W hen 2009 began, Nick Licata’s campaign for a fourth term on the
Seattle City Council was a sure thing. He’s popular. A former director
of WashPIRG, Licata is a champion of the arts and a fierce advocate for
the homeless and the poor. He has strong union support and has earned
votes from across the political spectrum for his work as a watchdog for
government spending and as a consistent leader in the campaigns to
oppose public spending on professional sports stadiums. He’s been the
council’s stalwart liberal for 12 years, and he won each of his two
reelection bids (in 2001 and 2005) with more than 77 percent of the
vote.
But something funny happened as June ticked away. A political
newcomer named Jessie Israel, one of just two women running for city
council in this year’s crowded field, started gaining traction by
piling up important endorsements (Washington Conservation Voters,
Cascade Bicycle Club, Seattle Police Guild, King County Realtors) and
going after Licata’s record. All of a sudden, politicos started asking
themselves: Does she actually have a shot at taking down Nick
Licata?
It is a long shot for sure, but Israel has shown a propensity for
the kind of hard-nosed politics that it takes to unseat a popular
incumbent. At a recent endorsement meeting with the Seattle Times, Israel accused Licata (as she had previously) of being
party to a lawsuit by a bipartisan watchdog group called Sane Transit
that attempted to stop construction on the light-rail system because
the final plans deviated from what the voters approved in 1996. Israel
pointed to this as evidence that Licata is more interested in the
traditional Seattle method of overanalyzing problems than actually
getting things done. During that meeting, according to a Seattle
Times account, Licata countered that it was a different group that
filed the lawsuit.
This, it turned out, wasn’t true. Sane Transit did sue Sound
Transit in 2002, though Licata was not directly involved in the lawsuit
despite the fact that Sane Transit only had a few members. Israel
pounced, seeing an opportunity to link Licata (stick-in-the-mud lefty)
to other enemies of light rail like Republican hardliner Rob McKenna
(the kind of anti-transit, anti-density conservative whose politics
you’d never associate with Licata’s). To be clear, Licata wasn’t part
of the lawsuit. But to borrow a phrase from Lyndon Johnson, she made
the sonuvabitch deny it.
“Frankly, to me, it is more important that he was clearly a member
of an organization that was designed to bring down light rail during
some of the most prosperous years of our history,” Israel said in an
interview with The Stranger about Licata’s denial.
In a phone interview, Licata countered that Israel has been too
vague on Sound Transit specifics and in her attacks on his positions.
“I haven’t heard her say anything about Sound Transit other than [that]
I oppose it,” Licata said.
Israel’s tack on Licata and transit has gotten her some media
traction and dovetailed with last weekend’s light-rail opening, helping
to frame the election on terms that Israel believes are her
strengths—Seattle’s long-term urban development and growth
management. Israel has raised only $53,000, putting her closer to the
bottom of all serious council candidates than to the top and well shy
of Licata’s $85,000, but it’s nothing that couldn’t be closed up with a
good month’s fundraising. A third candidate in the race, architect and
Seattle Planning Commission member Martin Kaplan, has raised $63,000.
In terms of cash on hand, the race is about even: Israel has $25,177,
Licata has $30,746, and Kaplan has $34,714.
And then there’s the generation gap. Licata, 61, is nearly twice the
age of Israel, 35. “One of the things that does worry me is that the
older generation knows him as peace activist and consumer advocate, but
they are a generation older than me, and that is worrisome,” said Gerry
Pollet, 50, a prominent environmentalist and Democratic activist who
supports Licata.
State representative Reuven Carlyle, an early Israel supporter who
worked with her on the Seattle board of the service organization City
Year, believes her timing—on the tails of Obama and his
still-resonant message of a changing of the old political
guard—could be perfect. “I think she is at the right place at the
right time to be open to the kind of change we are undergoing,” he
said.
“If it means running hard and kicking out some elbows along the
way,” Israel boasted, “then that is what needs to be done.” 
