Sidran: Costly and Unconstitutional
We admit it. We were wrong when we reported that Mark Sidran was Satan. Satan, after all, is a big fan of the U.S. Constitution. Lucifer likes to exploit our constitutional freedoms (dancing, listening to hiphop) for his ultimate, dastardly goal of luring us to the dark side. Sidran has no patience for the personal risks that come with our constitutionally guaranteed rights.
The U.S. Constitution is anathema to this mayoral wannabe. But don't take our word for it. Listen to the opinions of real, live local judges--judges who have ruled on Sidran's handiwork:
"It is hard to conceive of a more blatant prior restraint on speech.... [It] is drafted so broadly that it appears to sweep in even some political activity. Accordingly, the Court finds that the City of Seattle's current... entertainment licensing procedure... [is] unconstitutional."--from U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour's ruling on Sidran's efforts to unfairly regulate business at hiphop clubs like Neko's and the 700 Club (the plaintiff, in this instance). Sidran's unconstitutional bidding cost the city at least $125,000 in direct payouts. (And don't forget the city staff's time wasted on defending Sidran's unconstitutional methods.)
"The drug abatement... is an unconstitutional taking of property... under the Fifth Amendment.... It is also a violation of due process as guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment...."--Court of Appeals Judge Marlin J. Appelwick, ruling against Sidran's use of drug abatement "policies" at Central District nightspot Oscar's II. Those policies included executing underhanded drug stings and accusing Oscar's of violating a "Drug Elimination Plan" (install a video camera! charge a readmittance fee!) that Oscar's was not legally bound to follow. Sidran's unconstitutional policy cost the city about $100,000 in direct payouts. (Once again, don't forget to consider wasted city staff time.)
And Sidran doesn't much like the Washington State Constitution either:
"Seattle Municipal Code satisfies due process, except insofar as the Municipal Court did not consider whether the impoundment of appellants' vehicles was reasonable. The challenged impoundments were... unreasonable and violated the Washington Constitution."--King County Superior Court Judge Michael Trickey, finding that the city's execution of Sidran's impound ordinance, "Operation Impound," crushed some Seattleites' civil rights. Go figure--the Sidran ordinance gave police officers enough free reign to essentially conduct unconstitutional seizures.
In their September 2 endorsement of Mark "Unconstitutional" Sidran, The Seattle Times wrote, "Sidran is best suited to lead the city through four challenging years." If the Times meant constitutionally challenging, then yes, Sidran has the right track record.
