While all eyes were on the mayor’s race this week, another longtime
Seattle politician was getting his first real challenger since taking
office.
Police watchdog Peter Holmes planned to announce Wednesday
that he would challenge two-term city attorney Tom Carr in the
November election. As head of the group that oversees internal police
investigations at the city for six years, Holmes frequently clashed
with Carr over the release of the group’s reports. “The notion that
you’re protecting good cops by suppressing information about cops who
need to be disciplined or discharged is one I’ve never understood,”
Holmes says.
For critics of Carr, the news is exciting not just because Holmes is
the first person to seriously challenge the city attorney in eight
years, but because Holmes is everything Carr is not: a staunch
champion of government transparency, a proponent of expanded
public-disclosure laws, and a fiscal realist who opposes Carr’s costly
crackdowns on nightlife, pot smokers, and strip clubs.
“I don’t believe that fiscal responsibility and progressive
social values are mutually exclusive,” Holmes said recently.
Sitting in The Stranger‘s editorial office, dressed in a muted,
almost preppy brown patterned sweater and slightly shabby brown leather
oxfords, Holmes looked every bit the part of the soft-spoken bankruptcy
attorney he is. But when he got on the subject of the city attorney’s
priorities, Holmes got passionate.
“Look at the economic cost to the city of cracking down on strip
clubs,” he said. “Look at the cost of cracking down on nightlife.
How much money did we spend cracking down on bars in a sting that
utterly failed? How much have we spent chasing people smoking
marijuana?”
The list of Carr’s affronts to progressive Seattle values is as long
as the city attorney’s record in office. Elected as an alternative to
his divisive predecessor Mark Sidran, Carr supported the city’s
controversial (and since-overturned) car-impound ordinance (the law
allowed the city to seize the cars of people caught driving without a
license); backed the (also-overturned) poster ban; supported additional
exemptions to the state’s public-disclosure law; and supported the
aforementioned crusades against bars, strip clubs, and pot.
Neither Holmes nor Carr has raised much cash (Carr because he’s
never had an opponent, Holmes because he’s a relative unknown).
However, Holmes says he isn’t running to make a point. “I intend to run
a serious campaign, and I intend to win.”
In other election news, Seattle Great City Initiative founder
Mike McGinn announced Tuesday that he’s running for mayor;
former Seattle Sonic James Donaldson was expected to make his own
announcement Wednesday; and ex–city council member Peter
Steinbrueck remained circumspect about his plans. 
This is great news! Carr deserves a challenge, and Holmes has been a great public interest advocate the last few years.
I am SO excited that Mr. Holmes is running against Tom Carr. This is great news!
Yay! Time to get Carr out of office. Enough is enough.
carr is a first-rate polarizing figure. I had the displeasure of interacting with him, and he is anti-dislosure,anti-law (if they don’t suit his cause) and quite pompus.
He would gleefully trample all over the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights if it meant protecting Seattle employees from wrongdoing. Out with Carr!!!
Lawyer elections are tough as challenging the established hegemony of your local court is a quick way to start losing cases.
As such accountability, as in checks and balances, etc, is very tough. It is more important that we have ways of removing bad Judges and bad Prosecutors than it is to be focusing on bad cops – an important, but lesser priority.
These problems are very historic in nature. FWIW, Mayor Nickels career marks a reinvention of these problems under the guise of reform. In my opinion we’ve ended up with something worse, though to be sure for many minorities that is most definitely not the case.
As to spoiled white women, who cares?
Transparency is the key word in support of and demand for Pete Holmes to become our lead City Attorney. I have the upmost respect for Pete having worked with him on Police Accountability. He is fair, honest, mentally very quick and he has real integrity. David Goodenough
I believe Mr. Carr supported the various ordinances because he had an obligation to do so as the City’s lawyer.
Sort of like prosecuting shoplifters.
Yes, Johnnie Green, you tell ’em. Most of the regular Stranger readership are ignorant, dope-smoking, prostitute-patronizing, cop-hating, over-boozing bunch of reprobates. Not to mention this author and the editor being a shoplifter!!! Erica, Puhlease! You should read tghe City Charter before you write an article about a completely ineligible and unqualified candidate for City Attorney such as Holmes.