Yes, Nick should definitely be worried. Jessie Israel represents a fresh, clear voice for Seattle’s tired, old politics. She is smart, but not cocky. Experienced, but not entrenched. And as this story indicates, she’s garnered endorsements from a wide mix of groups — environmentalists, bike advocates, downtown business types, young Democrats, women and more. Nick is a nice guy. He’s smart and well intended. But he’s had the gig for TWELVE YEARS!!!! We’ve paid him more than $1 MILLION DOLLARS in city salary. And what, exactly, do we have to show for it???
Yes, challenging the old guard by accusing them of lawsuits which they were not actually a part of. Look into her endorsements a bit and ask yourself the real question: does Jessie Israel actually stand for anything or does she tell interest groups what they want to hear? “All of a sudden, politicos started asking themselves: Does she actually have a shot at taking down Nick Licata?” Hardly.
I’m very excited about the prospect of Jessie on the Council. She’s smart, idealistic, environmentally-focused, understands new technologies and biz opportunities, pragmatic and can work with people to really get stuff done. This can really happen folks!
In 2005, Licata was the lone City Council vote supporting Sound Transit’s position on the deletion of the First Hill Light Rail Station — impossible to build within budget … it raised the University Link price so much it would have threatened Federal grant funding. He agreed with ST that it had to be taken out.
Licata perhaps was the only Councilmember actually reading the background documents before voting? He’s the kind of elected official we should all like to see on duty.
I, an avid reader of Washington political news, demand more from Bryan T. Bissell. He writes fantastic stuff.
Is she Fo’ Real?
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweek…
King County Ombudsman Amy Calderwood today found that city council candidate Jessie Israel improperly used her position as marketing manager at the county parks department to solicit campaign support from her fellow county employees.
Licata is – at the very least – trying to misinform voters about his participation (with a bunch of suburban Republicans) in the Endless War against light rail.
At worst, he’s lying about his involvement. Time shall tell.
Licata’s political base is a mish-mash of disgruntled anti-government Repub’s and Libertarians, and NIMBY neighborhood types who fear any deflowering of their single family (read: white / upscale) neighborhoods. Both halves of Licata’s motley crew can’t stand the other. But, they are all so angry (about the horrors associated with change) neither side seems aware of the fact Licata is playin’ ’em both for his own political gain.
My God, John Niles is in perfect form. The King of Anti-Rail ideologues and right wing anti-transit think tanks circles the wagons around his last-rail-opponent-standing buddy Nick.
Niles forgot to mention he mercilessly criticized Sound Transit for that decision to cut First Hill Station. Witness the anti-transit chameleon in action.
Yet another good reason to get rid of Luckata.
Nick will beat her like a drum.
I am sad about Jessie. I liked her energy when she started running, but her subtle ageist attacks are lame. And her blatant lies about Nick’s support of the lawsuit mentioned in the article are exactly what we don’t need more of in local politics.
Nick has been around for a minute in local politics – and what’s awesome about that is we know who he is. And one of the best things about Licata is we know he is principled. We know what he stands for and we know he’ll stand for it. Jessie’s attacks on Nick show us something about her too – that she’s willing to bend the truth to attack an opponent for a desperate hope to gain some traction in politics.
Jessie needs to give us a reason to vote for her over Nick. So far I haven’t seen one. And her ageist and dishonest attacks are two reasons to not support her.
The reason young people can go to all ages shows in Seattle is because of Nick Licata. The reason young people have their own, revolutionarily run and operated live music venue at Seattle Center is because of Nick Licata. Nick is one of the reasons we defeated the horrid Nightlife ordinance. He’s one of the reasons we don’t have a completely ridiculous noise ordinance. He’s taken tough stands on regulation of the SPD, something few politicians ever have the spine to do. Nick speaks out when good ideas turn into bloated budget boondoggles. Nick took on the NBA, and showed amazing leadership in doing so, making the whole City of Seattle take a wise financial stand against billionaires’ and big corporate alliances holding Seattle hostage.
Do I agree with Nick on everything? No. But I also know I can get access to him when we disagree and we can rationally discuss an issue.
