Now that we have districts can someone explain why the citywide seats are handled as separate races? Why not just give them to the top two vote-getters?
Persak laid it out pretty good here. Not vague at all.…
@2--that would take another city charter amendment. And I wouldn't want such an important instant runoff election decided in a low turnout early August primary.
@2 I believe state election laws require all positions to be run as separate contests, and I doubt a change in city charter would void that statute.
"Burgess is calculating and confident, proposing progressive legislation that goes just far enough to place him on the right side of history but not far enough to risk alienating Seattle's mainstream left."

Very good analysis of a very uptight guy. Also to note, that Preschool Program with its "2000" seats? Well, we just figured out (from the City's announcement of the first seats) that most of those seats will NOT be new seats. No, most (if not the majority ) will be seats that ALREADY exist with independent preschool providers in Seattle Schools. All that changes will be the name and the curriculum. So Seattle, you didn't buy more seats for more kids who need preschool - you bought a preschool curriculum. I guess Councilman Burgess forgot to explain that part.

"Folks need to understand that, yeah, the city, within reasonable limits, needs to take their perspective into consideration in terms of the feedback of how that's going to look, but... the only way we're going to deal with housing affordability is by building."

From Gonzalez' lips to developers' hearts. I hope she can define "reasonable" because right now it appears a few neighborhoods are going to be forced to be the "reasonable" ones while others? Not so much and not so fair.

She is dead wrong on the "housing affordability is by building" (that or she's new to big cities). Because when you have a popular city - see NYC or San Francisco - rents and housing prices do NOT go down even if you have more buildings. What you will do is have more housing but lower/affordable prices? I've got a bridge for her in Brooklyn.
Thanks so much for posting this. Very helpful!
A lot of it would have mattered earlier, the voters guide were filled with the same repeated progressive talking points that they all looked like the same candidate.
Politicians and those whooping them up are talking about "big ideas". Keep your hands on your wallets at all times.
Interestingly, John Roderick went to Reddit to conduct his own (likely un-invited) Ask Me Anything. Quite the way to reach out to young voters, especially when you're seeing such abysmal returns.…
The Bradburd asinine stereotyping of "urbanists" is a tip of the iceberg of grotesque lack of knowledge of urban design issues and design and a hint of anger management issues experienced over the years by city staff, council members and anyone who disagrees with him. Of course he likes backyard cottages he built one huge one behind his nearly million dollar property and house off 18th S. in the CD. A true "viable" candidate is needed for city wide position 9.
@11 Negative and anonymous campaigning by nuance? Use your name if you're going to toss out unsubstantiated crap.

Regarding the urbanists, I think Bradburd is being pretty easy on them. In case you haven't been following the exchanges on various blogs (Facebook pages for each district, City-Builders), the dialogue has gotten very nasty at times. I have myself been attacked repeatedly and called a variety of names, including a wealthy, exclusionary, racist white NIMBY. (Only the "white" is sort of accurate.) Some of the urbanists have red-baited me, and some of the younger ones have palpable hatred for my status as a baby boomer homeowner who bought for far less than current prices. Kind of like the hint of resentment in your citing Bradburd's "million dollar property." I don't know about him, but I and many of my neighbors would not be able to buy our own houses today either.
Near as I can tell, every single one of the Seattle council candidates call themselves Progressive. Candidate commercials and mailers use that word over and over; it's become a meaningless term.

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.