- Jez Bennett/Shutterstock.com
- There's a joke in here about the Seattle Times really reaching for this argument, isn't there?
Just on Friday came new drama centering on a robo-calling campaign that is now apparently under investigation by the Seattle Police Department.
This morning, the Seattle Times gets in on the campaign's main theme (which is obviously "How Close Can We Come to Selling This as a Parks and Recreation Plotline?") with a whacked-out editorial on elephants. The lede is gorgeously weird:
LOCAL taxpayers now know how Watoto, Bamboo and Chai feel at the Woodland Park Zoo. Helping pay the bills does not earn respectful treatment.
A few paragraphs later, we get "The zoo would be a beneficiary of Proposition 1’s Park District, which only compounds the taxpayer-provided free lunch, and builds the wall of secrecy higher."
Because elephants, my friends, elephants. We are the elephants. And Proposition 1 is the zookeeper trying 112 times to inseminate us, obviously. We are covered in urine burns. Vote—WAIT A SECOND, THIS IS CRAZY. Nice try, ST! But not voting for Prop 1 because you're mad about the elephants is unbelievably shortsighted. Voting against Prop 1 doesn't do anything to help elephants. All it does is underfund local parks and squeeze our ability to fund future city needs like pre-K and transit.
The SECB's endorsements and cheat sheet are right here, and the deadline to mail your ballot is tomorrow. More than ever, we say: Don't fall for this shit, Seattle. We're always wishing the city could find some magical taxing authority that Olympia can't mess with and that would take some stress off our levy capacity. Well, surprise! Here it is. Vote for Prop 1.