What's the big controversy? Miscounting "disappointment" in a phone call?

I'm disappointed that this wasn't an interesting article at all.

All of Hannah’s articles should be written in crayon.

@1 That Sara Nelson lied about what the beneficiary of an amendment said in order to kill the amendment.

For instance, if Sawant put forth an amendment to take $500k out of the affordable housing budget, and Sara Nelson called you and you said “yay! I, Raindrop, am more deserving of the money than those lousy homeless fucks in Seattle!” And then Nelson said you were disappointed in the source of the money and used that to kill the amendment, you’d be a bit pissed off, right?

@3 what makes you think Nelson lied? Perhaps the director said just that but when confronted she played it down to save face with the defund crowd. She didn’t really answer Hannah’s questions either. In any case if this is the most egregious dirt TS can dig up i dont think they are going to sway anyone on Nelson.

You’re missing the far bigger story, which is that a “museum” with few programs, exhibits or visitors is getting $500,000 of previous dollars with far better uses.

@3: “That Sara Nelson lied about what the beneficiary of an amendment said in order to kill the amendment.”

According to the headline post, both ends of that statement are without foundation.

For the original telephone conversation between the council member and the museum director, each participant recalled it differently, and each seems to have heard what she most wanted to hear. There’s nothing unusual about that at all, especially not in politics.

For the amendment, it was failing anyway, so Nelson’s actions were completely superfluous.

And finally, the amendment never had much chance of passage in the first place, as the final paragraph reveals:

“Sawant's amendment came as a walk-on in the final meeting of budget negotiations, and only about half of those last-minute proposals made the cut this year.”

The only real question here might be, “Why was any of this a headline story?”

People forget that Black people experience individual, systematic, and structural racism on a daily basis. Thanks for the reminder to visit NAAM again and examine my white privilege and internalized bias and to advocate for these funds in the future.

@9: You're forgetting that Seattle is experiencing increased crime on a daily bases with a short staffed SPD. So your "white privilege" should dictate that SPD is a higher priority as you undoubtably care about the black victims of crime.