I don’t believe people seriously want to trade this strong, smart, successful, fiscally responsible, progressive in for someone whose only campaign strategy is to boast about her youthful inexperience, and then lie.
Stick with Nick!
If you were going to “kick out some elbows,” wouldn’t you have to be standing (dancing?) on the table?
Jessie Israel represents a fresh new voice in city politics. Seattle has changed a great deal in the past 20 years and it will continue to change and grow in the years to come. Jessie recognizes this and will be a voice on the council for smart growth and thoughtful density, vibrant walkable neighborhoods, good transportation alternatives (like light rail) and a prosperous and successful Seattle. I’m afraid that Licata simply wishes Seattle could go back to what it was 20+ years ago and has consequently been a strong voice for NIMBY-ism and the status quo. This should not be confused with problem solving.
@ 12:
I guess you’ll just have to find out for yourself: She can’t beat Nick Licata with an AK-47. I hope it won’t come as a shock to you.
“The reason young people can go to all ages shows in Seattle is because of Nick Licata.”
This is completely untrue and you know it Dave, you are totally overstating Licata’s role in the all-ages music scene. We went to all-ages shows all the time before Nick Licata was elected. Heck, we put on and went to all-ages shows the entire time there was a Teen Dance Ordinance, it just made it more of a hassle. Where the praise should rightly go for ending the TDO is on the music community, not elected officials, It was the never-ending grass roots work by dedicated people in the music community that lead to the TDO going away. Love the guy all you want, but some advocacy or a vote at the tail end of the fight didn’t make him our savior. It sure is typical of long term politicians to take the credit for others works though.
I’d be interested in what Jessie Israel’s stance is on some of the issues facing the music community. Music clubs, bands, labels, promoters and fans are a huge voting block and bring millions of dollars into Seattle every year. A lot of people are currently fed up with Nickels, Licata and the Mayor’s Office of Film and Music not being very good advocates for the music scene. They pay it lip service, no doubt, but we’ve seen a rise in regulations, proposed new licensing, selective law enforcement on clubs and more that have a lot of people grumbling and looking for more progressive candidates that truly support the music community. I think a lot of people are ready for change.
“The reason young people can go to all ages shows in Seattle is because of Nick Licata.”
You cannot seriously believe this!?!
Jesse Israel is a Seattle style Tracy Flick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_(1&hellip😉
She said she sides with the American Chemical Society.
MAkes sense, go with whichever way the wind blows. She said she’s against the bag fee, because, really, you know, she’s against the bags, but you know, let’s kill the bag fee, then have two years of eduction, then she’ll propose a ban on the bags.
This is not a pro environmental position. It’s a confused and silly position. But hey, the polls show you should be against the bag fee, but you have to be pro environment, so these kinds of contortions are well designed to satisfy anyone.
When she started her campaign, she said Licata is too often the one vote against the other 8 on the council. That was her reason for running. And she wanted to change that. She wanted to have unanimous council votes of 9-0, in other words, she’s dedicated to the powerst that be and conforming to the model of electability in Seattle.
So, so Tracy Flick.
What does her campaign website say about her record of fighting for what she believes in — nothing.
Has she ever fought any powerful interest? Not according to her web site. Her city year board service seems fine, but apart from that her biggest accomplishment appears to be her current campaign buzz…
in other words, her value is her own ambition and brazenness — very Tracy Flick.
She’s young, Licata is old, “we need change” (TM by Obama campaign) — the very model of artful campaign message without any substance.
Here’s her list of her accomplishments from her own campaign website:
“Israel’s family history goes back more than 100 years in Seattle and the Pacific Northwest on both Sephardic and Norwegian sides of her family. She has lived and worked in many of Seattle’s neighborhoods and now resides in a cute red house in Ballard.”
Olde Seattle, that’s a big achievement. And her house is cute!
“Jessie has a fifteen year track record of bringing together groups to invest in local community development, environmental and equity issues. She has trained around the world on building public-private partnerships & developing sustainable communities.”
