattle DanceSafe

DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS: Last week's Up & Coming write-up for Q-Burns Abstract Message erroneously stated that Q-Burns' 1998 release Feng Shui included a version of DJ Faust's proto-shoegazer classic "Jennifer." In fact, "Jennifer" was by the band Faust, not the DJ. We apologize for the dopey error, which was in no way the fault of our fine writer, Dave Segal, and have banished the fact-checker responsible to the Iraqi city of Fallujah to think about what he's done.

Also, the photos of Mia Zapata accompanying the March 25 news story "Her Day in Court" were unattributed. Credit should have gone to Ed Goralnick, who snapped the pictures in Portland just a few days before Zapata was murdered in 1993.