News Jul 31, 2013 at 4:00 am

Mayoral Challengers Fall All Over Themselves in Fierce Battle to Label McGinn as "Divisive"

illustrations by Kathryn rathke


You mean McGinn's letter which uses as its source for wage data the unpublished work of Puget Sound Sage ?……
Sage Board of Directors

Sergio Salinas, Vice President
President, SEIU Local 6

Dave Schmitz, Treasurer
President, UFCW Local 21

Erik Van Rossum
Secretary-Treasurer, UNITE HERE Local 8

And why is this woman who asked the question in June getting only 5 hrs of work the next week and expensive benefits at her UFCW unionized Safeway job concerned about keeping out another store that could offer her a job with more hours ?…
McGinn has a lot of quiet support on this in West Seattle. More than 60 West Seattle businesses, organizations, and neighbors signed a letter supporting McGinn's position on livable wages, affordable housing and walkable neighborhoods.

It's still open for signatures: Sign on letter to Rasmussen
And HOW many residents are there in WS? more than 60. Anyhoo... I don't think the challengers are flip-flopping. They can be for applying this kind of criteria in a reasoned, researched, vetted way AND against applying it in an inequitable, political way that depresses development in the city.
Face it, Seattle loves our Mayor.

The Powers That Be and their suburban masters - they don't.
So why isn't McGinn introducing legislation to set a minimum wage and number of hours per worker so they have a "living wage" ? It seems inefficient to play whack-a-mole with individual project requests for street vacations.

And since McGinn was the one to negotiate the MOU for the arena with Hansen, why is there no requirement for a certain minimum wage/annual earnings for the employees. There's a labor-peace agreement but unions don't guarantee a living wage (see that UFCW worker getting 5 hours at Safeway... posted above).
Being Mayor of Seattle would be an awful job. You can't wipe your ass without being accused of wrongdoing. Go McGinn.
@6 Ha ha ha... That's all that passive aggressive double talk. Entertaining isn't it.
I think it is fair to call the "position refinements" that Ed Murray (whom I like a lot, though wish he were remaining in the WA Senate) and Peter Steinbrueck (whom I also like, and who was my provisional Mayoral pick before all this) Flip-Flops. They were both definitely scrambling with damage control, when their prior public statements were exposed.

I was *not* much of a McGinn fan, honestly, before this. He has a cold fish quality, and doesn't seem particularly adapt at working the system, or working within the system. However, I am liking him a lot more now than I was a month ago. And other than that ill advised battle he was destined to lose over the deep bore tunnel (I was a fan of the "surface Street Solution" too, but it was never going to win) he has not really done a *bad* job.

I cast my primary ballot for McGinn, on the strength of this kerfuffle, but will re-evaluate my options come November.
i don't really care which of these navel gazers seattlites elect next, but in this example, Steinbreuck's position is not a flip flop.

you actually CAN'T use land-use and codes to prevent a single grocery store, but you can use them to zone out a type of store, including walmart. but if you do zone out walmart, you are also zoning out whole foods or safeway or whatever. that's why you can zone out stores "like walmart" but you can't zone out a single store.

that's not a flip-flop, but a demonstration that the candidate understands zoning laws much better than your reporter.
Steinbrueck's position does not represent a "flip flop" on the issue. His commen and rightfully so is tHat big box stores "likeWalmart" would be subject to LUC, and there would be consistent treatment under the law.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.