This is vague babble — no real facts or accomplishments given. A good campaign consultant wrote it though, it has all the nice words, like “invest”, “equity,” etc. And trained around the world, that sound good doesn’t it?
“At KingCounty, Jessie has been on point to help” — those consultant written words mean she’s not actually the leader of anything — “reshape King County Parks into an entrepreneurial, performance-driven governmental organization. This transformation allows parks to generate non-tax revenue and ensure green space remains open, even during tight fiscal times.” Lots of jargon…but what it means is she can’t even claim credit for the idea of generating revenue from aprks, she has a job implementing the idea, and she can’t even mention any actual accomplishment in the job. OK, she’s a mid level governmental bureaucrat….
“Israel serves on the Parks management team” again, not at the top, not a leader.
“with operating revenue of more than $20 million & 150 permanent employees.” Making it sound like she’s in charge of them, but she’s not. “She directly oversee Parks business revenue target encompassing 25% of overall operating revenues.” Ahem. Very artful, consultant written langauge. Parks do not have many revenues, you may have noticed, they’re usually free? They generate very minimal revenues. So she oversees 25% of a the small amount of revenues parks generates. Or she oversees the target, not clear. “Prior to joining King County, Israel managed start-up non profit, the Center for Women & Democracy at the University of Washington.” She did something activist-y while in college. Good. “In the 1990’s as a consultant, Jessie worked with neighborhood planning groups to establish the Central Area, Eastlake, Denny Triangle, Wallingford neighborhood plans.” She was a p.r. consultant, that’s nice.
Bottom line: an ambitious climber with no accomplishment to speak of, no idea she proposed and got implemented, and no idea that she opposed or blocked. No record of fighting for anything, really, although she has some nice service hours on the city year thing.
Her main achievement is the current race. This is Tracy Flick ten years out of college. Seems like she’s a GREAT campaigner, and she has great consultants who can write all the right words, invest, equity, partnership, etc.
But why would you vote for Tracy Flick over Nick Licata?
“Parks do not have many revenues, you may have noticed, they’re usually free? They generate very minimal revenues.”
Have you fact checked this or are you just talking out your ass? Every day this Summer I’ve seen a line 20 trailers deep at Sandpoint of people using the boat ramp all paying the drop in fee. It looks like from the Seattle Parks and Rec page they collect fees at the boat ramps, public pools, golf courses, Seattle Aquarium, Japanese Garden at the Arboretum, tennis courts, stadiums, all kinds of facility rentals including community centers, all kinds of sailing/tennis/swimming classes, etc. I would guess it’s actually in the millions.
Jessie was against the bag fee when it helped her collect conservative biz endorsements like Alki, then for the bag fee in front of the Stranger audience.
Jessie was for tree canopy protection when in front of Democratic LDs, but against it when she was in front of the Realtors.
Jessie puffs her environmental cred by boasting she saved county parks. She was a bit player in the process and accomplished whatever little she did it by commercializing them, something the environmental movement has long been against.
If you want someone who you think is on your side right up until someone with more money or political power than you says to vote another direction, then Jessie is your candidate.
I cannot seriously believe that anyone is taking Jessie Israel seriously. As is well outlined above, even the people promoting her cannot cite any reason she is a better choice for City Council than about 80,000 other Seattle residents — she’s in her 30s. ??? Is this a joke? Sure, some people don’t like some things Nick Licata has done, and want an opponent. That doesn’t make her pass the laugh test.
I don’t agree with Licata about most urban planning issues, which do matter to me. However, luckily, he IS on the losing end of most of those. What is far more critical, and has made a difference in this city, is that he led winning coalitions on all manner of other public policy issues, especially justice system issues, and especially when the mayor was on the other side. Fights against the mayor that have been successful the past decade have been led by/actively aided by Nick, almost without exception. There ain’t many of them. Those we’ve had, had been facilitated by Nick. Take Nick off the Council, and enjoy your ride to whatever destination the mayor or City Attorney choose.